Grandpa's answer continued,(part 3)

After a bit of silence grandpa continued by saying; “ Wars lost can be justified. It was just that Germany lost in WWII in view of the concentration camps. It was a just loss for Japan in WWII in view of their attack on Pearl Harbor. We declare that it was a just loss for England in regards to our revolutionary war. In fact we declared that justification in our Declaration of Independence. We declare that the South’s loss in the Civil war as just with the freeing of the slaves. We must remember, boy, there are always two sides to every war not just one. And if winning was a just outcome for one side then it must follow that losing was a just outcome for the other side.”

A smile came across my face as I began to see what grandpa was saying and I just nodded silently in agreement.

“Now, boy, the United States is considered the super power in the world. That status is the result of our economic strength as well as our military strength. But, being a super power does not make us right in all we say or do. Men run our government and man is not a perfect being so he will make errors of judgement. This is true even in the case of wars declared and waged.

This is where I believe the founding fathers showed their greatest genius by creating a federal government of three independent branches. The three branches contain different numbers of men, the executive branch consists of a single person, the judicial branch consists of nine members and the legislative branch consists of over 500 members. And it is the use of the democratic process that each branch comes to a decision. And the founding fathers placed the decision of declaring war in the hands of the legislative branch.

One reason for this, in my mind, is that it is far harder to get a majority vote for war from the branch that contains the most persons. It would require very good reasons for a majority to vote for it. Another reason would be the nature and purpose of this branch of government. Each member of the House, when voting, is voting as a representative of every soldier and every future soldier that makes his district his home, thus declaring the willingness of that soldier to risk his life, even sacrifice that life based on his representative’s vote. Senators are voting as the representative of his or her state thus declaring that state’s willingness to send their sons and daughters to wage that war if declared. The declaration of war is the heaviest burden a leader can possess and should be done only with the greatest of deliberation and debate.“

Grandpa went quiet again allowing me time to digest the words he was saying. But one question remained in my mind. What does this have to do with giving aid to the enemy as he claimed the guest speaker was doing?

Grandpa's Answer, (part 2)

“Wars are a peculiar phenomena, boy. While you can make comparisons with them each one is unique and with their own character. This is true of those that try to evaluate them also. Wars can be evaluated based upon their morality and value to a society or they may be evaluated in regards to whether or not a side is winning or losing without regard to the morality of its existence.

There are those who believe that wars have no value thus wars should never be waged in their viewpoint. This group of persons are identified as pacifists. There are those who dissent against a certain war but not others. These people will use pacifistic arguments to promote their viewpoint of dissent to any particular war they disagree with. For purpose of distinction I will refer to this group as neo-pacifists. Then there are those who believe that once a war begins the only determinants that should be evaluated are those that determine whether or not a side is winning or losing. Any other considerations are meaningless to this group. Again for distinguishing groups I will refer to this group as warriors. The ways to distinguish between these groups are the premises they use to justify the conclusion they have reached.

All three groups want the troops to come home. The distinguishing difference between the groups is when. The warrior group wishes the troops home only when there is victory over the enemy as defined by history. The other groups want the troops home before victory can be clearly declared.

There is a problem about bringing the troops home prior to the declaration of victory. And from what I have seen and heard it is a problem that those who dissent of a certain war do not realize as they present their argument to bring the troops home early. I honestly believe that they do not understand that they are aiding the enemy in their cause for victory.”

With these words said grandpa went silent leaving me to ponder over these words. How could bringing the troops home be aiding the enemy? But more important how could it be justified?

War in Iraq, (part 1)

Twas a beautiful Sunday afternoon and we were sitting under the old oak tree on a small knoll, my grandparents and me. The sun was warming us as the nice cool breeze made sure it was not too hot that day. A picnic basket sat behind us on the blanket we sat upon filled with grandma’s fine picnic vittles. Grandpa had never put this section of land under the plow but left it in its natural beauty. ‘Twas a Sunday after church tradition that grandma said they started when they first was married and settled upon this land.

Grandpa said once that while the church was considered as God’s house he felt closer to the Almighty out here. The reason he gave was that it was the hands of man that built churches while the Word of God built all we see here. How can you argue against that type of reasoning?

Grandpa was unusually quiet this day. It was one of those times both grandma and I knew it was not a good time to interrupt his thoughts. He was thinking on what happened at church this morn. The pastor had a guest speaker this particular Sunday and he spoke of the war in Iraq and how he thought wars should be fought by certain rules if they are to be seen as justified. Then he went on talking about all of the things that was being done by our troops that violated those rules. With this said he asked the congregation to vote for those politicians that promised to get the troops out of Iraq.

Grampa placed his callused hand gently upon my outstretched leg and surprised me by asking “What did you think of the guest’s talk this morning, boy?”

I sat there quietly for a few minutes collecting my thoughts hurriedly at the unexpected question. Then I spoke quietly but hesitantly. “ Well, Grandpa, he ended his talk by saying how important it was that we petition the President to pull the troops out.” Then I scratched my head in wonder as I added, “ but how do you win a war by pulling the troops out before they have achieved victory? What value is there in losing a war?”

Grampa just gently patted my leg as he chuckled and replied, “ good questions, boy, very good questions and ones deserving a good answer, hope I can give one that honors those that sacrificed their lives.” Then grampa went quiet once more.

Can an answer be given or is there really an answer to these questions?

Marx and Attitude

Grandpa was listening to the news one night and heard of another attempt to enact some socialist program and you could just see the veins in his forehead begin to throb in disgust. Turning the radio off he just looked at me and smiled as he began one of his enlightening little lessons of life.

“ Boy, your grandpappy has nothing but contempt for Socialism but he will admit that Marx was a genius when it comes to understanding society. Socialism and Marx have been inseparable terms. The one factor that sets Marx above every other sociologist is the fact he presented a theory for society based upon his previous expertise and knowledge of the effects of his field of expertise on society. And from this separated society into two classes by which he saw one class exploiting the other class for their own benefit. The big problem of seeing a society in terms of classes is that the classes are fixed and of a permanent nature and each individual becomes a member of that class as fixed.

But, boy, a man can learn much from Marx even if the feelings he inspires are feelings of contempt for his vision of society. Attitude is one aspect that one can use Marx as a basis of learning.

Learn the ways of a businessman and you will know success.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will only know failure.
Learn the ways of a businessman and you will know independence.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will only know dependency.
Learn the ways of a businessman and you will be in command.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will be in submission.
Learn the ways of a businessman and you will seek the freedom to take risks.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will seek the freedom from risks.
Learn the ways of a businessman and you will be known as thinking for yourself.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will allow others to do your thinking for you.

Learn the ways of a businessman and you will see government as a ruler, the people ruled.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will see government as a servant, the people it serves.
Learn the ways of a businessman and you will see taxes in terms of incentives to wealth.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will see taxes in terms of redistribution of wealth.

Learn the ways of a businessman and you will envy the poor in respect of their wealth.
Learn the ways of the worker and you will envy the rich in greed of their wealth.
Learn the ways of a businessman and you will know no master and be the master of your own destiny.
Learn the ways of a worker and you will know no slave but be enslaved to the destiny given you.”

With these words said he stood up and stretched out his arms and bid me a good night leaving me to remain and ponder over his seemingly contradictive thoughts of wisdom. How can you admire a man yet be contemptuous of his views?