Winter Soldier Investigation (was Re: Colin Powell)

Reese reeza at flex.com
Fri Dec 22 23:13:28 PST 2000


At 09:43 AM 12/22/00 -0600, Carrol Cox wrote:

>Max Sawicky wrote:

>

>>

>> Is our political position that x million U.S. vets

>> must be prosecuted for war crimes?

>

>No. Probably some thousands (mostly commissioned officers

>and some 'lifers' in the enlisted ranks) ought to be branded

>as such, some by name and the rest generically.

Carrol, I think a line needs to be drawn, to distinguish between following orders, and improvising on them. Another line, for those who follow orders, failure to do so resultant in punishment, and those who are the ultimate source of those orders. Your categorical castigation of the Nuremberg trials (reading into your statement below somewhat), would seem to justify this position.

That said, what is war, if not killing peoples on the declared "enemy" side, and breaking their things? The U.S. is not the first nation to engage in a wholesale manslaughter, nor shall we be the last. I believe it is important here, to distinguish between cultural mores and political motivations, especially when both generations and cultures are being bridged in what seems a most haphazardous manner.

>> If not, what

>> portion of the prosecution of Nazis was inappropriate?

>

>All of it, for reason you give in your next sentence. And

>also because I've decided that all exercise of U.S. power

>beyond its own borders since late 1944 is/was prima facie

>criminal.

Some would say everything since the mid-1860's should be thrown out - with reference to central government and the regulation of everything under. I'm not entirely sure of the exact source of this belief, nor do I particularly ascribe to it, but I would like to discuss in a non-inflammatory manner.

I believe several motivations can be ascribed to it, certainly (neo?)conservatism among them, but I wonder if that is truly the source, or merely an echo, a disconnect, a thought-stopping meme introduced for exactly that purpose.

>(The doctrine of Unconditional Surrender is itself,

>except in Civil War against slavery, a criminal doctrine.)

Civil War against Slavery. There never was a Civil War against Slavery in the U.S. The so-called "southern" States did not secede because of a slavery mandate, taxation was more central to the true issue(s) at hand. The Emancipation Proclamation didn't free anyone, it served only to polarize a singular issue on a long list (you can infer political spin here>.

Unconditional Surrender is not unheard of, in other cultures. Regardless, what does this have to do with anything relevant to this list's topic?

>> Victor's justice sure does simplify things.

I agree with you here, Max. It does simplify things, but that says nothing about the accuracy of what is learned, taught or remembered.

Reese



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list