Memorial Day is a US
federal holiday wherein the men and women who died while serving in the United
States Armed Forces are remembered.
This weekend and continuing through Monday Americans will
witness countless varied acts of praise for those who have died in America’s
wars. Ball games, parades, pancake
breakfasts, even Sunday church service (Laurence Vance,
be on alert) – one or more of these will offer opportunities for just about any
patriotic American looking for an opportunity to worship.
Apparently, about
1.3 million Americans died in the wars since 1775 (not counting suicides,
apparently one
every 65 seconds since 1999). It is
worth considering: for what did they die?
Was any of it worth it?
(Note: I will not, in this post, examine the costs and devastation
for those victims of American military aggression, more by orders of magnitude
– Memorial Day does not recognize those who died on the other side….For the
most part, apparently, Americans don’t care.
There is no American holiday for you!)
I will spend the most digits on this war, as even
the most principled anti-war critic might consider it an appropriate war.
The American Revolutionary War
(1775–1783), the American War of Independence, or simply the Revolutionary War
in the United States, was the successful military rebellion against Great
Britain of Thirteen American Colonies…
Certainly, if there was one war worthwhile in the history of
the United States, it would have to be this one. Who on earth could possibly disagree (well,
besides King George)?
“Hey, back here…I have a question: Whose
independence was won?”
It seems fair to ask if the war was
worth it. What if the war wasn’t
fought? What was this “independence”? “Independence” for whom? Was life for the average American different
than life for the average Brit twenty years after the war? One hundred years? Two hundred years? Was life for the average American different
after the war than it might have been had this war not been fought at all, if
the colonies remained part of the empire?
What of the path of Canada or Australia? Did the American Revolutionary War result in
a vastly different life for the average American than it did for the average
Canadian or Australian?
I don’t recall reading about a Canadian war for
independence. Let’s check:
Canada Day (French: Fête du Canada)
is the national day of Canada, a federal statutory holiday celebrating the
anniversary of the July 1, 1867, enactment of the British North America Act,
1867 (today called the Constitution Act, 1867), which united three colonies
into a single country called Canada within the British Empire.
Frequently referred to as "Canada's
birthday", particularly in the popular press, the occasion marks the
joining of the British North American colonies of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,
and the Province of Canada into a federation of four provinces (the Province of
Canada being divided, in the process, into Ontario and Quebec) on July 1, 1867.
Canada became a kingdom in its own right on that date, but the British
parliament and Cabinet kept limited rights of political control over the new
country that were shed by stages over the years until the last vestiges were
surrendered in 1982, when the Constitution Act patriated the Canadian
constitution.[
Canada Day?
What? It sounds so…passive. No war, no blood, no glory? They just, kind of, decided? No rockets’ red glare? What do they do in place of fireworks? Trade pens?
They call it a “birthday”! It is
so…non-violent. No war, plus they got the greatest rock band of all time out of the
deal.
What about the Aussies?
Hold onto your vegemite sandwich; you won’t believe this. They don’t even know when they got
independence; well not
exactly anyway:
We only became independent of
Britain on this day [March 3] in 1986.
You might think this statement
absurd. Surely Australia has been independent for a lot longer than that? Let
me provide a lawyer's answer: yes and no.
Yes, Australia as a nation became independent at some unknown date after 1931. By 1931 it had the power to exercise
independence but chose not to do so for some time.
An unknown date? Don’t
they care?
They could have done it in 1931, but didn’t? No bullets, no crossing the Murrumbidgee covered
in ice, no Valley Styx, no nothing? Were
they upset that they didn’t get to fight a war?
Did they declare a war, and Britain forgot to attend?
The Australian states, however, did
not gain their independence from Britain at that time. Bizarrely, they remained
colonial dependencies of the British crown, despite being constituent parts of
an independent nation. This meant state governors were appointed by the Queen
on the advice of British ministers and that it was the Queen of the United
Kingdom (not the Queen of Australia) who gave royal assent to state bills.
So what happened in 1986?
On March 3, 1986, these acts, the
Australia Acts, came into force. They state that the British government is no
longer responsible for the government of any state and that the Westminster
parliament can no longer legislate for Australia. Most important, they
transferred into Australian hands full control of all Australia's
constitutional documents. So March 3, 1986, is the day Australia achieved
complete independence from Britain. Happy Australian Independence Day.
That’s it? What
wimps!
Well, unlike the Canadians and Australians, at least the
Americans got to stay out of the British wars for the intervening 200 years…wait,
check that. More on this later, I think.
Back to the American Revolution: Will we ever know the true
behind-the-scenes story?
There was one person in a position
to do a completely thorough job of telling the story of the revolution, as he
had first-hand knowledge of every political action taken and attempted by the
principle actors of the time. [From “The
New Nation,” by Merrill Jensen]:
The one figure who, more than any
other, represented continuity throughout the Revolution was Charles Thomson,
the Irish-born “Sam Adams of Philadelphia.” He was elected secretary of the First
Continental Congress by the radical
element which had immediately sensed in him a fellow spirit. (Page 361,
emphasis added)
Unfortunately, we will never know Thomson’s story. He destroyed his notes and manuscripts:
He gave as a reason, that he was
unwilling to blast the reputation of families rising into reputation, whose progenitors were proved to be unworthy
of the friendship of good men, because of their bad conduct during the war.
(emphasis added)
Thomson destroyed his history
because the facts would have been damaging to the reputations of the
descendants of the founding generation.
The founding fathers were
scoundrels!
There was a subset of the founders who thought it better to
keep the gains of political power on the continent instead of sending the gains
to Britain. These were the only
“winners” of the Revolutionary War; just ask George
Mason:
…“posterity will reflect with
indignation that this fatal lust of sovereignty, which lost Great Britain her
western world, which covered our country with desolation and blood, should even during the contest against it, be
revived among ourselves, and fostered by
the very men who were appointed to oppose it!”
Robert Morris exemplified this class, but he
was not alone. Contrary to the myth
of Morris being the
financier of the revolution:
No attack on Morris was more
extreme than that by William Lee who declared him a most dangerous man in America.
He said that Morris was bankrupt at the beginning of the war, left the
country bankrupt at the end of it, but that at the same time “amassed an immense fortune for himself….”
Morris’ class won their
final victory in Philadelphia, 1787.
The War of 1812 was a two and a
half-year military conflict between the United States of America and the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, its North American colonies and its
Indian allies.
The first war of (attempted) American Imperialism. From Justin
Raimondo:
The warhawks, led by John Calhoun,
were motivated less by outrage over British harassment of American persons and
commerce than by the emerging delusion of Manifest Destiny that energized the
earliest advocates of an international American empire. The Appalachian and
southern states were the epicenter of this ultra-nationalistic agitation, and
the editors of the Nashville Clarion gave voice to the imperialist impulse when
they asked:
“Where is it written in the book
of fate that the American Republic shall not stretch her limits from the Capes
of the Chesapeake to Noorka Sound, from the isthmus of Panama to Hudson Bay?”
In 1809 Jefferson
wrote his successor James Madison:
"we should then have only to
include the North [Canada] in our confederacy...and we should have such an
empire for liberty as she has never surveyed since the creation: & I am
persuaded no constitution was ever before so well calculated as ours for
extensive empire & self government."
- Jefferson to James Madison, 27 April 1809
Even in his later years, Jefferson
saw no limit to the expansion of this Empire, writing "where this progress
will stop no-one can say. Barbarism has, in the meantime, been receding before
the steady step of amelioration; and will in time, I trust, disappear from the
earth".
In this same letter to Madison,
Jefferson writes of the possibility of securing Cuba as part of the expansion
under this Constitution “so well calculated as ours for extensive empire…”
Canada and Cuba? Why
not?
Of course, no war is civil.
Additionally, it wasn’t a war for control of the government; it was a
war of secession. The war was not
necessary to end slavery, although that was the only positive result. I should write no more; ask DiLorenzo, here
and here.
Lincoln or somebody said once that
you can’t fool all of the people all the time.
By turning a racist who wanted to deport all Blacks into a national
symbol of integration and brotherhood, the Lincoln mythmakers have managed to
prove Lincoln or whoever said it wrong.
This is the story of how they fooled all of the people all the time and
why.
From
“Forced
Into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream.”
You would think that a “government of the people, by the
people, for the people” would actually respect the wishes of…oh, I don’t know…the
people (a novel thought). Instead…well,
you know.
I toss this one in as just one battle of the many fought by
US soldiers while committing the genocide of American Indians.
The Battle of the Little Bighorn,
commonly referred to as Custer's Last Stand, was an armed engagement between
combined forces of the Lakota, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho tribes, against
the 7th Cavalry Regiment of the United States Army.
The Indians won this one.
Most conflicts in that time and place went the other way, of course.
The Spanish–American War was a
conflict in 1898 between Spain and the United States, the result of American
intervention in the Cuban War of Independence. American attacks on Spain's
Pacific possessions led to involvement in the Philippine Revolution and
ultimately to the Philippine–American War.
The Maine is best known for her
catastrophic loss in Havana Harbor on the evening of 15 February 1898. Sent to
protect U.S. interests during the Cuban revolt against Spain, she exploded
suddenly without warning and sank quickly, killing nearly three quarters of her
crew. The cause and responsibility for her sinking remained unclear after a
board of inquiry. Nevertheless, popular opinion in the U.S., fanned by
inflammatory articles printed in the "Yellow Press" by William
Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, blamed Spain.
What of the
Philippines?
McKinley had God on his side. How could anyone compete with God? McKinley confessed to a visiting delegation
of Methodist ministers…
…that he fell to his knees and
prayed for enlightenment and that God told him it was his duty to uplift,
civilize, and Christianize the Filipinos.
In 1898, Filipino freedom fighters
had expected that America would aid them in their patriotic revolution against
their Spanish colonial masters. Instead,
the Americans short-circuited the revolution and took the country for
themselves. Related American military
actions left more than two hundred fifty thousand Filipinos dead. Over the next seven years, many Filipinos
came to associate the Americans with torture, concentration camps, rape and
murder of civilians, and destruction of their villages.
From “The
Imperial Cruise: A Secret History of Empire and War,” by James Bradley
The White Man’s Burden (aka Kipling’s poem for American
Imperialism) made its first overseas leap.
See, the Americans fought to Christianize the Philippines, because the
Spanish weren’t Christian…wait a minute.
World War I (WWI or WW1), also
known as the First World War, was a global war centred in Europe that began on
28 July 1914 and lasted until 11 November 1918.
After 100 years, there is still no coherent explanation as
to why this war was fought. There is
even less justification to explain American involvement – were those
trenches along the 49th parallel?
Woodrow Wilson wanted to make the world safe for
democracy. He offered his infamous “Fourteen Points,”
virtually none of which survived Paris in 1919.
But he sounded good.
Many historians credit Wilson with ensuring an uneven treaty
in Paris. This sowed the seeds for
continued conflict, once all participants caught their breath. The lasting benefit of this war was the
certainty that it would be continued; whatever the realities of the burdens
placed on Germany at Versailles (driven
by the blood lust in the populations of the victorious democracies), the
propaganda effect within Germany helped bring National Socialism to the fore.
World War II (WWII or WW2), also
known as the Second World War, was a global war that lasted from 1939 to 1945,
though global related conflicts begun earlier. It involved the vast majority of
the world's nations—including all of the great powers—eventually forming two
opposing military alliances: the Allies and the Axis. It was the most
widespread war in history, and directly involved more than 100 million people,
from more than 30 different countries.
Anything but a “good
war.” With roots in Woodrow
Wilson’s interjection in World War I, Stalin’s
desires to expand communism throughout Europe and Asia, and Roosevelt’s
many attempts to get involved – most notably Pearl
Harbor (and, once involved, prolong the war), it is no wonder that somehow
Hitler gets all the blame. Did I
forget to mention Churchill?
And Hitler wasn’t going to conquer the world (that was closer
to Stalin’s goal, actually); we wouldn’t all be speaking German (although I
will take the beer, especially the Hefe Weizen).
See “The
Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, by Viktor
Suvorov; “Freedom
Betrayed,” by Herbert Hoover; “The
Pearl Harbor Myth: Rethinking the Unthinkable,” by George Victor; “1939 – The War That Had Many
Fathers,” by Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof; “The
Last Lion,” by William Manchester.
And never forget Buchanan.
Why? Because, well,
just because….
The Korean War (25 June 1950 – 27
July 1953) was a war between the Republic of Korea (South Korea), supported by
the United Nations, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea),
at one time supported by China and the Soviet Union. It was primarily the
result of the political division of Korea by an agreement of the victorious
Allies at the conclusion of the Pacific War at the end of World War II.
If you want to read of the misery of the soldiers, try
this. Then imagine that they could
have been at home instead; I’m sure many of them did.
The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến
tranh Việt Nam), also known as the Second Indochina War, and known in Vietnam
as the Resistance War Against America or simply the American War, was a Cold
War-era proxy war that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from 1 November
1955 to the fall of Saigon on 30 April 1975.
You know, the dominoes of communism would fall if Saigon
fell. Good thing that didn’t
happen…wait, check that.
Also known as Operation Free Kuwait….and save the babies…
and the US
government tricked Saddam.
The Gulf War (2 August 1990 – 28
February 1991), codenamed Operation Desert Storm (17 January 1991 – 28 February
1991) was a war waged by coalition forces from 34 nations led by the United
States against Iraq in response to Iraq's invasion and annexation of Kuwait.
Because Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11;
unlike the aggressor, he also had no weapons of mass destruction. So he deserved it.
The Iraq War was an armed conflict
in Iraq that consisted of two phases. The first was an invasion of Iraq
starting on 20 March 2003 by an invasion force led by the United States. It was
followed by a longer phase of fighting, in which an insurgency emerged to
oppose the occupying forces and the newly formed Iraqi government.
The War in Afghanistan
(2001–present) refers to the intervention by NATO and allied forces in the
ongoing Afghan civil war. The war followed the terrorist attacks of September
11, 2001, in an effort to dismantle al-Qaeda and eliminate its safe haven by
removing the Taliban from power.
You see, the terrorists were, for the most part, Saudi. That’s why the US government had to invade Afghanistan. (But don’t ask about Building 7…or the Pentagon…or Pennsylvania….)
Conclusion
That pretty much covers it.
Oh for twelve (and I’m sure I missed a few).
Now, I suspect a few of you are thinking I am taking this
all too lightly – making fun of serious events.
Let me be clear: virtually every American soldier who died in a war died
for a lie. I ridicule the lies, not the
deaths. However, I do not absolve the
soldiers, either.
Happy Memorial Day.
It's 0 (zero) for 12, not Oh for 12 - you may want to correct that.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ohfer
DeleteLeave it to someone from "The U" to get the connection!
DeleteWell it depends. I'm not familiar with Canada but for Australia and especially New Zealand it was easy for the descendant of English settlers to effectively fade into independence a because their ancestors had already slaughtered the native inhabitants and because events in "the home country' (never particularly interested in the colonies) focused Londons attention on Europe .
ReplyDeleteA book, written in 1913, stated that a secret unwritten agreement was made in 1897 that America would support Britain and France if they went to war against the Triple Alliance. As it happened, Woodrow Wilson allowed export of high-quality American munitions to the allies from early in the conflict,
ReplyDeletehttp://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/comment/PanGer/PanGer3.htm#ch10
Nock's "The Myth of a Guilty Nation" goes a long way towards making the (superb) case that the cause of WW1, unsurprisingly, was to maintain Britain's markets by destroying the all too capable competition.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds of how the support for Anzac Day was dissipating fast in Australia around the '70s and '80s (yet inexplicably picked up again in the '90s). People were losing interest because it was used to commemorate those who had a licence to legally kill. This also reminds of CK Louis and his "of course not, but maybe" routine where he points out that if you join the army then you should expect to be attacked and severely wounded.
ReplyDeleteSo: should soldiers be commemorated at all? Should they be seen on par with police officers: namely they get an unfair amount of worship for at the very least doing their job or worse getting into trouble over conflicts they started? Anyone who signs up to get into the military for the taxpayers services they can get are glorified bums and those who sign up to get a chance at legally maiming or even killing others is a psychopathic murderer.
Libertarians here feel the C.S.A. were in the right during the American Civil War thus all Northerners who fought against the South were blatantly vile ignobles: they were fighting to force a Union against the spirit of the founding of the original colonies. The northern soldiers should be forgotten whereas the southern soldiers should be commemorated at the ones fighting for freedom.
Last paragraph very well said. Thanks.
Deletegreat post Happy Memorial Day 2015 Sayings
ReplyDeleteawesome Memorial Day Quotes
ReplyDelete