Since September 11, which only happened last week, I have had a fairly bad case of the “glums.” This is a new noun. The dictionary shows glum as an adjective meaning broodingly morose, dreary and gloomy. So I have constructed a neologism, a new word, a noun, the glums, to mean in a funk and to include broodingly morose, dreary and gloomy. I suffer from the glums because of the tragedy at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon but also because the Bush administration seems intent upon starting a war without an obvious adversary. More on that a little later.
The last time I suffered an attack of the glums was in 1950 at the start of the war in Korea. In the spring of that year, I was a delegate to the annual convention of the Communications Workers of America (CWA), the union that represented most telephone workers in this country. I was 27 years old and had returned from duty in World War II only four and a half years before the Korean War started. My recollection is that the start of the Korean conflict was announced on a Sunday at the start of that convention. I had a short reaction to that announcement. It was “Oh” followed by a strong “expletive deleted,” as Nixon would say.
While I had specifically rejected the idea of entering the Ready Reserves and the National Guard in November 1945 when I left the Army, I thought that at my age, there would be a good chance of being called back. The thought of going back to drafty barracks, dubious meals and military discipline was quite enough to give me the glums. But when the thought of more combat was added on, the glums became a full load to carry. In the end, I was not called back but the glums lasted for much of the Korean War.
Now back to the Bush administration. As long as Karen Hughes and Carl Rove and others have Bush’s ear in top administration jobs, I am going to choke and to continue to have the glums. They, like so many others in the Bush team, are Texans. The only reason for their existence is to rig things so that Bush can be reelected. They are spin masters with no military expertise and that is not what is needed in Washington now or ever.
Condileezza Rice is Bush’s alter ego or more. She feeds him information and answers difficult questions that Bush can’t handle. Rice is an academic. She has no experience in dealing with real life issues such as death and human suffering. She is still top dog in Bush’s administration taking precedence over Colin Powell who has seen war. Bush addressed Congress Thursday evening on the war. It was announced to the public by his real voice, Condileezza Rice.
Bush spoke tonight reading his speech quite well. As David Martin of CBS said, he did not provide the incontrovertible truth about the terrorist attackers that Mubarek of Egypt has asked for. The Russians and Chinese have also been demanding proof before signing on as members of a coalition. And in his list of deplorable people – Nazi, etc. – he did not mention Communists. Aside from cheerleading, Bush was belligerent in demanding that other countries are with us or they are against us. What about countries that are forced to stay neutral because of demands of their electorate? And finally, Bush was at his bombastic best in demanding that all the leaders of the alleged terrorist group in Afghanistan surrender to us with our having the right to inspect their camps to see that everyone has complied. This is an advance demand for unconditional surrender. What happens if Syria with the Bekaa Valley group, for example, fails to satisfy our demand? And Iran and Iraq and North Korea – and on and on. How do we bend them to our will?
Bush did not ask Congress for a declaration of war. I suppose he could not because we don’t know what country or countries to name. If he sticks with his pledge that you are either with us or your country is against us, I suspect he may declare war on a large number of countries.
Bush is an inexperienced man with a lot to learn. Unconditional surrender of all the leaders of Afghan groups? If they don’t comply, does he plan to use the infantry? Unconditional surrender is a mighty big order. Unconditional surrender demands usually occur when it becomes clear that your enemy is on the ropes.
Well, I suppose we’ll have to see how this plays out.
Aside from Hughes, Rove and Rice, we have the Attorney General John Ashcroft, an ultra-rightist polarizer. Can you imagine him as boss of the FBI? Can you imagine Ashcroft trying to straighten out the failings of the FBI in the Pentagon and World Trade Center cases? Ashcroft’s sole recommendation for his job in the Bush cabinet was that he is or was the most far right member of the Senate – and he was defeated by the voters in Missouri last year. The religious right, personified by the rejected image of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, insisted that Bush name one of their number to his Cabinet. Falwell and Robertson! Does that bring back a very recent memory of the deity they worship pulling aside the curtain of protection over the United States so that the World Trade Center and Pentagon could be destroyed?
Karen Hughes is currently bragging that Bush is now speaking partially without scripts. She says it shows the real man. The real man is spooking Europeans, who are potential partners in a coalition, by such comments as “I want Isama bin Laden dead or alive” or “Man, we are going to smok’em out of their hiding places.” This is psuedo cowboy talk. It is followed by the Secretary of Defense saying, “We are going to drain their swamps”. This may be the colorful language of how Bush’s people think old Westerners would talk, but what it really reveals is the intellectual deficiency that exists in this administration. They are dumb – starting with the alleged President – and they are determined to stay that way.
Today, I read of aircraft carriers being sent presumably to the Middle East. The administration uses the word war over and over. “The first war of this century,” etc. The fact seems to be that people outside New York are clamoring for “bombs away” but New Yorkers seem to be saying that more casualties, particularly among innocent civilians, ought to be avoided. It clearly appears that the bomb throwers led by VP Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz are prevailing over the more rational Colin Powell. We are going to regret such an outcome if Colin Powell is ignored – and he has been to a large extent up to now.
The problem is that none of the people around Bush, with the exception of Powell, have any understanding of war. In the Vietnam War, Bush fled to the Texas National Guard and ordinarily failed to show up for duty. Cheney arranged one college deferment after another and never served. Karen Hughes, Carl Rove, Ms. Rice and John Ashcroft know nothing about armed conflict. They would do well to learn about it before our troops are engaged in places like Afghanistan.
In the 19th century, Great Britain made several attempts to control events in Afghanistan. In the end, they were slaughtered for their efforts. Late in the last century, the Russians set out to conquer Afghanistan. To a large extent, they went home in body bags.
I suspect that Bush read no poetry at Yale. If he did, I suspect that he would be loath to admit it given his adoption of cowboy culture. I hope that some one lends him a work by Rudyard Kipling, the leading poet of the Victorian era. Queen Victoria had long hoped to extend her hegemony to India and other places like Afghanistan. Do you recall Kipling’s “Recessional” – which goes…

God of our Fathers, known of old,
Lord of our far flung battle line,
Beneath whose awful hand we hold
Dominion over palm and pine
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget – lest we forget.

Before this administration plans to impose its will with “Dominion over palm and pine,” I hope it gives thought to another Kipling poem. The final verse of “The Young British Soldier” goes like this –

When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An’ go to your Gawd like a soldier.

I hope that no one should confuse my saying, “Let’s think this thing through” with a lack of courage. In World War II I enlisted and served more than three years. In the process, the Army says I officially served 28 months overseas. I think it was only 26 months, but this is the first time the Army ever gave me the benefit of the doubt. I saw enough human misery in Africa and Italy to last several lifetimes. So my friends, it’s not a lack of courage that moves me; it is that the Bush people – leave Colin Powell out of this – are all for war and destruction and more misery. And we haven’t identified the enemy. Are they going to bomb the Afghan people? How do you tell a terrorist from an ordinary Afghan person? Are we going to bomb Afghanistan back to the Stone Age? That has already been done.
When we begin to talk about war and bombing, an unpleasant and revolting thought springs to mind. It has haunted me for 59 years. These thoughts are not for the timid and faint hearted, so if you are afflicted in those directions, please read instead some of my more pleasant essays.
For the past 59 years, I have discussed my thoughts about war experiences in only abstract and superficial terms. My daughters did not need to know the details of men dying. With other veterans of World War II, occasionally I shared a few thoughts about what occurred in war operations. I never belonged to the American Legion or to the Veterans of Foreign Wars so I was spared frequent discussions about the war. It was my haunted thought that I had no right to ask others – family or friends – to bear the burden.
Every Aerial Engineer and every Radioman had to qualify as an Aerial Gunner before he could fly in Army Air Force operations. Basically, Aerial Engineers performed mainly as Aerial Gunners in combat operations. He sat in the rear cockpit of the attack bomber known as the A-20. Obviously, when enemy aircraft set out to cripple or kill the A-20, the attacks came from the rear, from the sides and from underneath. Generally, the earlier models of the A-20 were armed with one 50 caliber machine gun to be operated by the Aerial Gunner. As I recall it, a few had twin 30 caliber guns. Attacking aircraft could bring a many as six 50 caliber machine guns as well as a 20MM cannon to bear on their targets. Obviously, this was a mismatch unless the A-20 gunners combined their fire on what were called bandits – enemy aircraft.
Now at the end of the mission after the A-20’s landed on the airstrip, crews would start the grim task of recovering the dead and wounded men from the airplanes. In the earlier models of the A-20, the gunner sat with a canopy over his head. That had to be removed. In the later models of the A-20 with a turret, the turret had to be pried open. In too many cases, the Aerial Gunner was removed in pieces. Fifty caliber machine gun bullets will cut a man in half a lot quicker than you can read this sentence.
And so when I hear the war drums pounding as they are right now, I think of good men cut in half by enemy fire. The war hawks in the Bush administration ought to give this sort of thing some thought.
If Bush and his people are gung-ho for war, why have they failed to advocate return of the draft system to spread sacrifice more evenly among American men? Why have they failed to conserve petroleum supplies with a lid on the 12 – 14 mile average of the ordinary SUV? And why have they failed to turn to brighter heads than a thousand Karen Hughes, John Ashcroft, Carl Rove and Condileezza Rices can offer? While Bush’s people are still pushing for his missile shield and while his lieutenants are trying to repeal the capital gains tax, which benefits the wealthiest Americans, there exists in this country a wealth of brilliant people who have been demonized by the likes of Trent Lott and some administration figures. What about Robert Rubin, the former Secretary of the Treasury? What about Bill Cohen, a Republican who had been Clinton’s Secretary of Defense? What about George Mitchell, Bill Bradley and former VP Gore, or former senators Warren Rudman and Gary Hart? I’m sure they would have ideas to help this country in this emergency. And how about Bill Clinton? I know that Bush wants nothing to do with Clinton because the Arkansas hummingbird would expose Bush for the imposter that he is.
As long as this administration relies on the biased contributions of Karen Hughes, Carl Rove, John Ashcroft, Ms. Rice, Cheney and Wolfowitz, et al, it is fighting the battle with one hand tied behind its back. I weep for this country when it begins to engage in a war when so little intellectual preparation for it has been made so far.
We met the manager of the local farmer’s market, a woman of about 40 years, on Friday morning after Bush’s speech. She was greatly aroused by his words. “Let’s bomb the hell out of them” is what she said. Bomb who? If Osama bin Laden goes back to his native Saudi Arabia, should we bomb him there as he hides among the pumps for our oil supply?
This attitude of bomb “the hell out of them” is exactly the reason I set out to write this essay. I know that my thought of thinking this thing through before we bomb “the hell out of them” may not be popular this morning, but it is advice that the Bush Administration ignores at its peril. I understand the idea of punishing the “evil doers” as Bush calls them. I fully understand the thought of revenge. But remember what Sicilians say. “Revenge is a dish best served cold.” Right now, revenge is a red hot topic in Washington. When this country goes off half-cocked to an ill defined war on distant shores, that is only the beginning of it. In the latter stages when the body bags begin arriving, we will realize the full cost of our folly.
And that, my friends, is why this old soldier has a bad case of the glums. I’m afraid they won’t go away anytime soon.
E. E. CARR
September 20, 2001
~~~
First, it’s a little surprising how quickly the attack took on the moniker of “September 11th” and how well that stuck.
Second, this essay seems insanely prescient.
“I saw enough human misery in Africa and Italy to last several lifetimes. So my friends, it’s not a lack of courage that moves me; it is that the Bush people – leave Colin Powell out of this – are all for war and destruction and more misery. And we haven’t identified the enemy. Are they going to bomb the Afghan people? How do you tell a terrorist from an ordinary Afghan person?” and the entire penultimate paragraph were both completely on the mark. I’m sure there were many other voices all trying to explain the same consequences, but ultimately they were all ignored and we embarked on a disastrous campaign. ISIS exists today in part because of these actions, which is a handy bonus.
 
As an amendment to this essay, here are Pop’s thoughts immediately after the attack, which are similarly on-point:
THOUGHTS ON THE BOMBING
1. This has to sound the death knell of the Missile Star Wars Umbrella.
2. The U. S. hubris in going it alone – backing out of treaties, etc. – will result in other nation’s failure to warn us of impending danger. You know it all so deal with it.
3. Where was the CIA? Where was the FBI? Where were the other agencies – some are secret – why did they not warn us?
4. Hours after this event, three at, Bush could only say he had talked to Cheney, to some of his cabinet. Are those conversations the substitute for action? And then Bush goes into an undisclosed location.
5. Why isn’t Bush visiting New York or the families of the Pentagon workers?
6. This effort took a lot of planning and the participation of many people – and they weren’t discovered. Apparently the airplanes carried highly explosive material. Who got those packages abroad without discovery?
E. E. CARR
September 11, 2001