An excellent piece on the nature of war, and how to avoid it.
Ignore the titles (of Blog and post) - this is one of the few times the linked blog is not snarky at all.
Go ahead and read - I'll wait.
Good, now that you've read it - I agree with most everything he posits, but I would reinforce the idea that the post is, essentially, a way to make the anti-war movement more effective. I almost came away from his post thinking it a soft indictment of the current anti-war movement (and I suppose it is, in its way), but I would also say that he, and I, understand the NEED for the anti-war movement, and the strong desire for it to be more effective and more approachable. We need the anti-war movement as a
This is me speaking now only for myself. I've, despite my choice of profession, marched through DC against the war I later fought. I love the people I met there, and think I understand their motivations (to some degree), but in the end the movement in this country ends up being dominated (certainly in media coverage, possibly in reality) by groups (be they anarchist, socialist or simply disorganized) who lack a coherent platform that would be workable in this country.
I relish the thought that one day there will be an anti-war movement in this country with a strong political and philisophical backing - that can stand in opposition to the many pro-war interests we have today.
No, not really. But he is, evidently, thinking about the same things I am.
Here
This is precisely the reason it is time to get rid of the all-volunteer force. It has been too successful. Our relatively small and highly adept military has made it all too easy for our nation to go to war -- and to ignore the consequences.
Perhaps that is true, but it seems to me that isn't enough reason. As I said before, government-sponsored slavery (with a high mortality rate) [to paraphrase another friend of the blog] is, perhaps, not the best way to hold politicians accountable for their actions.
