As RobbL from Infinite Monkeys points out, today (Monday) was a slow news period(“…a little sodomy, some killing, bicycle-related accidents…"). While we’re waiting for fresh blog material, he’s provided five "questions we never ask" about the Iraq war to keep us busy.
Here are my thoughts on the matter:
1. Why does the United States need a large standing military (as opposed to, say, individual state militias)?
There are two answers to this one. The first is that we already have both a standing military and state militias. With all due respect to the those who serve, who would you rather have defending you against terrorists, the U.S. Marine Corps or the Iowa state guard?
The second answer is because the burden could not be shared equally. How would we implement such a system? Would we institute a state-level draft? If not how would we divide the duties of national security among the various states? Currently, Texas provides a disproportionate number of its residents to the military. Under a state militia system, Texas would have a large military force while some of the Northern states (such as Massachusetts) would provide a rather miniscule contribution. Would Texas have more say in sending troops if the Kennedy compound was being invaded by the French?
2. Are "efficiency" or "effectiveness" good enough reasons for our military to develop an internal culture of unquestioning order-following?
No. And, fortunately for us, the U.S. military doesn’t have such a culture. In fact, our military is more effective than almost every other service in the world precisely because we don’t have such a top-down, do-as-your-told mindset. While you might find small enclaves where such blind obedience takes root, such cases will be rare and almost always at the lowest rungs of the ladder.
In my fifteen years of service I’ve never met anyone who could not tell the difference between a lawful, moral order and an unlawful, immoral one. In fact, I would bet my paycheck that the only time that you will ever hear the issue come up is when someone is trying to transfer the blame during their court-martial proceedings.
3. Why shouldn't individual soldiers be held responsible for participating in an unjust war? (for purposes of discussion, let's say we invaded Canada to secure the free flow of Caribou meat and Celine Dion records, and to eliminate the festering problem of Languages of Unbearable Pomposity such as French)
A few clarifications need to be made before the question can be answered. First, we mush understand that "war" is not a single thing but an abstract term we use to refer to a particular series of events. During those events (i.e., during a war) Individual soldiers are already held responsible for participating in unjust and illegal actions. This is true whether the war as a whole can be considered just or not.
The second point that should be noted is that America is a representative democracy. If individuals should be held responsible for an “unjust war" then the citizens who authorized the war should bear as much of the burden as the soldiers who fight in it.
Finally, the fact that Canada has sent Celine Dion to debase our American way of life should be sufficient justification for invading our Northern neighbor. The fact that we have ignored such an intentionally aggressive act of provocation shows how restrained we are in the U.S.
4. How many civilian casualties are acceptable, and why?
If the cause is unjust, then the answer is none. If, on the other hand, it is a just war, then the question becomes, “Does the intended good outweigh the potential consequences of the innocents killed?"
For example, say that you have a terrorist group that hiding amongst a civilian population that they are using as “human shields“. The terrorists intend to remotely detonate a nuclear bomb within the hour, killing hundreds of thousands of people. Our military can eliminate this threat by dropping a precision-guided bomb on them but in doing so we'll inadvertently be killing several thousand innocent civilians. What should we do?
Under just war theory, the moral action would be to kill the terrorists and spare the hundreds of thousands of innocent lives that would otherwise be lost.
5. ONE YEAR? And that's the MAXIMUM SENTENCE??? WTF???
Before we break out a rope to hang Sivits with, we should look at the facts:
--Sivits was convicted under a special court-martial which is similar to a misdemeanor trial. One year in prison was the maximum that federal law allows for such crimes.
--Unlike normal prisoners, Sivits year in jail will likely include hard labor (the UCMJ forbids the language from being used in the sentencing). Personally, I'ld rather spend three years in a federal pen rather than do one year of hard labor in a military prison.
--That wasn’t the only part of his sentence. He was also reduced in rank and will be receiving a Bad Conduct Discharge. While civilians tend to make light of those parts of the sentence, they are significant (justa ask Sivits, who was more concerned about the discharge than the jail time). He will have a hard time finding future employment with a BCD on his record.
--We should also keep in mind that Sivits was convicted mainly of being a “passive" abuser. Unlike some of the others, it doesn’t appear that he treated the prisoners violently. He is mainly guilty of participating in the abuse and for failing to stop it from occurring. The others involved, though, will not get off so “lightly."
2
Ttgv, you sound like a Kerry election add. Stop. Please. Second, TEMPORARY fluctuations in gas prices do effect the economy, but you above statement is packed with alarmist language based on a worse-case scenario over the long haul. Might I remind you that we already went through that under Carter, another Democrat, who helped make us dependent on oil in the first place. Luckily, our economy hasad justed to the unnecessary burden, for the most part.
As to Kerry, I trust him as far as I can throw him. He is Clinton, but lacking tact, the ability to lie well, and the intelligence not to make horrendously stupid policy decisions (Clinton was smart enough not to rock the boat). And whatever Kerry's policy is, he has no moral fiber. He is greasier than a used car salesman.
Lastly, I would point out that America's economy is growing at historic rates (look up some non-partisan sources to find out the figures). But, after saying all that, I would agree that we do need to eliminate our dependance on foreign oil. There is plenty up in Alaska, if we, the public, would get it through our collective thick skulls that the environmental impact in negligible and that it would probably drive gas prices well under a dollar, but hey, last I heard, we were only getting eight percent of our oil from the Saudis. I wonder if inflated gas prices have more to do with gov't supported monopolies than foreign oil? It's the big reason while cell phone and cable bills can so high and your service can suck so badly.
Alternative energy is a ways off and we don't gov't agencies mucking around in the market. The market will move to those technologies when they're ready. Forcing firms to create products that have little or no demand will cause a commercial loss. That is going to bankrupt a few companies and drive others further into tit of corporate welfare. No thanks.
posted on 05.25.2004 2:03 AM3
The real answer to drilling in ANWR and our dependence on foreign oil lies in technology that is 50 years old: Nuclear. Were the US to build 100 nuclear plants, we would be swimming in cheap crude.
posted on 05.25.2004 6:49 AM4
Quick comment on "Just war" and civilian casualties: this is an argument that is becoming more forceful only with the advent of precision weapons, and Americans' recent willingness to spare population centers the carnage that war necessarily implies. During WWII, the policy of American forces was this--any armed resistance, anywhere, would be met with full force. A group of Nazi troops holed up in an apartment building would mean that a column of US tanks would demolish the building, while supporting infantry would gun down any survivors.
It is a recent phenomenon that America goes to war not only expecting, but demanding, minimal casualties on our own side, but that we would put our own troops in harm's way to minimize civilian casualties. And, one could argue that doing so extends the war--Japanese will was broken only by relentless bombing, saving probably two million lives were we forced to mount an invasion.
posted on 05.25.2004 6:56 AM5
Are "efficiency" or "effectiveness" good enough reasons for our military to develop an internal culture of unquestioning order-following?
That this question is even asked shows the author has no military experience at all. I know the movies and TV make military people look like mindless order followers, and that everything is accomplished by a lot of yelling cussing and barking orders. The Army I served in was a highly professional force, where junior officers and NCOs were given tasks to accomplish and allowed to use their initiative and creativity to accomplish those tasks. As a junior officer I was in charge of NCOs much senior to me in age. Only a fool would order these guys around like some scene out of "Full Metal Jacket"
Orders are followed in the military, but most people have no real grasp on how we really work together to accomplish the mission.
6
Dude, what's with the irrational hatred of all things French? And while I can certainly understand vitriolic hatred of Celine Dion, I'm not ready to blame all of Canada for her, any more than I'm willing to take responsibility for Carrot Top.
posted on 05.25.2004 10:23 AM7
Dude, what's with the irrational hatred of all things French?
Despising the French is irrational? I never really thought of it that way. It has always been a visceral reaction, like the autonomic response one has to the smell of manure. You can't really explain why you think it stinks -- it just does. ;)
posted on 05.25.2004 10:57 AM8
My last name is French...guess I really stink. Woo-wee, yup, I do...
posted on 05.25.2004 11:03 AM9
Joe, can I blog in my own blog about this blog entry?
posted on 05.25.2004 11:03 AM10
"If individuals should be held responsible for an 'unjust war' then the citizens who authorized the war should bear as much of the burden as the soldiers who fight in it."
I, for one, have never been asked to authorize a war, have never been given an opportunity to vote yea or nay on whether a war should take place; neither has anyone else. I did vote for certain people who later decided to go to war, but this wasn't a pressing issue at the time of the election, and you can hardly say that I authorized any wars based on that.
posted on 05.25.2004 12:03 PM11
"Individual soldiers are already held responsible for participating in unjust and illegal actions. This is true whether the war as a whole can be considered just or not."
Except that *every* action taken in an unjust war is unjust, whereas a solder is only held responsible if he does something that would be unjust in either case.
It seems to me that if we're talking about holding solders legally responsible, that sounds like a bad idea (where would we put them all?). But in terms of moral responsibility I don't think the question is so easy to answer.
posted on 05.25.2004 12:10 PM13
Question:
Do all of you guys support nasty, racist statements about French language and culture?
Do you agree with Infinate Moneys' assertion about "festering problem of Languages of Unbearable Pomposity such as French." Do you find the French language ofensive?
The Nazis did as well...
14
A couple of comments:
1. The "Languages of Unbearable Pomposity" thing was a joke. Just a joke. Like in "Monty Python". Joke. Ha ha. Not as funny as Jerry Lewis, I'll grant you...
2. I have talked to more than one Marine who said basic was EXACTLY like Full Metal Jacket. I have not asked Brad about it, but the two active duty Marines that I know said (apart from the murder-suicide at the end by Detective Goren) it was spot-on. I've also heard from guys I know from the Army that it's basic training is very different (much less extreme), so I'm interested in feedback from other active duty (current or former) Marines to hear what your experiences were like.
BTW, I'll try to grab some meaningful excerpts from the comments section here for my follow-on post.
RobbL
posted on 05.25.2004 1:34 PM15
Doh! David's gonna kill me over that blown apostrophe.
posted on 05.25.2004 1:35 PM16
Sorry - one more thing. I was, to a certain extent, trying to keep the questions abstract. At my church, when we talked about "just war theory," our pastor made a rule that we couldn't talk about the current conflict during the discussion. That was why I gave the "Canada" example, because I thought it would be a more clear-cut example of an unjust war.
posted on 05.25.2004 1:42 PM17
A.: Do all of you guys support nasty, racist statements about French language and culture?
No, actually I like French language and culture. It's Frenchman I don't particularly care for. (Honestly, it's all in fun. I can't take the French seriously enough to get that worked up about them.)
RobbL: I have talked to more than one Marine who said basic was EXACTLY like Full Metal Jacket.
Generally, we Marines say that because it makes us appear tougher, as if we went thru hell.
In reality Boot Camp is much more stressful and difficult than FMJ. But it's not really like the movie at all. I saw FMJ the night before I went to MCRD San Diego in '87 and was terrified. I had reason to be, of course, but the movie didn't prepare me for what to expect.
posted on 05.25.2004 1:50 PM18
Is your post a loaded comment meant to incite anrgy comments? Do you honestly think we have anything against the French language or culture? There are quite a few notable Frenchmen who contributed much to Western culture of were great friends on the United States. Blaise Pascal helped lay down the modern mathematical principals for statistics, proved the theory of barometric pressure, and was the father of several foundational concepts of Christian philosophy. Jean-François Champollion deciphered the Rosetta stone, giving us our understanding of Egyptian hieroglyphs. Gustav Eiffel designed the Statue of Liberty. The Dupont family risked life, limb, and fortune for America during the Revolution. The French also gaveus important military developments like the bayonet and the minnie ball, to name a few.
However, if there is anything I find deplorable of French culture, it's what it's becoming. Namely, an anti-semitic neo-fascist society with a permanent inferiority complex. In so feverishly seeking some type of greatness, they are abandoning anything that makes them great, becoming increasingly petty as well. Of course all of that is an act by those in power, so most of my disgust is not directed at the French people, and yet being a democracy means the people hold some of the responsiblity. The same as we do for our actions.
As to tour comments, they are jokes, which you probably already know, but convenietly feign ignorance for the sake of your rhetoric. The Nazi comment is childish and denegrating to those who suffered, many of whom are still alive, unlike countless millions of others. If I hear one more flipant comparison to Hilter or his Nazi party I am going to post a quote of it on a Holocaust survivor's forum and give them the e-mail of the person who made the comment.
posted on 05.25.2004 1:53 PM19
As an officer who never went through basic, I can't really speak to that particular aspect of military life. I will say for a fact that once soldiers come out of basic and into the regular Army, no one is yelling and screaming and getting in people's faces. Ok sometimes and NCO will need to do a little 'counseling' when a soldier is acting a fool. Honestly as an officer it would be poor form to degrade or humiliate a junior enlisted, and a death wish to dress down a senior NCO.
posted on 05.25.2004 2:08 PM20
"That is going to bankrupt a few companies and drive others further into tit of corporate welfare."
Ah, corporate welfare, the only kind of welfare Republicans can't get enough of. Capitalism at its finest. And all those red states sucking up Federal subsidies like so many greedy piglets at a sow's teats. I'd laugh if it weren't so pathetic and hypocritical.
"Lastly, I would point out that America's economy is growing at historic rates"
Really? Over what time period?
posted on 05.25.2004 5:00 PM21
Bruce, I hate hate belittling arrogance. Your post exmeplifies this fully. Stop it. It's childish.
Now, responding your points. First of all, if you notice, I hate corportate subsidies as well. Let me make one point clear: IT ISN'T CAPITALISM. It allows non-viable businesses to escape competition and other market forces, makes them all but unresponsive to consumer needs, and breeds unethical business practices. Good intentions or no, gov't intervention should be avoided where ever possible. There are plenty of Republicans (not talking about politicians) that agree with me on that.
Now, over what time period are they measuring? Well, I have heard various comparisons on various measurements of recovery, and the time periods rangind from the last twenty years to, if memory serves right, a century. Historical rates or not, the economy is GROWING, and I believe it's about 6.5% per year now, but don't hold me to that. I'm not a business man and I am not an investor. I don't write them and I don't keep them on file, which why I said look it up in the first place, thus asking the question sort of defeats me saying that.
posted on 05.25.2004 6:12 PM22
"Bruce, I hate hate belittling arrogance. Your post exmeplifies this fully. Stop it. It's childish."
Okay Daddy. I'll stop belittling you when you stop spooning out horse apples like one of Herr Karl's li'l puppets.
"I'm not a business man and I am not an investor. I don't write them and I don't keep them on file, which why I said look it up in the first place"
Short version: my head is up my butt but I had no idea anyone else was paying attention.
Really, man, have you no decency? Don't spoon out garbage and expect everyone to lick it up. Leave that sort of nonsense to President Abugrabbu.
posted on 05.25.2004 8:59 PM23
Concerning the five questions on war:
(1) We did have state militias and they went to war and it wasn't too organized and was too political (appointed hacks, but some turned out good leaders); so we developed a national service.
(2) Right now those Iowa Nat. Guard soldiers ARE defending you as a bunch of other soldiers form Ill., Ohio, New York, CA, ND, SD Tenn, Kenn, etc.
(3) Soldiers are taught rules of war, yes there are such things. But, the bad guys are not taught, or are using them against us. For example, two soldiers just returned from Iraq tell me of women used as shields as the enemy shoots from behind them. Civillian casulties will happen. None are acceptable, it is just..well.. war. That is why war is hell.
(4) One year in prison, reduced rank and foreit 2/3 of pay. Try to live on 2/3 pay for a year. I wonder if that soldier has a family?
24
"Short version: my head is up my butt but I had no idea anyone else was paying attention."
Bruce, short version: I don't feel like writing an essay on the subject when I have other things to do. Since it is a posted comment and not an article, I told everyone to check the sources for themselves. If you don't want to do a simple google search, that is your perogative, not mine.
"Okay Daddy. I'll stop belittling you when you stop spooning out horse apples like one of Herr Karl's li'l puppets."
I don't pay attention to Karl Rove. I am not even sure I have heard the man speak or read a quote of his in article. And I am not a Republican Bruce. I don't have a party affiliation. And you still have yet to rise above ad hominem attacks Bruce.
"Really, man, have you no decency? Don't spoon out garbage and expect everyone to lick it up. Leave that sort of nonsense to President Abugrabbu."
My "garbage" as you so call it is called the Austrian School of economics, among whom can be counted economists like Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich von Wieser, Friedrich Hayek, and Joseph Schumpeter. In the case Hayeck, he watched Europe suffer from it's socialist experiments first hand. I suggest that you check out his "Road to Serfdom." Schumpeter, with his theory of "creative destruction" sucessfully predicted the tech bubble at the end of the century, over fifty years before it could have ever have been concieved.
Keynes left us with deficit spending and the welfare state. Marx left us with examples of tyranny ruinous economic collapse. Sweden, with it's rampant national debt and tepid social services showed us a mixed system didn't work.
Now, if you want me to cite more sources than that cursory list for my "gargbage", I'll be happy to Bruce. I made simply made assertions earlier, that I believe to be both common knowledge and a matter of public and historical record. I left people with a disclaimer to look it up for themselves, so I didn't expect them to "lick it up." By saying that I am "spooning" things to people, your making the unspoken assertion that they don't have mind of their own, which is insulting to them. They can come to their opinions and judge the worth and merti of what I am saying.
If you think what I have to say is wrong, make some assertions of your own, point out logical holes, or bring some contrary evidence to the table. This is an open forum and I would be happy to debate it. Dissent is the basis of healthy democracy, but you didn't do that. You proceeded to attakc other people and attack me, and you even agreed you were doing it ("Okay Daddy. I'll stop belittling you when..."). Again, it's childish. It achieves nothing and fails to be useful to anybody.
posted on 05.25.2004 11:57 PM25
David Marcoe:
I agree with what you've posted in this article, but you should probably stop responding to Bruce Baum. He is nothing but a small minded TROLL!
Remember: Don't feed the Trolls!
:-)
posted on 05.26.2004 12:53 AM26
Marcoe bragged,
"My "garbage" as you so call it is called the Austrian School of economics, among whom can be counted economists like Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich von Wieser, Friedrich Hayek, and Joseph Schumpeter."
Yawn.
"They can come to their opinions and judge the worth and merti of what I am saying."
Yeah, it took me about two seconds to come to the opinion that you were a lying sack. "Historic levels"? I asked over what you time period you consider the growth of our econonomy to be "historic" (I guess I'm assuming that by "historic" you meant "a rate high enough to be referred to in history books" or at the very least, "a very very high rate"; I won't be surprised to see you dissembling).
What is historic are President Bush's approval ratings now. And if he ends up winning the election with these approval ratings, that will be truly historic.
I guess the growth rate of the economy can also be considered historic over the last couple months because it's the first time the economy has showed much growth at all under President Abugrabbu. Unfortunately, it won't be enough to provide jobs to the people who need them (and I'm not talking about people in India).
And why is it that all the most bigmouthed Bushlickers are the first to deny being Republican? Weird.
"Now, if you want me to cite more sources than that cursory list for my "gargbage", I'll be happy to Bruce. "
I'm waiting.
posted on 05.26.2004 3:13 PM27
There is an implied condition to that Bruce and that is that you'll actually engage in intelligent debate, instead of insulting. You haven't. So don't hold your breath. And don't respond either, as I won't be reading this thread. In fact, if you ever say anything again in comment to what I post, I won't be commenting, unless of course you feel like having an actual discussion and not degrading people.
posted on 05.27.2004 5:09 PM28
David Marcoe, one of the most self-righteous humans ever to post here, says:
"if you ever say anything again in comment to what I post, I won't be commenting, unless of course you feel like having an actual discussion and not degrading people."
Hmm. Do you mean an actual discussion like the one you started with the following words:
"And whatever Kerry's policy is, he has no moral fiber. He is greasier than a used car salesman."
Whatever, David. Hypocrite.
posted on 05.27.2004 8:57 PM29
I would rother have Iowa State Guard (IASG) defebding are state, than the U.S. Marine Corps against TERRORISTS. CPT Shaun A. Kloster (IASG).
posted on 06.30.2004 5:36 PM