Old Men Start Wars, Young Men Die In Them

Submitted by Laurence Vance via LewRockwell.com,

“Older men start wars, but younger men fight them.” ~ Albert Einstein

 

“Older men declare war. But it is the youth that must fight and die.” ~ Herbert Hoover

 

“I’m fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in.” ~ George S. McGovern

One hundred years ago – on July 1, 1916 – thousands of young men died after older men decided, again, to send them to war. On the first day of the Battle of the Somme, the British army suffered 57,470 casualties, of which 19,240 were deaths, the French had 1,590 casualties, and the Germans had over 10,000. It was the single greatest day for casualties in British military history. By the time the Battle of the Somme ended in November, the British had around 420,000 casualties, the French about 200,000, and the Germans about 500,000.

One would think that when almost 20,000 of your young men in the prime of their life die in one battle on one day that the British would simply say “enough is enough” and just tell the army to quit fighting and go home. But no, the British army continued to execute men for desertion like the hundred or more that suffered that fate in the two years before the Battle of the Somme.

It is senseless slaughter like the Battle of the Somme that led Ernest Hemingway, who was an ambulance driver in Italy toward the end of World War I, to say:

They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one’s country. But in modern war there is nothing sweet nor fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason.

 

Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.

Over 115,000 American soldiers would go on to die like dogs for no good reason after the United States foolishly and senselessly entered World War I in April of 1917. The thousands of U.S. troops who in more recent times died in Iraq and Afghanistan likewise senselessly died in vain and for a lie.

How do you prevent such senseless slaughter? How do you stop young men from dying in vain? How do you prohibit young men from dying for a lie? How do you stop making widows and orphans? How do you thwart young men dying like dogs? How do you stop young men from dying for no good reason? How do you end the war once and for all?

It is an uphill battle.

Governments, presidents, politicians, and military officers will continue to send young men to fight and die.

The military establishment will continue to want more money and more weapons of war to try out.

Legislatures will continue to fund bloated military budgets.

Defense contractors—merchants of death—will continue to lobby for more armaments, more military interventions, and more wars.

Uber-patriots, neocons, armchair warriors, just war theorists, progressive hawks, reich-wing nationalists, red-state fascists, pro-lifers for mass murder, and bloodthirsty conservatives will continue to cheer on the military.

Christian Coalition moralists, Old Testament Christians, evangelical warvangelicals, theocon Values Voters, imperial Christians, nuclear Christians, Religious Right warmongers, God and country Christian bumpkins, sniper theologians, and members of the Christian axis of evil—all claiming to worship the prince of peace—will continue to support the troops no matter what.

Some libertarians will continue to write me and say that although they agree with everything I say about the follies of U.S. foreign policy and military interventions none of it is the fault of the troops and I should quit criticizing them even though they enlisted in the U.S. war machine of their own free will.

So, how do you end the war once and for all? Easy. Young men simply need to stop joining the military. It is just as Einstein said:

Nothing will end war unless the people themselves refuse to go to war.

The pioneers of a warless world are the youth who refuse military service.

“War has never been possible,” writes Robert Meagher in Killing from the Inside Out: Moral Injury and Just War, “ unless men have been willing to kill each other and, while they’re at it, possibly to be killed.” And as I have said over and over again: you can’t have a war without soldiers. It is only by young men not enlisting or refusing to enlist that war can be ended once and for all.

 


Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
Sensetti
Sensetti
July 4, 2016 7:56 am

If young men are unwilling to fight for their country then they need to be prepared to be ruled by those who are willing to fight for theirs. War will always come, we can’t even stop the wars raging in our large cities.

wip
wip
  Sensetti
July 4, 2016 1:54 pm

Everyone, in my opinion, will/would be willing to pick up arms against any enemy that is attacking the homeland. This issue is, that too many countries start wars and then tell us we are defending ourselves or our own “interests”. It’s the “interests” where fraud and lies are perpetrated.

Stucky
Stucky
  Sensetti
July 4, 2016 5:10 pm

If young men are unwilling to fight for their country IF WE ARE ATTACKED, OR ABOUT TO BE ATTACKED then they need to be prepared to be ruled by those who are willing to fight for theirs.

There. Fixed it for ya. Otherwise, you would just be another in a looong line of people (see Vance’s list above) justifying war.

Ed
Ed
  Sensetti
July 4, 2016 8:59 pm

“If young men are unwilling to fight for their country then they need to be prepared to be ruled by those who are willing to fight for theirs.”

Bullshit. Young men here aren’t asked to fight for their country. They are bullshitted into fighting for the goals of greedy, power-tripping assholes. The government is not the country. Neither are the beneficiaries of the wars that every young American man has fought for.

The country consists of the people and the land. None of the wars fought in recent memory were waged for the benefit of the country.

Suzanna
Suzanna
  Ed
July 4, 2016 11:39 pm

absolutely correct!

Anonymous
Anonymous
July 4, 2016 9:21 am

“Christian Coalition moralists, Old Testament Christians ……………..”

What, exactly, is an “Old Testament Christian”?

In any event, at least we know Muslims, Atheists, Hindu’s, Shintoists, and on and on have no part in starting or fighting wars.

The only way to prevent war is to simply surrender and make, maybe at the first sign of hostility from the enemy, and make it unnecessary. I think the author would like that.

Stucky
Stucky
  Anonymous
July 4, 2016 5:12 pm

There are MANY wars and battles in the O.T. …. many of them justified by God, who on at least one occasion ordered that every man, woman, child, and animal be slaughtered.

OT = War God. NT, not so much.

Gayle
Gayle
July 4, 2016 10:22 am

All it takes to manipulate my dog into doing what I want her to do is offer a Trader Joe’s Peanut Butter Dog Treat. Human beings are no different, even if the reward is only a delicious feeling of patriotism.

jamesthewanderer
jamesthewanderer
July 4, 2016 10:30 am

I have no problem with defensive war. Someone who invades my house will find that out. I do have problems with offensive wars.
Some might say that the first Iraq war (that toppled Saddam Hussein) was justified, due to the torture, rape rooms and so forth. I thought that as well at the time. Now that I see the MSM lie constantly and the MIC lobbies for conflict, and those like Hillary see blood as a means to money and power. I cannot approve of bombing funerals and wedding parties to get one or two terrorists, and kill two dozen innocents. We are supposed to be the good guys, and women and children are not targets. Calling them collateral damage in order to continue the practice is a failure of morality.
Becoming a bully while wrapping aggression in justifying rhetoric is unworthy of America. And dealing death from above on farmers and villagers is hardly war, more like slaughter. We must rise above war for profit and return to better morals, in order to justify our continued existence on the earth.
By the way, I view Obama’s forced resettlement of Syrians among us as treason, and would consider the death penalty for forcible rapists. I do not approve of the Libyan “regime change”, the Syrian “regime change” or the Ukrainian “regime change” as either necessary nor justified; all appear to be “war for money”. Those who jump headlong into war repeatedly should be forced to fight in them; this would reduce the ranks of the war-mongers quickly, and the rest of us would be better off without them.
Let’s amend the laws to ensure that those who vote for war and their families must fight in them; I suspect they would become much more rare.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  jamesthewanderer
July 4, 2016 11:18 am

I think Switzerland has the right attitude about war.

I would like to see us develop a similar one.

Joey
Joey
July 4, 2016 3:54 pm

Yeppers, that’s the history.
So, in the interests of equal opportunity, let’s vote for that woman, and provide her and the fems an excuse to “give war a chance.”

But, if you don’t agree, this is for you.
Buffy St. Marie “Universal soldier”

Flying Monkey
Flying Monkey
July 5, 2016 4:36 am

At least in the US soon no one will be capable of fighting per the article you listed above.

“Approximately 71% of the 34 million 17-to-24-year-olds in the U.S would not qualify for military service because of reasons related to health, physical appearance and educational background, according to the Pentagon.

The ineligible typically includes those who are obese, those who lack a high school diploma or a GED, convicted felons, those taking prescription drugs for ADHD and those with certain tattoos and ear gauges, the Wall Street Journal reports, though some requirements can be waived.”

SSS
SSS
July 5, 2016 8:22 pm

“In any event, at least we know Muslims, Atheists, Hindu’s, Shintoists, and on and on have no part in starting or fighting wars.”
—-Anonymous above

Muslims? I nominate you as the first certifiably insane person to comment on TBP.