The Nature of Patriotism

Re: The Nature of Patriotism


When the time for argument has ended, America has ceased to be America.

I support you fully, Lusatian, as a soldier. I wish your safe and speedy return. But I will absolutely not wait until Novemeber of 2004 to express my strong opinions of this war.

Lack of support for the war does not mean spitting on soldiers, Lusatian! That, at times it DID happen after Vietnam is a tragedy - but there is no necessary logical connection between the one and the other.

I would find it helpful in discussing this, if you stated YOUR meaning of patriotism - in general I think it foolish atavistic nonsense, nor do I think a country going to war demands that its citizens suspend their morals and rationality! (I am Australian, so we are at war too.)

Would it have been wrong, Lusatian, for Italian people to have voiced dissent when Italy invaded Ethiopia? Was it wrong when there was internal French dissent against the atrocities committed by the French army in Algeria? For Americans to voice dissent against American actions in Nicaragua and Chile? (sure - no war was DECLARED - but America was at effective war against the governments of those countries.)

Is it your logic that citizens must never VOICE the dissent that we are told our soldiers fight for the right for us to voice? - (and I agree at times they HAVE effectively fought for that right - as in WWII.)

Is it your argument that, no matter how wrong we think our government's actions to be, that, once they commit force to their actions, we must not dissent? Would this include the police being called out to brutalise peaceful Civil Rights demonstrators in the south of your county in the sixties? This was state government ordered force of arms, after all - or do we cease dissent only when the government is federal and the uniforms not blue? These people believed they were fighting to preserve their beloved way of life from an evil external threat, you know.

I wish you and ALL the people involved in this thing well - and I hope it is as clean and fast as possible, for everyones' sake.

Lusatian,

Though there are some who shamefully have wished this action to go badly for America, there are even more who fervently hope that our victory will be quick and with minimum casualties. You are a part of the mightiest army in the history of the world, and we are exceedingly proud of you and your comrads in arms. Your professionalism is of the highest order, and your arms the best we can devise. The officers and non-commisioned officers who lead you are better than any before, and that is saying a whole lot. Your courage and patriotism give hope to old soldiers who sometimes shake their grey heads in wonder at those who will not stand to the colors. The goals that you are fighting for are worthwhile and will reduce the risk of greater suffering for millions.

If, by chance, you should be wounded or fall in battle, know that you will be honored and remembered while those who support the enemy with their words and actions will be forever an anathema. I am confident that few of our troops will pay the ultimate sacrifice. I am confident that you will all serve in the highest traditions of our services, and will only add luster to our national reputation. War is not glorious, it tests the meddle of all who participate in it. You will see things that are horrifying, and may have to inflict suffering on others in the coming days. I wish that was not necessary. Everything possible has been done, is being done, to minimize the trauma.

Keep your head down, and come home again safely to relate your experiences to awed grandchildren. Though we are far from the battlefield, we are with you in spirit. Go Army!

I wish that you would explain the logic of your repeated claim that voiced dissent is supporting the "enemy", Asherman. I mean beyond the argument that they may use such dissent to give hope to themselves I really do not see how we can be asked to impose censorship on ourselves or others because of ways in which others may perceive our words - you seem to imply that it is actually traitorous to voice dissent.

Is this only once war has been declared? You constantly bring up Vietnam - war was never declared there.

Does this apply, in your mind, to ALL populaces in ALL wars? Does it apply to citizens of the USSR when their troops invaded Poland in the fifties, Czechoslovakia in 1968? To citizens of Germany when their troops "liberated" the Sudetenland in ..was it 1936?

Bunny,

It is not unpatriotic to question, or demonstrate against the nation's policies. I have repeatedly argued that it is the patriotic duty of citizens to make their opinions known. Every one of us has the right and duty to try and convince others that our idea of "correct and proper" policies be adopted. When I was younger, I too demonstrated against a war that I felt was morally wrong. I was too young and idealistic to understand that Vietnam was a necessary campaign in the larger Cold War. In retrospect, I was the one who was wrong. I suppose that I do refer perhaps too often to Vietnam, but that was a defining moment in the history of my generation.

It is disloyal to "hope/pray" that the nation is defeated, that the nation's policies will fail dismally, and that its soldiers will die in large numbers. It is near treason to seriously say that it would be better to have 1000 Americans die fighting to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States, than to lose a similar number to remove from power a brutal dictator whose actions threaten the world. Right here on A2K there have been people who have posted those sentiments.

Are there times and circumstances where to act and aggitate for the defeat of one's nation? Of course there are. In the United States, that might be justified if the government tried to scrap the Constitution, or to become a repressive regime similar to those of Nazi Germany, the USSR, the PRC, the DRNK, or Saddam's Iraq. None of those conditions exist, nor are likely. It is not enough that one's partisan sentiments are extreme. Anyone who believes that those special conditions warranting rebellion may take up arms, and suffer the consequences. We are become so politically correct, that disloyalty is now felt to be an acceptable way for a citizen to behave on the flimsiest of grounds. Those here who say disloyal things will never pay the penalty they deserve.

I hope that clarifies the matter, but I doubt it will.

Bunny,

Let me ask you this:

Do you hope that things in Iraq go so badly that many of your soldiers die? Do you hope that the united action of our countries is a failure? Do you believe that Saddam Hussein is morally and ethically superior to the elected leaders of Australia? If you say yes to any of those questions, can you honestly say that you are an Australian patriot?

I know you are against this war, and that is your right. You should make your feelings known, and try elect leaders who share your ideas. Now that your government has adopted a policy, you continue to make your feelings known, that to is patriotic.

Hey asherman - seriously...
who the hell has said they want american soldiers to die in large numbers? I really wish you'd quit saying that BS.

I'm tired of that accusation too, Ash and Snood.

Asherman - I have stated clearly here and in other places that I hope the war ends as quickly and as cleanly as may be. Since it is impossible for Saddam to win, clearly that means that I hope for an American/British victory ASAP.

I realise I have misread you as condemning dissent, rather than wishing for the invasion to go badly - I was discussing dissent, not the other.

Asherman - I have no wish to be a patriot of ANY country. I have expalined my reasons before, and I am happy to paste them to here if you wish.

I am Australian, and this country has given me a great deal. I owe it and its people the best I can give - and I will try to leave this country better than I found it, to the extent that I can do so. That seems to me fairness and connection to my community - not patriotism.

I do consider Howard a better person and leader than Hussein, almost anything would be. I find it annoying that pro-war people continually seem to imply that if one is against this war, then one is pro-Hussein, or simply stupid and naive. I am against this war because I believe it puts such a rent in the fabric of our global civilization (such as it is!) that I fear the fabric will disintegrate.

I do not wish anyone to die in Iraq - but given that they are going to, it is human and instinctive to wish that they are not one's own people, and I think it will be far better for the poor Iraqi kids dying for Hussein and Bush's ideas about what is best (and the hapless Iraqi civilians) if Iraq is defeated very fast.

But, in asking me this question, you are setting up a straw figure - I have NEVER said that I hope the war, once commenced, goes badly for the US and UK and Oz. That would be a foolish thing to say, if one values human life, why am I then being accused of it?

I also find it rather patronising of you to say that I should be trying to affect who is elected in my country so that they better reflect my beliefs. I have been politically active since I was 17 - and that is longer ago now than I care to admit to myself! I am extremely active in attempting to influence the course of my country's political life - although much less active than many of my friends. I am well aware of th epolitical process and I consider those who are not to be living a sluggish, blinkered existence.

Asherman - you said "It is disloyal to "hope/pray" that the nation is defeated, that the nation's policies will fail dismally, and that its soldiers will die in large numbers"

Do you consider this would have been so, for instance, in Nazi Germany during WWII?

Would it have been true, also, for German Jews, Gypsies, feminists, homosexuals, Communists etc who were being killed and tormented in concentration camps to hope for German defeat?

If you DO consider it would be disloyal/traitorous, do you then admit the notion that there are higher moral and ethical duties than those to our nation?

Hmm - in re-reading your first post in response to me, it seems that you do...

Snood and Edgar,

Here are a couple of the more outrageous statements made recently on A2K political threads.

Tartan said:

(18MAR) "I'd like to say that I'm hoping that this US invasion of a sovereign nation will be a god-awful flop and mess."

(19MAR) "my reason dictates that mush Bush fail in this attack, not fail so that Iraqi citizens are slaughtered or troops put at any more risk than necessary (OBVIOUSLY) but fail so that the US finally wakes up to this horrific, lethal agitprop the administration has indulged itself in. Bush is the murderer guys"

"If I had to sacrifice 1000 American soldiers and I were given a choice between sacrificing them to "prove a point" by invading Iraq, or sacrificing them to remove from power the very dangerous Bush administration (far more dangerous to the world than that of Saddam Hussein), I'd sacrifice American lives for the protection of their own people and the rest of the world against our own administration."

Dreamweaver MX in response to the question, "which would you prefer to die, the President of the United States, or Saddam Hussein?"

(20MAR) "I prefer that Bush die because I consider him a greater threat but I agree that it would not do anything but make Americans more dangerous."

When folks wish for a larger, more costly war, they are worse than any so-called hawk posting here. What do you think that Tartan's hope for "a god-awful flop and mess" means in practical terms? If the war is concluded quickly with a minimum casualties and destruction, would that be a "god-awful flop and mess"? I rather think that Tartan clearly want all of those doomsday predictions to come true because that would really be a "god-awful flop and mess". Tartan has come very close to calling for civil rebellion against the government during time of war ... how would you characterize that? Choosing Saddam Hussein over the President of the United States is shocking.

Ash for brains,
Stop using deceit while striving to make a point. I never said I want American soldiers to die. You asked about Bush and Saddam and I answered. Don't continue your series of assumptions to try to make this some time of validation for your challenged opinions.
As to being outrageous if you think your opinion dictates to the universe what is and what isn't outrageous then I'm glad you have little say in world affairs.
I think it's outrageous to inflate Saddam into a grave danger. I think it's outrageous to post 90% assumtion 10% lie posts.

Dreamer,

I didn't say you wished American deaths, those were the words of another person. I do find it somewhat shocking that you seem to prefer a dead Bush resulting in a longer, and presumably more costly, war over the swift conclusion of hostilities that would result from the passing of Saddam from the scene. One inevitably would result in greater destruction and casualties than the other. But then, perhaps I didn't fully understand your remarks. Your uncouth personal attacks are out of place here ... please desist.

I wish fervently that this military adventurism stop right now and that the our troops withdraw to their bases and finaly to home. In this way I support a failure of US military policy.
As of this writing 16 soldiers from several nations have died. I am of the opinion that not only have they died in vain, they also have died in pusuit of a goal that will make the world a worse place than it now is.
I would have this war stop now before any more civilians have been bombed from their homes.
I wish this war to cease now before we turn the Kurds over to the tender mercies of the Turkish army as George Bush has promised.
I would have the US fail now by stopping the attack this instance; than watch another failure such as Afghanistan where Bush has left the puppet government to sink into a morass of anarchy and civil war.

None of this will happen of course, the war will not stop and wishing that I didn't live in a rogue nation will not make it so.
Just as the last war there will be few US casualties from enemy action. Just as last time civilian casualties will go unreported.

We still have a week or so before the main attack begins. The US awaits it's armor as it wends its way from the Med. Till it gets there we can watch on TV as more children are killed. We also just might pull off a miracle.


Buzz

By the way, how do we know that Lusatin is in the military? It is not evident from his post and his profile is blank.

Ash
Why do you keep bringing up other peoples words? If some people wish the things you say, then I find it horrifying myself, but no one here said those things, so why do you assume that the rest of us who don't believe in this war feel the same as those posters you mentioned? I am against this war, but that doesn't mean that I support Saddam in any way, shape, or form!!!!! I can't for the life of me figure out this "you're either with us or against us" theory!!! Just because some people say they are against the war and hope the US fails, doesn't mean that we all think this way and I don't appreciate that thought one bit. We are all human beings who have a wide area of thoughts and feelings about everything, so putting a label on us in an insult, to say the least. I do not support this war, but I do support the soldiers who are fighting it and hope they go home safe and sound.

Gezzy,

Tartan has said those very words that are quoted above.

Buzzcook - 16 soldiers including Iraqis?

What will Canada do when the American tourist trade hits the fan?
Since Canada hasn't supported the American, British and Australian war efforts in the Middle East, why should we ever visit Canada as tourists or even as University students?