WAR

“France is at WAR!” declared Francois Hollande president of France following last week’s claimed Islamic State (ISIS) terrorist attack on his country.  Fourteen years previously on 20 September 2001 United States President George W. Bush likewise declared before a joint session of Congress, “Our war on terror begins [today] with Al Quaeda, but it does not end there.  It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. . . .” 

 

This essay will declare my position on war as a means for eradicating an evil aggressor—if he can be found. I will first set the stage with some historical perspective.

Historical perspectives

To back up a bit further than presidents Hollande and G. Bush’s impassioned declarations of the 21^st Century, let us first consider a few of 19^th Century military theorist Carl von Clausewitz's observations concerning war.  He said:

• War must never be seen as having any purpose in itself, but should be seen as an instrument of policy and politics: "War is not merely a political act, but also a real political instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of the same by other [more forceful] means."
• The military objectives in war that support one's political objectives fall into two broad types: "war to achieve limited aims" and war to "disarm" the enemy: "to render [him] politically helpless or militarily impotent."
• All else being equal, the course of war will tend to favor the party with the stronger emotional and political motivations, but especially the defender [italics added] (contrary to the common prejudice that soldiers generally endorse aggressive warfare).

Valuable, also, to my understanding was 19^th Century writer Leo Tolstoy’s Christian-centered philosophy of war articulated in his epic novel War and Peace and in A Letter to a Hindu.  He saw war as a bane on all humanity.  In the end, war served little positive purpose outside of causing pain, grief, destruction and suffering, and could cause drastic change (mostly negative) to society.

Tempering Tolstoy’s view, however, would be the eschatological (concerning last matters such as death, judgment, our final state, etc.) thought that for better or worse the resolution of some final conflict will produce a new society ultimately free from war. 

My view is that following the devastation of wars of the kind we are experiencing and will continue to experience will come a final victory for the side of right.  The Messiah (Christ) will prove victorious through the doctrine of Christ, though there will be many casualties.  False religious/political doctrines such as communism, Jihadism, Nazism, or of the seemingly more benign early American political concept of manifest destiny will not sustain a people because these constructs are built on a faulty and false foundation. Indeed, they will foster a climate of war.

Ethical categories

A system for categorizing different schools of thought on war from several centuries can also be found in philosophies based on the ethics of war—the  Realist, the Pacifist, and the Just War theories. In a nutshell:

Realists will typically hold that systems of morals and ethics which guide individuals within societies cannot realistically be applied to societies as a whole to govern the way they, as societies, interact with other societies. Hence, the so-called realist believes a state's objective in war is simply to preserve its national interest.

Pacificism however, maintains that a moral evaluation of war is possible, and that war is always found to be immoral. Generally, there are two kinds of modern secular pacifism to consider: (1) a more consequentialist form of pacifism, which maintains that the benefits accruing from war can never outweigh the costs of fighting it; and (2) a more dogmatic form of pacifism contends that the very activity of war is intrinsically wrong, since it violates foremost duties of justice, such as not killing human beings. Nonviolence also holds that a moral evaluation of war is a duty, and that war is always found to be immoral.  Mohandas K. Gandhi,  Martin Luther King and Leo Tolstoy  were all famous advocates of the power of truth, lawfulness, soft power, nonviolent resistance, and  civil disobedience methods instead of war and to prevent war.

Just War Theory, along with pacifism, holds that morals do apply to war. However, unlike pacifism, according to Just War Theory it is possible for a war to be morally justified. The concept of a morally justified war underlies much of the construction of  International Law, such as the Geneva Conventions.  Aristotle, Cicero, Augustine, and Aquinas are among the early philosophers who have espoused some form of a Just War philosophy.

One common Just War Theory evaluation of war is that war is only justified if 1.) waged in a state or nation's self-defense, or 2.) waged in order to end gross violations of human rights. The position of the United States government (if it could be found) and most of the West would be a secular application of the ‘Just War Theory.’ Likewise would be my position except with a religious rather than a secular foundation and with a very limited involvement.  And so I now come to that foundation.

Christian war perspectives 

The ancient Christian apostle James  writes, “From whence come wars and fightings among you?  Come they not hence even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not; ye kill and desire to have, and cannot obtain; ye fight and war, yet ye have not because ye ask not.  Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.” (Holy Bible, KJV, James 4:1-3) 

A modern Christian apostle, Bruce R. McConkie, in the context of James’ time and of our time writes: “Wars come because of a desire to steal, to plunder, to take another man’s goods; they come from a desire for sex immorality, for power, for fame, and for wealth.  There are no great international principles at stake; there are no earthshaking reasons for combat.  Any such are simply excuses.  It is not nations of people and races of men that rise up to battle because of some irresistible need to take up the sword against other nations and kingdoms.  Wars are simply quarreling and fighting in a magnified and organized form.  They are born of lust and inspired by the devil.  Satan is a warrior.  In heaven (pre-mortality) and on earth he rebels and fights because wars destroy souls and hinder the work of righteousness.  They are no different in principle from fighting and contention between individuals.” (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 264) 

 

The question must first be answered before anyone attempts to engage a modern enemy in hot combat:  Who is the enemy? ‘Terrorism’ is not a nation, a regime, or an army. It doesn’t wear a uniform.  Terrorism is a tactic used by an ideological fanatic or group of fanatics in pursuit of ideological goals and to redress grievances  which  transcend borders.  It is “deliberate, systematic murder, maiming, and menacing of the innocent to create fear and intimidation to gain political or tactical advantage” or to “pay back” for a perceived wrong. 

The question is, How do you fight an ideology that motivates a ‘true believer,’ one who cares nothing for civilized mores, one who wants to be a martyr for his cause?  You can’t use a conventional approach to combat a guerrilla tactic much less a strong ideological difference. To fight a faith you need a faith—a better way. And it must be persuasively communicated to your enemy in order to make him your friend. “In the gift of his Son hath God prepared a more excellent way [faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ]” (Book of Mormon, Ether 12:11).

In the meantime, as far as justification for involvement, there is such under certain conditions. (First be assured that there will continue to be war in our time and that it will escalate.  Read Matthew 24: 3-14.) 

Justification for involvement, for me, would be forced by the need for a defensive position—to defend myself, my home, family, friends (and, by extension those in my care or influence) and liberties and country and my Church as a duty to God.  One of the central and repeated messages of The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ persuades me of and commits me to that response.  Any offensive action taken, I believe, and my religion teaches me, would be at my own peril and would not have the approbation of the Lord.  God, I am convinced, hates war.

Thanking Our Veterans

Remembering with gratitude our 22 million American veterans on 11-11.

 

To the men and women who went and those who now go about their business so America can go about her business and “sleep in peace tonight.”

Thank you all.   

                            American Soldier Lyrics

                                         Artist: Toby Keith

I'm just trying to be a father
Raise a daughter and a son
Be a lover to their mother
Everything to everyone
Up and at 'em, bright and early
I'm all business in my suit
Yeah, I'm dressed up for success
From my head down to my boots

I don't do it for the money
There's bills that I can't pay
I don't do it for the glory
I just do it anyway
Providing for our future's my responsibility
Yeah I'm real good under pressure
Being all that I can be

And I can't call in sick on Mondays
When the weekends been too strong
I just work straight through the holidays
And sometimes all night long

You can bet that I stand ready when the wolf growls at the door
Hey I'm solid
Hey I'm steady, hey
I'm true down to the core

And I will always do my duty no matter what the price
I've counted up the cost, I know the sacrifice
Oh, and I don't want to die for you
But if dyin's asked of me
I'll bear that cross with honor
'Cause freedom don't come free

I'm an American soldier, an American
Beside my brothers and my sisters I will proudly take a stand
When Liberty's in jeopardy, I will always do what's right
I'm out here on the front line
Sleep in peace tonight
American soldier, I'm an American soldier

The Written Word

In my Church there is a brief inspirational broadcast every Sunday morning from Church headquarters in Salt Lake City.  It is called “The Spoken Word,” and has aired to millions of people worldwide for many years.  As good as it is, it does not compare in lasting personal influence to the potential impact of the written word whether religious or secular.

 

Consider a well-known case in point:  U.S. President Abraham Lincoln in his memorial address to the fallen Civil War soldiers at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania said “the world will little note, nor long remember what we say here,” and it could have been the case. But fortunately someone saved his written notes and preserved for the world one of the most powerful, revered, and valued inspirational messages ever delivered.

 

My point is that just as something as powerful as the Gettysburg Address was preserved for millions of readers not alive in 1863, there are other written essays, letters, books and communiques that have also been preserved and had profound personal impact upon their readers.

 A written personal letter or poem or even just a note, especially if handwritten may be viewed as particularly precious and treasured some day by someone who needed it. 

 

Yes, the spoken word can be a temporary comfort or provide inspiration or direction, indeed “A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver” (Proverbs 25:11) but a telephone call, text message, Skype conversation or even an email message—unless saved and printed—cannot be reviewed and pondered and savored because it is said and then gone.  In addition to the permanence provided by the written word, the deliberate pace of writing allows the writer to express what he or she really feels so both the writer and the reader are benefitted. 

If you have something important to say write it down and keep a copy for yourself whether a contract, a love letter, a record of something important you witnessed or did or thought or discovered—something you don’t want to forget or something you want to pass along.  Who knows who it will help some day?

My advice?  If you really want to “reach out and touch someone,” reach for paper and pen and not the phone.