Yesterday was veterans day in many countries around the world. And while mourning those who have died in conflict and war is a understandable and worthy effort, this holiday has long been used as a means of promoting imperialism, warmongering and soldier/military worship.
If we truly desire to be advocates of peace, justice and freedom in this world, then we would not be supporters of war, militarism, nationalism or imperialism. War does not bring peace in almost any capacity. In the short-term – people are killed, property is destroyed and men are taught to hate other men with whom they otherwise would have no conflict. In the long-term, resentment is fostered, free peoples are occupied and despotic regimes are installed or even elected in response to the memory of violence and aggression.
Our freedoms come from a benevolent and gracious Creator, who has given us life and life abundantly. He has delivered us from our sins and offered us peace with Him and peace with each other. War is not the domain of Christians and it is not in the footsteps of Christ.
Charles Spurgeon once eloquently said:
War is to our minds the most difficult thing to sanctify to God. The genius of the Christian religion is altogether contrary to everything like strife of any kind, much more to the deadly clash of arms. . . . Now I say again, I am no apologist for war, from my soul I loathe it, and I do not understand the position of a Christian man as a warrior, but still I greatly rejoice that there are to be found at this present day in the ranks many of those who fear God and adorn the doctrine of God their Saviour (“A Peal of Bells,” July 7, 1861, Metropolitan Tabernacle).
The freedom to worship, to dissent, to speak, to work, to create, to trade and to associate first come from God. They do not come from the military, or because soldiers are dying in other parts of the world. The military, by its very nature, is destructive of these freedoms. It calls men to worship the state, to pledge allegiance to the state, to be silent and take orders, to sacrifice one’s life, to do as one is told, to eat from the state’s hand and to hate it’s enemies.
Veterans day is not a day to be grateful for the military or the state. It is a day to remember the dead, who have died for the vanity, greed and sin of men. It is a day to pray to the Prince of peace for his intervention in this violent world, that he would not tarry in his coming. It is a day to forsake trusting in men and his sinful appetites, and hope in the assurance of God’s grace and peace which he has promised us, and demonstrated with the blood of his Son.
You may also be interested in:
Pretty sure that Memorial Day is for remembering the soldiers who have died. Veterans Day is to honor those who are still living. To recognize the sacrifices that they made. To thank them for serving. Thanks and worship are not the same thing. We don’t pay them THAT well…the least we can do is thank them.
Seems like most years this day comes and goes without much notice. For some reason, I noticed it this year. I agree that the Christian has no place in the making of wars. But maybe that argument should be shared with our president who is considering 4 different military options, all of which will increase troop numbers in Afgainstan.
I celebrate November 11 as Armistice Day, commemorating the end of the first world war. That way it doesn’t celebrate war or deify soldiers; it celebrates peace. I feel that is more significant than a generic all-encompassing Veterans Day.
TANK, I realise that today is veterans day in America. I am writing this from the UK, where today is “veterans day” (being a day of memory for dead soldiers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_Day
Yesterday was a day to thank God for giving us a military to defeat evil and uphold good (even though it doesn’t always do so).
I disagree, Darius. I’m definitely in favor of having a military to defeat evil. But Veterans Day is to remember the soldiers, not the military itself. That’s a distinction that means something to me. Maybe it doesn’t mean something to everyone, but it’s important to me.
Darius, a military is not a good or an evil – nor are any of its endeavours ever defined in such broad strokes as good and evil. It is a tool of the state, one which the state uses to enforce its definitional nature of violence and aggression against free peoples. A military, on the other hand, which is made of free peoples, defending those people against aggression, and limiting itself to defence only, can accomplish much good.
Here we celebrate Remembrance Day and it feels more like the day Jew described than the one Colin described. I’ve always felt like the Day wasn’t really about the soldiers so much as “Lest We Forget”…I was always taught that Remembrance Day was to remind us how horrific war is so we won’t get dragged down that road again.
Gurr8, this is what I’ve heard from other Canadians. Canada also doesn’t have an imperialist history/present or anything really approaching a nationalistic or militaristic society.
I would very much like to move there.
I would very much like to move there.
Spoken like someone who doesn’t appreciate what having a solid military means. Pretty soon, only the U.S. will be the last military left to defend against evil… then again, it pretty much already is. The Canadian military and most European ones are pathetic… at least the UK tries to keep some semblance of an army together.
This post is another example of just how stupid and foolish libertarianism is when it comes to foreign policy. And when I say stupid and foolish, that’s putting it mildly.
By the way, Jew, good distinction. I was primarily speaking against Colin’s silly hatred of all militaries.
Darius said, “… thank God for giving us a military to defeat evil…” My problem with that broad statement is that the military would have to kill us all and then themselves in order to defeat evil. “Evil” just isn’t the right word to use, because evil is what is inside each and every one of us.
The freedom to worship, to dissent, to speak, to work, to create, to trade and to associate first come from God. They do not come from the military, or because soldiers are dying in other parts of the world.
I think we need a discussion of primary and secondary causes. God does give all gifts, but he does use secondary causes to bring them about. We see God use militaries in scripture all the time (both Israel’s and those against Israel). It seems clear to me then that there is nothing wrong with saying that these things come from the military, as long as God is kept as the first cause.
Furthermore, and I say this as a Canadian, I think you all need to read “On War” by Clausewitz.
The US pretty much is the last country left with a massive military, and it’s suffocating them economically (not to mention the blowback that has come and will come from the US’s aggressive and belligerent foreign policy).
If the US reduced their military to a size actually commensurate with the threat against them, we’d surely have some flying cars. …well, presuming the state also lets go of the auto companies.
Bryan, you are correct that God uses secondary causes or “means” to accomplish things. The rest of that statement you cited, however, talks about why the military does not bring about any freedom, and is, by definition, a force or anti-freedom. I would argue that this could be expanded to include the state in a general sense, which, despite language affirming the “securing” or “protecting” of freedom, can only accomplish this by violating freedom. Aggressive/pre-emptive war-making is an act against freedom in both the long and short-term.
“If the US reduced their military to a size actually commensurate with the threat against them,”
Hahahahahaha. You’ve got to be kidding. Living in the UK has warped you, man. Or maybe it was living in Oregon that did it. Either way, are you seriously suggesting that the US should REDUCE their military? If anything, they should increase it. It is only by God’s grace and, humanly speaking, the American military, that this world isn’t completely overrun by tyrants (Obama notwithstanding). This is particularly the case now that the US fights everyone else’s battles. Obviously, we can’t rely on the French to do anything if there is another Hitler (not that we could rely on them with the original one). God help us all if (probably more like when) we have another Hitler in this world, especially if America’s military gets to be as pathetic as most European country’s armies.
Amen Bryan.
Darius, what happens if that next Hitler is America? Never over look the monstrosity within ourselves! Can we stop ourselves?
Darius, if you thought about your position more critically (indeed, even your statement) and just pulled off the labels of “good” and “bad” which you have arbitrarily placed on certain entities, I think the error you are making would be as apparent to you as it is to others.
“Darius, what happens if that next Hitler is America? Never over look the monstrosity within ourselves! Can we stop ourselves?”
Which is an argument for MORE military buildup from other countries, not less.
Colin, America has been fighting other people’s battles for nearly a century now… and those other countries have taken that for granted to the point of basically eliminating their own militaries knowing that we will rescue them if they need it. America’s stuck in a difficult position… for just like welfare enables people to be lazy, we are enabling those countries to eliminate their armies by becoming the de facto security force for the entire world (the whole missile defense thing is a joke, let the Poles protect themselves!). BUT, if America weakens its army, it opens itself (as well as its allies) up for attack and since no one else is able to make war these days, by the time anyone else figured out how to build up its military again, it would be too late. Without America, if Iran decided to reenact a Persian empire across the globe, no one could stop them.
I would like to see the US wean the rest of the West and world off of its military teat, though I recognize that this isn’t easily done.
Obviously, the real solution is for everyone to just have their own set of personal nukes; one with them, and one on their personal sub, to deal with first-strike threats. I’m pretty sure that would fix everything.
Darius, I agree with you that the US is subsidising a lot of other country’s defences. However, the US is not merely doing this out of a benevolent, self-sacrificial desire to protect these countries.
I’m curious what kind of of activities an imperialistic Iran would engage in. Sanctions against other countries? Invasions of its neighbours? Pre-emptive strikes? Threats against other countries? Building a nuclear arsenal?
Darius,
If the US continues to play imperialistic cop of the world, it can’t also ‘wean world off its military teat’. Perhaps if you weren’t so fearful of the world, you’d notice that people seem to get along fairly well without a huge military. You see the argument that America may be the next Hitler isn’t just an argument for other countries to beef up (or perhaps hit the ‘roids), as it also works with America reducing its military. But, you seem to think that America was the super-power that really defeated Hitler in the European theatre, ignoring the fact that most historians see Russia as the one to really whip Hitler’s Germany enough. In that case, America was more of the clean-up crew, not the ‘big, damn heroes’ (off-topic: that’s a Browncoats allusion). You have a better argument in the Pacific theatre, but that campaign was almost exclusively US against Japan.
Colin, your inability to make moral distinctions would be hilarious if it weren’t so dangerous and typical of today’s postmodern, multicultural world. What’s sad is you don’t even recognize this.
“Perhaps if you weren’t so fearful of the world, you’d notice that people seem to get along fairly well without a huge military.”
Ah yes, the ol’ liberal… er, progressive idea that the world is getting better and that people just want to get along. What was that about people who don’t learn from history?
Regarding WWII and who gets credit for what.. I agree that Russia helped immensely, but if it weren’t for America, they would have had a hard time winning because our involvement kept Hitler’s forces separated rather than focusing all of his resources against Russia. On the flip side, without getting Stalin’s help, it would have been nearly impossible for the US to beat the Germans.
Darius, it isn’t (necessarily) that the world is getting better, but that most Westerners don’t really care for war these days, with the exception of the US — if we are judging by the way peoples and countries view their militaries. The military is supposed to be used to defend a nation, not to stop others from fighting. The imperial flag of ‘protection’ that America waves is what has led a lot of different people groups to dislike the country. To put it another way: we’ve gotten better at masking our feelings (good or bad).
Regarding WW2, generally historians place the most decisive battles on the European front in the hands of nations other than America (and this is even American historians!). D-Day and such was good as a distraction, but the US was not the only one involved there, as it was primarily focused on the Pacific theatre. To prioritise American involvement in Europe during WW2 is a very American-centric romantic notion. The US did not beat the Germans, the Allies did, primarily thanks to the Russians in Stalingrad (which was before the US got involved in the European front)…and now I have all these memories coming back to me about playing Risk and land wars in Asia…
Ah, Risk. Fun memories indeed.
Colin if the state by definition in your view is anti-freedom then your view of military follows. I doubt I would want to give you that first step through, and we would really need to define anti-freedom. It is true that some rights must be given up to the state in any view of it, but does that make it anti-freedom? A discussion for another thread.
Darius, I hope that “Amen” was to reading Clausewitz.
Bryan, indeed. But thanks for acknowledging the flow of my logic. And I do feel like you understand what I’m saying.
Ты как обычно радуешь нас своими лучшими фразами спасибо, беру!