Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ;  (less...)
Add to My Group
May 26, 2008 at 11:36:19

View Ratings | Rate It

Memorializing The War Dead

by Douglas Smyth     Page 1 of 1 page(s)

www.opednews.com


Tell A Friend

Now let's think about the war dead this Memorial Day past and remember about the over 55 thousand killed in Vietnam, the over 4,000 killed in Iraq. But think about this: what did they die for?

 

It is probably true that in Afghanistan we're fighting a non-state enemy that does at least threaten harm against our nation, but look at what the 55,000 dead bought in Vietnam. Vietnam, Communist Vietnam, is now a full trading partner of the US, although not as critical to our economy as the Communist nation to its north (the Peoples Republic of China).

 

About the only thing those 55,000 plus fatalities won for the US was about a decade of turmoil in Southeast Asia after it left Vietnam.

 

Will the 4,000 and counting in Iraq win the US even as much?

 

The prevailing rhetoric on the stump and amid the bunting of this Memorial Day is that our war dead paid the ultimate sacrifice "for Freedom." But did they, in Vietnam; are they in Iraq? Rhetoric does not meet reality.

 

It may comfort those who lost husbands, wives, lovers, fathers, mothers, sons, daughters in these wars to think that at least they were fighting "for Freedom," but in the wars we have fought, at least since Korea, and with the possible exception of the war against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the US was not fighting "for freedom." It was, and is, fighting for Empire, although it never acknowledged this openly. After all, neither the Vietnamese of Ho-Chi-Minh, nor the Iraqis of Saddam Hussein actually threatened the US's "freedom." Parenthetically, both were former allies, Ho-Chi-Minh against the Japanese in Southeast Asia, Saddam against the Iranians (we shared intelligence with him until about a week before the first Iraq war). Even Osama bin Laden was a former, if unwitting, ally in the fight in Afghanistan against the USSR. The US provided the resources for setting up, training and equipping the Mujahadeen, who later became al Qaeda.

 

These are not the only imperial wars the US has fought. The Mexican-American War and the Spanish-American war were explicitly imperialistic. At one point in the early 20th Century, it seemed possible that both Cuba and the Philippines would become American states. The US takeovers of Puerto Rico and Hawaii were also purely imperial ventures, and the Hawaiians of today (the native Hawaiians) still wish for what they had before: an independent nation.

 

I am not writing this to dishonor or discredit the sacrifices Americans have made for their country. Those sacrifices were real enough.

 

It's the rhetoric that isn't real; Americans dying in Iraq are not dying "for freedom;" they're dying so that American oil companies can gain real control of Iraqi oil, so that multi-national corporations can dominate Iraqi markets and so that the cronies of Bush-Cheney-McCain can continue to profit from the unbelievably lucrative war contracts that the occupation generates. Americans are dying, in other words, for very private profit, at the expense of the Iraqis and at the expense of the rest of the United States, which cannot afford to provide health care, or rebuild its crumbling infrastructure, or adequately support its lagging educational system in large part because of the huge war expenditures (voted for again, by the "Democrats" in the US Senate) and in part because our international debt is rapidly depleting the value of the only major asset we have left: the US dollar.

 

Americans are dying so that the US can become a bankrupt, second-rate nation, whose people's health is significantly poorer than most other industrialized nations, whose children are not being educated as well as French, Italian, or even Chinese children and whose roads, bridges, railroads and airports are falling noticeably behind even many "emerging" economies in Asia.

 

On Memorial Day this year, Americans should reject the smarmy rhetoric of "dying for freedom," and reflect upon what it is that Americans are really dying for. They die for a failing vision of American Empire, at least as doomed as Rome's was in, say AD 457, when Emperor Majorian took the throne. Rome fell nine years later, in part because Majorian's vision of ruling for the people died with him when he was assassinated in 461.

 

I do not imply that the US will "fall" as Rome did, but there are many parallels to the era, (see my <u>The Selfish Class</u> at http://www.roman-empire-america-now.com when the ruling millionaire class (Roman Senators) believed that the Roman Empire was eternal; they were unwilling to part with even a small part of their wealth to finance economic recovery, or even defense "of the homeland." Their counterparts today are led by Senator McCain, who wants to make the tax-cuts for the wealthy permanent, while fighting even more imperialistic wars, and who is even willing to compromise on the use of torture, despite the fact that he was tortured himself--in one of the US's imperialistic wars.

 

What McCain and the pro-war party are really for is the continuation of imperial aggression against any nation (Iran, Venezuela, Somalia? China, Russia) they perceive as standing in the way of US global hegemony. That way lies obvious disaster, since the US can't even afford to maintain the two smallish wars of occupation in which it is currently engaged.

 

So, memorialize the war dead, but think seriously about why they died.

 

http://www.roman-empire-america-now.com

I am a writer and retired college teacher. I taught college courses in Economics and Political Science (I've a Ph.D) and I've written as a free-lancer for various publications. I now write a website and a blog at (more...)
 

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.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 comments


George Custer Bush

I wonder what's on GW Bush mind standing in front of the graves of those who died in Iraq? For they did not died for anything, not even for Iraqi oil. But perhaps they died for 21th century George Custer grand delusions.

by TomK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 331 comments [24 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 26, 2008 at 12:20:57 PM

Recommend  (0+)

Memorializing...

Thank you.  What you have to say is so obvious one wonders why it has to be said.  The comment about "George Custer Bush" makes me think of John McCain who is brave (and brash), finished at the bottom of his class and is, as was Geo. Armstrong Custer, and politically ambitious.

by Gerald Sutliff (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Monday, May 26, 2008 at 1:03:59 PM

Recommend  (0+)

I'm a vet.

I just wanted to point this out; I served, for three long years.

I was lucky; I got out of the Army just before the first escalation into Vietnam, but I was in the reserves then. For that war they didn't call up many reserves, for which I was thankful.

But I'm sure that many of the people we called "lifers," men I knew and worked with, went on to Vietnam, and some of them probably died there.

The point I'm making above is that they did not die for freedom. Most of them fought simply to protect their buddies. They may have been gallant, courageous, heroic, but they did not die for freedom, even if they thought they were.

Rhetoric is not reality, but it enables a skewed and mistaken War policy to continue--until we bankrupt ourselves and our Saudi, Chinese and Japanese financiers say "Enough!"

by Douglas Smyth (27 articles, 5 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 91 comments [8 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, May 27, 2008 at 10:16:40 AM

Recommend  (0+)

Soldiers are victims and suckers like everyone else.

They are not heros, psychos, or noble savages.  The dead ones are victims of political and military accidents, no more.

by John Hanks (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1762 comments [39 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 2:30:11 PM

Recommend  (0+)

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

Most Popular Articles
in the Last 2 Days
(by Recommend Emails)

Health Insurance Exec Whistleblower Wendell Potter Testifies Before Congress by Wendell Potter

REPORTING FROM HONDURAS: Hondurans Call Out for Help from the International Community by Medea Benjamin

Bush's 4th of July Celebration Posted by Darla

North Korea – Impending Missile Launch May Require US Military Action by Steven Leser

Italy to Declare Independence from U.S. Military by David Swanson

How the Terminator Can Save the World by Scott Baker

Most Americans stupid as a box of rocks as to overpopulation: On American sustainability--Anatomy of Societal Collapse by Frosty Wooldridge

USA's Role In the Honduran Coup -- and How We Must Fix It by Mary Shaw

Tampa, FL - UnitedHealth to Enter Funeral Parlor Industry by James Dunham

Does North Korea Really Pose a Grave Threat to the Security of the US? by Nathan Nahm

Go To Top 50 Most Popular

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum