Joe Mayer's conclusions on Iraq

War Ponderings – Part Three

by Joe Mayer

• War means foreign occupation of a country for a short or long period of time. Occupation is never benign. It is corruptive, exploitive and violent. Its stated objectives are seldom realized. The interests of the occupier and the occupied are the opposite of each other. In itself occupation produces violence. Will "stay the course" occupation reduce violence, establish a stable government, bring about an Iraqi/American convergence of ideals, or will it produce the opposite?


• War robs a country of some of its best intellects. They are hired or conscripted to design new weapons – bunker buster nuclear bombs, white phosphorus, star wars and the militarization of space. We are supposed to be appeased since some of these technologies filter down to peaceful use. Why don't we put the money and the minds to peaceful objectives first? Are our priorities skewed? Wouldn't the dividends be greater and the losses less? Aren't most of our weapons designed to explosive obsolescence so that more expense is needed to replace them?


• War is classist and racist. In the hierarchy of class and race (it does exist and thrive) humans are ranked in value and therefore some are considered dispensable. Thus, vice-presidents when asked about military service can answer, "I had more important things to do at the time," and presidents can go AWOL without accountability. Do classism and racism provide a means of advocating war without a personal price? Why did we eliminate the draft? Would a new draft be fair or would it still provide refuge for the elite?


• War is war on the media. Embedded means "in bed with." In a dictatorial society the press is forbidden to write against the regime. In modern America the press, owned and controlled by corporate interests, has the same ownership as the majority of elected officials. Thus press, Congress and the administration answer to the same ownership. Does a free press exist in the United States? Is multi-media ownership by a few corporations worth fighting? Is it only a war mentality that is at stake or is it democracy itself?


• War is also war on religion and God. Our president unapologetically claims going to war answers God's call. Falwell and Robertson urge hatred as God's will. Other religious leaders preach a message of peace. The same is true in Muslim practice. Historically this hasn't changed since theism was popularized. Are we so insecure in our relationship with our creator that we bend with religious leaders' latest pronouncements? Do we really believe that God likes us more than other peoples in other nations? Can war convert? Or save?


• War is war on our ideals and democracy. Our president believes that the title Commander-in-Chief takes precedence over "checks and balances," over Constitutional Law, over International Law. Congress is easily bullied into submission. Abhorrence of torture, the right to court hearing, and prohibiting government domestic spying, all achieved after long struggles, are sacrificed to fear. When will we realize that not only the projected enemy but we ourselves are losers in war? How can a free people idealize a "war president"? How many democracies have been lost from within?


• War is war on truth and trust. The current administration isn't the first to play loose with truth in order to get citizen approval for its imperial ambitions. Historically, both Democratic and Republican administrations have misled the American people into approving and paying for war with life and treasure. When Congress goes along with this charade it too suffers loss of trust. The present approval rating of Congress is even lower than the president's. Why do Americans elect people who can't be trusted? Does it demonstrate the futility of an electoral system based on money and sound bites? Will war be our foreign policy response as long as money dominates politics? Is it democracy?


• War is war on domestic programs that assist citizens in need. As our military budget soars and we let the President get away with budgeting for war outside the normal process, domestic programs are called "budget busting." How can the richest country in the world refuse to provide healthcare, college education, housing, that affects more people than any other first-world country? Does it matter whether it is called communism or socialism or another -ism when we care for our fellow citizens?

Considering all of the above – WAR IS IMMORAL.