What if they gave a war and no one came?

CPT Jack Durish — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:55:20 -0400

This was a popular refrain of the antiwar movement during the conflict in Vietnam. It was used to vilify us. After all, there would be no war, no babies murdered, if we all just burned our draft cards and refused to fight. Does anyone actually believe this?

I'm surprised that this cry hasn't been heard recently. Despite the fact that the WMDs were found, pacifists still insist that “Bush lied and people died.” Despite the fact that it has now been documented that Bush directed the CIA and his Administration to refrain from making a big deal out of the WMDs, his critics insist that it was his only rationale for going to war (that and as revenge for an alleged attack on this father). Despite the fact that Saddam Hussein was in breach of the agreement that suspended the war that drove his forces from Kuwait, the war's critics insist that there was no legal basis for the resumption of hostilities. In view of all this, I'm surprised that the pacifists haven't fallen back on the argument that all wars would be impossible if common folk like you and me simply refused to put on the uniform, pick up a gun, and go soldiering.

Interestingly, like most good ideas, it was taken out of context and perverted to the simplistic thinking of idealists. The actual line is plagiarized from a poem by Bertold Bretch

What if they gave a war and nobody came?
Why then the war will come to you!
He who stays home when the fight begins
And lets another fight for his cause
Should take care:
He who does not take part
In the battle will share in the defeat.
Even avoiding battle will not avoid Battle,
since not to fight for your own cause really means
Fighting in behalf of your enemy's cause.

I suppose it rhymes when read in Bretch's native language (German). It certainly doesn't support the pacifist's ideology in any language. Failure to read past the first line simply is lazy thinking.

Now let me say it to one and all, "Thank you for coming..."

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Jun 2 at 2015 11:57 AM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:57:54 -0400

gotta check it out. First time hearing about it.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Jun 2 at 2015 11:59 AM

SSG (ret) William Martin — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:59:30 -0400

People who protest against veterans and service members are ignorant, stupid and they should find the near mountain to jump off. If a few do it first, I am sure all will follow. We are blames for the actions of politicians, the white house and even the President when it comes to going to war. I guess I am wrong for joining the military.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 2 at 2015 12:17 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 12:17:53 -0400

What if I went to war, and nobody supported me?

That is my fear.
That we wage war (contingency operations, whatever) and can't be bothered to build national consensus that this was the way to deal with the problem at hand. That the opposition to war is celebrated, while those who wage it are forgotten.

I respect people's right to protest. There have been times that the US military has been committed to causes that reasonable people would think are questionable. Some are against war on principle. That is OK. I would fight and die for your right to protest.

I did not go to war based on a lie. I went to war because the people entrusted over me with the power to decide to engage in military action saw fit to send me. I owe it to them to be the best I can be, to not stain the honor of our nation, to close with and destroy our enemies, and if necessary, lay down my life in the cause of our nation's defense.
They owe to me the right training, equipment, and men to accomplish what they are ordering me to do.
I do not need their adoration.
I do not need their medals.
I do need their will to ensure that I can do what they've ordered me to do.
That is our sacred compact.
And that is where we have gone wrong way too often during the past couple decades.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Jun 2 at 2015 12:53 PM

COL Ted Mc — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 12:53:30 -0400

CPT Jack Durish - Captain; The "WMD" that were found were leftovers from the Iran/Iraq war (you know, the one where the government of the United States of America was supporting Saddam Hussein against the evil Iranians) and were not even remotely usable as originally intended in the forms found.

The "documentation" which purports to show "hat Bush directed the CIA and his Administration to refrain from making a big deal out of the WMDs" comes as a big surprise to those of us who didn't sleep through the news between 2001 and 2004 [and probably to those who defended Mr. Bush's repeated assertions that the "vast stockpiles of WMD" had been found.

The attack on President GW Bush's father is not "alleged" - it resulted in the trial and imprisonment of almost 15 people as well as serving as the justification for a US military attack on Iraqi positions AND was cited by President GW Bush as having happened (even thought the attack was only in the planning stages when it was aborted). Of course the probability that there was ACTUALLY no such attempt (see the Duelfer Report) as President GW Bush and (that portion of) the US intelligence community (that wanted to see the Iraq War started up again) believed cannot be discounted.

Indeed, there were several UN resolutions which stated that Iraq was in material breach of the Cease Fire Agreement - unfortunately all of those resolutions are somewhat suspect since the post-bellum findings are that the "factual" basis for those resolutions simply didn't exist.

Further, there was NEVER any legal basis for an AMERICAN attack on Iraq after the Cease Fire Agreement. There might have been a legal basis for a UN attack on Iraq - but there was NO LEGAL BASIS for an AMERICAN attack.

HOWEVER, the attribution of the quote to Berthold Brecht is incorrect. The Becht poem (Cantata for Koloman Wallisch) is actually

Wenn das Volk entwaffnet ist
Kommt der Krieg.

. . .

Wer zu Hause bleibt, wenn der Kampf beginnt
Und läßt andere kämpfen für seine Sache
Der muß sich vorsehen; denn
Wer den Kampf nicht geteilt hat
Der wird teilen die Niederlage
Nicht einmal den Kampf vermeidet
Wer den Kampf vermeiden will; denn
Es wird kämpfen für die Sache des Feinds
Wer für seine eigene Sache nicht gekämpft hat.

Which (roughly) translates as

When the people are disarmed
War will come.

. . .

He who stays home when the fight begins
And lets others fight for his cause
Should take care. He who does not take part
In the battle will share in the defeat.
Even avoiding battle does not avoid
Battle, since not to fight for your cause
Really means
Fighting on behalf of your enemy's cause.

The "quote" is actually (most likely) a pastiche of the line “Sometime they’ll give a war and nobody will come.” from the Carl Sandburg poem: "The Little Girl Saw Her First Troop Parade" and Brecht's "Kommt der Krieg.".

If failure to read past the first line is simply lazy thinking, what is failure to check facts?

PS - The question is NOT "What if they gave a war and the only people who showed up were the guys on the other side?" the question is "What if they gave a war an NOBODY came?" - which is a completely meaningless question because you can't "give a war" if NO ONE shows up.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Jun 2 at 2015 1:39 PM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 13:39:11 -0400

The problem is, the bad guys always come. The good guys can choose not to fight, but the bad guys will just come faster. A couple things most 60's hippies didn't do: Study history, and study human behavior.

Response by LTC John Shaw made Jun 2 at 2015 3:11 PM

LTC John Shaw — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 15:11:13 -0400

Wow, Classy move by the American left!
Let's blame the people ordered to go to war and not the political actors.

I think they believe it until someone they love or care for are killed by those that wish to do us harm. This is why getting Congress to declare war is where we need to go back to. It will take much longer to get the consensus needed but it should mean societal commitment that we don't seem to get with the authorization of force votes.

Response by LTC Bink Romanick made Jun 2 at 2015 7:53 PM

LTC Bink Romanick — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 19:53:20 -0400

No WMDS were found. I call BS. That to me negates your whole premise. You can't rewrite history.