Antiwar.com Blog

When John Tierney was named a columnist at the New York Times back in March, I yawned. First, it’s the paper that gave Nytol its name. More conducive to my indifference, though, were the hosannas Tierney’s appointment drew from the likes of Virginia Postrel, Reason, and neolibertarian central. Hurrah, I thought, another wonker obsessed, at best, with tweaking Social Security or, at worst, with eradicating “Islamofascism.” Glenn Reynolds’ enthusiasm did nothing to soften my prejudice.

Then came this article, which hinted at better things. Then this.

Postrel, Reynolds, and co. appear not to have read it.

Leading the pack of Christian warmongers that I mentioned in my last post who practically elevate military service to the level of the Christian ministry is President Bush himself. But Bush does them one better. He insists that there is no higher calling than military service. In his June 28th speech, he said:

“And to those watching tonight who are considering a military career, there is no higher calling than service in our Armed Forces. We live in freedom because every generation has produced patriots willing to serve a cause greater than themselves. Those who serve today are taking their rightful place among the greatest generations that have worn our Nation’s uniform.”

To those who are considering a career in military “service,” I would say: Don’t take a chance on wasting your life for Bush and the U.S. global empire. There are other ways of getting money for college–like working for it. We live in relative freedom in spite of the military, not because of it.

It was two years ago, on July 2, 2003, that George Bush bragged, “There are some who, uh, feel like that, you know, the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is: Bring ’em on. We got the force necessary to deal with the security situation. “ – George W. Bush, July 2, 2003.

Yankee Doodle, Friendly Fire and matt at Today in Iraq have put together a synopsis of what has happened in Iraq since that speech as their July 4th, 2005 blog entry. I will warn in advance that the photos are not pleasant to look at. Thanks so much, YD, FF and matt for this excellent but painful summary of the war in Iraq over the last two years.

Read here: July 4, 2005

Also available in .pdf format without the photos: July 4, 2005

Saturday on the Weekend Interview Show: First up will be Mike (in Tokyo) Rogers on his new book Schizophrenic in Japan : An American Ex-Pat’s Guide to Japanese and American Society/Politics & Humor.

In the second hour, I’ll be discussing a possible renewal of the slavery known as conscription and how to resist it with Debbie Hopper from mothersagainstthedraft.org, and Scott Kohlhaas from draftresistance.org.

Update: Show’s over: Archives

James Wolcott reads National Review — so you don’t have to.

Speaking of National Review, they recently ran an editorial accusing Senator Dick Durbin of perpetrating an “anti-American slander” most foul when he compared Guantanamo to the Soviet gulag, averring that this is characteristic not only of Durbin but of his party. What must they make of this recent tidbit unearthed by the New Yorker in a piece on the Larry Franklin-AIPAC espionage scandal:

“At about this time, Franklin received a call from Michael Ledeen, his ally in matters of Iran policy. ‘I called him and said, ‘Larry, what’s going on?’ ‘ Ledeen recalled. ‘He said, ‘Don’t worry. Sharansky’ ‘—Natan Sharansky, the former Soviet dissident—’ ‘survived years in the Gulag, and I’ll survive prison, too.’ ‘”

Ledeen, by the way, who often graces the pages of National Review, might have saved them the embarrassment of publishing such a singularly fatuous editorial.

Anti-American slander — it’s everywhere.

UPDATE: The convergence of the Two Justins. Says Justin Logan: “James Wolcott is reading the Corner so we don’t have to. Check this post on Rich Lowry moving the goalposts on Iraq (forward, back, forward…). My favorite, though, has to be this analysis of an exchange between John Derbyshire (who has, in fairness, said some truly odious things) and John ‘lead wit‘ Podhoretz.”

Christian defenders of war and the military, and especially those who practically elevate military “service” to the level of the Christian ministry, ought to pay more attention to the words of those who have been in the military instead of disqualifying me from criticizing the military because I have never “served.” Here is a recent “insider’s view” from one of my readers:

“I just read your piece from today’s Lew Rockwell. Well put. I find it hard to believe that so many nominal ‘Christians’ think that the military is some kind of enclave of virtue. I was in the Army for 4 years (’84 -’88). Let us forget, for a moment, that the purpose of the military is to kill and destroy property — as if that is not bad enough. How does the military hold up when it comes to instilling what Christians call ‘values’? Well, I was shocked at the pervasiveness of drunkenness and sexual immorality among my fellow soldiers. A half-hearted review of the divorce and unwed pregnancy statistics of military personnel would give one an outline for a book on military culture. Go to a VA hospital and see which department is the busiest — it will be the alcohol and drug treatment program. Military culture is rotten to the core (despite the clean-shaven, spit-shined facade), and it corrupts those who enter therein.”

L. G.
South Dakota