« Going to see Harry Potter | Main | Who said all Conservative women »

November 20, 2005

The 'Unpopular' War

Carl Goss, in the comments in this post regarding the Republicans successfully calling the Democrat's bluff, says:

It still doesn't make the war any more popular.
It begs the question, is any war popular?

Certainly the Civil War wasn't, where Lincoln was being excoriated and reviled by Copperhead Democrats

Many northerners had tired of war. Democrats began denouncing Grant as a "butcher." "Patriotism is played out," declared one newspaper. "Each hour is but sinking us deeper into bankruptcy and desolation." Thus while Lee's armies teetered on the verge of destruction, the Confederate cause saw its last, bright hope flicker in the fall of 1864. Southerners considered their northern sympathizers to be "large and strong enough, if left to operate constitutionally, to paralyze the war and majority party."
Even WWII was not a "popular" war. Prior to Pearl Harbor FDR was met with strong, derisive opposition to such things as his "lend-lease" legislation. American hero Charles Lindbergh gave speeches across the country for the group America First conjuring up a conspiracy of the FDR administration, the British and the Jews trying to involve America in a war we had no business pursuing.
Have you ever heard an interventionist, or a British agent, or a member of the administration in Washington ask you to go back and study a record of what they have said since the war started? Are their self-styled defenders of democracy willing to put the issue of war to a vote of our people? Do you find these crusaders for foreign freedom of speech, or the removal of censorship here in our own country? [...]

When this war started in Europe, it was clear that the American people were solidly opposed to entering it. [...] National polls showed that when England and France declared war on Germany, in 1939, less than 10 percent of our population favored a similar course for America. But there were various groups of people, here and abroad, whose interests and beliefs necessitated the involvement of the United States in the war. [...] The three most important groups who have been pressing this country toward war are the British, the Jewish and the Roosevelt administration. [...] Behind these groups, but of lesser importance, are a number of capitalists, Anglophiles, and intellectuals who believe that the future of mankind depends upon the domination of the British empire. [...] I am speaking here only of war agitators, not of those sincere but misguided men and women who, confused by misinformation and frightened by propaganda, follow the lead of the war agitators.

As I have said, these war agitators comprise only a small minority of our people; but they control a tremendous influence. Against the determination of the American people to stay out of war, they have marshaled the power of their propaganda, their money, their patronage.

Amazing how the same sentiments are expressed today by the likes of Moveon.org, Michael Moore, and Mommy Sheehan -- the Iraq War being part of a "NeoCon-Zionist conspiracy for oil and world domination."

America First disbanded within days after Pearl Harbor. However, WWII was still not a "popular" war. The peak induction year of the draft during WWII was 1943 - 3,323,970. Certainly men and women enlisted voluntarily, just as they do today. But there was not a monolithic sentiment to immediately go and fight the war. Let me inject my own family anecdote: my father, too young to enlist directly at the beginning of WWII did participate in ROTC in high school and then fudged his age, enlisting at 17. As a paratrooper with the Army 11th Airborne, he spent two years with the occupation Army in Japan (without the a-bomb he would have been part of the invasion forces). On the other hand, one of his first cousins tried to avoid the draft. He took pliers and broke several of his teeth (yes, made me cringe too when my dad first told the story). The Army promptly had the rest of his teeth pulled, outfitted him with dentures and inducted him.

American culture during WWII was one of support of the troops and their mission. This didn't make it a "popular" war, just one that everyone knew had to be completed and won. Media at the time was not just dedicated to reporting the news but also figured it had a moral obligation not to undercut the American war effort. Zell Miller captured the essense of what reporting would have been if today's journalists covered the battle of Iwo Jima.

Pfc. Doe: "Well, I've been pinned down by enemy fire almost ever since I got here and have had a couple of buddies killed right beside me. I'm a Marine and I go where they send me. One thing's for sure, they are putting up a fight not to give up this island."
Cutie: "Our military analysts tell us that the Japanese are holed up in caves and miles of connecting tunnels they've built over the years. How will you ever get them out?"
Pfc. Doe: "With flame throwers, ma'am."
Cutie (incredulously): "Flame throwers? You'll burn them alive?"
Pfc. Doe: "Yes ma'am, we'll fry their asses. Excuse me, I shouldn't have said that on TV."
Cutie (audible gasp): "How horrible!"
Pfc. Doe (obviously wanting to move on): "We're at war ma'am."
(A Marine sergeant watching nearby yells, "Ask her what does she want us to do — sing to them, 'Come out, come out, wherever you are. Pretty please.' "
The biggest celebrities of the WWII era did what they could to support the war effort, from enlisting (ie Jimmy Stewart, Clark Gable) to traveling across the country raising funds through war bonds (ie Carol Lombard - Clark Gables' wife, who died on one of her flights). Did this mean the war was popular, or rather, that the survival of American culture and ideals was worth supporting? Few people gloried in the war. People of the era, be it the Civil War, WWI, WWII, just accepted that shit happens and sometimes it is up to you to step into the room and clean it up. Certainly the soldiers in it have their dark days
Anapolis, MD February 1st, 1865
Dear Mother
I seize this opportunity of dropping you a few lines by the way to let you know how I am and how I am getting along. I am not in good health at this time principally cold though I have been shaking with the ague some. I hope though this will reach you in good health. I left Nashville, Tenn on last Thursday morning the 26th of Jan at 6 o'clock a.m. after laying one night in the Zolicoffer Barracks. We got to Louisville that evening. I had my pocket book stole that day in the cars with fifteen dollars and sixty cents in it. I had several searched but it was no use so I gave it up. I am satisfied one of the fellows of the 140th Indiana got it. [...]

I wrote at least 25 or 30 letters from Nashville Tenn and was there nearly 6 weeks and not a word from any of you. I want you all to try and do a little better. It is said that the President of the United States passed through this place today for City Point on some business connected with peace. I hope it may be true or at least that peace may be made shortly. I mostly write this letter to let you know where I am and as soon as I get where I can write at leisure I will give you and uncle Sam a history of my career and my observations of the army that I think will be interesting to some of you for I have seen some queer times and made some observations that would look improbable to most of you thou I intended to keep a journal but found I could not do it. The term and substance is this - a soldiers life is worse than a dogs life - few honest men in it - none among officers and especially doctors. I think above all things a doctor ought to be the best friend to a soldier and they are the most miserable quacks and scoundrels that lives. The morals of this people after this war will be mourned by the wise and good of this nation. I have no chance to write to do any good. I hold the paper in my hand as best I can. You had better direct your letter to Co. D, 26th Ky 2nd division 23rd Army Corps Washington City. I must stop. Will write in a few days again. Your son. J.K Ellis

James Kenton Ellis is my 2x great-grandfather. Another relative of mine (great uncle), Ray Aseltine, enlisted at age 16 for WWI and was a Marine in France serving with Pershing. He survived, barely, being a German POW (which no one knew, as he had been declared MIA) and wrote of the horrors he endured. I wish I had his letter with me, but as I recall the ending paragraph, written from his stateside hospital bed, he did not regret going to war. For all the horrors he had seen and experienced, he felt proud to have answered his country's call to duty.

No soldier, no citizen glories in war. War is not "popular" anymore than a radical mastectomy is "popular". Read any of the number of milblogs, the men and women who are in Iraq at this moment or have served over there. It is not sweetness and light, it is not warmongers and mercenaries, it is not popular. It is about people who see the mission as something that needs to be done.

We don't just mouth a few words on appropriate occassions ... I pledge allegience ... and that's that. Our relationship with our country and its values is an ongoing work. The failure of many of a marriage begins at the wedding even if only one of the partners believes they can now relax and not work on the relationship. The failure of a sense of duty to one's country begins with a citizen who believes being born in the country is enough. If one marriage partner is hypercritical of the other, consistently and publically belittling the other, letting small and generally inconsequential flaws overshadow the good; we don't hesistate in our judgment that the belittler is the destroyer of the relationship. We don't accept his/her excuses that they really love the object of their derision and they are only trying to help. So if someone acts in the same manner in regards to America, what can we say about that person?

People are not cast in concrete. We all grow and change. We achieve and we fall. Yesterday's hero can be today's fool. Hopefully we take lessons, from our own experience and from the experiences of others.

John Murtha was startled that on the heels of his speech where he called for an immediate withdrawl of our forces in Iraq that Republicans put forth a bill that was the essense of his speech in clear, unequivocal prose. We can honor Murtha's past service even while we can point to the fool he became by giving a speech that ignored the experiences of WWII and Vietnam. When Murtha said the war was "unwinnable" and the only solution was "political" he forgot the lessons of Chamberlain. When he called for the immediate severing of American support of Iraq, he forgot the lessons of Saigon 1975.

I'll agree with Carl that the Iraq war is not "popular." But popular is not a synonym for justified. I do find the war just.

As always, we have a choice. We can finish the war by winning it, or we can finish our part by surrendering.

Funny thing. I saw the new Harry Potter movie earlier today and one line comes back to me.

You can choose the right way or the easy way.
No one, least of all President Bush, said the war was going to be "easy." I just wish we'd leave the word "popular" out of the whole affair.

Posted by Darleen at November 20, 2005 02:45 PM

Comments

- As oft repeated, and just as often studiously ignored, the left absolutely must co-join the two quite different words "popular" and "justified". Otherwise they're without anything to say except "Yeh its true, I hate war and death just like everyone else". Then just to make sure their lexiconal manipulations will not be lost on anyone, they run yet another of their agenda ladened, "ask a question the right way and you can get any answer you need" skewed polls, which the dingdong left MSM runs with relish....

They'll ask: "Do you support the continuing death of our soldiers in Iraq?".....

or: "Do you think the war in Iraqui is popular with the American people?"....

But they'll never ask: "Would it be safer for America if we fight the Jihadists in the streets of America?"....

Or: "Would withdrawing our troops and surrendering in the WOT be better than defending our country and our way of life against the Extremist Islamofascists?"....

Or: "Do you think President Bush did the right thing by fighting the Islamic Murdering butchers where they live?"....

Or: "Do you believe we'd be better off in the WOT if President Bush was more like Jimmy Carter?"....

Or: "When Dean, Polosi, Kerry, Fonda, Moore, Soros, Reid, Franken, Kennedrunk and the others on the extreme left say they "speak for the majority of Americans" do you believe what they say and agree they speak for you?"

- Don't hold you breath on ever seeing the rabid peaceniks, remnents of the Communist/Socialist party dregs from the Nam days, ask those kinds of pertinant questions. The answers would be decidedly "unpopular" with the koolaide drinking Moonbats "fer sure".

- This whole "babblefest" going on right now amongst the Bush deranged has not a thing to do with caring about our military, and everything to do with one simple glaringly obvious fact. If things go well in Iraq for Bush the Dems are scared shitless they'll be caught once again on the short end of the stick. So they're howling that we should be planning the steady buildup of Iraqui legitimate forces and the soonest possible drawdown of American forces....

- Which of course KosKiddies, is exactly what we've already been doing all along. Sorry. No cigar. Late entries, Xeroxed copies at that, will not be considered as viable substitutes for what passes as "elite thinking" these days on the political scene. Very simply the Democratic party needs to break the strangglehold of the leftists and get a freeking plan or they're facing even more years of playing "yapping hounds" lost in the political wilderness.....

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at November 21, 2005 02:58 AM

No, no war is ever popular with sane human beings.

However, it's not "peace" when terrorists freely butcher civilians, and plot to make the world submit to their weird, 7th Century ideology.

We'd been at war for a long time before 9/11; we just didn't realize.

(And, really---questions of "popularity", and who likes us and who we like---that's juvenile, high shcool stuff. But then, most Leftists seem to be stuck somwhere in late teenager-hood, no matter what their chronological age is.)

Posted by: TalkinKamel at November 21, 2005 07:43 AM