Touch the Mothers, Touch a Rock: A Military Mom¹s View of War & Terror
Susan Galleymore
Powerful energies are revitalizing America's peace movement: ìmilitary momsî are speaking up about what we are learning, first hand, about war and terror. We are calling to bring home our warrior sons and daughters, alerting communities about our military's apparent inability to equip our troops, ignoring presidential decrees to hide our dead from the public, and calling to our sons and daughters to refuse deployment for an illegal war. Moreover, we are forging alliances with mothers around the world and learning how governments manipulate ordinary citizens, people like us, "the little guy." Who better to decry terror than parents whose children are proxies for a war and occupation that G. W. Bush packaged and sold as an expeditious rummage through Iraq for WMD? Now American momsóand dads--are learning what we share with moms and dads from Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Palestine, Russia, Chechnya, and China: fear for our kids and our grandkids. Indeed, mothers around the world--obdurate and encouraged--are acting against repressive governments, militarism, and disapproving fellow citizens:
- Russia's Committee of Soldiers' Mothers stare down military officers on military bases and retrieve their conscripted sons from horrific--and too often fatal--induction hazings.
- Chechnya's mothers overcome impossible barriers to secure freedom for their kidnapped sons.
- Palestine's mothers and girls confront Caterpillar's Israeli-steered armored behemoths for their families.
- Israel's Four Mothers successfully called for Israeli Defense Forces to pull out of Lebanon.
- South African mothers spoke for many when they faced Apartheid's terrors and declared, "when you touch the mothers, you touch a rock."
After all, it is mothers who retrieve our children's torn bodies from leaders who embroil us in war. And just imagine, the mothers who are accept their children's remains are the "lucky" ones. Chile's Mothers of the Disappeared have spent over thirty luckless years asking for the remains of family members arrested by Pinochet's regime.
Stuck between Iraq and a hard place
While G. W. encourages Americans to fear ìthose who wish to do us harmî we are learning, instead, to fear G. W. and his policies. He and his advisors brought us the bombardment of Afghanistan, the war and occupation of Iraq, and flag-draped coffins arriving under cover of dark at Dover Air Base. They are directly responsible for the sexual abuse and torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, the physical and mental trauma of our troops, the recorded deaths of over 100,000 Iraqis, and the displacement of at least that many Iraqi homeless into tent cities that bloomed all over Iraq during winter, 2004.
G. W.'s policies bring mourning military families and friends to gravesites where docile mothers receive folded flags far from the media spotlight. And G. W.'s policies bring heart sore military families and friends to overcrowded hospitals to visit teenage war-torn amputees undergoing iterative procedures to repair that which cannot be repaired (missing limbs, damaged brains, unseeing eyes) or regained (trust in our leaders, faith in The American Dream, belief in sacrificing for freedom).
G. W.'s second inauguration spotlighted the cynical manipulation of our war wounded wheeled into glitzy ballrooms for fifteen minutes of fame and a fleeting brush with glamour. But where are the spotlights when yesterday's lionized troops scrabble onto Department of Veterans' Affairs impotent lists for housing, or jobs, or other promised but sorely lacking benefits?
As budgets shrink in every sphere of American public life (except the Pentagon's) is G. W. counting on windfall profits issuing from Iraq to fund our deficits? For, a glance over the edicts Paul Bremer put in place before he flitted Baghdad in June 2004 indicate that Iraq's wealth will funnel directly to American business, banks, and barons. When G. W. speaks of ìfreedomî does ìthe little guyî understand that he is speaking of market freedom, the freedom to exploit other countries' resources, the freedom of force and superior arsenals, and the freedom to use our naive kids' trigger-fingers? With the 2004 federal deficit at $412 billion (3.6 percent of our nation's economy) and projected at $368 for 2005--not including $80 billion requested to continue devastating Iraq--America certainly needs a financial plan. But it needs a solid plan, not a plan that rests on winning an already lost--and always illegal--war and siphoning off Iraq's wealth.
Iraqi families with loved ones imprisoned within Abu Ghraib's melancholy walls mourn too. In Iraq, any association with Abu Ghraib--and implicit sexual abuse and tortureómeans ostracism from decent society. The reputations of Iraqis jailed there are stained for life and they'll repay society by forgoing marriage, children, and grandchildren rather than bring ignominy into their homes. For Iraqi culture is different from ours--not better, not worse, simply different. In mobile, fast-paced America, individuals with damaged reputations can reconstitute lives, recreate families, and present varied personae to assorted communities. In Iraq, this is not so. So America's impact in Iraq goes far deeper than devastation wrought on bodies, towns, and museums. The occupation has mutated Iraqi culture in ways Americans do not have the worldliness to comprehend. (Indeed, if, as G. W. constantly reminds us,"they" hate us for our freedoms, could it be because our freedoms include cultural assumptions that are arrogant and ignorant?)
Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana said, at Condoleezza Rice's confirmation hearing for secretary of state, "Those in charge must be held accountable." Indeed, they must.
This is not my beautiful life
Before G. W.'s response to 9/11--wholesale co-optation of other countries' national resources and cultures--many Americans believed our foreign policy included providing largess to the world's seemingly child-like and ever-needy, as well as spreading freedom and democracy for the good of humankind. Many Americans would have heroically shouldered this White Man's Burden into the New Millennium. But, after four years of G. W. and four more to go, some are recognizingóas did colonial predecessors--that it is a fool's journey. Not even a militarily superior enforcer country such as the United States can compel nations by the barrel of a gun toward freedom and democracy while edicts transfer national wealth to a few corporations. And Iraq's so-called insurgents are ordinary Iraqis, ìlittle guysî fighting to expel invaders from their homeland.
Despite mainstream media's embedded war reporters, desultory enacting of freedom of the press, and vigorous parroting of G. W.'s rhetoric of fear to coerce us to silence, many Americans are beginning to understand that America's foreign policy works hand-in-glove with America's increasing militarism. While some Americans are not ready to admit it, we intuit we are pawns in the cult of militarism and its ever-present side-kick the "entertainment industry." We perceive that not only are we not inoculating our children against violence depicted in television, movies, video games, music, even board games[1] and our president is setting up our susceptible kids for military recruitment.
No Child Left Behind... an act?
Deep within G. W.'s 670-page education law, No Child Left Behind (NCLB), is a provision requiring secondary schools to provide military recruiters access to school facilities, contact information for every student, and the right ìto aggressively pursue students through mailings, phone calls, and personal visitsîóeven if parents object.
Just in case a few stragglers dodge recruiters, G. W. paid a right-leaning public relations man $241,000 taxpayer dollars to promote NCLB. Armstrong Williams softens up parents for recruiters who demand names of high school seniors and the names of their younger siblings.[2] Indeed, Major Johannes Paraan, head U.S. Army recruiter for Vermont and northeastern New York, admitted, "The only thing that will get us to stop contacting the family is if they call their congressman. Or, maybe, if the kid died, we'll take them off our list."[3]
Chicago has the most militarized school system in America where more than 9,000 students, ìsome as young as 11, are enrolled in school programs run by the U.S. military. The city is home to the nation's largest contingent of programs run by the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corp (JROTC) program [and] is now in the midst of the largest expansion in its 85-year-old history. Forty-one of the city's 92 public high schools are home to JROTC units, and another 16 middle schools have ìleadershipî programs run by the military [with] plans for offering JROTC in every high school in the city. The Chicago school system is spending $2.8 million on JROTC programs in 200==more than it spends on any other special or magnet program. The Department of Defense kicks in an additional $600,000 on salaries and supplies.
Why are schools inviting soldiers into the classrooms? For an irresistible bargain: the military provides textbooks, uniforms, and instructors for the first two years and an infusion of resources for cash-strapped schools. [It] bills itself as a solution to dropout rates and failing grades, promising to provide troubled kids with the discipline they need to stay in school and improve their performance.
Some Chicago public school parents say they appreciate the respect for authority that the military mentality cultivates. Single mothers see male instructors as good role models.
With three-fourths of his military academy students African-American and 22 percent Hispanic, Chicago's Superintendent Brig. General Frank Bacon Jr. (retired) has been accused of training disadvantaged children for militarism. "We don't have any Vanderbilts or Rockefellers in here," he admits. "We are a poverty area-- 73 percent of our students eat free lunches." But his goal, he insists, "is education, not recruitment."[4]
But military moms are noticing that moms privileged by socio-economic class--Brig. General Bacon's Vanderbilts and Rockefellersóprovide their sons and daughters not to the military as cannon fodder (aka ìmeatî) but to the oligarchy as politicians and pundits, intellectual strategists and armchair warriors, and as fiscal advisors and corporate welfare beneficiaries who prey on our economically vulnerable young.
Surely even ardent Bush-supporting mothers felt a twinge of unease at First Mother Barbara Bush's response to ABC's Dianne Sawyer's query about her views on American troop deaths. Senior Mrs. Bush replied: "Why should I waste my beautiful mind thinking about the dead? Why should we hear about body bags and deaths? Oh, I mean, Dianne, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"[5]
The dÈclassÈ amongst us, including moms whose children try to ìmake somethingî of themselves by enlisting in the military for its technical job training or post-service educational benefits, waste our beautiful minds thinking about body bags and death. We waste our beautiful minds dreading military personnel on our doorsteps, arranging long-term care for our war-wounded children, grieving for children driven mad by war and hidden in Walter Reed's Ward 54, and worrying about a re-instated draft forcing our children to consider flight to Canada as draft dodgers or flight back from Iraq as dead "meat."
You can fool some of the people some of the time
Yet even as our economy depends on the manufacture and sales of horrific arsenals, our foreign policy sold as ìexpanding American preeminence in the world,î our young men fall for musty truisms that the military "builds character" and "makes men of boys," the Bush/Rove propaganda onslaught is wearing thin.
As G. W.'s constant peddling of patriotism with only one faceóthe simplistic face he presents--brings Americans to their senses, we're realize that neat-'n-tidy Positivisms packaged by armchair warriors are dulling our native intelligence and reducing our capacity to think critically. Overdone dualismsógood versus bad guys, heroes versus "losers," support-the-president-no-matter-what versus traitors and/or terrorists--are breaking our four-year trance. Even if we're not yet ready to admit it, The American People are intuiting that our military sons and daughters are being sacrificed for oil, big business, and The Military-Industrial Complex and its corporate hangers-on.
As Operation Iraqi Freedom drags into its third year with an American to Iraqi death ratio of 1: >85, as our sons and daughters deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan for second and third tours of duty, and as our current administration continues to paint a comforting picture at home of an absolute hell for troops overseas, moms and dads learn:
- that Secretary of Defense Rumsveld's revamped, agile, and responsive military appears unable to equip our military sons and daughters in combat zones. Despite our president's promises to allocate funds to train, feed, clothe, and raise the pay of our troops, many troops are inadequately trained, lack wholesome food, water, or protective armor, and face pay reductions,[6]
- that the deep loyalty that welds troop units is manipulated by military leadership,[7]
- that the Department of Defense is likely misrepresenting numbers of Americans dead and wounded[8]--and never mentions civilian dead and wounded.
- that troops who avoid stop-loss and are sprung free at the end of their service contacts are frequently jobless and homeless. Soldier Harold Noell said, ìI fought to get out of housing projects and believed my recruiter's lies about creating a better way of life through the military. My four kids are living with relatives while my wife and I live out of our car. Now, to shelter my family, I'm fighting to get back into housing projects."[9]
- that The War on Terror, "will ultimately cost billions more [dollars] than estimated before the end of the decade. The Army briefing estimates that in fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007, more than $35 billion could be needed to pay for backlogged equipment maintenance, battle losses, and to replace dwindling stocks prepositioned in the Persian Gulf."[10] (Note: these estimates exclude costs of rehabilitating our kids suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, contaminated with toxic Depleted Uranium, and stricken with disillusionment, homelessness, joblessness, and other unmentioned post-combat by-products.)
- that US military personnel are removing large quantities of earth from Fallujah and hosing down the remains of that city's infrastructure so that no evidence remains of U.S. chemical weapons used to pacify Fallujans in November and December, 2004.[11]
What do mothers want? A case study
I wish I could say that all mothers--and fathers--are life-affirming warriors for peace and justice. Alas, they are not. I discovered this after a trip to Iraq to research what our media was not telling Americans, to talk to Iraqis, and to visit my son on a military base in the Sunni Triangle.
Back home I spoke about civilians killed in Baghdad's streets by jittery GIs, violent mid-night arrests of Iraqis by U.S. military personnel, an overstretched U.S. military unable to deliver functional equipment to our troops, and GIs driven insane by war. Lt. Col. Sassaman summed up the military plan: "With a heavy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them."[12]
A San Francisco Chronicle article[13] opened floodgates of publicity around the US, Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Holland, Ireland, Italy, Scandinavia, Spain, South Africa, and other countries. Before long irate parents emailed their thoughts. These examples are shortened for brevity but not edited:
April 3, zhorsager
ìYou should be ASHAMED OF YOURSELF for embarrassing your son. He is there of his choice and he isn't a little boy as you are trying to keep him. You should be proud that he was man enough to join our military instead of him being a radical as we see many his age are at this time in their life. I feel sorry for you that you can't see what an honor that he is serving our great county. What kind of a mom are you? I'm outraged at your actions! It's no wonder our country is in such a mess! People like you should not have ever been allowed to go there...you don't sound like an American to me. Why don't you try talking to the radical musliums. Better yet ask Sadaam Hussien? You would not have lived long enough to ask that questions. (sic)î
April 3, Vince:
ìHow awful that you write and repeat negative things that iraqui's are saying about our troops! If I was your son...I would be ashamed of you! Don't you remember 911? If your son was in one of those buildings, you would have a whole new view on the war in Iraq. Speak to the mothers who have lost their sons in New York! ... I pray for our troops daily, and it sickens me that people like yourself, condemn our country and our leaders who want to keep us safe.î
April 3, Bobby/Doreen
ìWith all due respect for your brave son, who along with mine is fighting to protect the right of people like you to be an asshole, Fuck you.î
April 5, Irene
"You are an embarassment to all of the American Born Mother's of our U.S. Soldiers, Your son must be so ashamed of you. My Husband had to put up with someone like you during Vietnam, her name was Jane Fonda. ...God Bless America and the Freedom we have because of supportive families and brave young men and women. Did you forget about 9/11/01? I am not interested in speaking to you as I refuse to fill any of your pages with my wisdom [but] I have read your article. You glorify your position with anecdotal evidence... Soldiers do not use excessive force. If people cooperate instead of resisting they will not be treated harshly. ...When you become a part of the Military you must freely swear or affirm the Oath of enlistment which includes: to Support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, Obey the orders of the President of the United States and all officers appointed above you in accordance with regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The UCMJ also holds soldiers to a much higher standard than civilian law. There are also provisions to disobey illegal orders. i.e. To be ordered to shoot non-combatants would be an illegal order and a soldier is duty bound (that oath thing again) to disobey this illegal order. I could go on point by point and refute your entire article with FACTS not antidotal evidence. (sic) Your use of Motherhood to further your political agenda is very disheartening... I applaud your son for taking a stand for something he believes in. Its no surprise to me he joined the army. You madam seem like a very scary person who would definitely drive a normal developing man away. Good day Madam."
April 5, john
"Lady, You had no business going into Iraq. Our military is on a very serious job! Speaking out against what our military while they are in harms way is the most dangerous thing you could do. (sic) What, do you think that the people in Iraq don't see what airs on TV?"
April 5, David
"You useless fucking bitch! a soldier is what he is because of his family! You have dishonored 20 generations of soldiers. I have a son on active duty and I just retired and you have just pulled a Hanoi Jane on every thing your son stands for. If I where your son, and i've been there, i would suicide immediatly and end the dishonor you have caused. you are obviosly a democrate and a follower of hanoi jane and those who would destroy this country (sic)."î
May 9, Teresa
"Your son is to be commended for willingly performing service to defend America. How sad to see that his own mother wishes to stand in solidarity with Iraqis who oppose and intend to kill Coalition forces. I can only hope that your soulmates do not succeed in killing your son."
May 12, Mark
"Tokyo Rose, Hanoi Jane, and now you. How sad."
August 11, Lorenzo
"You are a disgrace to the United States of America, to your son who is brave enough to serve in the US armed service, a disgrace to all who have died in the past defending your rights to be, in my opinion, a low life loser more concerned with the well being of those muslim swine who would just as soon cut off your head as any other ìinfidelî, may you burn in hell, if you think the two johns are the answer, and if we are unlucky enough to see their election to the highest office of the government you will get to see hell sooner than you think, the muslim pigs only support your kind because you play right into their hands, they will continue to kill Americans regardless of your attempts at appeasement, you are a sad case indeed, I pity your son having to face his fellow soldiers to explain that his own mother would let them all die in vain. Freedom is worth dying for and at least your son knows that, I pray that he will live and that he will not suffer due to your idiocy."
The truth is out there... somewhere
I'm still puzzled about why parents critical of my actions suggest an embarrassed son is worse than a dead sonówhat's more, one killed in an illegal war.
And to Vince who suggests mothers and fathers who lost children in the collapsed World Trade Center would disagree with me: Not a single family member I talked to recommended vengeance or revenge for that tragedy Rather, they want the truth about what happened that day and believe they have not heard it from the Bush Administration.
Meanwhile, mothers, fathers, citizens, resist war and terror! Continue to learn, don't be discouraged, and forge alliances with like minded people. Yes, you'll have to counter dominant voices supporting war, occupation, and hegemony. Yes, you'll be reviled. But silence about your misgivings may cost your children's lives. Join the growing American insurgency to G W's policies.
© Susan Galleymore. 2005.
Notes:
1. Video games: Cannon Fodder: http://www.games4win.com/games/cannon-fodder/
Blogs: National Guard hunting for fresh meat http://masterdev.dyndns.dk/drslog/index.jsp?sid=469
2. Keen, Judy and Drinkard, Jim. USA Today, "Media Distributor Severs Ties with Commentator," January, 2, 2005.
3. Goodman, David. "No Child Left Unrecruited." MotherJones.com. November/December 2002 Issue.
4. Goodman, David, "Recruiting the Class of 2005..." MotherJones.com, January/February 2002 Issue.
5. ABC's "Good Morning America," March 18, 2003. Dianne Sawyer and Barbara Bush.
6. Read interviews with military moms on www.motherspeak.org/interviews.html.
7. Ashbeck, Gary. "The Stickiness of the 'Band of Brothers'" CommonDreams. January 13, 2005.
8. Letter from Donna of Arkansas. http://www.motherspeak.org/intervs/donna ltr.htm .
9. KPFA Radio. "Flashpoints." January 13, 2005.
10. Bender, Bryan. "War's 'Hidden Cost' Called Heavy: Billions Eyed to Replenish Forces." Boston Globe, January 14, 2005.
11. Jamail, Dahr. Live audio interview. KPFA Radio. "Flashpoints." January 18, 2005.
12. Sassaman, Lt. Colonel. "U.S. Tactics in Iraq begin to Mirror Israel in the West Bank." CommonDreams, December 7, 2003. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1207-06.htm
13. Garafoli, Joe. San Francisco Chronicle. "Hey, Nick, your mom is here." Front page, April 3, 2004.
Visit MotherSpeak's website (www.motherspeak.org) to learn more and to order starter kits to end militarism in your community.