Recent public commentary praising the Navy League for welcoming the nuclear-powered carrier REAGAN to Santa Barbara last month misses the point by failing to understand our global position. Blinded by pure nationalism, these "patriots" wanted us to celebrate the sailors from this enormous warship that also carries nuclear bombs and missiles along with 80 combat aircraft. However, most of the paeans to honor brave sailors immediately morphed into the pageantry and blazing power of the USS Reagan itself. The new science-technology religion in our military democracy requires orgasmic exuberance whenever we behold our best weapons. What does such fervent celebration of our mobile naval nuclear weapon imply? Did the sailors also visit the crosses at Arlington West?
For global geo-political understanding, let's look at the context one hundred years ago when President Theodore Roosevelt ordered his new fleet of battleships to steam around the world, setting off in 1907. TR had recently won the Nobel Peace Prize for helping settle the 1905 Russo-Japanese War, but he was still worried about Japanese military moves in the Far East. Having just seen construction of 16 state-of-the-art new battleships, Roosevelt realized it was basically an Atlantic Ocean fleet, and that we were weak in the Pacific. He had the vessels deliberately painted an un-warlike white, and they set off in December of 1907 around South America. It was a technical feat to get the 16 ships safely through the Strait of Magellan and up to California on a showy world circumnavigation. TR's global goal was to forestall Japanese aggression by a peaceful show of force in the Far East, including a provocative fleet visit to Yokohama. Always contradictory, TR did love the pageantry of American power abroad but his chief goal was to prevent war. Indeed, we avoided hostilities with Japan until December 7, 1941 (Pearl Harbor).
The thunderous cheers for the 1908 Great White Fleet's visit to southern California reflected a jubilant nation at peace. By contrast, the USS REAGAN's 2008 port call in Santa Barbara reflects a worried and aggressive America. The behemoth boasts incredible firepower, dwarfing that of all the 1908 battleships combined, and will eventually return to the Persian Gulf region again to support our assault on Iraq. The never-ending-war has become a never-ending-story for our children.
Yes, it was certainly important to support the visiting sailors during their port call here—they are the young we've chosen to sacrifice in order to continue our occupation—but we could have worn black and kept a sober mien mixed with sorrow. A global outlook reveals that America is the aggressor in the Middle East, and now we're enmeshed in a bloody occupation. Writers who extol the REAGAN's unbelievable firepower and go through these techno-enthusiasm orgies usually add the noun "defend." Since Iraq did not attack the USA, how can offensive maneuvers by our gargantuan carriers be in defense of America? Jingoistic nationalism celebrates offensive weapons and blitzkrieg air strikes.
We currently have over 150,000 soldiers plus an unknown number of mercenaries occupying Iraq, with many thousands more in Afghanistan (as well as NATO forces), and mighty naval forces cruising off the Strait of Hormuz. Why shouldn't Iran be terrified? Like wealthy and powerful Athens in her Classical Age, we're off on belligerent military adventures around the globe, and the rest of the world see the REAGAN as an offensive, threatening weapon. Why can't US military forces be applied to globally rather than to occupy? How could true patriots celebrate the recent visit like the 1908 Californians when they know where the REAGAN goes and what it will do "for us" in the Persian Gulf?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)