Contrary to what some people claim, violence does solve things. It is not, however, the only solution; it’s just that the people who benefit by violence want you to see it that way. Violence is an easy method of engendering or maintaining power. An entire industry (the military-industrial complex) has risen up around this type of power-mongering and rakes in billions of dollars each year. Possibly more, considering the modern high-tech costs of war.
What is confounding is that, in recent years, liberals and peace protesters have come out with slogans like “support our troops, but not the war” which is sort of like saying, shut down the factory, but keep the factory workers employed, because without the soldiers, there is no war and without the war (or at least the potential of it), there is no need for soldiers.
Soldiers are not robots. If they were, they’d be fighting machines and wouldn’t get things like post-traumatic stress disorder. Since they’re not robots, like other human beings, they possess free will and can make choices. They’re also free to make mistakes. I believe that intentionally or carelessly killing other humans is a mistake. The most basic function of any organism is its own survival and as highly evolved animals, if we cannot respect the right of other humans to live, then we cannot expect them to respect our right to live.
The most natural urge of any animal that is attacked is self-defense, which requires evasion or counter-attack. On some occasions, a counter-attack may be the more viable option and may unavoidably result in the death of the attack-initiator. Brutes and thugs who initiate violence cannot expect to remain unharmed. Extrapolated to the cultural level, I understand that physical defense of one’s country is necessary for the governmental survival, and therefore I understand and support the maintenance of a defensive fighting force.
However, the act of physical offense or placing oneself in a situation of artificial defense (i.e., pretending that you are acting defensively when no one has attacked you nor declared war on you) is not necessary for survival, it is only desirable for power. So, no, I do not support the soldiers who perpetuate such acts of aggression, just like I do not support the institutional system of aggression (the offensive-oriented military and “the war”) nor the leaders who make the decision to instigate this systematic aggression.
Soldiers are complex people (like all of us) and, although they may be mistaken in their actions, this does not make them evil. I have some sympathy for soldiers, especially considering that the military standard practice uses extremely powerful psychological tactics to recruit and train fighters to act and never question orders. Soldiers are smart (physically brilliant) and, in some ways, honorable and admirable human beings, but they are conditioned to believe they do not have autonomy and cannot choose their missions and this makes them highly fallible.
Interestingly, I had arguments with two different “liberal” friends (who claimed to oppose war, but support soldiers) because they had family in the military and, much like soldiers, they let their loyalty override all other considerations. They somehow confused caring for an individual with support for their occupation (as if you couldn’t like someone but disagree with an action of that person). This made it seem as if they only had compassion for the soldiers they know and none for the unknown victims of those soldiers. I have compassion for both, but in the case of any attack, I have more sympathy for the non-initiator of the attack than the initiator (especially the non-combatant civilian victims of so-called “collateral damage”).
I have utmost respect for soldiers who overcame their extensive psychological conditioning and objected to the latest Iraq War and refused to fight. I also have respect for any defensive soldier who trains and fights only to defend this country from a real attack (and never oppresses any civilian), but I think any soldier who follows orders to attack a non-attacking country or individual is making a grave mistake.
Note: I was initially afraid to post anything like this on the internet (after the aggressive response of liberal friends), but after watching a documentary on Howard Zinn (himself a veteran for peace), I remembered that it is important to speak up. Staying silent is to be complacent and complicit.
Also: It bugs me that people talk about “the war” as if there’s only one. There’s been two obvious foreign wars started by USA this century so far – the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq. And they’ve flirted with war with North Korea, Iran and lately Russia.
In scary news, there is a new kind of military deployment in our own country, to help with “civil unrest, crowd control” and other issues. That’s right – we now have the actual military ready to come in and kick ass in case of citizens protesting or otherwise misbehaving. Let’s call it “Brigade homeland” (you can find an article on this on armytimes.com or do your own search – I’m not providing a direct link; 1st tour begins Oct. 1, 2008).