On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 13:07:23 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:


Tom, there have been any number of great leaders throughout history who
have stated they "despise" war (or negatives just as strong) and who
have held their soldiers in high esteem. The father of our country,
George Washington, hated war.


I understand that. And I agree. The soldier does a dirty job - the
job that nobody else wants to do.

However, you cannot make the leap from hating a war and loving the
very people who make that war possible. You are either for it or
against it - you can't be both.


Why not? I think the war in which we are now engaged is the height of
stupidity, but I have no negative feelings about the troops who were
ordered over there.



I fully appreciate the reasons for stating that the war is illegal and
that it is not worth the effort and that we entered into it on dubious
evidence. I understand that.

However, you cannot separate the act of war and the very people who
make it possible.

I differentiate between the people who made it possible (the political
leaders) and those who put their bodies in the way of bullets.

You can't - it's not a logical position - without soldiers, you can't
have a war. It's as simple as that.

If I see a really ugly office building going up, I don't blame the
workmen (assuming the quality of work is decent). I blame the architect.

It's not analogous by any stretch of imagination.

Besides, if you have an ugly building, the architect was only doing
what the owner wanted done. Shoot the owner. :)

If you can, then you need to revisit the Nuremberg Trials transcripts
in which the act of following legal orders does not, in and of itself,
indemnify the soldier from all guilt resulting from performing acts of
war.

That's really not relevant to my position.

Of course it is. If you regard the leaders who made the war as
responsible for creating an fraudulent environment leading and
creating the war, then the war is not honorable or legal. The
political leaders gave the orders for the soldiers to do what they do
- you cannot indemnify the soldier from the very acts that make the
war the war. Even since Nuremberg, the excuse of "only following
orders", stated by Marshall Alfred Jodl (who lead a very interesting
military career being basically opposed to Hitler the entire war, but
managing to survive anyway but hanged not because he did anything
dastardly, but because of his position) is considered, in an of itself
as inexcusable.

As to George Washington, I'm fairly familiar with that War and I can't
think of a specific quote or phrasing that indicated that he hated war
and the acts of war. After all, the only reason he was placed in
command of the Continental Army was because he had a uniform and
Benedict Arnold didn't. :)

However, I'm always willing and able to admit that I'm wrong.

I'll look around for something from Washington relating to his disdain
for war.

Good enough.

Later,

Tom