On this eve of war with Iraq (although, I read that they will comply with the new, improved UN resolution on inspections...what Gulf of Tonkin incident will be fabricated to justify this war?), I think back to about a year or so ago when I was heavily thinking about the post 9/11 world. I'm generally a very lazy emailer but the national frenzy and my own war angst prompted me to participate in some email exchanges with friends which I used to help organize my own thoughts and ideas about the "War on Terrorism." I think some of those ideas could bear repeating in this format. The most thoughtful of these email exchanges was with a close friend from college who now beats the actor path in Los Angeles, Stephen Carver. It was important for me to communicate with him because he opposed the Gulf war back in '91 and I, in my youthful conservatism, supported it. The ideological tables were reversed in this exchange below and it made for some good thought. To be fair to Stephen, this post is my own and therefore heavily biased toward my own ideas--I essentially turn him into a straw man for this reprint, but Stephen is quite the debater so I just wanted to say that his views are not nearly so well represented as my own...

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

so here it is:

I must admit, that I struggled for about a week after the attack about whether to support American military agression to solve the terrorist issue. In fact, much of my self-argumentation in favor of war was very similar to your issues. The attacks were horrifying; I'm still not sure that I fully comprehend the destruction...my initial train of thought was that if ever there was a cause for a "just" war this is it. Let me try to expand my point of view in terms of what you wrote (hope this point/counterpoint thing isn't annoying...Jane you ignorant slut!). Your stuff is, mostly, in parenthesis.

(Now, there were also the "freedom" issues of the Kuwaiti people)

Actually, Kuwait is one of those non-democracies that we support in order to enrich the wealthy elitists that own and run our country...Iraq versus Kuwait...it's kind of like Disney versus the Southern Baptists; I'm not quite sure of who to cheer for...well, okay, Kuwait, but only because they have a smaller military.

(As for the current situation, I believe the stakes are very different. Oil
is not the reason we fight this one...although I will admit it is still a
contributing factor, as it seems to be in all our dealings in that area of
the world.)

I would, myself, even go so far as to argue that it's not just oil driving this "war" but the American economic system itself...my point of view has evolved to the point that I believe our government is of the wealthy elites, by the wealthy elites, and for the wealthy elites. I can't escape the feeling that the "way of life" that the President says we are fighting for is the freedom of capitalists to exploit the poor and powerless and that public shock about the brutality of the terrorist attacks is cleverly being harnessed to provide popular support for US military agression. War will not stop terrorism--government officials have been very clear about that; in fact, we have been informed that war will cause MORE terrorism.

(You're very right when you state that American foreign policy
got us to this place, and hopefully, we WILL change some of that foreign
policy (personally, I don't think we should be friends with totalitarian
governments simply because they control the oil...we have the technology to
get away from the oil, which is a good thing, both for America, and the
world...if we can EVER get the oil companies to switch to the new
technologies...but that's another argument for another day).)

I very seriously doubt that American foreign policy will change at all...if, in fact, the "way of life" for which we fight is actually capitalist exploitation, we cannot change our foreign policy! For decades, our government has been willing to deal with almost any regime regardless of their domestic policies as long as there is some money to be made or regional stability to be provided such that money can be made...do you know about the torture classes at the US military-run "School for the Americas" down in Georgia? We've actually taught foreign soldiers how to kill and torture their own citizens! It is said that the Salvadoran officers that ordered the murder of Archbishop Oscar Romero were trained in the United States. Manuel Noriega was recruited by Bush #1's CIA. Iraq was financed and supported by the US when it was fighting Iran. The Taliban and their ilk were called "the moral equivalent of our founding forefathers" by President Reagan when they were fighting the US financed war against the Soviets...we'll see if our foreign policy changes, but absolutely NO ONE in either the government or the mass media is seriously considering it at the moment. As for oil...well, who got our president elected, anyway? (and I don't mean the Supreme Court.) Military agression is absolutely doomed to fail if it is not coupled with profound changes in how we deal with most of the world...

(However, when
dealing with animals who would do something like bomb the WTC and Pentagon
and kill over 6,000 completely innocent people, you simply cannot let them
win.)

I agree. They are animals and they should not be allowed to win. But, as Bush #2 has pointed out, this "war" will be fought on many fronts, many of them non-military. I support almost all of those approaches that I've heard about (excepting, of course, military agression): freezing assets, criminal investigations, intergovernment police cooperation, increased security and vigilance, diplomatic and economic pressure. I believe that bin Laden should be brought to trial, not killed on a battlefield. This, more than anything else it seems to me, would help to preserve our "way of life" in the way that you and I and all Americans of good conscience understand the concept. This is not a pipe dream! We found the bombers of Pan Am flight 103; we just sentenced the embassy bombers...it might take a long time, but justice has been proven to work (unless you're OJ or Robert Blake...).

(They and the people who support them have committed an unspeakable
crime against humanity (and I don't use the term lightly), and there must be
an end to terrorism in the world...if that's even possible.)

Again, I agree. But terrorism will not ever end until we start to walk the walk rather than simply talking the talk. Henry Kissinger engineered Pinochet's coup in Chile--ever see the movie Missing? He's a free and revered man, a Nobel prize winner and as much of a criminal as bin Laden. How can we denounce terrorism when our government has been guilty of it many times over?

(Even if it's
not possible, we MUST make the price for carrying out such terrorist actions
too high for the people who support them.)

What if the cycle of terrorism/retaliation/terrorism never ends? Do we escalate? When do we drop the bomb? There are conservative thinkers considering that possibility right now...will mass destruction of civilian populations deter terrorism or make terrorists all the more desperate? My best guess is the latter. Not to mention the fact that detering civilian deaths is the reason we make war in the first place...Joseph Heller's Catch 22 comes to mind here...

(I do agree with the freedoms we have been given to try to find happiness in whatever
way possible. The very freedom which allows you to be a pacifist is at
stake.)

I have to respond that in war and mobilizations of the population to support war, these freedoms are some of the first things to go...this is historically true. My biggest fear is that some day soon, I could lose my job or end up in jail for opposing the war...this may sound fanciful to you but many people are really po'd at anyone who criticizes the president or questions the "war." This could get much worse as terrorist attacks increase...We now have an unseen enemy in the US and fervent patriots out to get them; the parallels to the McCarthy era are too numerous to be ignored.

(We now live in a world where madmen will use
airplanes as bombs to achieve political...POLITICAL...ends, and that my
friend, is simply not the way in which civilized people deal with politics.)

I argue that we've been in that new world at least since we were in high school, and violence has been used to solve political problems throughout history--this leads me to wonder what civilization is exactly, anyway. I was enraged and horrified by the attacks but felt no surprise. We've been vulnerable to this kind of attack for years...anybody that has been paying attention knew this despite the way the mass media have utterly downplayed and de-emphasized the problem...in fact, congress has discussed the issue on more than one occasion but any preparation or change in policy was seen as too damaging to business! I see this as proof that this "war" on terrorism is not about American lives, but about world stability for business. Don't forget, besides the thousands of lives lost in the attack, the economy took a major hit...it is my belief that the economic damage, not the loss of life, rallied the wealthy elites to accept changes in policy.

(but killing innocent people has never been something that America has stood for...except
while Nixon was President....ugh.)

I strongly urge you to read Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States." Zinn does a fantastic job of connecting and making sense of thousands of facts that are more or less known to any educated person (including thousands of facts of which I was unaware)...millions of Native American deaths, millions of Africans lost in the brutal conditions of the slave ships and on the plantations, thousands of dead Filipinos in the Spanish-American War, thousands of labor and political dissenters killed in numerous demonstrations and uprisings, the deaths of thousands in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the deaths of thousands of civilians in the bombings and fire bombings of Germany, the napalm and My Lais of Vietnam under Johnson (and ugh Nixon), the thousands dying in Sudan due to the loss of drug manufacturing, the hundreds of thousands of dead children in Iraq due to the US backed economic sanctions...it appears that killing innocent people has always been the American way. I must also point out that in all of these instances, the killing has not benefited the rank and file citizens of the United States; these deaths usually benefit the wealthy elites that dominate and control American politics.

(Osama bin Laden seems to be the type of man that enjoys the power he
commands, and is warping the tenets of Islam to suit his own political
agenda. As he continues to gain power, he will only grow BOLDER, not less
so, and no amount of talking will stop him...we are past that point. He has
already declared his desire is the destruction of America, and the only way
that will ever happen is if we are on the losing side of WWIII, which
is EXACTLY what bin Laden wants.)

I believe that in addition to money, bin Laden desperately depends on Islamic anti-American sentiment in order to have any real power. That's how he gets his recruits; that's why young men are willing to sacrifice themselves, blindly believing that their own deaths will save their culture The true key to ending terrorism is ending anti-American feeling. The only way to do that is to start treating the world as human beings rather than as labor and resources to be exploited and markets to be sold to. But like the wealthy elites are gonna allow that...

(As I see it, our options are as follows: we do what he wants, which is
withdraw from Saudi Arabia, leaving the government there to deal with him
(which they won't...they are terrified of him))

Did you know that the Saudi government has been propped up and militarily supported by our government since the creation of the state? That they practice torture against dissidents? In my opinion, we have always been in the wrong to support the Saudis. The only reason we're there is because of big oil which owns Bush #2's balls and butt.

(and we back out of our relationship with Israel.)

I don't think we should do that...but we do tend to support them no matter what sadistic acts they perform. Israel clearly represses the Palestinians (don't get me wrong, they're pretty unsavory themselves). We pay for the repression, provide the weapons and advanced military training and nod and wink as rock throwing youths are mown down by helicopter gunships.

(Thus, Osama bin Laden wins, and terrorists all
over the world get the message that terrorism works. Then, they will find
some other things they hate about America (our capitalism, the fact we're so
rich...whatever), and they will grow bolder and bomb something else and
we'll have to change our policies again. It will become a continuous loop
of violence.)

Hmm, possibly. But I think that military aggression will result in the same thing. I refer to my policy change and criminal justice recommendations above.

(OR, we stop him (them) now. This is our generation's opportunity to stop
Hitler BEFORE he invades Austria. As unappealing as it is to resort to
violence, there are times when we must.)

I don't think bin Laden is Hitler, yet. But if Middle Eastern anti-American feeling and sympathies with Islamic terrorism continue to increase, he will be Hitler...perhaps Nostradamus's third Antichrist just like the Orson Welles narrated HBO special from the early eighties? (Just kidding.) Remember how Hitler came to power. He used paranoia about Jews and Communists to unify the German public. Economic frustration and a sense of defeat made the people willing to accept strong leadership. I say we address the underlying cultural and economic problems which, in my view, are likely to make bin Laden a Hitler. This is far better than killing, starving, and making refugees of millions of innocent human beings...war torn countries historically resort to crazy leaders (Cambodia springs to mind).

( As much as I believe in the higher
nature of man, there are times when I realize we ARE simply still
animals...and violence does solve some problems)

I guess I'm not that strong of a pacifist because I agree with you in principle...my resistance to war stems from the fact that throughout history, wars are fought by the people while the benefits are gained by the elites. If someone were punching me in the face and I couldn't get away, of course I would fight. Kick the fucker in the balls. I believe that violence does often solve problems. The questions are, what are the problems, whose problems are they, and are there better solutions? In this case, I believe that war will only make things worse.

(and tends to create more)


Well, I guess you can kinda see where I'm coming from...

(As long as there are violent people in the world like Osama bin Laden and
other terrorists,)

or the United States government...

(When people like bin Laden can be brought to a
bargaining table to air their grievances, THEN and only then will the cycle
of violence stop.)

I feel like our foreign policy is such that those that feel as bin Laden does (politically, not violently) have not really had a chance to come to the bargaining table...their concerns directly contradict the concerns of the corporate powers and wealthy elites that dominate American and Western politics...their views and pleas are dead on arrival and rarely are even allowed to arrive...

The rest of your comments about the attacks were concerned with your bad feelings about supporting the "war" and your feelings about the attacks. I feel the same way about the attacks myself...and I understand your feelings about supporting military violence because I felt them myself for about a week or so...

So I certainly do not condemn you for your position. I simply disagree and I thank you for the opportunity to exchange opinions...this whole thing really really sucks big time for hawk and dove alike...everyone is frustrated and feels a strong sense of powerlessness. I've heard that incidence of depression is rising.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Some final notes: This has been slightly edited; I removed a comment about anthrax possibly originating from al Queda and I believe that the School of the Americas is in Georgia, not Florida. So I changed the state. Also this was excerpted from a slightly longer email. Hope you enjoyed my war rant.