In Memoriam, 2020, by Robert Gore

This article was first posted on Straight Line Logic on Memorial Day, 2015. It will be published every Memorial Day for as long as SLL continues as a website.

You don’t fight for your country, you fight for your government.

The Golden Pinnacle, by Robert Gore

On Memorial Day, America remembers and honors those who died while serving in the military. It is altogether fitting and proper to ask: for what did they die? Do the rationales offered by the military and government officials who decide when and how the US will go to war, and embraced by the public, particularly those who lose loved ones, stand up to scrutiny and analysis? Some will recoil, claiming it inappropriate on a day devoted to honoring the dead. However, it is because war is a matter of life and death, for members of the military and inevitably civilians, that its putative justifications be subject to the strictest tests of truth and the most probing of analyses.

Millions have marched off to war believing they were defending the US, which implies the US was under attack. Yet, setting aside for a moment Pearl Harbor and 9/11, US territory hasn’t been invaded by a foreign power since the Mexican-American War (arguably—Mexico claimed the territory it “invaded” was part of Mexico), or, if the Confederacy is considered a foreign power, the Civil War. That war ended a century-and-a-half ago, yet every US military involvement since has been justified as a defense of the US. That has gradually attenuated, in a little noted slide, to a defense of US “interests,” which is something far different.

Only one of those involvements could, arguably, have been said to have forestalled not an invasion, but a possible threat of invasion: World War II. Watching newsreel graphics of Germany’s drives across Europe, Northern Africa, and the USSR, and Japan’s across Asia and the Pacific, it was perhaps understandable that Americans believed the Axis powers would eventually come for them, especially after Pearl Harbor. However, that was a one-off attack by the Japanese to disable the US’s Pacific Fleet. To launch an invasion of the US, Japan, a smaller, less populated nation whose economy depended on imports of vital raw materials, including oil, would have had to cross the Pacific and fight the US, and undoubtedly Canada, on their home territories. The Pearl Harbor attack, provoking America’s entry into the war, proved a strategic blunder for the Japanese. An invasion would have been ludicrous. Similarly, Germany, up to its eyeballs in a two-front war, couldn’t conquer Russian winters or Great Britain across the English Channel. How was it supposed to either cross the Atlantic, or the USSR and hostile guerrillas, then the Pacific, and attack the US? That, too, would have been ludicrous.

The 9/11 attack was also a one-off. A majority of the attackers came not from a US enemy but rather a supposed ally, Saudi Arabia. They received funding and other support from people in that country and perhaps its government. A conventional war against a “state sponsor of terrorism” might have required war against Saudi Arabia; it is still not clear how involved its government was. That option was never considered. Rather, the Bush administration performed metaphysical gymnastics and launched the first war in history against a tactic: terrorism. Although the jihadists who perpetrated 9/11 were self-evidently not the vanguard of an invasion, the terrorism they employed was deemed a threat to US interests in the Middle East, and to life and property in the US. However, none of our subsequent involvements in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt, and Yemen have been necessary to maintain US citizens’ freedoms, the nation’s territorial integrity, or its lives and property.

There are undoubtedly many epitaphs on tombstones in this country to the effect: Here lies the deceased, who died defending America, and not one that reads: Here lies the deceased, who died defending American interests. However, the latter is in most cases more accurate than the former. Who decides the interests for which members of America’s military will die? Those considering entering the military today must look beyond the slogans, contemplate the risks of being killed, wounded, dismembered, paralyzed, or psychologically traumatized, and ask themselves: why and for whom are these risks being borne? You don’t fight for your country, you fight for your government. Is it worth risking one’s life for the US government?

In 1821, John Quincy Adams said America had not gone “abroad in search of monsters to destroy,” and while we wished those seeking liberty well, theirs was not our fight (see “In Search of Monsters,” SLL, 4/11/15). Since then, America has searched for monsters, found, and in some cases, destroyed them. However, as the poison of power has worked its evil on the minds and souls of those who possess it, the monsters have become more ethereal, apparitions conjured like creatures in the closet by children when they go to bed. The war on terrorism creates more terrorists, the monsters of choice since 9/11. The government still pays occasional lip service to “democratic values” and “civil liberties,” but allies itself with regimes which have no more fealty to those values and liberties than the “tyrants” the government opposes. “Defending America” and “Promoting Our Way of Life” have become transparent pretexts for American power and domination unbounded. As Adams so presciently warned, the search for monsters has turned the government itself into a monster, the biggest threat to Americans’ “inextinguishable rights of human nature.”

Those who have fought and died to defend America and its freedoms are noble beyond measure. Those who pay self-serving tribute to their valor, but make war and expend lives as means to corrupt ends are evil beyond redemption. Honor the former; expose and oppose the latter.

26 responses to “In Memoriam, 2020, by Robert Gore

  1. General Smedley Butler laid it all out, “War is a Racket”, and what we have been experiencing since his demise is absolute confirmation that all the wars are about war profiteering based upon LIES and government fraud to start them. The list and the actions are without question. Iraq, Syria, now the Afghan debacle for almost 20 years, Libya, all the middle east debacles.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

    Like

  2. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 - Excalibur News

  3. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | Zero Hedge – Truly Times

  4. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | NewsLinks.Net | Conservatve News

  5. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 – iftttwall

  6. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 – Finanz.dk

  7. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | Financial Investing Today

  8. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | Commentary and Observations | CuttingScore.com

  9. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020

  10. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 – TradingCheatSheet

  11. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | WESTON POST

  12. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | Zero Hedge

  13. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 – Maris Research

  14. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | Zero Hedge - The Republican Ballot

  15. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 – Investing Money Trends

  16. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 – SYFX+

  17. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | Zero Hedge – MONITOR

  18. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 - Tradezy

  19. Pingback: Today’s News 26th May 2020 | The One Hundredth Monkey

  20. So often in history, mass murderers find their way into positions of power and prestige allowing them to carry out their crimes with impunity. Winston Churchill is a good example. Fundamentally the only difference between Hitler taking Ukraine and Grant taking the West is that Grant won and Hitler lost and the only similarity is that a lot of people died on every side erroneously thinking they were defending their country.

    Like

  21. Pingback: In Memoriam, 2020 | Real Patriot News

  22. Robert, 9/11 was a Deep State Zionist caper that was so successful that even you 20 years after the fact think it was an “attack”. If you want some truth go to https://www.bollyn.com/.

    Like

    • I have my doubts about 9/11 and have posted numerous articles exploring the official narrative’s many contradictions and inconsistencies. However, going off in those weeds for this article would have been a distraction that detracted from the main points I was trying to make.

      Like

  23. Pingback: Covid-19 PanICdemic/Plague:  In Memoriam (May 25, 2020) | e-commentary e-ssay e-poem

  24. Robert.

    Where does the premeditated attack, with US government complicity, on the USS Liberty fall is this discussion? It would be reasonable to assume that a belligerent attack on a lightly armed (and armored) non combatant America Flag bearing ship in International waters for over two hours involving waves of attacks from fighter aircraft, motor torpedo boats and assault helicopters that actively destroyed lifeboats, used napalm and caused the death of 34 men and the wounding of 171 other would………..constitute an act of war.

    If the answer is yes, then please let me know when we finally strike back so I can take point. I think a third unmentioned component of your reference to the sacrifice of young men and women should be WHOSE INTEREST. Because from World War I to the present day (actually you could go back further) all western nations have sacrificed blood and treasure to ensure the birth and maintenance of a nation. Now certainly Lockheed Martin and Raytheon and Northrop Grumman and all the others have an interest and a desire to remain at war throughout the world but why primarily in the middle east. Would they kill americans to do it? Do they have a track record of purposefully killing people to secure an end. I again ask when going to war, Whose Interest?

    Now returning to the Liberty, I recall that during separate moments of the two hour ordeal the USS Saratoga and the USS America responded to the Liberty’s distress calls by launching aircraft to defend their brethren (you know the hollywood rubbish of never leaving your buddy behind) but were recalled. First by the interception of the Secretary of Defense and second by the sitting President of the United States, who on tape stated that “I will not embarrass our ally” and was later heard to make the off hand remark that he wished the G-d D–n ship would sink,

    Sir when can we have this discussion. Because without it, there is no reason to ever have the first discussion that you raised so eloquently minus a few insignificant details.

    Like

    • Rashid

      The USS Liberty incident was a travesty. I’ve read several articles about it and have posted two by Ray McGovern. Where does this incident fall in this discussion? Squarely in the middle of it, as one of many insane tragedies the US government has visited on its military personnel. The lack of US response was done to protect Israel, which may or may not have committed an act of war (If Johnson knew about the attack before it happened and allowed it, is the attack an act of war? Reasonable people can disagree. If Johnson did know about it beforehand, a strong case can be made out that he committed treason.) Like so many things our government has done, the incident needs to be exhumed, fully investigated, the results disclosed, and justice administered to any of its malefactors who are still alive. I have little hope that any of that will happen.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.