Why War? Which War?

(Note: Lighter fare onthe FRONT Porch)

Iffin' it ain't the grandest arrogance to think youse gonna address such a tall topic as war?!?!

But I is gonna take a run at it. We talk about war so easily that the meaning and the motivation seem to be lost in all the chatter.

Let's start wif this: I despise "Imagine", that snivelin' Beatle song:
"Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace.."

Looky folks, onkly a fool can sing this idiocy. Iffin' they ain't nothin worth dying fer, then nothin' is important enough fer livin', lessen youse jes' an animal wif only eatin' and excretin' ter do wif ya life. Gag. I doan LIKE war, but I doan like fake "peace" even more.

We'uns in the USA jes' celebrated Memorial Day--when we remember wif respect those who died or were injured so we could be free to sit at computers and blog our thoughts and even our jibes or insults. The thang about some wars of recent memory--WWI, WWII, fer instance, is that they had a defined goal that most folks understood and agreed wif'...now--notice real quick that I ain't claimin' that those wars had national agreement on HOW the goals were to be accomplished. Aunty Belle knows they's a difference betwixt goals and methods. Mah goal could be to feed the poor of mah city--good goal--but it ain't right to accomplish tht goal by robbin' banks whar hardworkin' folks is savin' they pennies..so right up front, we gotta make the point that goals and methods are not interchangable.

But war ain't "clean." We'uns cain't get all prissy about methods--oh ter be shur there are better and worse methods--we must not become animals, and we's got treaties fer guidance in wartime--but mostly, by the time ya' get to WAR, youse unrealistic to think that war can be conducted clinically.

So then, why war? What goal is so crucial to folks that they tolerate methods that would be intolerable outside of war? What is it about human relations that brings us to war at all?

Now youse can shur get a copy of the History of War and read til ya's blind, so here is some shorthand:

War happens when not going to war is worse than the horrors of war; when the consequences of not fightin' a war are worse than the losses from war. But fer that point to be reached, someone (king, emperor, tyrant) or most of the someones (in a democracy) must believe that something is worth fightin over.

Fer most of us'uns, that "somethin'" is survival..but even that term needs some clarifying--you can survive under communism, under a dictator like Saddam...but would ya want to? Peace ain't jes' the absence of war, ya know. Why, a dictator can insure "peace" by brutally supressin' any free speech or artisitic expression, by forced labor that works ya til ya drops after 14 hour days, and keeps everyone in the same sort of dormitory so no one has anything better than another, cause no one has anything--at all. But, they won't be no bombs burstin' in air, no gun totin, no bloodshed, no guts spillin' out--yet is that life "peaceful"?

Survival means more than bread and water.

Now over at Sweet Shoat's sty

and Stogie's place,

they's some interesting readin'--one about the survival of Europe, one about a war hero. Both of these posts put me in mind of somethin' important about war--then, and now. See, a "hero" is only reverred iffin' the cause the hero fought for is agreed upon by most folks--I mean, when Saddam declared henchmen heroes, nobody was buyin’ that pig 'n a poke. What is it that we revered in the men of WWII ?

Here is one idea: honor. Yep, that ole fashoned word that, fer menfolks, means willingness to self-sacrifice by puttin' others first --fellow soldiers, women, chillen, ole folks. Why? Cause ya jes' doan wanna see them suffer what's a'coming iffin' ya can do somethin' about it. What the WW II men and women had going was
1) defined goal, unity of purpose
2) authentic sense of honor

But that was then...and we's livin' in now. Now we ain't got no defined goal that unifies us as Americans or Western Civilization. This heah is a REAL BIG POINT:

We no longer agree on the goal.


Shur, we always had some who wanted the goal but advocated other methods of meetin' the goal...but we'uns at least agreed on the goal. This ain't jes' theory: Iffin' ya wanna go to Florida ya can disagree about HOW to get'cha selfs there--by horse and buggy or skateboard or hot-air balloon...but ya all wants to get there somehow. But iffin' some of ya' doan wanna go to Florida--jeepers!They got gators and too many augmentations pokin' outa wrinkled 70 year old chests--and ya wanna go ter California where they's only earthquakes and hollywood, well then the means of gettin' there is moot--ya ain't agreed on the goal.

Over in Europe they's a problem of the goal/method thang. See, the folks is smellin' something rottern in Denmark...the stench is coverin' the continent and the Eurocrats cain't play-like it's jes' Limburger. What's happenin' is that the people have the goal of survival--they wanna keep they cultures and they freedoms and they right ter self-determination. But the method ter accomplish that goal of survival means naming ISLAM as an enemy--along with multicultualism that never does work. But the Euro-elites think that the populace is stoo-pid about the true nature of the thang. Worse, there's no unity of purpose between Europeans in general and their leaders.

The E-crats doan have that goal of survival--nope pets, Aunty can tell ya'--one gets around in the Poa-rk Rind bidness. These crats doan have no sense of honor toward they fellow countrymen--they wanna grab world power and honor, but fer thryselves, not fer helpin' they folks. I done seen some of these folks up close and personal and they doan want the survival of Europe--or "western civ". They offered the people a new constitution for all of Europe that warn't nothin' but a noose around the neck of Europe...mor'n a hundred pages of Orwellian NewSpeak fer globalism, and...shhh!
....world government. Iffin' the goal is world governmment, then Europe has to go the way of the Dodo. (USA too--but a little bit later). So, we have DIS-unity of goal.

But then Islamic forces done us a favor--they jes' got too bold and lawless: burnin' Paris, bombing Madrid and London, rioting over cartoons in Denmark...and Lawdy ! It done woke up some (need more!) folks to the real plight. On top of the Islamic worries, Euro-folks is noticin' that they leaders is sellin' out to multiculturalism so now folks have LESS than they used to--less freedom, less economic promise, less sense of identity--cause when ya' leaders go off to Strasburg to make laws as Europeans and not as Irishmen or Italians, why, ya' lose--lose ya' identity, lose ya' economic freedom that becomes subordinate to whatever Strasburg tells ya', and ya' lose self-determinism. The Eurocrats talk of "freedom" fer immigrants, but to do that, freedom is stolen from the home-folks.

Here's an example: Isalm permits multiple wives, while European culture does not. But now lawmakers in the UK have suggested letting Islamic men have two legal wives--this means establishin' a double standard for different types of citizens..and the introduction of the dysfunction of polygamy into Eurpean culture automatically undermines the original European culture at its core--family life. So to extend "freedom" to Islamic immigrants, both freedom and culture is taken from the European nationals.

The plain folks doan recognize yet that this is about survival--that one main thang that folks will go to war about. An' I'se worried, cause this is the sort of thang that foments nationalsim that becomes dangerous--already we heah the liberals shriekin' about fascism--an it has reared its ugly haid over theah.

So listen up liberals: It's yore fault if fin' Europe goes fascist; yore policy of multiculturalism that is leadin' Europe to a new and perhaps dangerous nationalism.

Get'cha hands off European culture, better yet, respect it like ya' demand Westerners respect other cultures. All cultures ain't eqaul folks. Seen big crowds beatin' feet to Islamic nations? Funny thang--folks want to immigrate to WESTERN nations mostly--all cultures ain't equal, and lots of folks wanna get away from certain sorts of cultures. Some cultures are better and it's OK ter say so. Let any immigrants of any stripe adapt themselves to European culture. Iffin' they wanna live in Europe (or USA), they must abide by European laws and customs. Otherwise, ya' risk fomenting a backlash against immigrants.

Multicultural is fun--at the fair or a festival celebratin' other cultures' dress and food--fun is over when it multiculturalism gathers the force of law against the primary culture.

Here's the dirty Eurocrat secret: This heah is a new kinda war. In Euro-crat speak they's talkin' about "soft law" an' that leads to "soft war". The whole point of soft-law is to let somethin' become the "way it is done" long enough to "establish" the practice as "lawful." (Like lettin' drugs be winked at until drug use is "normal" and then lo! Laws are passed to protect the drug use.)

Then these new laws constitute a "soft war" on the values and traditions that the regualr folks cherish, 'til the folks is on the wrong side of the law--they are then the deemed "criminals" for opposin' the loss of they own values and own freedoms. When regular folks wake up to this, they will have the same goal--survival--an they will move to a new method to achieve it--war.

This of course, will be a civil war --within all of Western Civilization....unless we start our own "soft-war" to educate--er, blogucate the folks.

Aunty Belle is real interested in yore thoughts on this matter--lemme know what'cha thinkin'.