Winning An Earthquake
On an idle day somewhere north of Toronto, I’m bunkered down in the tour bus and reading numerous articles on anti-war.com, The Independent, and Washington Post. I got to thinking after I stumbled across a quote by Jeanette Rankin, the first woman elected to Congress: “You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake”…
It seems impenetrable logic now: You can’t “win” this war in iraq. Yet time and time again the concepts of winning and losing are jammed into our ears and spewed from the throats of those who will never pick up a weapon or fly a fighter jet or steer a tank- our elected officials. The same elected officials who will also refuse to enlist their own children in the battle to “win” in Iraq.
So, if it is indeed impenetrable logic that you can’t win this Iraq war, why? Numerous reasons. You can’t win a war that those who are to fight it don’t want to; you can’t win a war that has no clear final objective; and you certainly can’t win a war that wasn’t intended to end in the first place.
Is it just me, or does the whole “winning” and “losing” smorgasbord of rhetoric stink of dehumanization? When does the abstraction get called out for what it is: a deterrent used to alienate us from each-other, a smokescreen, a somatic injection that sublimely tells it’s okay that they’re dying, winning will be won.
At some point, mark my words, The United States will somehow spin this dreidel upon it’s head, claim that “losing” the war in Iraq will be the only way to “win” it. Believe me, though it sounds almost comical, it is the last employment of newspeak needed to end this charade properly. It may not come in those terms specifically, it may indeed be dressed in more innocuous methods, but the root message will remain a ridiculous contradiction.
Rankin’s quote is brilliant, and most understood not just for its statement about war, but upon earthquakes: it is a monster which will wreak havoc according to it properties; it is upheaval from within. And make no mistake, has the most destructive properties of anything that’s ever been “man-made” is war.
November 1st, 2007 at 12:50 pm
While I agree the quote itself is brilliant, there are, unfortunately, several organizations that are “winning” in relation to their role in this war.
I hope this quote doesn’t give them any ideas as far as creating an “earthquake” division of Blackwater or Haliburton.
November 1st, 2007 at 1:56 pm
I think you can win an earthquake. You can survive an earthquake - I’d characterize that as winning.
An earthquake isn’t a monster wreaking havoc. It is a natural disaster - caused by the collision of two opposing tectonic plates which move about and inevitably collide because they are sitting together on a cooling planet.
People can survive earthquakes. They can be prepared and trained and know how to deal with them when they arise. They can build structures in a design that withstands the impact. They can choose to live in areas that aren’t close to the fault line.
When an earthquake happens - its characteristics could indeed be like a war, a mass violent disaster. But after the tremors settle most people who survive rebuild after the shakeup.
Earthquakes aren’t premeditated or planned either.
I think your ‘impenetrable’ logic has a fault line. And for that matter - when is logic ever impenetrable? Can someone point me to a logical statement that is impenetrable that isn’t a tautology?
November 1st, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Ummm, your literal interpretation is outside my figurative one. The logic I wrote of has more to do with the notion that “winning” when summated boils out the human quotient of a war.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:09 pm
I take it back - I guess logic could be impenetrable if it was incomprehensible. If it was so obtuse or abstract that someone couldn’t understand it - in which case it would be absurd and then all we could do would be to laugh at it.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Ok, you may not believe this, but I actually thought this up myself and wrote it down in my sketchbook many years ago, so don’t steal it.
“Wars are not won by those who are right, wars are won by those who are left.”
November 1st, 2007 at 2:13 pm
So you’re being figurative about the war then? - well okay fine.
See I am a little bit more bothered. I try to think about it literally - but thats just my angle.
But you’re right ultimatley when you phrase it like that, figuratively, - winning does ‘boil’ out the ‘human quotient’ of war - no matter which sides ‘wins’. Unless you say - “we won the war - but we lost dear Mark Daily”, for instance, and put a name to a face.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:32 pm
It’s a subject which will no doubt, foster debate- winning and losing in the context of war. You can delve into nuances and pluck out words from what I wrote, but the point I’m trying to make is simply that there are some significant factual reasons why the Iraq war can’t be won, and there are also some some figurative, personal ones.
And as for the use of the term “win” being justified by recognizing the names of dead, I think that’s trite. Overlooking the way in which the media will try to placate our emotions and ‘honor’ those fallen by publishing the few names which are released to them doesn’t make up for the overwhelming publication of Bush Administration rhetoric, by the same outlets.
November 1st, 2007 at 4:00 pm
War isn’t exactly a zero sum game. I mean, you could reduce our lives to something like it- as if death is losing, then winning is that we’re allowed to live? It seems more than silly to me. What’s a war, really, except a series of battles- and each battle fought with a different objective in mind while each individual and each group that would have a hand in the battle, literal or figurative (which is to say financial), has a different objective in mind. Or, if the same objective, a different pocket to fill. Iraq, unfortunately, isn’t about winning the war- I don’t even think it’s about a war. It seems more so that we just call it such a thing because it meets the standard definition. The fact of the matter, people are dying while we argue about technicalities- I don’t understand what winning has to do with it. When did it stop being enough for us to just say “People are dying”?
November 1st, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Ya. War ends with relative gains. As in, Side A wins because Side A lost less (lives, territory, resources) than side B.
November 1st, 2007 at 5:15 pm
I think there’s a bigger message some might be missing in this post; that THIS particular war cannot be won in the traditional way of win and lose, nor seen as victorious. You can survive an earthquake but (normally) an earthquake is precise, quick, and doesn’t drag on and on for years.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:16 pm
It seems to me that any “winning” that could come from this war, has already come to those who won, namely Bush, and every other corporation who has very much personally profitted from this war. The horrible part to me about it is that they have “won” what they have by spilling the blood of so many innocent families and so many soldiers. Innocent people who are fighting for what they believe in, and being lied to and betrayed again and again. Really, can any war be won or lost to any degree?
November 1st, 2007 at 6:44 pm
” “People are dying”?”
That’s an unfortunate side effect of war; but war isn’t really all that dangerous.
Why, tainted presciption drugs kill between 250,000 and 350,000 people in China every year. Aspirin kills about 100,000 or more americans every year from causing gastric problems. People die from ulcers.
So you really get a skewed perception from hearing “War is bad-War is bad” all the time.
Maybe war is natural- a thinning out measure. Man tends to do what satisfies him.
The time to get excited about war, is when it starts killing millions. Which will be very soon.
November 1st, 2007 at 7:08 pm
You’re right, Robert- that’s when we should get excited- when the numbers get fucking huge. Prevention in any situation that could lead to the deaths of others is an absolutely absurd notion. Let’s wait until we can say millions of people are dying- that makes it worth a look until then- it’s not even news is it?
November 1st, 2007 at 7:17 pm
“itâs not even news is it?”
Of course it is…….but the current state of the world in conflict is nothing compared to what it has been and will be again. Very shortly I reckon. And try and stop it….it can’t
hurt. But I don’t think it can be stopped. I think, for the most part, we’re a doomed species. That’s today, of course. Tomorrow I might invest in a Moscow Condo.
November 1st, 2007 at 7:32 pm
I chimed in on this topic on P.Pitt’s post a few weeks back.
How does one define win?
There has to be some “prize” to win. You have to be able to achieve some goal if you use the term “win”.
If people don’t know what the specific prize/goal was, how will you ever declare you’ve ‘won’?
What struck me in your first linked article was this line:
“US troops facing extended deployments amid the danger, heat, and uncertainty of an Iraq occupation are suffering from low morale that has in some cases hit “rock bottom.”
Do troops usually have “high morale” in war?
How do they ever return to a normal life after that type of work?
It must take massive amounts of courage to do that work.
November 1st, 2007 at 11:05 pm
[quote comment="31559"]” “People are dying”?”
That’s an unfortunate side effect of war; but war isn’t really all that dangerous.
Why, tainted presciption drugs kill between 250,000 and 350,000 people in China every year. Aspirin kills about 100,000 or more americans every year from causing gastric problems. People die from ulcers.
So you really get a skewed perception from hearing “War is bad-War is bad” all the time.
Maybe war is natural- a thinning out measure. Man tends to do what satisfies him.
The time to get excited about war, is when it starts killing millions. Which will be very soon.[/quote]
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how war is justified. By people like Bob.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:11 am
I didn’t justify war; I merely advanced a theory. Do you make a habit of shooting messengers?
I hate war…..i’ve been in a few….no fun at all.
But, those figures I listed are true. Where is the outrage over that?
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 am
Yo Rob, you know the difference between dying in war and dying from prescription drugs and aspirin?
Aspirin and prescription drugs are designed to help people. Wars are designed to kill people.
If I were you I’d refrain from the urge to make comparisons in the future.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:52 am
[quote comment="31580"]Yo Rob, you know the difference between dying in war and dying from prescription drugs and aspirin?
Aspirin and prescription drugs are designed to help people. Wars are designed to kill people.
If I were you I’d refrain from the urge to make comparisons in the future.[/quote]
Well, thank god you’re not me, huh?
Good prescription drugs are designed to help people, not toxic crap palmed off on innocent people. The ChiComs don’t care who they kill. Or wheather they use guns or pills. Or lead paint.
Who’s to say the bastards aren’t manipulating the weather!!??? They’ve already admtted to having “Stations” set up to control Olympic Games weather, Huh. Lets make sure they don’t kill athletes during the games with bad chow!!
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:32 am
People are dying. How’d ya like to be your average civilian Iraqi cooking dinner one minute then you and your house are blown to bits and gone the next. We’d all have a whole different perspective on things if it was happening in our back yard. Give your head a shake Bob. Sure there’s shitty drugs out there but this is a war. It’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better. As for the weather….yeah right, what a joke - nobody can control the weather.
November 2nd, 2007 at 7:08 am
“. Itâs going to get a lot worse before it gets better. ”
fleeter, that was my point exactly.
How’d you like to be sitting at your desk working when an airliner crashes into the building?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-06-29-china-rain_x.htm
It’s not my joke, the joke is Chinese…..
November 3rd, 2007 at 12:36 am
All of this seems beside the point, which is really what I was talking about; though, I think that might have gone over your head or maybe not anywhere near your head at all. The context of the post is one about the war and even before I said anything, someone had pulled words from context in order to make them fit somewhere else with whatever meaning they attempted to apply. To question authority isn’t just to question those in power as we generally see as governmental figures and such, but also to question words of anyone with any “authority”- authors, scientists, religious figures, journalists- to question quotes, who really said them, why, where did the words and information come from and how they’re being used and interpreted. This is to apply to everyone, including someone on the internet who would feel impotent in being able to do anything about people dying anywhere and so woe is us, we might as well just concede and post weather conspiracy theories because it’s funny. The subject was the war and so I limited my response to my thoughts on the war and winning.
However, what I said about it not being enough to just say people are dying applies even in what you’ve been saying. How many people have to die unnecessarily for any reason before we all agree to come together and attempt to stop it? Why does it HAVE to get worse before it gets better? It’s like I said- when did it stop being enough to just say people are dying? I think whatever the answer would be, that’s where it started and so that’s where it will stop. As far as I figure it’s when we stopped valuing ourselves and lives as being worth anything- desensitized to death and convinced that we’re so unimportant that anything we might say or do in order to prevent it from getting worse, attempt to make it better, or attempt to better others and ourselves is futile or not worth it. I mean, my god, who keeps telling you people that you’re not worth shit and why in the world have you agreed to believe it? But worse, why do you find it necessary to convince others to feel as you do? Does misery really need more recruiters? Seems a little like the people who do so need external validation. Kind of like those rich people who have so much money they could never spend it within their lifetime, but can’t stop themselves to dedicating the rest of their lives toward acquiring more money. They collect paper, you collect misery.
And, by the way, people are dying in our backyard. As was mentioned- in your own towns and cities, down the street, right. It doesn’t make the news because it isn’t news- we already know about it, we hate to look at it, we don’t write news articles on it because we don’t want to draw attention to it, and we don’t plan on doing anything to improve the situation for those people. And we could easily contribute to better the situation in many ways, large and small. Or we could all just sit around and tell ourselves how worthless we are in order to justify others dying for it. I think it’s the sacrifice that gets most people- that helping others costs them something. Bitching is free, though. But then, it comes down to choice, doesn’t it. If you don’t mind placating yourself and whatever you do or don’t do because someone told you that you can’t do anything and it has to get worse- then well, I guess you can’t and it will. It doesn’t change the fact that you’re worth more than that.
So it’s unrealistic for one person to save the world, but you’d have to be some kind of moron not to realize the massive effect that inspiring people to choose certain things has upon the world. That’s how wars start, right? That’s what keeps the government in business, even. And natural disasters have the same sort of cause and effect behind them. We don’t control the weather- but in order to kill someone we have to make that choice. Why not cite the negative in a context that might inspire others to choose something better- the kind of better that keeps people alive and away from suffering instead of being the causes of it?
November 3rd, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Well said.
I’m assumeing you have pointed this missive at me. You make mention of the weather conspiricy twice. That was a joke……but the Chinese government IS manipulating the weather as best they can. It’s no stretch to imagine them using it as a weapon if they could.
But that’s beside the point. You write as if I were the cause of all the misery in the world.
And the plain fact of it is, I have spent most of my adult life trying to make a difference.
You don’t have a clue as to the extent of my sacrafice. You disagree with my opinion of what is in store for mankind. That’s fine; but don’t shoot the messenger. (a lot of that happens here.)
I can tell i’m hitting a nerve…….i’ve been called an asshole, a troll, an anti-semite,idiot. And now you add moron. Thanks.
November 3rd, 2007 at 4:38 pm
I didn’t just mean you, Robert. Sometimes some things aren’t ALL about you. ( : That was a joke. So many people I meet who claim they are unable to do anything to improve or change their situation or help others hide behind the reason that there’s nothing they can do. I didn’t shoot a messenger, Robert. I was, as you said, disagreeing with your opinion. And, it being your opinion, as in belonging to you- I don’t see where you’re coming up with a messenger status unless you think you’re someone’s representation aside from your own. Anyway, you didn’t hit a nerve. Given it’s the most common argument I hear- you pretty much just jumped into the ocean. Because it wasn’t entirely directed to you- I did not call you a moron and said “you’d have to be a moron not to see…”- which I assume you have seen given your other comments. It was more so a figure of speech, so you can take the moron badge off. Please don’t stretch and twist my words. As far as what you do to help others- thanks for that. I don’t mean it to sound contrived and I know most don’t help people in order to be thanked, but it’s often overlooked and goes unnoticed and like most things that are- shouldn’t be.
November 3rd, 2007 at 5:20 pm
If I were a moron; how would I know I was a moron? (That was a joke)
I promise to be a better, more useful member of this forum. But still, I think what’s coming is going to be dreadful. I’ll keep my prognostications to meself!
Peace and Love from Robert (really)
(I can get a little morose and depressed at times.)