War and Weight Watchers

Joe / Deacon Bo, I appreciate both of your thoughtful replies. Also, I apologize for the agressive tone before, for that was not intentional. I will think upon the things you both have said. As for the discussion here, I feel that I should briefly reply, and then politely bow out, since I have already spoken my mind. I am convinced that any further rigorous dialogue would become arguing over things that we barely understand, much less can change. Believe it or not, I am not pro-war, as it were. I just have an appreciation for the necessity thereof (as someone who carries a weapon in the name of the empire, and yet carries the cross of Christ). Joe, I don't think that you have a category for people like me (or the secret disciples of Christ working for the Roman guard who couldn't (nor should they have) quit their day job(s)). Trust me, there is tension in what I do, and I "walk the line" every single day, appreciating every single bit of irony. Somtimes we don't agree with everything that's happening in our cultural context, but it is nonetheless the place where we must contextualize Christ's gospel. I would really like to engage you on following Jesus in the empire and loving enemies vs. war, but I feel that I must bite my tongue for now. However, you can find several posts on this particular subject on my blog. Deacon Bo, what you have described I think many would consider a mild view of pacifism. Regardless, I do not believe I called you such (if I did I am sorry), nor do I have any interest in throwing around such labels. As for the money spent on war, there is a simple truth among it all: war is expensive. How expensive? Without saying too much, I will say that the necessity for fuel alone over here is greatly disturbing, and yet eye-opening. Back stateside, it's easy to mock and complain about the war budget. I don't think many civilians realize how MASSIVE this war really is. It's huge, man. Is money being wasted? Probably, but we really have no way of knowing (although we have the glorious right to voice our outrage), nor can much be done about it all at this point. To back out now would be a grave mistake for our country, one that would make the history books, right behind all the other fallen empires. Maybe you're rooting for that? :P Here's a post about these things: http://beggarsandbread.blogspot.com/2010/09/between-two-kingdoms.html His grace and peace to you both. ~JS

Jason, I want you to know that I really appreciate your passion and that you took that time to voice your disagreement. It is always easy to simply roll your eyes and disregard opinions that deviate from our own so... thank you for the courtesy of the note. having said that, you have articulated several points that are within the very narrative that I am saying needs critique . Here are just three issues that deserve consideration: 1) I am not a pacifist. This is not some starry-eyed “imagine” scenario that I am working off of. So the binary contrast with “just war” is a false one. As Joe pointed out, The past 30 years of American Military action could hardly be described as having gone through the ‘just war’ progression in order to justify going to war. The truth is that we have circumvented the process of ‘just war’ and have instead just gone to war. Let’s not pretend that these current conflicts are automatically ‘just’ in the historic rubric. 2) While the military campaigns are sold to us under the moniker of “defending our freedoms” , I have been to many other countries that have freedom and it is not said to be laid on the foundation of military action. This is a false narrative. We are told that these current military actions are necessary to ensure our freedoms. There is a serious question, however, about their capacity to ensure our freedom and it is certainly doubtable that they are making us safer. 3) You misunderstand my concern over the Military Budget. I am not commenting on how much of the $$ make it to the ground where you are (and I am disturbed by how little of seems to make it there). My comment is on the Budget crisis we have in the US and how we cut lunch programs for our poorest children to save thousands, but that the Billions that go to these military contractors is unquestioned and untouchable. In all of the talk about the Economy of the last decade and the housing markets, wall street scandals, etc. there is nearly a complete silence that well over 40% of our budget over that decade has gone to war.

It's hardly ignorant to be suspicious of any 'just war'. If just war criteria were rigorously applied, no US war or military action would qualify. If, in 2002, we made a list of the most brutal and oppressive dictators in the world, Saddam likely would not have made the top 10. Many would even be US allies. So it's not ignorant to argue that the US military has not been used to defend 'freedom'. I'd be a lot more comfortable if all the militaristic talk of freedom was backed up by a use of the military that didn't have other suspicious motives. Zimbabwe, Darfur, Uganda? We don't defend freedoms there because there's no US interest in it. What's the point of having the most powerful military in the world if we're not going to enforce a no-fly zone over Darfur and stop civilians from being massacred? And how about following Jesus? Is there something to be said for taking Jesus at his word when he says to love our enemies? He didn't seem too concerned with defending freedom, and invited his followers to join him by taking up a cross. That's got to mean something, right?

I normally appreciate the points of view shared here, and I am glad for this article, even though I think it is crap. The main point(s) seems to be that 1.) Freedom is not solely the result of our military – and 2.) freedom is not all our military does. I share your frustration with people who are blindly patriotic and/or nationalistic, but I know plenty of people who appreciate the "freedom isn't free" culture, but would never say that "freedom is solely the result of our military", nor that "freedom is all our military does". Instead, I think the word that they use is "DEFEND", not "solely" produce. As an Airman serving in Afghanistan currently, I have a bit of perspective on how the freedoms [that both grateful and ungrateful Americans appreciate] are defended. DEFENDED. If the military isn't defending them, then WHO IS? Any takers? As for the government's war budget, you have no idea what you're even talking about. You wouldn't believe the GOOD that we're doing out here (but of course, that stuff doesn't make the news). I haven't showered in months (we must bathe with baby wipes), we relieve ourselves in porto-potties (the locals' truck that is supposed to empty our porto-potties has been broken for weeks now, but I'll spare you the horrifying description), we shave using bottled water, we cannot send mail, supplies/mail are air-dropped every few months, and the food we eat is really terrible. Not to mention, my wife has had to learn to be a single mother, and my kids miss their father. Every society that has ever existed has had the necessity for war, and these societies have always been littered with ignorant pacifists who don't understand the depths of social justice, the need for a just war, or the fact that war really is as necessary in this fallen world as it is ugly. So, go ahead and write posts about how the military isn't the only reason that we have freedom every Memorial Day if you want to. For now, that is your right. Just remember that no one actually thinks that, but also no one else is actually "defending" said rights. Grace and peace to you all. ~JS

This is well said. I've often felt uneasy when people talk about war and military action a necessary evil to defend our freedom (usually online; I'm Canadian and these issues aren't forefront in most minds) but have never been able to organize my thoughts well enough to understand why.