 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / General Topics / May 2004Mylai
What are we trying to do? Are we all ignorant of history, from Jericho to Vietnam? To ignore history is to be condemned to repeat it. We're calling the defense of following orders the Nuremberg defense. We should call it the Calley defense, which also failed. Lieutenant Calley massacred women and children, people military people call noncombatants. He committed that horror in the context of the anger of war and under orders of his immediately superior commander, a captain who got off free, one rank above him. Calley, after his punishment, went back to work in his father's jewelry store. Children sent to war are children sent to war, and they are our children we sent to war. The trials in Nuremberg were of people of the rank of Richard Myers. The defense failed for them because they were high enough in the chain of command to command many thousands of soldiers. Calley's defense failed most in that many good soldiers left our military because we said they couldn't depend on their commanders for discipline. I will disagree again and again with Myers's defense he repeats again and again, that a general has no responsibility for his soldiers. His argument is worse than Nuremberg. The Nuremberg trials said generals must be responsible! www.star.net/silence > What are we trying to do? > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > off free, one rank above him. Calley, after his punishment, went back to > work in his father's jewelry store. You'd prefer his head on a pike? > Children sent to war are children sent to war, and they are our children we > sent to war. Yup. "God told Abraham, kill me a son..." - Bob Dylan, "Hiway 61" Story's older'n dirt. > The trials in Nuremberg were of people of the rank of Richard Myers. The > defense failed for them because they were high enough in the chain of > command to command many thousands of soldiers. Calley's defense failed most > in that many good soldiers left our military because we said they couldn't > depend on their commanders for discipline. Real disipline is dependent on extraordinarily clear and unambiguous leadership. They are like positive and negative ions to each other. > I will disagree again and again with Myers's defense he repeats again and > again, that a general has no responsibility for his soldiers. His argument > is worse than Nuremberg. I don't know the details, so I cannot say. Somebody practiced in the art has to interpret this for us, so that we may truly understand - and then they must explain why it came to this before this defect was identified. I know of the case of Abner Louima, who was ... violated by New York City police officers. There appears to be a rend in the cultural firmament here. I don't think that sort of thing used to happen - or at least we didn't know about it. If he can explain technically why the paths of accountability were irrevocably compromised, then why did he not resign? There was an oath involved. But I do know this - the only difference between terrorism and the legitimate use of force by legitimate government is the small fig leaf of accountability. If that is gone... > The Nuremberg trials said generals must be responsible! The Nuremburg trials were vengeance, not justice. > www.star.net/silence -- Les Cargill I suspect that we all have the same heart, and so I suspect that the trouble with humanity is that our rationality lets us try to avenge our own despair by blaming anything. From that I would not put anyone's head on a pike to that I think vengeance is the opposite of justice, we agree. I mean, we agree as far as I can see! Why do you think we do not? www.star.net/silence > I suspect that we all have the same heart, and so I suspect that the trouble > with humanity is that our rationality lets us try to avenge our own despair [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I mean, we agree as far as I can see! Why do you think we do not? > www.star.net/silence Recognizing that the outsider is a danger to us and should be killed is not despair. It is rational self-defense, not vengeance. The outsiders' head on a pike at the city gate is not vengeance - it is a warning to other outsiders. Your suspicions are insufficient to cover the gamut of human experience - that includes the experience of placing the heads of our enemies on pikes as a threat to their brothers. Sincerely, Henry Kissinger. The most practical way, the best if your goal is justice, to deal with an outsider is to bring the person inside. www.star.net/silence > > I suspect that we all have the same heart, and so I suspect that the > trouble [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Henry Kissinger. > The most practical way, the best if your goal is justice, to deal with an > outsider is to bring the person inside. > www.star.net/silence Perhaps true, but justice always fight with fear, and fear is stronger. At least in the short run. > > > I suspect that we all have the same heart, and so I suspect that the > > trouble [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > > > Henry Kissinger. What do you mean by "justice"? > What do you mean by "justice"? On a practical basis, everyone being treated equally under a rule of law. The absence of arbitrary treatment of the less powerful by the more powerful. On a philosophical basis I will leave that to the God or superior all-knowing being that I do not have sufficient Faith to accept as reality. That's his (hers? its?) realm, not mine. I was responding to your use of the term, however, not so much trying to force you to use my definition. > What do you mean by "justice"? Vengeance, tempered by mercy and reason. Reason is the ability to formulate a coherent, self-consistent framework of understanding which resonates in both heart and mind. Mercy is the property which discounts the personal pain in favor of skepticism of one's own frame of reference. -- Les Cargill Vengeance is a vicious, vicious cycle. And it has nothing to do with justice. Justice is the beauty that it truth. Beauty is the truth that just is. www.star.net/silence > I suspect that we all have the same heart, and so I suspect that the trouble > with humanity is that our rationality lets us try to avenge our own despair > by blaming anything. I think that the heart of man is a chemical soup, and that reason, *real* reason ( which is ultimately informed of the heart ) is the only way out. That's a relatively expensive process. > From that I would not put anyone's head on a pike to that I think vengeance > is the opposite of justice, we agree. Not literally. I used that hyperbolically. Vengeance is an element of justice. Justice is the impulse to venegeance tempered with mercy and reason. > I mean, we agree as far as I can see! Why do you think we do not? I don't know one way or 'tother. Ultimately, Applonian/Dyonisian dichotomies are bogus. We really are one thing, even though it is convenient to break it down. > www.star.net/silence -- Les Cargill The whole problem of humanity is that we confuse our hearts with our minds. The whole problem of humanity is that we judge others as we judge ourselves. The whole problem of humanity is that we work so hard at bigotry. www.star.net/silence |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.