[jjr69] Re: Martin Luther King's Opposition to the War on Iraq
- From: <viet.be@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <jjr69@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <salonmixte@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:40:39 -0800
Van, Dung, Khai,
As much as I oppose violent means to resolve conflicts, and in the Iraq case, a
contemplated PREEMPTIVE strike under the guise of protecting the world, I must
say that SOMETIMES war is inevitable, even necessary. I would not advocate
avoiding war at any cost. For example, fighting a war to defend one's country
against invasion is, to use Marting Luther King's own words, honorable and
just. That is how I see the self-defensive fight that we (the Vietnamese who
chose to live in the South, and the Americans who helped them) lost.
I resent the fact that those who opposed the VN war see it and continues to see
it as an event that dishonored America. I don't see it that way. On the
contrary, it was a part of US and Vietnamese history that should be honored.
The only regrettable part was the outcome.
Please forgive me if I offend any one. It is my only (!) bias in politics.
Mr. Nash's , and MLK's, lamenting that the poor and the Blacks died in
disproportionate numbers is a justified concern. But how does a nation equally
distribute the burden of death, when it comes time to fight to ensure that
something worthwhile (like the freedome of a friendly people: the Vietnamese)
be preserved? Or should a country live in complete isolation, close its eyes,
plug its ears, and not come to the aid of a friendly nation? How does one do
that? I don't have answers here.
Nothing less than freedom and self-defense justifies the loss of lives,
especially the lives of young men and women. I'm forever grateful that a
large number of Americans and Vietnamese died for me (us) to live the precious
few years of relative freedom. I remain saddened by those losses.
I lost my father in the war. If I were asked whether I would give up my
father to a "just and honorable" war, I will say no. The problem is, I wasn't
asked. And I believe that he died in honor. I also believe that he joined
the Army knowing of the ultimate consequences. And he accepted them willingly.
Preserving freedom, coming to the aid of a friend, or self-defense, is NOT the
case in Iraq. But it does not mean that all war is evil.
> From: Vanthdo@xxxxxxx
> Date: 2003/01/15 Wed PM 04:07:32 PST
> To: jjr69@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [jjr69] Re: Martin Luther King's Opposition to the War on Iraq
>
> Dear anh Dung (Luu),
>
> I think Mr. Nash was equating the 2 wars with respect to the effect they
> might have on this American society, i.e., the poor Blacks and Hispanics who
> usually are sent to war to die. His argument is more based on a social
> context than a political or ideological one.
>
> I think the argument has some merit, even when we think back to our Vietnam
> war, where most of the kids from well to do family usually found a way out of
> the draft and thus out of harm's way. I say this without any judgment or
> criticism toward the rich kids. It is just the way things work, as unfair as
> some of us may perceive it. I say it though with sadness and with a
> conviction to oppose this war, or any war for that matter. I see no purpose
> in killing people just to assert an authority, a power, or to further any
> ends. Simplistic as some thought my beliefs are, I can hardly see how we can
> otherwise justify losses of lives, properties, country, peace and happiness
> to the dictates of a few powerful people who hold our children's fates in
> their hands.
>
> In substituting the word "Iraq" for Vietnam", just as anh Khai has so well
> understood it, you are only asked to look at and compare the impact of the 2
> wars on the 2 countries' social fabric.
>
> Mr. Nash is not a politician, he is an academic professor on the East Coast,
> and has spent his life working on great causes helping the poor immigrants
> and fighting for justice.
>
> Van
>
>
>
>
Viet Be
Other related posts:
