What Veterans For Peace Said

A draft of my thoughts on Obama's war against ISIL was rendered moot when I read the statement issued by Veterans For Peace.  So I will simply quote my brother veterans who say it well.

Veterans For Peace is disappointed but not surprised by the so called strategy President Obama presented last night. We are disappointed because it is more of the same. The U.S. will continue to be “the greatest purveyor of violence” on the earth. It will continue to follow a failed policy of war-making in the Middle East.  It will continue to waste precious financial resources which should be directed toward human needs and to support the U.S. economy.  It will continue to put U.S. service members into harm’s way when other solutions are possible and it will continue to take the lives of innocent people, most of whom will undoubtedly be women and children who are always disproportionately impacted by war.

We are not surprised because it has been made clear to us that our leaders are not interested in finding solutions other than war to solve international conflicts.  After thirteen years of war what has been accomplished? Iraq and Afghanistan are in shambles, the Taliban has not been defeated, al Qaeda has further decentralized to at least thirty countries, ISIL has emerged as a power of sorts in Iraq and Syria and a State Department report outlines that terrorism increased by 43% in 2013. By any objective measure, U.S. foreign policy in the Iraq and Afghanistan from Bush to Obama has been a failure. Yet more war is put forth as the answer, even though President Obama himself in the recent past said there is not a military solution to the violence in Iraq and last night explained that ISIL does not pose an immediate threat to the U.S. Why then do we continue down this path?
[...]
President Obama outlined a strategy no different from what the U.S. has done for the past thirteen years. It is not a plan for success, it is a gamble that war will work this time when it has spectacularly failed thus far. We at Veterans For Peace challenge the American people to ask whose interests does endless war serve? Who is paying for these wars, whose children are dying in these wars and who is getting paid to finance and provide weapons for these wars? We the people are being driven by manipulated fear to support polices that are not in our interest. Peace is harder than war, but it is cheaper in blood and treasure. After thirteen years it is time to take another path, the path of peace.

If only...

Duane King (1936-2014)

Olympia Veterans For Peace lost another long-time member last week.  Duane King, a Korean War veteran who served in Vietnam with the State Department, died March 3.  Duane was fiercely anti-war and was a constant reminder to the rest of us about why we were veterans for peace.  Duane was part of the studio crew for our chapter's cable-access television program, "The Veterans' Hour" but also told his own story in front of the camera as part of our Soldiers' Stories series.


Godspeed, Duane.

Another Passing. One On Deck.

T.S. Eliot called April "the cruelest month".  April 2013 certainly lived up to that reputation for me and even came with a follow-up kick in early May.  I previously wrote about the death of my co-worker  April 1.  Turns out that was only the first death notice.

Not long after my co-worker died, my friend Mel was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer that had metastasized to his lung.  His prognosis is six to 12 months.  Mel is almost 83 and beat several cancers in his 60's so he is pretty mellow about his fate.  He calls himself lucky.  I am lucky to have known him for the past nine years.  He's been good company and, as a retired attorney, a valuable and sometimes iconoclastic legal resource.  Had I not met Mel, I may not have ended up in Olympia.  His son's connection to this town that brought me here.  Maggie and I are taking the opportunity to enjoy his company while we can. 

That was April.

May began with another death.  Ken Schwilk's died May 8.  Ken is a fellow Veteran For Peace, a charter member of the Rachel Corrie VFP Chapter 109 here in Olympia and Camera 1 on the studio crew for the chapter's cable access television program, "The Veterans Hour".  Ken served in Vietnam in the late 60's.  Here in Olympia he has been a consistent and vocal advocate for peace.  I am honored to have served with Ken as a veteran for peace.

Ken's death was sudden; most of us learned of a possible cancer diagnosis only in late April.  I saw him mid-March and can't say that I noticed anything at all.  Maggie thought less color maybe.  He performed in an annual musical production in February.  And now he is gone at 68.

Aside from Vietnam and VFP, Ken and I had the shared experience of living in Charlottesville and Richmond, Virginia.  As a regional manager his territory covered the southern portions of  Piedmont Virginia where I grew up.  We both knew the routes and landscape of that region.

Godspeed, Ken.

Ken in September 2012

Those Terrible Veterans

Veterans For Peace Chapter 92 was rejected for marching in the Auburn, Washington Veterans Day parade.  Now a federal judge has ordered the city to allow VFP to march.  

Apparently veterans advocating peace bring the wrong message.  As the city attorney described it,

the city was thanking veterans for their contributions and for “defending freedoms around the world,” and that the VFP’s anti-war message, peace flags and reminders of the human and financial tolls of conflict were antithetical to that message.

That's right folks, reminders of the human and financial tolls of conflict are not a welcome thought on Veterans Day.  Fortunately, the judge saw right through that bullshit:

Judge Pechman said it would be a stretch to somehow arrive at the conclusion that the VFP’s message that “peace is a good thing” is somehow dishonoring veterans. She ordered the city to ensure that the group’s placement in the parade is “in keeping” with its members’ status as veterans.

Ignoring the cost of war makes it all too easy to think of war as an option. 

Shameless Video Pluggery

A few weeks ago I taped an interview about my book, At the Speed of Foot, for The Veterans Hour", a production of my VFP Chapter here in Olympia.  The interview is a mix of Appalachian Trail and Vietnam experiences with discussion and plugs for the veterans benefit counseling that program host Dennis Mills and I provide at Coffee Strong.

It's about an hour long.  Watch what you will.

Not only does Dennis interview guests well, he also does post production editing for final release.

Dennis is the other counselor with me at Coffee Strong.  Actually it's me with him since I alternate Fridays; Dennis goes every week.  Today we learned that he passed the exam to be certified by the VA.  Now we are both certified.

Update:  I cannot  figure out how to resize the video to not overlap my blogroll.  If you want to watch without seeing links bleeding through the image, you can find the video here.

Keeping Some Perspective

As much as the VFP Convention made me realize how little my society has moved toward greater peace and justice, it also reminded me that I always have the option to resist. Resisting is a difficult and risky choice. That was no more evident than listening to S. Brian Wilson talk of resistance and seeing two prosthetic legs in place of the ones he lost blocking a nuclear weapons train in 1987. The namesake of my VFP chapter is Rachel Corrie, who lost her life at age 23 resisting dispossession in occupied Palestine. That is what I call resistance.

My own resistance has involved far less risk. Hell, most of the time it barely involves inconvenience. I was more willing to risk my life in complying with orders to fight in Vietnam than I have ever been in resisting America's economic and social injustice and inherent militarism. Like most Americans I have cooperated with the economic and social systems that create the injustice and war. For most of my life I believed that American would change and that the progress toward human dignity and security for all would come to pass.

Recent events convince me that I fooled myself, that I am a victim of the "Delusional Revolution" described by Robert Jensen, another convention speaker. Jensen described the three great revolutions in human history. The first was the agricultural revolution which created the hierarchical society that enabled some to dominate others. The second was the industrial revolution which exploited fossil fuels to create even greater concentration of power. And the third is the delusional revolution, the idea that we can continue to amass wealth based on a finite resource. Although I've long known that Earth's resources are limited, I've not really acted on that knowledge. I still drive a private vehicle. I continue to fly. I acquiesce to the power structure that profits from exploitation.

And all of this means that if my actions and beliefs have any meaning, I must refuse to cooperate with the system that is destroying this planet and the many species that live here. But here's the rub--my non-cooperation is only effective as part of a mass movement. My actions alone will change nothing. So that's why the convention, as frustrating as it seemed, reminds me that I am not alone, that many others share my beliefs. What we need now is to organize and act.

The several hundred VFP members who were in Portland this weekend are one of many core groups that can give meaning to our individual actions. I was especially pleased to see Iraq Veterans Against the War attending and participating in the convention; two IVAW members serve on the VFP national board. I take some comfort in knowing that another generation of veterans is speaking out.

A while back I read somewhere that activism is simply what one person can do and that success is not necessarily guaranteed, that the final outcome may be long in the future. But in the meantime, acting keeps hope alive. So that's what I'm doing--keeping hope alive.

That was worth a trip to Portland.

Why March?

"To get from one place to another," according to my basic training drill sergeant. That's pretty much the entire point. From that perspective, after seven years of war, another march against the war doesn't take us anyplace we need to go. I did not march yesterday. The time and effort to travel to Seattle for any large-scale march (for which I find no evidence in the local media) the is just not worth it. I and many other Americans have been in the streets since 2003. Maybe we kept things from getting worse but we did not stop the greatest disaster of all: extended wars of occupation and garrisoned military bases around the world. To keep doing the same things and expecting different results makes no sense. If I'm marching I want to be going someplace.

Maybe 10,000, maybe less, turned out in DC yesterday to remind our government that many Americans do not consent to war in our name. I'm disappointed that the message doesn't come through more forcefully. Hundreds of thousands should be in the streets, just as millions around the world said "No!" to war seven years ago. Americans overwhelmingly voted to end the war in November 2008. But then, that didn't work, so maybe most of us have decided not to waste the effort required to march.

Here in Olympia, Veterans For Peace held a candlelight vigil Friday evening at Sylvester Park downtown for Iraqi civilians killed in the crossfire. We put up about 500 markers with the names of dead civilians of all ages and circumstances. At 7:34 pm, the time on 19 March 2003 of the first shock and awe strike, we read one name and rang a bell in memory of the dead. We did that 13 more times. Earlier in the evening our regular Friday vigil had more than the usual suspects and the Artesian Rumble Arkestra had its largest ensemble ever--I counted 18 musicians. I had a good breeze for my VFP flag.

Yesterday's marchers, however few, have my appreciation. As frustrating as it may be to petition without effect, the effort keeps the idea alive, still percolating somewhere in the national consciousness. Fortunately, the DC marchers had good weather and from the looks of it some had a good time. If nothing else, joining thousands of others in the streets, is a good reminder that we are not alone.

Best slogan: "Jobs and Education. Not War."

Best sign: "Drop My Tuition. Not Bombs."

Snarkiest sign: "Pinochet's Buddy, Kissinger, Has a Peace Prize, Too."

Increasingly Meaningless

The other night I heard Rethuglicans chastising the Democratic Congressional majority (aka, Defeatocrats) for not funding CheneyBush’s latest request for war funding. Apparently, the Democrats were willing to cough up $70 billion for the war after CheneyBush agreed to $11 billion extra for domestic spending. When he backed off from the domestic money, Democrats, who’ve demonstrated all year that they are suckers for Rethuglican terror tactics, found something resembling a spine and balked at the $70 billion. Majority leader John Boehner and the junior senator from my former home state of Arizona, Jon Kyl, declaiming about Democrats failing to “support the troops”.

Nothing new there. But I find the phrase particularly hollow from a party and administration that has consistently failed to support those troops when they return from the war with physical and mental injuries. Back during my little war, this was not a problem since EVERYBODY just wanted to forget the whole thing and the soldiers who fought in it. Some anti-war folks were even hostile to the troops, although I think that hostility has been blown out of proportion. Far worse was the indifference that was everywhere.

That’s not the issue this time around. Everybody “supports” the troops, so much so that they are a political football to be bandied about in favor of particular political agendas. I’m no different; I have my own agenda. I define supporting the troops as sending them into harm’s way only when absolutely necessary and making every effort to help them return to something approaching a normal life when they return. By that definition America fails on both counts. We’ve sent our forces to a wholly unnecessary war in Iraq and we have provided nowhere near the resources to assist them and their families when failed them miserably upon their return.

Of course, that is merely my interpretation. Sure, it’s based on what I read but my knowledge is at best second-hand. I know few Iraq veterans and those few share my anti-war views. I really don’t know what the mass of this generation’s veterans think or feel. Unlike me, they are all volunteers. I do know from my own experience that soldiers have an incredible “can-do, will-do” ethic. Even I was not immune to that ethic although I rejected the entire premise of the reasons for my being in combat. I’m pretty sure that ethic is even more entrenched in the modern volunteer army.

Which brings me back to the point. If America wants to support the troops, it should think carefully about why we ask them to shed their humanity and kill other people, either directly or as “collateral damage”. That’s the political agenda I have in mind when I say support the troops: give them a mission worthy of their sacrifice and make them whole (or as close to whole as possible) after that sacrifice.

[cross posted at Mockingbird's Medley .]

A Day at School

Last week, I joined fellow Veterans For Peace in a counter recruiting presentation at a local high school. Unlike military recruiters who have full access to school facilities, students and student information, counter recruiters must be invited by students, parents or teachers. We spoke to five English classes in a Phoenix area high school. If nothing else, the day reminded me of how hard teachers work. I was exhausted at the end of the day.

The kids were overwhelmingly Hispanic with some white, black and native Americans. What I noticed mostly was that they were kids in all their varied styles and expressions. Their teacher gave us a list of questions she had requested from each class. The questions were at once naive, insightful and honest. The teacher did an excellent job of incorporating us into the curriculum. She provided her students with a triangle diagraming the elements of argument--emotion, logic, factual information–and asked them to identify how we used each and give examples. She also used the opportunity to introduce vocabulary that was unfamiliar in our presentations. I thought it was a creative use of the opportunity to teach.

Our presentation was pretty direct and graphic. We talked of war as killing and explained the moral and ethical dilemmas we faced in that situation. We also showed photographs of war, not to shock but to remind the students that war nothing like the sanitized version offered by the media. Dennis told about his first kill in Vietnam, about how difficult and mind-bending it was, about how he read the dead man’s letters revealed that the dead man was no different from himself. John asked the students if they are willing to kill another human being. None were. They said it is not right unless that other human being is actually presenting a deadly threat (my paraphrase of their answers). I spoke about the balance between one’s obligation to serve the country and the nation’s obligation to honor that sacrifice with meaning. All three of us told them why we believe they should be wary of recruiters and this war. Dennis emphasized the particular risk of assault and rape faced by women in the military. We did not get too many questions directly from the classes. Most of the students were reticent. The list of questions we had gave their names so we asked them about their questions and opened a dialogue that took some interesting turns.

A few students asked about the military’s focus on Hispanic recruits, especially after we described the new recruiting offices the US has opened in Mexico, Dominican Republic and the Philippines. Some were aware of the contradiction in a country that welcomes Mexicans as recruits but not as immigrants. They also asked why we have wars, for which our only answer is that nations and leaders fail in their dealings with each other. When we asked them if they knew why the US is fighting in Iraq, most were silent. The ones who spoke said “9-11" which gave us the opportunity to describe the very real disconnect between the Iraq war and that tragic event.

I was amazed at how little of the world these students seemed to know compared to my own knowledge at that same age. Of course, my 40 year old memories of high school probably give me more credit than was actually the case. I was more aware of Vietnam and world events at their age but I was also pretty advantaged compare to these students so the difference could easily be due to that. Their lack of awareness did not mask their intelligence or curiosity at all. I thought many showed a real ability to think, especially the ones who stuck around after class to ask more questions.

We explained how recruiters work and why. We offered information on how students can protect themselves from recruiters by either opting out of the federal requirement that the school share information, by learning about the military and what it offers or by taking a parent or a veteran with them if they are interested in a military career. We used to recommend the military as a possible career choice, provided that a recruit does in fact get the training and opportunities he or she signs up for. Recent changes in the recruiting contract eliminate any guarantees–a recruit may be trained in a skill they request but there is no guarantee that they will actually be assigned to work in that skill if the military needs them for other purposes (read: combat or combat support). These days we tell the kids to look elsewhere in contemplating ways to serve their nation.

For me the best part of the day was seeing a teacher who teaches her students to think. I cannot imagine a greater gift.

postscript

We received a very nice thank you note from the teacher and a stack of thank you’s from the students. I’m just starting to read them now and will post some of their comments later.