Re:war vs. anti-war (multiple responses)

Tue, 9 Sep 1997 04:03:26 -0400



Ted, with all due respect, purists in my book are those who beat their
breasts about having been right from the begining and who diss those
who didn't do the sam,e as they. Purists tend to recite personal
histories, much as a blue blood recites a petigree. More specificly,
my remarks are aimed at the few who would condemn all vets in a
gesture that divides the world into "the light and and the dark." My
feelings about purism has little to do with COs and pacifists

The reasons for being in the military during the Viet Nam Era were many
and quite complex involving class, region, level of education, personal
politics, etc. Also, the motivations for activity in the peace movemnet were
just as complex. The reasons, motives, for being in both, were perhaps even
more so and certainly just as draining personnally, if not more so. At the
time (late sixties--early seventies), I observed that the peace movement was
the start of a healing process for the vets so involved, and for many, an entry
into a humanistic politics.

Tom Page

The Wichita State University BBS (316)-978-3779 Wichita Ks


From: "drieux, just drieux" <>
Subject: Re: Re:war vs. anti-war.

Randy, et al,

What I keep waiting to hear from folks is some
sort of 'well this is what we Really Learned'
from all the 'war v. anti-war' stuff.

A few days back I had to deal with the fact that
once again a Nail Bomb Blew up in Isreal, slaughtering
some, maiming others, and leading an artist friend of
mine to support the EvilInternationalPhoneCompany to
contact the GrandDameOfHerKlan who regularly hangs out
on the street where the dead died.

We chatted about this while sitting in a cafe in fremont
today, so I could play "go" with her Beau, and try to get
past my ANGER at civilians who keep making such nice
soft targets by gathering in clumps in side walk kafe's
for such Completely Impractical reasons as to 'alledged'
read the news papers and the trendy rags of the pretentious
psuedo intellectuals du gauche, when all along it's the
'oogling and eye contact games'.

Clearly given all the great Progress made in the Land of
Moral Certainty about how to arbitrate BOTH Modern Warfare
and Modern Relationship Management that has been the grand
legacy of the sixties, we would obviously have some great
solution to first this ongoing adjuct to the Six Days War
of the sixties, and the irrational behavior of the younger
generation that clearly has no respect for all the Great
Wisdom we accrued for them. But inspite of the Great Moral
Victories of the AntiWarKrusade, the killing Goes On. And
just as consistentantly the younger generation no longer
really listens about the Horrid Failure of the Evil Male
ChauvanistSexistSexualRevolution, and keep becoming infatuated
and irrational, and still acting like humans, even in this
age of Aids....


Date: 09/07/97
Time: 16:46:54


From: "Mike Bennett" <>
Subject: RE: Buying the System Line (was: Summer of Love/Vets)

I think one has to remember that people, like water and electricity will
follow the path of least resistance or inconvenience. Most people in America
do not think in moral terms but of "how can I get what I want?" Giving up
something for the good of the whole is counter to the concept of individual
rights they use to justify this self-centered behavior. They attend the
church that offers the best child care or business connections. They join the
Klan to have someone to sell used pickups to. Women adopt the politics of the
current boyfriend or vice versa.
People like the antiwar constituency felt awful about the war and the only way
they could feel better about themselves was to oppose it. Working class
people spend most of their lives trying to get their asses out of one jam or
another caused by their oppression. the draft was one. They do what is
necessary to survive and have families. Until we offer them an alternative to
looking out for themselves the best way they can, we have no right to preach.
Of course we can always teach by example. RIGHT?