Leaders
Don't Kill People...
By Michael Boldin
03 March, 2007
Countercurrents.org
If
I have my facts straight, George W. Bush has never killed a single person
in his life. All the torture and death that people attribute to him
has been carried out by people who were "only following orders."
Psychologically, I find this
quite interesting. As a person, it doesn't appear that Bush would or
could hurt anyone, especially not innocent people. But, as "commander-in-chief,"
he can order and oversee actions that result in the deaths of tens of
thousands of innocents without even batting an eye. A friend and critic
of mine believes that leaders such as Bush assume full responsibility
for the actions of a nation's military. I strongly disagree.
We've all heard the excuses
over and over again. The soldiers aren't responsible because they're
following orders. The military isn't responsible because they have to
obey the civilian leadership. The President isn't responsible because
he was given bad intelligence. The intelligence agencies aren't responsible
because they had bad informants, and made the best call they could under
the circumstances. And, of course, Congress isn't responsible either.
Why not? I don't really know. Maybe it's because they're utterly incompetent.
Seriously, though, we have
a major problem here.
RESPONSIBILITY
So, who is responsible for
the death and destruction in Iraq?
Who? The pilots who dropped
the bombs? The commanding officers? The secretary of defense? The President?
Or, as the war hawks would like us to believe, is it the people defending
their homeland from invasion? If they'd just stop resisting.Our peace-loving,
democracy-spreading military wouldn't have to defend themselves and
kill these people, right?
Who is responsible might
not even matter, because the truth is no one will be held accountable,
and there will be no trials or prosecutions for the countless innocents
that have been killed in America's foreign wars. The result is that
the politicians are further emboldened to wage even more wars in the
future.
STANDING ARMIES ARE
DANGEROUS TO YOU
Historically, governments
have misused standing armies in two main ways, both of which inevitably
result in tyranny for the People. The first is to engage in foreign
wars, which invariably result in massive spending, which enables the
government to place a bigger and bigger tax burden on the people. This
was well-stated by James Madison, the "father of the Constitution":
Of all the enemies to public
liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises
and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from
these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are
the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of
the few.
Governments generally call
for increased patriotism at home while these foreign wars are being
waged. The politicians demand greater powers and reduced liberties for
the people; claiming that these moves will help bring peace. Explaining
this second way standing armies are misused, Madison continued:
In war, too, the discretionary
power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices,
honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing
the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people....
[There is also an] inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of
fraud, growing out of a state of war, and ... degeneracy of manners
and of morals.... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst
of continual warfare.
The concept here is simple.
Governments use their armies to stir up, or even produce, enemies by
meddling in the affairs of people in different countries. Then, they
attempt to scare their own people with cries that the "enemy"
is ready to invade, and that war is absolutely necessary to stop these
evil killers. Once war breaks out, the government then demands additional
power over the people to supposedly "protect" them in time
of war.
Sound familiar?
WHERE THE REAL DANGER
LIES
American history is filled
with politicians who used foreign adventures to boost their political
standing at home. The war in Iraq, now lasting over 15 years and Presidents
from both political parties, demonstrates why the Founding Fathers so
vehemently opposed standing armies.
The use of our military to
invade nations or do "police actions" in places like Iraq,
Afghanistan, Colombia, Serbia, Vietnam, and elsewhere, is both unconstitutional
and immoral. The death toll resulting from this aggressive foreign policy
has become massive.
Ask yourself this. Is the
Iraqi insurgent fighting in Baghdad more threatening to you than warrantless
spying or massive war spending? Is al Qaeda more menacing than the suspension
of Habeas Corpus? Is the "terrorist" in Iraq a greater danger
to your freedom than all those politicians who signed the Patriot Act
without even reading it? Just exactly who or what is the greatest threat
your rights?
To those not blinded by interest,
the answer is clear. It's not individuals like Clinton or Bush. It's
not the military. It's not the NSA, the Supreme Court, or Congress.
The greatest threat to your liberty is your own government; it's the
system which has allowed all this to happen! And, sadly, it's been this
way for many years.
But, the politicians couldn't
get away with much if we didn't give them the tools. The government
couldn't grow in power without the billions of dollars they take from
us each year. The politicians wouldn't be able to wage war without the
massive military machine which has become synonymous with American foreign
policy.
I say to you, look at who
your leaders are, and ask yourself if these people can be trusted with
such power. Presidents such as Truman, Bush, Johnson, and Clinton have
used the military in ways which have resulted in the deaths of millions.
They used the same standing army that people like George Washington
and Patrick Henry warned us against. Don't tell me that this country
needs such a military force. A national militia would never have done
such things.
SOLUTIONS
In contrast to this bloody
mess, the founders envisioned a society that would be protected by militias
on the state level. A national defense would only be put together when
the nation itself was directly threatened by invasion.
What's my suggestion? Well,
I'm sure many of you won't like it, but that's the way things go. I
say let's get rid of the whole damn military. Stop spending countless
billions and billions to maintain a global presence. Bring all the troops
home once and for all!
Just think, if the military
was disbanded then there would be no more overseas bases. There would
be no more bombings of faraway nations. There would be no more terrorists
created by a meddling foreign policy. There would be no more regime
changes. There would be no more foreign wars. There would be no more
war funding bills to debate. There would be no more use of weapons like
agent orange and depleted uranium. There would be no more enemy combatants.
There would be no more military prisons. There would be no more collateral
damage. And, most importantly, the root of the problem would finally
be smashed into pieces; the treacherous policy of American interventionism.
Thus, there is only one solution
to this grave danger to our freedom and prosperity. We the People must
act on the warnings of the Founding Fathers against standing armies
and foreign entanglements. We must shut down the American military empire,
close every single overseas base, and bring all the troops home. The
troops would then be released into the private sector, where they would
be quite effective in leading local militias to defend the nation in
the highly unlikely event of a foreign invasion.
REAL NATIONAL DEFENSE
Do I want a defenseless country?
Absolutely not - I want a defenseless government! I want a government
that doesn't have the power or the tools to wage anymore foreign wars,
and thus, one that doesn't have the excuse to take away your liberty
to "protect" you.
There is an alternative that
one would call a real national defense. This is one where the people
themselves are responsible for the defense of their country. The individual
American was considered to be so effective and important to the defense
of America that the Constitution specifically mentioned it in the 2nd
Amendment.
Those in power, and their
followers, of course, would never want this to become reality, though.
They'll try to scare you away from such a strong system of defense.
They'll warn you of all the great dangers that will "surely"
come. But, don't believe such things, for they are the lies of tyrants!
Here's one I've heard time
and time again. "If we didn't have the military, you'd be speaking
German or Japanese right now!" Don't make me laugh! The Japanese
were able to pull off one surprise attack by air, and the Germans weren't
even able to cross the English Channel, much less the Atlantic Ocean!
So what would happen if another
country ever began preparing masses of ships and planes, and millions
of soldiers to invade the United States? The Founding Fathers gave us
the answer. Such an invading force would be met by the power of tens
of millions of free, well-armed American citizens who would quickly
rise to resist and defeat any such invasion.
Think it can't work? Think
again. Invading and successfully occupying nations with an armed population
is a feat rarely accomplished. The people of Afghanistan were able to
drive out the mighty Soviets, and just a small percentage of the Iraqi
people are currently making occupation untenable for the mightiest military
in the history of the world.
A NEW DIRECTION
What would we do about murderous
foreign dictators? Yes, you got it. The Founding Fathers gave us an
answer to that as well. First of all, the government would no longer
force you to give them any money. And more importantly, the government
would no longer have the ability to go around looking for tyrants to
destroy, and populations to "save" through war. Instead of
endless foreign entanglements, we'd build the freest and most prosperous
nation in history.
Of course, those Americans
who would want to leave their families and jobs to support revolutionary
movements in other parts of the world would always have the freedom
to do so.
Thus, in determining our
future, we have a clear choice. Should we continue down the path we
are on today? Should we continue on this path of empire, with massive
standing armies, hundreds of overseas bases, foreign wars and sanctions?
Should we continue our foreign policy which creates hatred in millions
and millions of people; thus making you a target of their retaliation?
Should we continue down the path of ever-growing taxes and regulations,
as well as the endless loss of liberty that always comes with empire?
Or, should we change direction?
Should we take our nation down the path that the Founder Fathers envisioned?
Should we create a society where government is strictly limited and
forbidden from invading foreign nations? Should we build a society where
freedom and prosperity reigns; a nation that would serve as a model
for the rest of the world? If we choose this path, every person on earth
would always know that there would be at least one refuge for the oppressed,
the United States of America.
We can have something different,
and I, for one, choose the path of liberty.
Michael Boldin,
who is an outspoken critic of the American political system. He is a
senior editor and contributing writer for http://www.populistamerica.com.
Michael welcomes your feedback at [email protected]