Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   4 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

"What It Is Like to Go to War", by Karl Marlantes--My Response

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Jerry Lobdill     Permalink
      (Page 2 of 6 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

Author 4979
Become a Fan
  (8 fans)
- Advertisement -

These two seemingly incompatible positions invite wonderful moral philosophical debate. I can't say that Waite's position is more or less moral than the warrior's. I can say that the position of the conscious warrior will decrease the suffering of political violence in an imperfect world while the position of Terry Waite will eliminate the suffering of political violence only in a perfect world.


Do you really believe that is what happened in Iraq? In Afghanistan?


One of my axioms of faith is that we don't live in a perfect world. In order for a moral code to be of any practical value, that moral code must be applicable in the world in which we live. I unabashedly take a utilitarian stand that any moral code must help reduce suffering.


There was no warrior's moral code at work in any of our wars except in those men who elected to defy the draft and move to Canada rather than serve in Vietnam.


- Advertisement -

This view invites the criticism that war itself causes more suffering than not going to war. The answer lies in the relative value one places on nonphysical suffering-for example, living under a dictator-and that gets us back into basic belief structures.


You assume that it is the place of the US to make that judgment for other nations and start a war wherein the civilians of that nation have no voice and die by the hundreds of thousands as a result.


Although the world would definitely be less violent and therefore a better place if everyone acted like Waite, we happen to live in a world where people abandon Waite's nonviolent position regularly. When they do, they inflict injustice and suffering on innocent people. The warrior steps in and persuades them, by threatening or inflicting pain and death, to put an end to their harmful behavior. The warrior's dictum is, however, oddly dependent philosophically on Waite's dictum. In order to adhere to the warrior's dictum the ethical warrior acts only when and if others use violence first.

- Advertisement -


You're not convincing me.   The warrior makes no judgment call here. His decision was made long ago when he enlisted.


Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6

I am a retired physicist and hold a B.S. in Ch. E. as well. I have been an environmental activist since the early 1970s. I have been a writer of opinion pieces and other essays since about 1995 and am a published author of history. I have (more...)

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -
Google Content Matches:

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Currency in Fiat Monetary Systems in General and the US Federal Reserve System in Particular

The Trouble With Cash--a World Awash in $100 Federal Reserve Notes

"Small is Beautiful-Economics as if People Mattered"

The looming crisis of the death of Windows XP

We have been transformed into a pathocracy--Political Ponerology, a must read

Conspiracy Theories vs. Conspiracies and the Case of the World Trade Center