Posts Tagged ‘War’
Letter to the Editor
I am writing in response to Peter Molenaar's May op-ed, "Peace Be With You." In this piece, Mr. Molenaar repeats a number of Russian talking points about Ukraine, all of which are refutable by listening to Ukrainian both here at home in Minneapolis or on the ground in Ukraine. But more importantly, as someone with a long academic background studying fascism and the far right, I want to speak to his accusations of Ukrainian "fascistic gangs." Put simply: to believe that, prior to February 24th, there were roving bands of fascists roaming the streets of Kharkiv or Mariupol is false. Fascist groups in Ukraine were and are tiny. They had no meaningful representation in the parliament, nor did the Azov Battalion--about which so much has been said--ever grow beyond about 1000 members. Putin's brutal leveling of their home city of Mariupol has likely killed most of them. Good riddance, but let us also keep their size in perspective. Russian (and Soviet) uses of the word 'fascist' are grounded in their World War II experience. After World War II, the word came to mean "anyone who is opposed to the USSR (or East Germany, etc.)." In this use, it means that the United States, Britain, and France, who supplied so much of the weapons and supplies that kept the USSR from collapsing in the German onslaught, were referred to as "fascists" themselves once the war was over. How could this be? Put simply: it was a rhetorical trick and nothing more. As someone who considers themselves an antifascist, it is and always will be my duty to stand up against fascism wherever it is. At the same time, I have far too many Ukrainian friends from my time living in Central Europe who now find themselves fighting against Putin's unprovoked and plainly genocidal war. They are fighting to preserve their freedom from Putin's authoritarian system. Sincerely yours, sam harrison Powderhorn Park Note: Peter Molenaar, our regular columnist, has promised a rebuttal to Sam [...]
Peace Be With You
By PETER MOLENAAR Should you notice an anguished look in the eyes of our Somali neighbors, bear in mind that some 350,000 Somali-African children are presently at severe risk of starvation due to climate-change-induced-drought. Actually, in that part of the world, several million cling to life in a state of malnourishment. We might then agree that the perpetrators of global warming are guilty of mass murder of unprecedented scale. Moreover, I suggest the ominous trajectory will intensify, lest we put an end to war… and an end to the imperial capitalism which perpetuates war. Let us consider that one root of the Ukrainian crisis stems from the Wolfowitz Doctrine, the essence of which (in Kissinger’s words) intends to “break Russia''. Then, enter Victoria Nuland, Obama’s “point person” in the 2014 Washington engineered coup which toppled Ukraine’s elected government. (Regarding the mobilization of “ultra-nationalist” thugs, nobody should doubt the role of the C.I.A.) Nuland now serves Biden who has used this crisis to deflect from his Tax the Rich/Build Back Better failure. What should have been done? Bear in mind that “our'' Ukraine has denied self-determination to the peoples of the Donbas (southeastern Ukraine). The sad truth: Ukrainian militias have killed some 13,000 Russian speaking people there since 2014. Therefore, Biden should have warned Putin: hey, halt your forces at the western border of the Donbas… halt your forces there, lest the world fail to bear witness to your cause. Putin’s case: 1) Ukraine must disarm its fascistic gangs and private militias 2) Independence for the Donbas region must be upheld 3) Recognize the democratic decision of Crimea to rejoin Russia 4) Proclaim Ukrainian neutrality 5) Say no to NATO. Tragically, Biden failed to act appropriately in a timely fashion, and Putin went way out of bounds to reveal his own imperial vision. Indeed, it appears now that “we” have deployed the “Afghan [...]
The “Laws of War” are the worst idea ever
Just like the “Iraq War”, Obama is now putting a projected “deadline” to end the “Afghan War”, is this even possible? How can he say that the 2014 deadline will mean that “the Afghan War as we understand it is over” --it appears he doesn”'t understand “war”. If he is in a real “war”, then the “war” decides when it is over. If he can “end” the “war” whenever he wants to, and just walk away””what he is partaking in is equal to a video game. And if he does have the power to “end the war” whenever he wants, why not just “end it” now and save a lot of lives and money? They give themselves way too much freedom once they have defined their actions as a “war”. Let”'s say bin Laden attacked New York City and Washington with a military and Bush attacked Baghdad with commercial passenger jets slamming into buildings”¦how would we process it””what it seems to come down to is what we”'re familiar with. If bin Laden attacks America with a military within the “laws of war”, is his violence seen as more legitimate, and if Bush using commercial jets to attack Baghdad, is his violence seen as less legitimate? There is a right way and a wrong way to murder people””bin Laden is a mass murderer, Bush is a “war” starter. Bush murdered people the acceptable way, and Obama is doing the same thing, murdering people the acceptable way within the “laws of war”. (more…)
War cannot be created
“War” cannot not be created like a basketball game”¦meaning you can create a basketball game by doing basketball things, but you cannot create “war”, which is the freedom to kill and destroy, by doing warlike things. You cannot get “war” from doing “war”, “war” cannot create itself. The problem is, we believe “war” can be started like a basketball game, that once you have soldiers, bombers, battleships, things being blown up, you”'ve got yourself a “war”. The “war” starters in 2003 knew this-that even though they did not have any real reasons to attack Iraq, that once they got the visual appearance of a “war” going-they were good, they had themselves a “war”, they had themselves a “war zone” they had themselves the freedom to kill and destroy within the “war zone”, but all they had was a fight that they picked. With our belief that “war” can be accessed through nothing more than violence, defenseless countries like Iraq with “shock and awe”, the country of Iraq was pulled “into war” with the United States and Britain. Just how does attacking someone get them “in war” with you and then have the freedom to kill them? Now this same process is going to be played out with Iran. Israel and the United States talking arrogant talk about whether they will or they will not “go to war” with Iran. Does not Iran even get a say in this? They will be one half of the “war”. Someone needs to explain to me if the U.S. or Israel attacks Iran, how does that pull Iran “into war” with them? It must be a magical pull-in process, because I see no evidence of a military attack having such power. Frank Erickson
