What the fuck is up with the Ares worship? (psuedo-political and wholly nihilistic)

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Caveats and rationality section
a) I know I should be avoiding politics, political threads, and all that. I know it in my bones and I know what I should be doing about politics is what Elvis did way back when and shoot my TV during the first debate (whenever that will be). That being said I should really not be the one creating a thread about politics, but well there is only so much shit you can take silently before you have to scream in a public place. So to those I am about to offend or disappoint, I apologize profusely.

b) This is at its heart a rant. I'm not publishing a paper on sociology. Nor am I trying to win the most civil debate contest. This post is to be a long-winded and angry rant. Ideally, with curse words, so if you find that type of thing to be offensive to your virgin ears, fuck off and join a logical thread.

c) Due to enhanced tones of patriotism, allow me to state that my view on wars does not in any way affect my view of warriors (men willing to die for a cause). Any attempt to gleam a connection of this type will be answered with a slap across the cheek (bum cheek that is and to the lads as well).

d) Greek mythology lesson: There were two gods of war. Athena, also the goddess of wisdom was the goddess of defensive war, the goddess of protecting yourself from invaders. This gave birth to the conotation that this action was wise and praise-worthy. I personally hold the ideals of Athena in esteem. I believe in the need for a standing army, of strength against attackers and even in violent revenge for strikes as well as helping allies when they are being attacked as well. Anyway, that aside, Ares was the god of offensive war, depicted as an uncouth brute, an asshole. He was not meant to be a symbol to rally behind. The Romans of course changed all that...



Okay, I've been patient and nihilistic about the whole election so far. So Bush has been well....Bush-like and of course his cabinet is filled with criminals and traitors to America, but well I have low expectations. And unlike everyone else, I know that Kerry won't be a saving wind. All that he's got going for him is that he's not going to fuck America with a smile like Bush's cronies. So, overall the campaign has not hit me so hard. I expected the people to line up 50/50 despite the evidence rolling fresh off the paper everyday. I expected the debate to revolve around non-issues and blatant lies. I'm used to all that. But with this never-ending focus on Kerry's war record and most importantly his choice to protest Vietnam after he came back from fighting it, I can't take it anymore.


What's wrong with our culture, where being against a stupid war (and Vietnam is considered by universal concession to be one of those dumb-as-shit confrontations) is considered something ghastly and morally reprehensible whereas being for starting a nuclear exchange with Soviet Russia or for conquering a land that has never had any beef with your nation is seen as glorious and heroic.

Being a "peacenik" is seen as synonymous with treason in America's eyes. Despite all our bluster about how all we want is peace and war being a last resort, people are flamebasted if war is not their first resort. Isn't something fundamentally wrong if we jump to our guns as if diplomacy didn't exist?

Furthermore, the point of the war is no longer seen as relevant. Fighting communists or WMDs or whatever are not the purpose of war in about half of America, it is the pursuit of war that is the purpose. People see a glory in war, a way for boys to become men, a way for people to feel good about their country and themselves, a way for people to feel strong and invincible. So I may be broke and fat and unable to scrape my life together, but damnitt my country can sure as Hell invade the fuck out of Grenada.

Overall the dead bodies, shattered families, destroyed governments and peoples, the chaos of war's aftermath and all that shit seem to be treated with blinders by today's warmongers. They sit far away from the reality and cheer the spectacle. The explosions, the tracer bullets, the nifty speeches, and flagwaving. All that matters is the victory and the pursuit of blood. The conquest. Ares sitting proud on a throne of bones.

And furthermore, it's not new, after the Civil War, a man could not be elected if he did not make allusions to the glory of warfare (I believe it was called "saber-rattling"). During the Spanish-American war, yellow journalists flooded the nation with jingoistic headlines demanding Americans show their strength and invade Spanish holdings and claim them as their own. And during the Cold War it was a good thing to be seen as one who'd nuke Russia over a lack of pickle. A General Ripper figure was seen as "strong", "uncompromising", and one to teach the ruskies whatfor.

And so war is pursued to show "strength". It comes so fucking cyclically that one could easily slip in the phrase "he's fighting in the war" and the piece would still be timeless. And anyone who protests is not strong, is an "appeasor". These roles are becoming so set, so ingrained that a war veteran is seen as less of a man than a male cheerleader because the former protested a stupid war and the latter began an even dumber and far more offensive war (hey at least the government pretended we were actually fired on before invading Vietnam and you could say we were defending an ally...that hated us).

And this is done despite the money drain. We fight war after war, draining the treasury down again and again. Spending trillions on elaborate shit that we throw away after a few years despite the fact that they were already more than we already needed. So much money spinning down the drain while any social programs flounder. We starve ourselves, hurt ourselves, and condemn ourselves to ignorance with poor schools in order to pay for this itch to kill. Look at nations devoted to peace. Their social programs are enviable. Their people are kind, intelligent, etc... Whereas we, flounder, waste the values that made us a shining beacon to feed Ares one more body.

The Ares worship overall is so thick in the mindset of real Americans that any man with a pocket full of propaganda could incite people to invade Cincinnati and show those damn Ohians whatfor in order to protect democracy and all that. There are many here that will follow any war against anyone. They live for the feeling of glory and patriotism and damn weeping Athena and her aegis (she's probably French anyway).

Anyway, it's just been sickening me lately and I know like Vonnegut knew that there is no way to change this. Some people just live for Ares and it takes no imagination whatsoever to get a crowd of people to wave the banner of Ares and fight for his cause. War will be made no matter what and will be cheered. Protestors and people who just feel we should gaurd the scrap of ground we got now are trampled aside in this zeal. Athena is bloodied by a cop in the Free Speech Zone. And we all accept this shit. And we pay.

Fuck the Ares-worshipping America. Even if that means that I'm part of the fuckhead America. The Traitor America. The Commie-pinko America. There is no glory in the gory, the severed limbs draped over Ares fat and wandering schlong. There is nothing but a narrow-minded self-destruction, a love of the slaughter and the cowardice of a man too weak to ever do something so feminine as stop to think. I've had enough of their shit and America has had enough of their shit. Someone please get their cult-asses out of here and we can begin to rebuild those idealized pedastals to Athena.








All right, rant over. I apologize again to everyone, but I really needed to drain that part of my mood today. I know its a futile message, a pathetic attempt to make myself feel a little better at the expense of the moods of others. Again I apologize but holding it in was making me a right ol' bastard in other respects.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Despite the diatribe, the core question is interesting. I might offer a tiny bit of insight, based only on my own observation.

This country is obsessed with winning. There are NY yankee fans who know sod all about baseball, but they know a winner when they see one and are quick to jump on the band wagon. Our relish of and respect for the winner is so strong and so ingrained, we only pay lip service to honoring the valiant competitor.

On superbowl sunday, two teams will meet and play a game. One will win and one will loose. The "loosers" will feel wretched, despite the fact they had to win so much to even get to that final game. Sales of the winner's paraphenalia will sky rocket, at least till next season begins.

We extend the gladitorial concept of winning to everything. From a promotion at work to getting the better of the salesman at the car lot.

We lost in Vietnam. It is a bitter pill to swallow. Much like the German populace became convinced of the "stab in the back" to explain their loss of World War I, people who protested the vietnam war have become our corrupt politicians and those who stabbed us in the back.

It is the rare athelete whose team has lost, that gives all credit to the victors. In general the explanation of the loss will run the gamut from bad luck, to bad officiating, to bad weather to not having their "A" game that day to anything else. Much like that athelete, Americans need an explanation of loosing that takes some of the sting out of it.

We carry this almost combative compulsion to win into most areas of our life. Itis fairly easy to manipulate us into a conception of war as a win/loose delimma. And it is pretty easy to bring out the competitive, we have to win mentality when you are adept at manipulating the press and other informational outlets.

The true surprise should not be that we go to war over things that make no sense, it should be that we don't go to war more often. We have such a technological advantage over others we are almost assured of a win. And thats what the majority of us want, to be winners. On the winning side.

When FSU plays Middle Tenn. state or Nebraska demolishes East Carolina vo-tech, you don't hear Seminole or Husker fans complaining that their team isn't playing a quality opponent. You hear them basking in the reflected glory of "their" team winning 70gagillion to nothing. The man who mentions that your team SHOULD have won 70gagillion to nothing is ostracized. He becomes the enemy.

People who protested Vietnam are like that fellow who states the truth that fans don't want to hear.

In the movie patton, George C. Scott says America loves a winner and will not tolerate a looser. I read the papers here and let me assure you, when the Yankees, Mets, or Knicks are loosing, you wouldn't believe how vicious the criticism gets. Scott's paraphrase of Patton is as true now as it was in 1944.

Another line from that movie talks about Roman generals returning from the wars being treated to a triumph, a tumultuous parade. I don't think we worship Ares as much as we live for the trimpuh.

-Colly

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Despite the diatribe, the core question is interesting. I might offer a tiny bit of insight, based only on my own observation.

This country is obsessed with winning. There are NY yankee fans who know sod all about baseball, but they know a winner when they see one and are quick to jump on the band wagon. Our relish of and respect for the winner is so strong and so ingrained, we only pay lip service to honoring the valiant competitor.

On superbowl sunday, two teams will meet and play a game. One will win and one will loose. The "loosers" will feel wretched, despite the fact they had to win so much to even get to that final game. Sales of the winner's paraphenalia will sky rocket, at least till next season begins.

We extend the gladitorial concept of winning to everything. From a promotion at work to getting the better of the salesman at the car lot.

We lost in Vietnam. It is a bitter pill to swallow. Much like the German populace became convinced of the "stab in the back" to explain their loss of World War I, people who protested the vietnam war have become our corrupt politicians and those who stabbed us in the back.

It is the rare athelete whose team has lost, that gives all credit to the victors. In general the explanation of the loss will run the gamut from bad luck, to bad officiating, to bad weather to not having their "A" game that day to anything else. Much like that athelete, Americans need an explanation of loosing that takes some of the sting out of it.

We carry this almost combative compulsion to win into most areas of our life. Itis fairly easy to manipulate us into a conception of war as a win/loose delimma. And it is pretty easy to bring out the competitive, we have to win mentality when you are adept at manipulating the press and other informational outlets.

The true surprise should not be that we go to war over things that make no sense, it should be that we don't go to war more often. We have such a technological advantage over others we are almost assured of a win. And thats what the majority of us want, to be winners. On the winning side.

When FSU plays Middle Tenn. state or Nebraska demolishes East Carolina vo-tech, you don't hear Seminole or Husker fans complaining that their team isn't playing a quality opponent. You hear them basking in the reflected glory of "their" team winning 70gagillion to nothing. The man who mentions that your team SHOULD have won 70gagillion to nothing is ostracized. He becomes the enemy.

People who protested Vietnam are like that fellow who states the truth that fans don't want to hear.

In the movie patton, George C. Scott says America loves a winner and will not tolerate a looser. I read the papers here and let me assure you, when the Yankees, Mets, or Knicks are loosing, you wouldn't believe how vicious the criticism gets. Scott's paraphrase of Patton is as true now as it was in 1944.

Another line from that movie talks about Roman generals returning from the wars being treated to a triumph, a tumultuous parade. I don't think we worship Ares as much as we live for the trimpuh.

-Colly

Agree heartily.

I think the reason we do so many pro-Ares actions is that very drive to be winners, to be "stronger, faster, better" like the Six Million Dollar Man.

Scott is on the money too.

I think when you get this victoryphilia mixing with this bizarre compulsion over our perceived manliness, you get bad results. And stupid wars are probably just one tip of the iceberg.

It's always an interesting contradiction between America's love of the underdog and their fanatical devotion to winners.

P.S. Love the sport analogy. It's a perfect metaphor to what we treat war as when we wage it nowadays. It's a game against some college team somewhere and we expect to win a bajillion to nothing. And suddenly Lithuania has some surprise upsets...

 

[nushu2]

I know several people living in the States that feel the same as you but were scared to speak out and be called a traitor.

The United States was created in an era of idealism and a time when one war followed another. To a degree, it still retains that 18th century idealism but there used to be room for different opinions.

The U.S. was criticized for entering both WWI and WWII late. The reason for the delay was that women's groups promoted a pacifist attitude. Even before women gained the national vote, their political power was enough to threaten the politicians.
It was very controversial, when they continued to protest for the vote, after the U.S. entered WWI.

Then, just as now, it was considered offensive to protest at a time of war. That was still a problem during the Vietnam war but it was also a time that teenagers thought they could change the world.

I admire your courage for declaring an unpopular opinion at an awkward time.

 

[LadyJeanne]

I believe Americans would not worship at the altar of Ares if our wars were fought, won, or lost on our own territory. For the most part, Americans do not understand from personal experience the devastation and death caused by foreign troops invading our country. We do not see the irreparable damage to cities, infrastructure, farmland, lives, families, and the economy.

Watching the destruction happening 'elsewhere' to 'other people' on CNN is not the same as finding your house destroyed by bombs dropping from the sky. Hearing about children and women shot dead in the street is not the same as dodging bullets or land mines while you attempt to find a loaf of bread for your hungry family. Hearing about water and fields polluted by chemical agents, living without electricity in bombed out buildings, dead livestock, and hospitals filled to bursting with civilians who have lost limbs...all that can be dismissed with a flick of the remote control or a turn of the newspaper page.

We do not know what it is like to rebuild our entire country, to cower from heavily armed troops occupying every corner, to submit to searches by foreign troops with orders to kill or detain at guarded checkpoints on our roads, to see our dead families herded into graves, to smell the acrid smoke of gunpowder and see dark smoke pouring into our sky.

I am certainly not advocating a war in our country, but I believe Americans would feel differently about our participation and instigation of them upon other people if we truly understood what war is.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I believe Americans would not worship at the altar of Ares if our wars were fought, won, or lost on our own territory. For the most part, Americans do not understand from personal experience the devastation and death caused by foreign troops invading our country. We do not see the irreparable damage to cities, infrastructure, farmland, lives, families, and the economy.

Watching the destruction happening 'elsewhere' to 'other people' on CNN is not the same as finding your house destroyed by bombs dropping from the sky. Hearing about children and women shot dead in the street is not the same as dodging bullets or land mines while you attempt to find a loaf of bread for your hungry family. Hearing about water and fields polluted by chemical agents, living without electricity in bombed out buildings, dead livestock, and hospitals filled to bursting with civilians who have lost limbs...all that can be dismissed with a flick of the remote control or a turn of the newspaper page.

We do not know what it is like to rebuild our entire country, to cower from heavily armed troops occupying every corner, to submit to searches by foreign troops with orders to kill or detain at guarded checkpoints on our roads, to see our dead families herded into graves, to smell the acrid smoke of gunpowder and see dark smoke pouring into our sky.

I am certainly not advocating a war in our country, but I believe Americans would feel differently about our participation and instigation of them upon other people if we truly understood what war is.

Yes.

The fact that we haven't fought a war on American soil since the Civil War has made us too willing to be careless in our wars as a burgoning empire.

The number of armchair generals cheering falling bombs and tracer bullets like they are a 4th of July celebration is a sickening side effect of it.

 

[dee1124]

I believe Americans would not worship at the altar of Ares if our wars were fought, won, or lost on our own territory. ... I am certainly not advocating a war in our country, but I believe Americans would feel differently about our participation and instigation of them upon other people if we truly understood what war is.

Very well said, Lady Jeanne, and yet we have had wars fought here and still haven't learned. Perhaps it's because the last one was nearly 150 years ago. We've forgotten what was said by a man who knew as well or better than anyone: "War is at best barbarism. . . . Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell."

Interestingly, my Bartlett's says that's only attributed to Sherman, supposedly in a speech to graduates of a military academy 14 years after the war. Nevertheless, it rings true today.

150 years and it's all the Glorious Dead, Hallowed Heroes Who Gave Their All. What a time we live in.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Very well said, Lady Jeanne, and yet we have had wars fought here and still haven't learned. Perhaps it's because the last one was nearly 150 years ago. We've forgotten what was said by a man who knew as well or better than anyone: "War is at best barbarism. . . . Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell."

Interestingly, my Bartlett's says that's only attributed to Sherman, supposedly in a speech to graduates of a military academy 14 years after the war. Nevertheless, it rings true today.

150 years and it's all the Glorious Dead, Hallowed Heroes Who Gave Their All. What a time we live in.

"It's best that war is hell, lest we grow too fond of it"-(paraphrasing)Robert E. Lee

 

[Colleen Thomas]

"It's best that war is hell, lest we grow too fond of it"-(paraphrasing)Robert E. Lee

I was going to quote that Lee quotation too.

Another (paraphrased)

It is the soldier, above all others who prizes peace ~ Douglas McArther

-Colly

 

[rgraham666]

A quote: The surest way to become a pacifist is to join the infantry. - Bill Mauldin

Another: Give them all the same grub, and all the same pay, and the war would be over and done in a day. - Erich Maria Remarque

I think more than anything that it is ignorance of war that makes so many people so fond of it.

To many, war is something that occurs on a movie or TV screen, it's over quickly and the good guys win. A few good guys might die for some pathos, but that's about it. And the bad guys are little more than faceless 'others'.

This type of ignorance and the attitude that comes from it can't but help foment wars.

And the ignorance is easily fixed. There are many books out there written by people who had been at the sharp end. Remarque, the book 'Cross of Iron' (I have a thing for Germans), David Drake, even Tom Clancy. I think he's very fair about his depictions of war in his books.

And for movies, Platoon, the original All Quiet on the Western Front, We Were Soldiers, Saving Private Ryan all showed what a horror war is.

But ignorance is bliss, and many people would rather be happy than good.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

A quote: The surest way to become a pacifist is to join the infantry. - Bill Mauldin

Another: Give them all the same grub, and all the same pay, and the war would be over and done in a day. - Erich Maria Remarque

I think more than anything that it is ignorance of war that makes so many people so fond of it.

To many, war is something that occurs on a movie or TV screen, it's over quickly and the good guys win. A few good guys might die for some pathos, but that's about it. And the bad guys are little more than faceless 'others'.

This type of ignorance and the attitude that comes from it can't but help foment wars.

And the ignorance is easily fixed. There are many books out there written by people who had been at the sharp end. Remarque, the book 'Cross of Iron' (I have a thing for Germans), David Drake, even Tom Clancy. I think he's very fair about his depictions of war in his books.

And for movies, Platoon, the original All Quiet on the Western Front, We Were Soldiers, Saving Private Ryan all showed what a horror war is.

But ignorance is bliss, and many people would rather be happy than good.

With the old Breed, at Peliu and Okinowa by E.B. Sledge.

It is one of the most gritty, hardest hitting and down and dirty books I have read detailing the brutal fighting in the Pacific theatre in WW II.

-Colly

 

[rgraham666]

With the old Breed, at Peliu and Okinowa by E.B. Sledge.

It is one of the most gritty, hardest hitting and down and dirty books I have read detailing the brutal fighting in the Pacific theatre in WW II.

-Colly

Just the mention of those places bring a shiver.

Somme, Ypres, Stalingrad, Normandy are others.

I would also recommend Goodbye Darkness by William Manchester.

 

[dee1124]

Not to put down the seriousness of the point Lucifer made in startng this thread, but ... this is a little lighter than what we've been talking about. Call it taking a breather.



HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS DEMAND WARS IN EASIER-TO-FIND COUNTRIES
"How Come No One Fights in Big Famous Nations Anymore?" They Ask

Washington, D.C. (SatireWire.com) — A delegation of American high school students today demanded the United States stop waging war in obscure nations such as Afghanistan, Kuwait, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, and instead attack places they've actually heard of, such as France, Australia, and Austria, unless, they said, those last two are the same country.

"People claim we don't know as much geography as our parents and grandparents, but it's so not our fault," Josh Beldoni, a senior at Fischer High School in Los Angeles, told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "Back then they only had wars in, like, Germany and England, but we're supposed to know about places like Somalia and Massachusetts."

"Macedonia," corrected committee Chairman Carl Levin of Michigan.

"See?" said Beldoni.

Beldoni's frustration was shared by nearly three dozen students at the hearing, who blamed the U.S. military for making them look bad.

"I totally support our soldiers and all that, but I am seriously failing both geography and social studies because I keep getting asked to find Croatia or Yemvrekia, or whatever bizarre-o country we send troops to," said Amelia Nash, a junior at Clark High School in Orlando, Fla. "Can't we fight in, like, Italy? It's boot-shaped."

Chairman Levin however, explained that Italy was a U.S. ally, and that intervention is usually in response to a specific threat.

"OK, what about Arulco?" interrupted Tyler Boone, a senior at Bellevue High School in Wisconsin. "That's a country in Jagged Alliance 2 run by the evil Queen Deidranna. I'm totally familiar with that place. She's a major threat."

"Jagged...?" said Levin.

"Alliance. It's a computer game."

"Well, no," Levin answered. "We can't attack a fictional country."

"Yeah right," Boone mumbled. "Like Grenada was real."

The students' testimony was supported by a cross-section of high school geography teachers, who urged the committee to help lay a solid foundation for America's young people by curtailing any intervention abroad.

"Since the anti-terror war began, most of my students can now point to Afghanistan on a map, which is fine, but those same kids still don't know the capitals of Nevada and Ohio," said Richard Gerber, who teaches at Rhymony High School in Atlanta. "I think we need to cut back on our activities overseas and take care of business at home, and if that means invading Tallahassee (Fla.) or Trenton (N.J.) so that students learn where they are, so be it."

"I've always wanted to stick it to Hartford (Conn.)," said Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island. "Oh shit, is my microphone on?"

The hearing adjourned after six hours. An estimated 2,000 more students were expected to hold a march in the nation's capital, but forgot which city it was in.

Copyright © 1999-2002, SatireWire.