I saw a headline yesterday in the Internet that said " U.S. Winning the War in Iraq ", or words to that effect. That statement blows my mind for a couple reasons. First, I cannot imagine what " winning " means in a situation like Iraq , which is an ongoing humanitarian disaster. Second, does " winning " mean that we will be encouraged to start another mindless war?
I read the article, despite my misgivings, and it gave me food for thought. The gist of the article was that the surge worked. Well, maybe...I am aware that the present administration and the McCain campaign will jump on any acknowledgment of success in Iraq like hungry dogs spying fresh meat, but I wonder if people in the peace movement are just as eager to deny the government any shred of success. My question is: Are we willing to give the devil his due? The reasons for the current lull in Iraqi violence are necessarily complex; we can think of all sorts of reasons for it besides the surge in troops. It could be the passivity of the Sadrists; it could be the fact that we effectively bribed the Sunnis; it could be the alignment of the planets. My point is: Do we have enough integrity to admit that Bush may have been right, just this once?
All this brings to my mind a larger question: Do we really want peace in Iraq , or do we really want to stick to Bush and the Neocons? To be honest, it was easier to complain about the war when the administration was so obviously and painfully incompetent. What is in our hearts? Is it compassion for the Iraqis, or is it loathing for the Bush regime? If what we care most about is our anger at the current U.S. government, then I think we have a problem.
Francis Pauc is a WNPJ member in Oak Creek, Wisconsin
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Monday, July 28, 2008
Michelle Naar-Obed: Violent video games used for military recruitment have "touched a nerve"
Michelle Naar-Obed, of Loaves and Fishes, a Catholic Worker House in Duluth, Minnesota, sends us this encouraging report about their work opposing the Army's use of violent video games to for youth recruitment, most recently at the Duluth Airshow:
First, a big thank you to all that called, emailed, and left messages with the airshow organizers, recruiters, PR man and/or airshow sponsors. Thanks to Carol Hannah who researched all the contact info for the sponsors, to Judy Miner who rallied the WI folks to this cause and to Frank Cordaro for sending out information to the broad-based Catholic Worker communities across the country. Responses came in from as far as Oregon.
A report on media coverage: Considering media were not even approached, the coverage was exceptional. Following the local story covered by the Duluth News Tribune and a local TV station, the story was picked up both regionally and nationally. Other media sources who covered this were Mpls. Star Tribune, Pioneer Press, a nationally syndicated podcast called Civilianism, the Wall Street Journal, Minnesota Public Radio, the Associated Press, and a couple of right wing AM radio broadcasters.
It was obvious that the issue of targeting teens through video games for military recruitment touched a nerve. Some of the vets were outraged at the idea of war being reduced to a game and promoted as entertainment. Once I got past all the name calling and slander, I learned a lot from reading the 188 comments posted on the Duluth News Tribune "talk about it" online column. The comments are open to the public and are accessible by going to the DNT website, scroll to "talk about it, more topics", and then scroll down to the July 7 question. You don't have to register to read the comments, only to post a comment. Some of them are worth reading. Another issue that seemed to get addressed, although minimally, is how militarism has become entrenched in every aspect of our society.
Although the Virtual Army Experience wasn't banned from the airshow, quite a bit of discussion was generated through the exposure of its presence. Apparently, some of the sponsors didn't know that this thing would be at the airshow and 2 county commissioners promised to fight for the withdrawal of county money from future airshow events. 2 years ago, St. Mary's Hospital withdrew their sponsorship because of the increased militarization of the airshow.
A witness at the Airshow: On Saturday, July 19, 9 people from Loaves and Fishes and the Duluth peace community offered to break bread with airshow attendees by setting up a "food not bombs" tent in the airshow's public parking lot. Free food was distributed and a safe, nonconfrontational space established to promote dialogue. Once the airshow security recognized that the group was from Loaves and Fishes, the Duluth police were called and the group was treatened with arrest. A few folks broke off to do some sidewalk chalking and Michael Larson was cited for "grafitti" as he was chalking "war isn't fun." Michael has a September 8 court date. The group was also told that it is illegal to give away food. The rest of the group left shortly afterwards without any further arrests.
So those are the highlights. Thank you again to all who raised their voices against the insanity of war. JUST TO BE CLEAR AND TO NOT BE MISQUOTED - this was in no way an attack against the many soldiers who have found themselves either willingly or unwillingly caught in the battlefront. We walk a thin line with recognizing our responsibility to speak out against the injustices of militarism without attacking any individual person in the military. It is often awkward, difficult and uncomfortable to talk about these issues of life and death. We will make mistakes, but I hope we can forgive each other, continue talking and try to find the common ground that binds us together as human beings.
In peace, Michele Naar-Obed
UPDATE: "I like that I got to use a gun!" said 13-year-old Spencer Padgett, after trying the "Virtual Army Experience." Read more...
First, a big thank you to all that called, emailed, and left messages with the airshow organizers, recruiters, PR man and/or airshow sponsors. Thanks to Carol Hannah who researched all the contact info for the sponsors, to Judy Miner who rallied the WI folks to this cause and to Frank Cordaro for sending out information to the broad-based Catholic Worker communities across the country. Responses came in from as far as Oregon.
A report on media coverage: Considering media were not even approached, the coverage was exceptional. Following the local story covered by the Duluth News Tribune and a local TV station, the story was picked up both regionally and nationally. Other media sources who covered this were Mpls. Star Tribune, Pioneer Press, a nationally syndicated podcast called Civilianism, the Wall Street Journal, Minnesota Public Radio, the Associated Press, and a couple of right wing AM radio broadcasters.
It was obvious that the issue of targeting teens through video games for military recruitment touched a nerve. Some of the vets were outraged at the idea of war being reduced to a game and promoted as entertainment. Once I got past all the name calling and slander, I learned a lot from reading the 188 comments posted on the Duluth News Tribune "talk about it" online column. The comments are open to the public and are accessible by going to the DNT website, scroll to "talk about it, more topics", and then scroll down to the July 7 question. You don't have to register to read the comments, only to post a comment. Some of them are worth reading. Another issue that seemed to get addressed, although minimally, is how militarism has become entrenched in every aspect of our society.
Although the Virtual Army Experience wasn't banned from the airshow, quite a bit of discussion was generated through the exposure of its presence. Apparently, some of the sponsors didn't know that this thing would be at the airshow and 2 county commissioners promised to fight for the withdrawal of county money from future airshow events. 2 years ago, St. Mary's Hospital withdrew their sponsorship because of the increased militarization of the airshow.
A witness at the Airshow: On Saturday, July 19, 9 people from Loaves and Fishes and the Duluth peace community offered to break bread with airshow attendees by setting up a "food not bombs" tent in the airshow's public parking lot. Free food was distributed and a safe, nonconfrontational space established to promote dialogue. Once the airshow security recognized that the group was from Loaves and Fishes, the Duluth police were called and the group was treatened with arrest. A few folks broke off to do some sidewalk chalking and Michael Larson was cited for "grafitti" as he was chalking "war isn't fun." Michael has a September 8 court date. The group was also told that it is illegal to give away food. The rest of the group left shortly afterwards without any further arrests.
So those are the highlights. Thank you again to all who raised their voices against the insanity of war. JUST TO BE CLEAR AND TO NOT BE MISQUOTED - this was in no way an attack against the many soldiers who have found themselves either willingly or unwillingly caught in the battlefront. We walk a thin line with recognizing our responsibility to speak out against the injustices of militarism without attacking any individual person in the military. It is often awkward, difficult and uncomfortable to talk about these issues of life and death. We will make mistakes, but I hope we can forgive each other, continue talking and try to find the common ground that binds us together as human beings.
In peace, Michele Naar-Obed
UPDATE: "I like that I got to use a gun!" said 13-year-old Spencer Padgett, after trying the "Virtual Army Experience." Read more...
Sunday, July 20, 2008
David Nordstrom: Blame Republicans, not Democrats, for FISA bill
On July 9, 2008 after five months of delay and debate, the U.S. Senate passed a bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to establish a procedure for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence and for other purposes. The bill, H.R. 6304, passed on a vote of 69-28, with three members not voting. I am writing this now because I expect some voices in the peace movement to criticize "the Democrats" for supporting this bill. However, I want to note that all of the 28 no votes were cast by Democrats, while only 22 of the yes votes were. Among the 28 Democrats voting no were Senators Reid, the party's leader, Kerry, the party's presidential nominee in 2004, and Byrd, the dean of the Senate. Despite claims to the contrary, the Democratic Party is not a monolithic body. As we hear claims this summer and fall that Democrats gave the White House this legislative victory, let's remember that the main credit belongs to the Senate Republicans.
David Nordstrom is a WNPJ member living in Madison.
David Nordstrom is a WNPJ member living in Madison.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Steve Burns: The “Forbidden Fruit” of Army recruiting
Peace Action and Vets for Peace were right to celebrate their accomplishments last week, when they brought new attention to the Army’s use of violent videogames as a recruitment tool at Milwaukee’s Summerfest. As a result of pressure from the peace movement, Army recruiters began to require a minimum age of 18 for anyone who wanted to participate in their “Virtual Army Experience” video game. Before the protests, recruiters were admitting children as young as 13 – or possibly younger – to fire a truck-mounted machine gun at images of dark-skinned “Arab terrorists” projected on a screen. Recruiters were also handing out free copies of the game to teens and preteens to play at home.
And now, as a result of protests against the same display at the upcoming Duluth airshow, military recruiters and airshow organizers have already announced that no one under the age of 17 will be allowed to participate in the Army’s ultra-violent “war games.”
While these accomplishments are real, and we should all celebrate the fact that the Army has been prevented from offering machine-gun training to twelve-year-olds, we should also be wary of these developments and understand how these age restrictions can actually help the Army meet its recruitment quotas.
The best analogy comes from the long struggle against the tobacco industry, and its efforts to market cigarettes to youth. For the tobacco companies, age restrictions are a double-edged sword. Tobacco executives know that if someone doesn’t start smoking in their teens, they’re probably not going to start smoking – ever. At the same time, the message that “smoking is for adults” is exactly the message the tobacco execs want to send out, because it makes cigarettes more attractive to young people.
This “forbidden fruit” effect can work to the advantage of military recruiters, too. What could make an ultra-violent video game more attractive to a 13-year-old than being told that he’s not old enough to get a copy?
A “not in front of the children” approach also sends an implicit message to youth that we don’t trust them to make important decisions about their lives. Of course, there are good reasons for that distrust: both tobacco companies and military recruiters rely on the sense of immortality that teens possess, an effect that seems to wear off once one enters the mid-twenties. But recruiters can play on a young person’s resentment at being “protected,” and use that as a way to build trust with a potential young recruit.
That’s why most national peace organizations that support counter-recruitment, like American Friends Service Committee, prefer to provide youth with the information and arguments they need to resist the recruiter’s pitch, rather than attempting to follow a strategy of “protecting” youth from recruiters.
These two approaches aren’t necessarily opposed. A policy limiting the access of recruiters to a high school can help strengthen a student counter-recruitment group by allowing it to organize its opposition around a few distinct recruitment events, rather than having to constantly react to recruiters roaming the hallways at will.
So what’s the proper mix of strategies for a public event like Summerfest or the Duluth Air Show, the next stop for the “Virtual Army Experience”? I think two approaches would be useful. The first is for parents, to make them aware that their tax dollars are being used to market a militarized version of “Grand Theft Auto” to their kids. I call this the “Do you know what your kids are up to in the recruiter’s tent?” approach. But, more importantly, we need to have an approach that puts youth in charge, and provides new opportunities for young people to get involved in counter-recruitment work.
For example, one obvious need is to have more timely information about exactly what the recruiters are up to. During the Summerfest controversy, we were often forced to rely on secondhand information, day-old reports in the Journal Sentinel, and even right-wing talk radio to find out what age limits were being applied and whether the Army had changed its display from life-sized live-action images to stationary targets. What if we had helped young peace activists organize themselves into a monitoring force, to report day-by-day on recruiter activities?
As much as the Army sees events like Summerfest as an opportunity to bring new recruits into the military, we should be looking at the Army’s presence at these events as an opportunity to bring new recruits into the peace movement. If, at the end of the day, the Army has done its sales job, but we leave with a half-dozen newly-experienced counter-recruitment activists, eager to take their new skills back to their own high schools, I would count that as a “win” for the peace movement.
And now, as a result of protests against the same display at the upcoming Duluth airshow, military recruiters and airshow organizers have already announced that no one under the age of 17 will be allowed to participate in the Army’s ultra-violent “war games.”
While these accomplishments are real, and we should all celebrate the fact that the Army has been prevented from offering machine-gun training to twelve-year-olds, we should also be wary of these developments and understand how these age restrictions can actually help the Army meet its recruitment quotas.
The best analogy comes from the long struggle against the tobacco industry, and its efforts to market cigarettes to youth. For the tobacco companies, age restrictions are a double-edged sword. Tobacco executives know that if someone doesn’t start smoking in their teens, they’re probably not going to start smoking – ever. At the same time, the message that “smoking is for adults” is exactly the message the tobacco execs want to send out, because it makes cigarettes more attractive to young people.
This “forbidden fruit” effect can work to the advantage of military recruiters, too. What could make an ultra-violent video game more attractive to a 13-year-old than being told that he’s not old enough to get a copy?
A “not in front of the children” approach also sends an implicit message to youth that we don’t trust them to make important decisions about their lives. Of course, there are good reasons for that distrust: both tobacco companies and military recruiters rely on the sense of immortality that teens possess, an effect that seems to wear off once one enters the mid-twenties. But recruiters can play on a young person’s resentment at being “protected,” and use that as a way to build trust with a potential young recruit.
That’s why most national peace organizations that support counter-recruitment, like American Friends Service Committee, prefer to provide youth with the information and arguments they need to resist the recruiter’s pitch, rather than attempting to follow a strategy of “protecting” youth from recruiters.
These two approaches aren’t necessarily opposed. A policy limiting the access of recruiters to a high school can help strengthen a student counter-recruitment group by allowing it to organize its opposition around a few distinct recruitment events, rather than having to constantly react to recruiters roaming the hallways at will.
So what’s the proper mix of strategies for a public event like Summerfest or the Duluth Air Show, the next stop for the “Virtual Army Experience”? I think two approaches would be useful. The first is for parents, to make them aware that their tax dollars are being used to market a militarized version of “Grand Theft Auto” to their kids. I call this the “Do you know what your kids are up to in the recruiter’s tent?” approach. But, more importantly, we need to have an approach that puts youth in charge, and provides new opportunities for young people to get involved in counter-recruitment work.
For example, one obvious need is to have more timely information about exactly what the recruiters are up to. During the Summerfest controversy, we were often forced to rely on secondhand information, day-old reports in the Journal Sentinel, and even right-wing talk radio to find out what age limits were being applied and whether the Army had changed its display from life-sized live-action images to stationary targets. What if we had helped young peace activists organize themselves into a monitoring force, to report day-by-day on recruiter activities?
As much as the Army sees events like Summerfest as an opportunity to bring new recruits into the military, we should be looking at the Army’s presence at these events as an opportunity to bring new recruits into the peace movement. If, at the end of the day, the Army has done its sales job, but we leave with a half-dozen newly-experienced counter-recruitment activists, eager to take their new skills back to their own high schools, I would count that as a “win” for the peace movement.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Steve Burns: Grand Theft Auto vs. Grand Theft Oil
Peace activists in Wisconsin are celebrating a rare victory over U.S. Army recruiters, after the management of Milwaukee’s Summerfest asked recruiters to shut down a high-tech videogame, the “Virtual Army Experience”, that allowed children as young as 13 – or possibly younger – to fire a truck-mounted machine gun at images of people projected on a screen. Now, in a compromise between Summerfest and the Army, the game is back up, its images of dark-skinned “terrorists” replaced with “inanimate targets.”
Soon after the initial decision, the hate emails started coming into our office (usually a sign that we’ve had a productive day) most likely from listeners of right-wing Milwaukee radio talker Charlie Sykes, who devoted several hours of yesterday’s show to attacking Summerfest’s decision.
Of course, there was the old standby, “Why don’t you move to Cuba?”, always a favorite here at the WNPJ office, but another angry emailer, Tom G, asked: “What is your organization doing about Summerfest allowing Kids to play the virtual game Grand Theft Auto?” in reference to another exhibit at Summerfest, an ultra-violent video game which allows a player to adopt the persona of a gun-wielding car hijacker.
To which I responded: “Excellent point, Tom G!” Summerfest is no place for the promotion of violence, whether it's being done by a private-sector videogame company or by the U.S. military. In fact, I followed up on Tom G’s suggestion by phoning Summerfest management this morning (414 273-2680) to:
1) Thank them for pushing back against out-of-control recruiters
2) Ask them to improve on a good first step by banning all violence-promoting videogames from the Fest.
I was greeted with the good news that both violent games have been banned, a stance I hope Summerfest management maintains for all future Summerfests.
But Tom G’s question also got me thinking about the similarities between Grand Theft Auto and the Virtual Army Experience, leading me to take the struggle for peace and justice into bold new territory: video game reviews.
Here’s how the two games stack up:
Realism:
A friend who admits to spending way too much time playing the online version of “Virtual Army Experience” tells me that there’s a glaring omission from the game: no civilians. Every character on your computer screen is either a “good guy” (U.S. Soldier) or a “bad guy” (Arab Terrorist). No worries about being traumatized by the accidental shooting of civilians at an Army checkpoint, an all-too-common occurrence in Iraq. Grand Theft Auto, on the other hand, is replete with characters who are neither criminals nor police. Cops n’ Robbers shootouts on GTA frequently result in the deaths of “civilian” bystanders – something that has brought the game much criticism. On realism, I score it GTA 1, Army 0
Firepower:
Here, there’s really no contest. Aside from the belt-fed 50 caliber machine gun that Army recruiters were encouraging Milwaukee’s 12-year-olds to take for a spin, there’s the Army’s ability to call in “shock and awe” air strikes – a tactic rarely used by convenience-store stickup men. (Taking a step back into the real world for a moment, the Washington Post, in a report on the “surge” in the use of missiles by the military, reports that the U.S. military, between late March and early May, fired more than 200 Hellfire missiles into the crowded Baghdad slum of Sadr City.) On the ability to bring death to the target (or even anyone near the target), it’s clearly Army 1, GTA 0
Loot:
Again, no contest. Compare the list price of that stolen Lincoln Navigator (about $60,000) with the billions of Iraq’s currency reserves “lost” by U.S. officials charged with the postwar reconstruction of Iraq, or the billions in oil revenues that will be flowing to the U.S. oil companies awarded “no-bid” contracts by the Iraqi oil ministry with, we are assured, no interference from U.S officials. Stealing a car just can’t compare with stealing a country, so score this one Army 1, GTA 0.
In short, when it comes to electronic encouragement for violent behavior aimed at our youth, the Army wins. Grand Theft Auto can’t compete with Grand Theft Oil.
Soon after the initial decision, the hate emails started coming into our office (usually a sign that we’ve had a productive day) most likely from listeners of right-wing Milwaukee radio talker Charlie Sykes, who devoted several hours of yesterday’s show to attacking Summerfest’s decision.
Of course, there was the old standby, “Why don’t you move to Cuba?”, always a favorite here at the WNPJ office, but another angry emailer, Tom G, asked: “What is your organization doing about Summerfest allowing Kids to play the virtual game Grand Theft Auto?” in reference to another exhibit at Summerfest, an ultra-violent video game which allows a player to adopt the persona of a gun-wielding car hijacker.
To which I responded: “Excellent point, Tom G!” Summerfest is no place for the promotion of violence, whether it's being done by a private-sector videogame company or by the U.S. military. In fact, I followed up on Tom G’s suggestion by phoning Summerfest management this morning (414 273-2680) to:
1) Thank them for pushing back against out-of-control recruiters
2) Ask them to improve on a good first step by banning all violence-promoting videogames from the Fest.
I was greeted with the good news that both violent games have been banned, a stance I hope Summerfest management maintains for all future Summerfests.
But Tom G’s question also got me thinking about the similarities between Grand Theft Auto and the Virtual Army Experience, leading me to take the struggle for peace and justice into bold new territory: video game reviews.
Here’s how the two games stack up:
Realism:
A friend who admits to spending way too much time playing the online version of “Virtual Army Experience” tells me that there’s a glaring omission from the game: no civilians. Every character on your computer screen is either a “good guy” (U.S. Soldier) or a “bad guy” (Arab Terrorist). No worries about being traumatized by the accidental shooting of civilians at an Army checkpoint, an all-too-common occurrence in Iraq. Grand Theft Auto, on the other hand, is replete with characters who are neither criminals nor police. Cops n’ Robbers shootouts on GTA frequently result in the deaths of “civilian” bystanders – something that has brought the game much criticism. On realism, I score it GTA 1, Army 0
Firepower:
Here, there’s really no contest. Aside from the belt-fed 50 caliber machine gun that Army recruiters were encouraging Milwaukee’s 12-year-olds to take for a spin, there’s the Army’s ability to call in “shock and awe” air strikes – a tactic rarely used by convenience-store stickup men. (Taking a step back into the real world for a moment, the Washington Post, in a report on the “surge” in the use of missiles by the military, reports that the U.S. military, between late March and early May, fired more than 200 Hellfire missiles into the crowded Baghdad slum of Sadr City.) On the ability to bring death to the target (or even anyone near the target), it’s clearly Army 1, GTA 0
Loot:
Again, no contest. Compare the list price of that stolen Lincoln Navigator (about $60,000) with the billions of Iraq’s currency reserves “lost” by U.S. officials charged with the postwar reconstruction of Iraq, or the billions in oil revenues that will be flowing to the U.S. oil companies awarded “no-bid” contracts by the Iraqi oil ministry with, we are assured, no interference from U.S officials. Stealing a car just can’t compare with stealing a country, so score this one Army 1, GTA 0.
In short, when it comes to electronic encouragement for violent behavior aimed at our youth, the Army wins. Grand Theft Auto can’t compete with Grand Theft Oil.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Steve Burns: Good job, Wisconsin Peace Movement!
The recent 70-26 vote in the U.S. Senate for an additional $162 billion for the Iraq war, enough money to pay for the occupation of Iraq through the end of Bush's term, was a disappointing one for peace activists, but it did offer some encouraging news for Wisconsinites. Wisconsin became one of only six states that had both of their Senators vote against war funding, when Sen. Herb Kohl joined Sen. Russ Feingold in voting "no" on the measure.
Kohl's conversion is a recent one. Over the past five years, Wisconsin peace activists have targeted Kohl with letter-writing campaigns and frequent protests at his offices, including one overnight "occupation" of Kohl's Madison office involving more than 40 students affiliated with the Madison Campus Antiwar Network:
Students protest in Sen. Kohl's office, April 2007
Through it all, Kohl steadfastly maintained that Congress had an obligation to continue funding as long as troops were in Iraq. Now Kohl takes the positions that war funding without a withdrawal timetable is unacceptable. Good job, Wisconsin peace movement!
Kohl's conversion is a recent one. Over the past five years, Wisconsin peace activists have targeted Kohl with letter-writing campaigns and frequent protests at his offices, including one overnight "occupation" of Kohl's Madison office involving more than 40 students affiliated with the Madison Campus Antiwar Network:
Students protest in Sen. Kohl's office, April 2007
Through it all, Kohl steadfastly maintained that Congress had an obligation to continue funding as long as troops were in Iraq. Now Kohl takes the positions that war funding without a withdrawal timetable is unacceptable. Good job, Wisconsin peace movement!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
