I remember, one time, reading about the Seven Years’ War
(actually from 1754 – 1763) and wondering at what a long time wars used to go
on for—you know—back in the olden days. Then it occurred to me, “Wait, my
country has been at war for seven years now, and Vietnam, that was seven years
too.” That was seven years ago. We are now roughly halfway to eclipsing the
Thirty Years’ War of (1618 – 1648). And, since no one can really say why we
went to war in the first place or how we know when we’re done, I’d bet we have
a reasonable shot at another Hundred Years’ War (1337 – 1453).
Since a full on argument for Christian pacifism would be
ignored outright, I have the more modest goal of suggesting that potentially
endless wars should be avoided. Here are nine ways to tell if you are in one.
You know you are in a state of permanent war when…
…(1) outcomes are
never mentioned. We neither go back and revisit the results of the last war
nor define the sought after results of the next one. In fact, in this state,
“war” is a description of timeframe and events so ambiguously defined that we
would struggle even to narrow in on any one specific period from which to
assess them. Some obscure political philosophers and theologians warned of the
dangers of marching in to kill a strong man willy-nilly and leaving a power
vacuum. But their voices were no match for the welter of beating drums post
9/11. Everyone agrees now that ISIL is a problem that needs to be eliminated,
but it is taboo to go back and question why ISIL was able to go unrestrained in
the first place, post-Saddam.
…(2) the reasons for
going to war are fluid and interchangeable, and one war can be justified by
many different reasons that replace each other over time. “Terrorism” fades
into “weapons of mass destruction” fades into “making it safe for democracy.”
Anything will do. The answer to the question “why” really isn’t that important
in a state of permanent war. We still need some kind of spot filler to respond
to the question why, but we’re not picky about what that spot filler is.
…(3) the enemies are
fluid and interchangeable. If the
reasons for going to war in the first place are so malleable, then it should not
surprise us that Afghanistan can be so easily swapped for Iraq and Iraq for
Syria, Libya, or whatever is next.
…(4) “soldier” does
not refer to an ad hoc recruit trained to go address a specific conflict but
refers to a permanent professional class. Rome had a permanent class of
military officers and soldiers. “Soldier” was understood to be a lifetime
appointment, not a delimited job description for any one particular set of circumstances.
No one questioned whether there should be such a thing as a professional
military class, since the idea of constant geo-economic expansion was built
deep into the imperial ethos defined by the slogan Pax Romana (“Roman peace”). Implicit here, was the idea that
“peace” was not valued where it existed in and of itself but only that peace
which was “Roman.” It was not lost on anybody that Rome needed to continue swallowing up the
cultures and the economic output of new, otherwise peaceable, societies in
order for life within the boundaries of the empire to stay peaceable.
…(5) the need for
perpetual military action is an effective rallying cry for both sides of a
bi-partisan system, even when they can’t agree on anything else. At this
point, it’s telling that Rand Paul might be the one notable 2016 presidential
candidate that vocally does not support endless military action. Far from
sighting any moral or ethical struggles with it, his reason is simply that we
can’t afford it.
…(6) when nominees
for commander and chief do mention, in their campaign speeches, the desire to improve the humaneness of
our methods, their language quickly changes once they're in office, but little else does. The truth is that no one who comes into this office will be
able to come through on such promises if the problem is systemic and bigger
than they are. This is why thoughtful theologians who comment on the issue of
war speak in mythological and spiritual terms. Milieu defining slogans like
“Manifest Destiny,” “God bless America,” and “freedom” tell far more about what
is or is not going to change than any one person’s campaign speeches.
…(7) human rights
atrocities that were once thought unspeakable, gradually become more and more
acceptable in the popular consciousness over time. One would have to search
far and wide for a lingering voice still shouting “Close GTMO.” We’re over it.
…(8) how active a war
is in the popular consciousness is measured solely in terms of how many troops we have on the ground; drone strikes and
other computerized actions do not count, regardless of their effects. Our lives are the ones that matter.
