SqUeAkz wrote:If we don't face the hard truths of war then how will we really know what is going on?
An entirely reasonable position.
First of all we have to agree that there is such a thing as a "Just War," irrespective of whether or not the conflict in Iraq is such a war.
If we can agree to this premise, we then have to weigh our ability to assimilate the "hard truths" of war with our will to pursue the Just War.
Only the truly bent will find the killing of others to be a satisfying activity, but this doesn't necessarily, mean that killing others is to be avoided at all costs.
Of course, if one is to reject the killing of others under any circumstances, then the notion of a Just War has no foundation. But, at the same time, one would have to accept the fact that one's life and liberty are to be, ultimately, sacrifical.
I honor all who truly hold this belief, however I also believe that the number who truly do are quite small. It is very easy and self aggrandizing to declare "War is evil! We should not kill anyone," but such is a meaningless declaration if one is not prepared to give up life and liberty to advance the tenet.
Let's assume though that we agree with the concept of a "Just War."
In conflict with the pursuit of a Just War is (and thankfully so) is the natural reluctance of individuals to kill one another. Surely there are those who, for whatever complex psychological reasons, are enthused by killing, but we need to acknowledge that they are the exceptions and not the rule.
Therefore, if we wish to win the Just War (and why would we not?) we have to concern oursleves with the ability of our warriors to fight to win.
If we burden our warriors with moralistic precepts of killing they will, unquestionably, become less effective in their mission.
So the goal is to keep our warriors immune from humanistic concerns so that humanistic principles can triumph.
It is almost a paradox.
The alternative is to accept the gradual and inevitable spread of totalitarianism throughout the world.
This is all well and good if one belives that the rewards for their actions on Earth will be dispensed in Heaven, but what if one doesn't believe in an after life?
Ironically, most of the people who would reject the notion of a Just War, don't believe in an afterlife.
Here again, the purists among these folks receive my utmost respect: such are people who are willing to greet the black void rather than violating principle. Utterly heroic.
Unfortunately, I've never met any of these heroes, and considering their scant numbers, doubt I ever will.
And so we come full circle: Do we really need or want to know what is "going on?"
Under any number of circumstances (The Vietnam war for example) we most assuredly do. Under others (i.e. WWII) we might not.
What it boils down to, I believe, is how much you feel you can trust your government.
And, of course, in this we many of us differ greatly, however the question returns to: "If the president of your political choice were in power, would you accept his or her march to war?"
When you think of Afghanistan and Iraq, think too of Somalia, Serbia and Haiti.