Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

George McGovern To Obama: "How About A FIVE-YEAR TIME-OUT On War?"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 10:50 AM
Original message
George McGovern To Obama: "How About A FIVE-YEAR TIME-OUT On War?"
Edited on Sun Jan-25-09 10:50 AM by kpete
Calling a Time Out

By George McGovern
Thursday, January 22, 2009; Page

.................

As you have noted, Mr. President, we take pride in our soldiers who conduct themselves bravely. But as you have also said, some of these soldiers have served two, three and even four tours in dangerous combat. Many of them have come home with enduring brain and nerve damage and without arms and legs. These troops need rest, rehabilitation and reunions with their families.

So let me suggest a truly audacious hope for your administration: How about a five-year time-out on war -- unless, of course, there is a genuine threat to the nation?

During that interval, we could work with the U.N. World Food Program, plus the overseas arms of the churches, synagogues, mosques and other volunteer agencies to provide a nutritious lunch every day for every school-age child in Afghanistan and other poor countries. Such a program is now underway in several countries approved by Congress and the United Nations, under the auspices of the George McGovern-Robert Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Act. (Forgive the self-serving title.) Although the measure remains painfully underfunded, with the help of other countries, we are reaching millions of children. We could supplement these efforts with nutritional packages for low-income pregnant and nursing mothers and their infants from birth through the age of 5, as is done here at home by WIC, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children.

Is this proposal pie-in-the-sky? I don't think so. It's food in the stomachs of hungry kids. It would draw them to school and enable them to learn and grow into better citizens. It would cost a small fraction of warfare's cost, but it might well be a stronger antidote to terrorism. There will always be time for another war. But hunger can't wait.

more at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/21/AR2009012102489.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
panader0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. This proposal is so right. Can you imagine the benefits?
People might start liking peace so much, war could become a thing of the past, as it must, if man is survive and prosper. Providing luches to all children would have an extremely positive effect. See my sig line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. "Let's not have any war. Unless we need to."
Edited on Sun Jan-25-09 11:06 AM by Occam Bandage
Or, in other words, the policy of the United States for the entirety of its history. It's a pity that phrase, "genuine threat," is so open-ended. I mean, no President would say, "lol, let's go to war because it's awesome. There's no threat or anything, I just really dig war."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. Yes, but when George McGovern says it, he means it literally and genuinely
He was perhaps the strongest voice in our country for peace during the Vietnam War. His efforts may have caused that war to end a lot sooner than it otherwise would have ended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ani Yun Wiya Donating Member (639 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
3. Sounds like it would be a good start.
War is the greatest of crimes against humanity and needs to be stopped dead in its tracks.
Imagine the progress we could make against poverty if we actively disallowed war which merely breeds it and feeds upon the hapless victims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
4. Define war. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Here is Orwell's extremely accurate statement on it.
I had always thought this was the case. But it never really became conscious until I was watching 1984 the other night. And this paragraph jumped right out of the entire movie.


"In accordance to the principles of Doublethink...
"it does not matter if the war is not real...
"or when it is, that victory is not possible.
"The war is not meant to be won. It is meant to be continuous.
"The essential act of modern warfare...
"is the destruction of the produce of human labor.
"A hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance.
"In principle, the war effort is always planned...
"to keep society on the brink of starvation.
"The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects.
"And its object is not victory over Eurasia or Eastasia...
"but to keep the very structure of society intact."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. "And its object is not victory over Eurasia or Eastasia...
but to keep the very structure of society intact."

That entire story is quotable, but you chose the perfect quote to describe the b.s. we call "war."

x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. It's about the destruction of the fruits of our labors.
I find the concept to be something almost nobody understands. And I believe it is why many Americans wanted to go to war after 9/11. What I mean is that our blindness to this concept has enabled our leaders to con us into war. After 9/11 we were happy to be conned. And this is why it was so frustrating for we who knew better.

And now we see just how dramatic that shift in wealth is. Billions. Trillions. Not to mention dead and injured.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Yeah, I agree about the war on Afganistan. Even ol' peacenik me was angry
Edited on Sun Jan-25-09 01:56 PM by Peace Patriot
at that moment, on 9/11, for a few hours. I pretty quickly came to my senses, but a lot of Americans did not, and swallowed that bullshit hook, line and sinker. However, Americans began to think harder after that, and, by Feb '03, the eve of the invasion of Iraq, nearly 60% of the American people opposed the war on Iraq--but they were ignored, or, to be more accurate, their opposition was noted, and electronic voting run on 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations, with virtually no audit/recount controls, had been devised as the remedy (passed in the same month as the Iraq War Resolution), and was being fast-tracked all over the country to take care of the American peoples' revulsion at this war, in the 2004 election. From there, the American people have had a long journey toward their awakening, not yet completed. Our "military-industrial complex" is no longer something merely to be wary of, as Eisenhower warned--it is eating us alive.

Unfortunately, our new, young, hopeful president is quite into the Forever War. He has never lied about this. He intended to move it from Iraq--now pacified, with the oil contracts signed--to Afghanistan. But his reason for this is where I fault him. The purpose of this Forever War, now to be moved to Afghanistan, is not that there is anybody there we can kill whose death will make us safe, but because of this strangulation of the war profiteers. They will permit nothing else. War profiteering, and a few other attendant enterprises, IS our economy.

Looked at abstractly, we could have a very adequate defense, sufficient to any threat, if we cut the military budget by 90%, and stopped this new policy of preemptive, aggressive war in its tracks. We would accomplish far, far, far, FAR more for our own safety, if we were to give the trillions of dollars wasted on war to the world's poor. But we have this cancerous growth on our backs as a country, that is literally eating us alive, comprised of those who make bombs, guns, tanks, fighter jets, helmets, helicopters, gunboats, aircraft carriers, military uniforms, medals, c-rations, barracks, nuclear warheads, missiles, high tech surveillance networks, military hospitals, surgical equipment, bandages, hospital beds, computer systems, accountants, hundreds of military bases around the world, language schools, combat schools, officer training, and on and on and on--all the stuff of war.

In practical terms, we cannot just yank all this--unless our utter bankruptcy does it for us--and start over. That is what needs to be done. But no politician (except maybe Dennis Kucinich) would dare propose such a thing. They all pray to the God of War. And, as James Douglass' new book, "JFK and the Unspeakable," so eloquently lays out, with meticulous documentation, the price of a U.S. leader stepping onto the path of peace is death.

I like Kennedy's idea of starting to bend the war budget toward peaceful uses--the NASA program for putting men on the moon. I guess you have to have lived through that era to know how militaristic it was, and what a revolutionary idea that was--that we could have a goal with independent scientific and human value, and put all these engineers to work, not to make better nuclear bombs, but to awe the world with aiming at the stars. It was not all militaristic subterfuge, nor was it all "beating the Russians" into space. I know some of those engineers. They longed to have their talents put to peaceful use. They were dreamers. Many of them were, not just a few. And I've since learned, from Douglass' book, how fully committed to peace Kennedy became, before he was assassinated. He wanted to END the "Cold War." He was fully committed to it. It was his death warrant.

So I am not talking idly here. I know how hard it is even to imagine a world without nuclear weapons, and without this gigantic war machine, let alone the difficulties of achieving it. It is as if we live under a dark, dark cloud--our own "Iron Curtain"--under which some things are simply unthinkable or unimaginable, and, for our politicians, unsayable. The war profiteers rule. But they are bad masters. And we must begin to think how we can throw them off, if we want our democracy and humanity to survive.

Although the American people wanted peace, and voted overwhelmingly (a huge landslide) for LBJ, after Kennedy's death, because LBJ pledged himself to peace in Vietnam and in the world, LBJ was lying. I remember this well. It was my first vote for president. I had been too young to vote for Kennedy (though I volunteered for his campaign in 1960). I voted for LBJ because he wanted peace. It was denied to us by this powerful, malignant, economic force of the manufacture of war. It does not have to be this way. It was clear then, and it is clear now, that the American people are a peace-minded people, but our leaders cannot produce peace for us on their own. We have somehow to make it possible for them to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. The peripherals of war.
You have replied to someone who fully understands every ramification of this discussion. My father used to say that instead of bombs we should drop refrigerators and stoves. It would save lives and the process of rebuilding.

But sadly not only are the peripherals of war far far greater a portion of this society's economy, but perhaps a major contributor to global warming. Mil-Spec. As an engineer, and someone who spent his youth in the Silicon Valley surpluses, Lawrence Livermore Sunday morning surpluses, Army surplus stores, I can attest to the magnitude of processing beyond anything we get as civilians. Super quality. Bombs and guns must work first time every time.

The question is, how do we ween ourselves off of war. I liken this to the Garden of Eden. Whether fact or fiction. Here we have the opportunity to stop the murder. Will we take the high road?

I now live in Caspar. Someone put a sign on my property. It says "End the war". I keep thinking we are in the minority here. But like you said, I think most people would prefer something other than death and destruction.

The media is where this begins, I believe. The BBC has begun showing far more graphic images of Gaza than during any time I've watched. I have to turn away. It's too difficult to see a child with an eye missing. Displaced families. Destruction of the infrastructure that took so much effort.

Knowledge is where this begins.

You are so correct about the death sentence. None of this was accidental. And I hope more than anything that Obama remains free from the aggression of the other side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Caspar, California? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Yes. I just moved back after a haitus in Oregon.
I'm running the Coastal Commission gauntlet. Hopefully I'll be out of the rv in a few months. But that's another story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Hey, we're neighbors! I'll PM you. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Excellent post
I remember the excitement of NASA and the men-on-the-moon, and the way it felt like the direction of our future. Not just to my young self, but to the adults around me.

Sometimes it's hard to recall it now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
6. Love it - Go to Create a U.S. Department of Peace HR 808 - link here........
Thank you George McGovern!

Participate in an historic citizen lobbying effort to create a U.S. Department of Peace.

http://www.thepeacealliance.org/

There is currently a bill before the U.S. House of Representatives (HR 808)

Congressional Co-Sponsors - 110th Congress

List of U.S. Representatives who currently co-sponsor HR-808, the bill to create a Department of Peace and Nonviolence for the 110th Congress.
Read more...

http://www.thepeacealliance.org/content/blogcategory/44/649/

Rep. John Lewis' Remarks at The Peace Acts Forum

On May 3, 2008, Rep. John Lewis of Georgia spoke at The Peace Acts Forum at the Carter Presidential Center about how we can move the idea of a Department of Peace forward.
Read more...

Representative's Floor Speeches In Support of the Bill

Transcripts of one minute speeches given on the floor of the House of Representatives on Tuesday, February 6, 2007 during the introduction of H.R.808, the bill for a Department of Peace and Nonviolence, in the 110th Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AwakeAtLast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. OMG - What a concept!
That is truly revolutionary!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
9. I'm here.
:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
11. I agree aside from the fact that we need this time-out to last a lot longer than five years.
If unjust war is wrong now it will still be wrong five years from now, we need more than a five year time-out we need to change our outlook on militarism and vow to never get into an unnecessary war ever again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
12. K &R! I just said a similar thing on another thread.
O8)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
14. Only five years?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
18. this is why i voted for mcgovern in 72.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barb162 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
21. Let him tell that to the Taliban; it's a great idea!
Edited on Sun Jan-25-09 03:14 PM by barb162
Really, if he can get AL Qaida and others to do that, wonderful.
I always liked McGovern; he's a good guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClayZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
23. Bravo George McGovern!
K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
24. McGovern could not even defeat Nixon.
Worse than Kerry IMO (I love Kerry now, just FYI.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-25-09 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
25. War is over (for five years)
If you want it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC