To the editor:

In these times of uncertainty, a central problem we face is the role of force in world affairs.

I have my own perspective, for as a Marine I believed that force was the only defense of American freedoms. I would become agitated whenever civilians questioned this “fact” that I held dear, because this belief represented what Marines latched onto to justify our indoctrination as trained killers. We believed that our presence was the only thing standing between America and the enemies of freedom.

However, because this is a given in the military, and indeed in the American public’s collective mind, maybe we should ask how we can measure such an assumption. For example, although we may look to certain U.S.-led wars as necessary for protecting our freedoms, there are many instances of U.S.-led force that at the very least validate that we should compare this assumption with hard facts (see Vietnam, Central America, Congo, Chile, Angola, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, and dozens of CIA actions, etc.). Likewise, if we think about it, core freedoms – civil, labor and women’s rights, environmental protection, the right to assemble and free speech, to name a few – have been gained and protected not through force, but in spite of it. There are many ways to protect freedoms, and the methods we choose determine how history judges us. Let’s remember this the next time they try to sell us a war based on false assumptions, and perhaps future generations will not condemn us for our past.

Chris White,

Lawrence