posted September 22, 2004 02:36 PM              

This raises an age-old question: is the function of war and the culture of war primarily for external defense or for the maintaining of internal power? I submit that this question is far from resolved and needs to be debated.

From the historical beginnings of the state 5,000 years ago, war had two faces: one turned outward for defense and conquest; the other turned inward to prevent revolt against the authority of the state. Thus, the early city-states of Mesopotamia were engaged in military conquest abroad and maintenance of a hierarchical social structure at home that included semi-free laborers, slaves and prisoners of war. Greece and Rome were built on slavery, the slaves captured by war and kept in check by internal military force. The crusades abroad of the Middle Ages were accompanied by the inquisition at home.

Although not often discussed, today's "democratic states" have not escaped from this dynamic. My 1995 article in the Journal of Peace Research, Internal Military Interventions in the United States shows that this has been a constant theme in American history. During the period of slavery, we do not have records, although we know there was a great deal of military activity, often local, against slave rebellions and escapes and against Native Americans. More recently, for the past 120 years there are more complete records indicating approximately 18 interventions within the US and its territories and the involvement of about 12,000 army and national guard troops per year. During periods of external war, the internal wars are usually intensified and accompanied by large scale spying, deportations and witch hunts. It is clear that we are in danger of this once again.

It is important to recognize the culture of war. The culture of war is broader and deeper than war itself, and easier to employ in a democracy, as it depends heavily on secrecy, propaganda and education and not necessarily on overt force.

The modern democratic state is embarrassed to admit to making war on its own citizens, and so it tends more and more towards a culture of war carried out in secrecy. A note in the International Herald Tribune of May 14, 1997, reported that the cost of classification of secrets by the US government was over $5 billion dollars a year and that does not include the CIA secrets because that cost is secret. Although precise data are not available, it would appear that the present US government has increased its secrecy even more. How much is being used for an internal culture of war?

The persistence of internal culture of war underlines the importance of a culture of peace, and especially its emphasis on democracy and the free flow of information, without which democracy cannot properly function.

Although it was eliminated by the European Union from the final version of the 1999 Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, the following provision, contained in the draft document, A/53/370 (paragraph 98) continues to be relevant:

posted September 23, 2004 02:44 PM            

After all 26T, everyone knows we have a lot more to be concerned about with mob families running numbers rackets and prostitution rings than terrorist trying to kill American civilians here.

Bush did not set up the secret courts used by Homeland Security forces to get secret warrants to wiretap, to do the sneak and peek entries or anything else. That court has been in operation and used by the government for some time before Bush became President.

Nor do I think you have the right to know what measures the government is using to identify, track, infiltrate and frustrate terrorists and terrorists groups here in America or abroad. Nor does CBS, NBC, CNN, ABC have to right to know so they can blab it all over the 11:00 news and tip terrorists off to the means and methods deployed against them.

If you want to know 26T, join the CIA and get the proper security clearance.

Of course, for all I know, you may be one of those individuals who believe Bush and the CIA perpetrated the attacks of 9/11 and in that case you could also believe there are no terrorists and no terrorist groups, Bin Laden is the misunderstood do gooder Senator Murray, Democrat, of Washington says he is who builds roads and schools in downtrodden poor areas. Bad press is his main problem.

posted September 23, 2004 02:47 PM              

quote:

---

You could believe a lot of things 26T and you're welcome to your favorite conspiracy theory.

---

Thank you jwhop.

posted September 23, 2004 04:14 PM              

"At the height of a political debate, God is ROFLing." - 26

Life's a piece of sh!t, When you look at it. Life's a laugh and death's a joke. It's true. You'll see it's all a show. Keep 'em laughing as you go. Just remember that the last laugh is on you.

Eric Idle, Monty Python - Bright Side of Life

posted September 23, 2004 10:10 PM              

quote:

---

Well, it is unfortunate that there is certain data and certain information that must be kept secret.
.................................
The ideal situation would be that of highly confidential information/secrets in the hands of one (or several) who have the best interests of the whole at heart, I think.

---

posted September 23, 2004 10:16 PM              

"Laugh and the world laughs with you."

"Post Newsmax articles and believe the lies... and the peace loving anarchist hippies in GU laugh at you."

..........good naturedly of course.

posted September 23, 2004 11:34 PM            

ALITTLE INSIDE 11:11 JOKE. LOL

THE DOVE OF LOVE WILL SHOW THE WAY!