Obama’s Heroes Would Not Approve of His War in Afghanistan
Thanks to Derrick Crowe of Rethinking Afghanistan and Return Good for Evil for this video.
We have to speak truth to power–always. In season and out, regardless of change of administrations.
October 23, 2009 - Posted by Michael Westmoreland-White | Afghanistan, foreign policy, nonviolence, peacemaking, U.S. politics, war
11 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
About
Michael L. Westmoreland-White, Ph.D. I live in Louisville, KY USA with my wife, Kate, and our two wonderful daughters. My wife, Kate, is a Baptist minister who works at a Catholic charity (the Society of St. Vincent de Paul) to provide assisted housing to homeless people. Our daughters are Molly (’95) and Miriam (’99). I am a former soldier converted to gospel nonviolence and a once (and future?) academic theologian turned peace activist, author, and peace educator. Contact me at mlw-w@insightbb.com
The Levellers were a 17th C. movement during the English Civil War. They were a religiously-inspired political movement for democracy, human rights, justice for the poor, and peace. Their strongest leader was Richard Overton, a pacifist General Baptist influenced by Dutch Mennonites. Although I write on a wide range of topics, most often this blog deals with the intersection of faith, especially Christian faith, and work for social justice and peace. So, I have named the blog and dedicated it to the spirit of Richard Overton and the 17th C. Levellers.
Rules for commenting on this blog: 1) Respect everyone, even when you disagree strongly. 2) Keep comments relatively short. If you need a long post on your own blog, I’ll follow you there to see what more you have to say. 3) Stay on topic, please. 4) Don’t hog the conversation; let others have a turn. 5) This is a family-friendly blog. No profanity or language that my children and your children cannot read, please. Failure to follow these simple rules could lead me to removing your comment(s).
Christian Peace Bloggers
Baptist Bloggers
Baptist Bloggers
Join | List | Previous | Next | Random | Previous 5 | Next 5 | Skip Previous | Skip NextBlog Stats
- 529,542 hits
Biblio-Blogs
Blogroll
Religious Social Criticism
- A Thinking Reed
- Avdat
- Baptist Voices for Peace and Justice
- Big Daddy Weave
- Bruce Prescott
- Confessions of a Recovering Pharisee
- Cramer Comments
- Doing Theology from the Caribbean
- Earth as it is in Heaven
- FORpeace
- Fors Clavigera
- Global Perspectives
- God's Politics
- Good God: Faith for the Rest of Us
- Hopeful Daniel
- I Saw It In Palestine
- Intellectuelle
- J. C. Baker
- Jesus Politics
- Mainstream Baptists
- Mystical Politics
- Never Give Up
- On Journeying with Those in Exile
- On the Homefront
- Pam BG’s Blog
- Peaceable Zealot
- Ponderings on a Faith Journey
- Return Good for Evil
- Sandalstraps’ Sanctuary
- Sean the Baptist
- Sepherim
- Sub Ratione Dei
- Telling the Stories That Matter
- Texas in Africa
- The Episcoptist Chronicles
- The Great Swalmi
- The Jesus Manifesto
- The Prophetic Edge
- The Quakers’ Colonel
- Theopolitical
- Through the Woods
- Vindicated
- Words from Washington
Theology Blogs
- A Greater Courage
- Anabaptist Studies
- Baptist Voices for Peace and Justice
- Confessions of a Recovering Pharisee
- Connexions
- Cramer Comments
- Doing Theology from the Caribbean
- Dr. Platypus
- Earth as it is in Heaven
- Exiled Preacher
- Faith & Theology
- Flying Farther
- Fors Clavigera
- Gifts of God
- Global Perspectives
- God in a Shrinking Universe
- Good God: Faith for the Rest of Us
- Hopeful Daniel
- Imaginary Grace
- Inhabitatio Dei
- Intellectuelle
- J. C. Baker
- Jesus Creed
- Jesus Politics
- Leaving Munster [Graham Old]
- LeRon Shults
- Life at Jeff Street
- Maggi Dawn
- Missions and Theology
- Nothing New Under the Sun
- On Journeying with Those in Exile
- Pam BG’s Blog
- Peaceable Zealot
- Per Caritatem
- Reading Yoder
- Return Good for Evil
- Sandalstraps’ Sanctuary
- Sub Ratione Dei
- The Bonhoefferian
- The Episcoptist Chronicles
- The Fire and the Rose
- The Great Swalmi
- The Ivy Bush
- The Jesus Manifesto
- The Magdelene Mystique
- The Prophetic Edge
- The View From This Seat
- Theopolitical
- Trinitarian Soundings
- Trinities
- Vindicated
- Words from Washington
Pages
Where Are My Readers?
-
Recent Posts
Top Posts
- Index of Posts on Theological Dialogue Partners
- Dialogue Partners in the Wider Evangelical Tradition
- Peace Church Influences on My Thought: Mennonites, Brethren, Quakers
- Conservative Evangelical Dialogue Partners
- Index of Posts on Theological Mentors
- "My Favorite Liberals": My Essential Dialogue Partners Among Theological Liberals
- Films for Women to Understand Men Better
- History of American Liberal Theology
- My Debt to Jewish Thinkers
- Popular Series
Recent Comments
Archives
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
Categories
- abortion
- Afghanistan
- Africa
- American Friends Service Committee
- anabaptists
- antisemitism
- arts
- assassination
- atheism
- atonement
- authority
- autobiography
- baptism
- Baptists
- Bible
- Biblical exegesis
- biography
- blog-ring
- Blogroll
- blogs
- books
- Catholic social teaching
- child welfare
- Christian calendar
- Christian zionism.
- Christianity
- Christmas
- church
- church history
- church-state separation
- citizenship
- civil liberties
- consumerism
- convictions
- courts
- criminal juste
- criminal justice
- death penalty
- democracy
- detective fiction
- discipleship
- Easter
- ecology
- economic justice
- ecumenism
- education
- elections
- empire
- entertainment
- ethics
- eucharist
- evangelicals
- evangelism
- faith
- family
- fantasy fiction
- feminism
- films
- foreign policy
- forgiveness
- Friends (Quakers)
- fundamentalists
- gender
- GLBT issues
- global warming
- government
- guns
- healthcare
- Hebrew Bible/O.T.
- heroes
- Historic Peace Churches
- holocaust
- Holy Spirit
- homosexuality
- hope
- human rights.
- humor
- hymns
- incarnation
- interfaith
- Iran
- Iraq
- Islam
- Israel
- Israel-Palestine
- Jesus
- Jews
- Jimmy Carter
- John Howard Yoder
- Judaism
- judges
- judicial philosophy
- just peacemaking
- just war theory
- Kingdom of God
- labor
- law
- liberal theology
- liberation
- liturgy
- logic
- love of enemies
- materialism
- media reform
- mentors
- messiah
- ministry
- MLK
- moral discernment
- music
- myths
- New Testament
- nonviolence
- nuclear weapons
- Obituaries
- pacifism
- passions
- peace
- peacemaking
- philosophy
- politics
- popular culture
- poverty
- prayer
- prejudice
- professional societies
- progressive faith
- race
- Reformation
- religious liberty
- Religious Social Criticism
- resurrection
- saints
- salvation
- scandal
- science & faith
- science-fiction
- Sermon on the Mount
- sexism
- sin
- slavery
- social history
- taxes
- terrorism prevention
- testimony
- the tragic
- theological education
- theology
- torture
- tradition
- U.S. politics
- Uncategorized
- violence
- virgin birth
- virtues
- war
- women
- young people
War only brings pain, misery, death and more war. When will humanity realize that war is the essence of futility and folly ?
Comment by Paul | October 23, 2009
[…] minority view on Afghanistan Levellers blogger Michael Westmoreland-White is an academic theologian who is an adherent of Christian pacifism. He argues by way of video […]
Pingback by A minority view on Afghanistan « BaptistPlanet | October 23, 2009
Paul,
I can think of at least a dozen countries or people groups in the world today who would strongly contradict your statement that war brings “only” pain, misery, death, and more war. Sometimes, war brings peace, safety, and relief for the oppressed. You may think there are better ways to bring about that peace and relief, but you can’t deny that war does accomplish those ends sometimes.
Mark
Comment by Mark Congdon | October 24, 2009
Michael:
Thanks for posting my video!
Mark:
Even if we grant your point (which I’m not sure I do at all), I contend we’d have to amend it for accuracy: “peace and relief” can only be attained through war for those that survive, those that escape un-maimed and un-raped and un-crazy, those that make it out with their loved ones and their culture, those that don’t watch their hopes for schools and health and communal prosperity burn on the altar of militarism. If you’re willing to make those concessions, well, then, sure, war helps those not in those categories. Even in the “best” outcomes from a war, those caveats must be acknowledged.
The point made in the video above is that the folks the president regularly cites as his heroes would firmly disagree with his apparent stance on the issue. That’s something that we certainly cannot deny, either.
Comment by dcrowe | October 24, 2009
I can. Even the winners of war pay far too high a price.
Comment by Michael Westmoreland-White | October 24, 2009
Dcrowe,
To clarify, I was not responding to the original post, only to Paul’s comment.
War brings many difficulties. It also, sometimes, brings benefit. Whether the benefit outweighs the cost, in any particular situation, can definitely be disputed, but to say that war brings “only” destruction is clearly incorrect.
Michael, I did not say that the cost was worth paying. That can be discussed. But, some good does sometimes come from war, and I was simply correcting Paul’s clearly incorrect statement to the contrary.
If war is categorically immoral, as I believe you are trying to argue in your larger series, then my point is immaterial anyway… It doesn’t, in that case, matter how much good is accomplished by war… The ends cannot justify the means.
I am simply trying to correct an obviously wrong observation, that overly simplifies the dilemmas that must be faced in evaluating this issue.
If war truly brought only evil, for everyone, in every case, then anyone who ever supported any war would be obviously evil. Unfortunately, the issue is not that simple, obvious, or easy.
Mark
Comment by Mark Congdon | October 24, 2009
I can as well.
Comment by Steven Kippel | October 27, 2009
Mark, by your reasoning good also comes from miscarriages, job loss, paralysis, and rape.
Comment by Steven Kippel | October 27, 2009
Steven,
It is true that good results of some kind can come from any action, however destructive and horrible the action itself is. That appears to be a pretty obvious observation.
I was not arguing for the morality of war, or for the advisability of war. I was simply correcting an incorrect assertion, which if it was taken as stated would drastically oversimplify the debate.
There is one key difference, I think, between war and the items you listed. It is possible (in some cases) to say: “We fought a war to achieve a good result, and whatever pain was caused along the way, we did achieve that result.” I don’t think a similar statement (of initial intent and achieved result) could ever be used about any of the things you mentioned. Any good that comes from those things is ancillary, never primary.
To give a different analog, some wars could be compared to finding a man attacking your wife, about to rape her, and pulling him off, restraining him forcefully, and calling the police. You may have caused injury to somebody in the process, and there may be other damage caused by the situation, but you can truly say, “I attacked that man to save my wife from being raped, which is a good thing, and whatever else happened along the way, I did achieve that result.”
That still leaves the very difficult question of how much ancillary damage is acceptable, and how much primary good should be required before entering into a war. And, of course, if like Michael you believe that violence is categorically immoral, then these questions are immaterial… the end cannot justify a categorically immoral means.
But it is possible for war to be carried out for good intentions, and for those good intentions to be realized as a result of the war. For most of us, that is an important consideration in the difficult debate about war.
Comment by Mark Congdon | October 27, 2009
Mark Congdon says that it is possible for a war to be fought for good intentions and to achieve those results.
Maybe. What he leaves out, is that even if those results are achieved, there is also much evil achieved that could outweigh any of the good achieved.
Comment by Michael Westmoreland-White | October 27, 2009
Michael,
I’m surprised by you. I did not leave that out. I have specifically discussed it, clearly and in detail, at least twice.
From what I wrote earlier this morning:
“That still leaves the very difficult question of how much ancillary damage is acceptable, and how much primary good should be required before entering into a war.”
From what I wrote on Saturday:
“War brings many difficulties. It also, sometimes, brings benefit. Whether the benefit outweighs the cost, in any particular situation, can definitely be disputed, but to say that war brings ‘only’ destruction is clearly incorrect.
Michael, I did not say that the cost was worth paying. That can be discussed.”
Michael, I am very open to dialog about this issue. I am undecided, and excited to hear what you have to say, hoping to have my current leanings challenged. But please don’t insult me by ignoring what I said, setting up a straw-man version of my thoughts, and then attacking it.
Mark
Comment by Mark Congdon | October 27, 2009