Saturday, November 29, 2014

Obscene Geometry: The Hard Facts about Death and Injury from Nuclear Weapons


Cuisenaire Rods
One of my sisters was an elementary school teacher.

And so I, as a much younger brother, was the beneficiary of many of the educational materials and aids, books and objects, that came to fill her house over time.

I wonder if you, too, have memories of little colored blocks in bright colors that were made of very nice wood and were cut to precise sizes so that they nestled together perfectly? Perhaps you, yourself, used "cuisenaire rods" at some time in school; or perhaps your children (or grandchildren) have . . . .

It has been decades since I thought about cuisenaire rods -- or rather, "those little blocks," as I always called them before I looked into them for this blog post. I was prodded into thinking about cuisenaire rods -- and about how they help to visualize mathematical and geometric relationships -- by research I was doing for #NoNukesTuesday.

Just two weeks from now, people will gather in Vienna for the 3rd Conference on Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons, and so I wanted to prepare some materials to encourage people to follow it virtually. I went to the website of the 2nd conference, held just a short time ago in Nayarit, Mexico (February 13-14, 2014), and began to review the documents there.

I had already been somewhat familiar with one recent document on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons: the PAX document "What if a nuclear bomb exploded in Rotterdam?" Now I saw a document from Mexican government posing the same question with respect to Mexico City: "Nuclear Blast in Mexico City" (Coordinaciòn Nacional de Protecciòn Civil de Mèxico), based on the estimated consequences of the detonation of a 50 megaton nuclear bomb. I looked at page after page ... an inner radius with lethal 200 psi air blast and 5000 rem radiation  affecting ~1 million people ... with a wider 6 km radius fireball affecting ~1.7 million people ... surrounded by an even wider (11 km) 10 psi air blast radius which could be expected to be fatal to nearly all ~7 million people affected, because of the blizzard of disintegrating structures ... 51 km radius of third degree burns (nearly 20 million people) ... and on and on.


Detonation simulation of nuclear bomb 50MT at Mexico City
"At 10 psi over pressure, heavily built concrete buildings are
severely damaged or demolished; fatalities approach 100%."
(Coordinaciòn Nacional de Protecciòn Civil de Mèxico)


Thoughts rushed through my mind: it had never occurred to me that Mexico has to worry about detonation of a nuclear weapon ... isn't that limited to countries like -- ?  But then, of course, I realized that no one is "off limits." I noted in the document from Mexico that Mexico is party to a treaty that makes Latin America a nuclear weapons-free zone (see Treaty of Tlatelolco). So how much assurance does that provide to Mexicans that they will never suffer a nuclear attack? 80%? 90%? 97%? Clearly, that's not enough for the government of Mexico, which is responsibly asking: "What would we DO if this were ever to happen?"

When you read the conclusions of the report from Mexico (" ... FIRST 24 HOURS: Not much could be done to help people in the area of the 50 percent blast-casualty distance ... ") it is clear why Mexico and other states are working so hard for the abolition of nuclear weapons.

This isn't real, is it? This couldn't ever really happen, could it?

And then there was the report from Nagasaki.

It was heartbreaking to read the report of Dr. Masao Tomonaga, M.D. Ph.D. (Scientific Research Group on the effect of nuclear weapons in various aspects), "If Another 16 kiloton Atomic Bomb Detonates on a Modern City; A Study Based on Hiroshima/Nagasaki cases." That the people who have suffered one nuclear attack should have to be the ones to, themselves, painstakingly recapitulate and meticulously explain the details again and again . . . .

Not only do the Japanese survivors of the atomic bomb have to try to shake us into consciousness of the threat we are under . . . but they also have to find a way to convey to us that the threat today is so much greater than the one that hit Japan. How to get people to envision the consequences of the detonation of nuclear devices that are hundreds or even thousands of times more powerful than the ones used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

This was the image that really stunned me:


Nuclear detonations above a virtual modern city with 1 million population
16 kiloton atomic bomb at 600 m ... 4.5 km radius
1 megaton (1000 kiloton) hydrogen bomb at 2400 m ... 18 km radius
(Dr. Masao Tomonaga, M.D. Ph.D.)


"It's just sections of a cone," I said to myself. "Any child equipped with a cuisenaire-esque set of blocks can easily look at a map and figure out for him- or herself what the future holds."

That's right . . .  just take a map of your local metropolis, spread it out on the floor, and put the whole family to work learning the geometry of nuclear strike using high quality wood-crafted educational aids.


Cone Sorting Toy
from The Wooden Wagon / Toys and Folk Art


Ask yourself: which of your children (or grandchildren) do you want to share this obscene geometry lesson with?





TAKE ACTION:  Go to the websites about the two Vienna events, follow the proceedings, share on social media, and work with the organizations involved on recommended follow-up steps:

Update - August, 2015 - Nuclear disarmament activists will bicycle around Washington, DC, to demonstrate the extent of death and injury if (when?) the nation's capital is the target of an attack.


Related posts

Perhaps most startling of all, the area affected by 3rd degree burns would extend far beyond the city limits to encompass towns as far north as Waukegan, as far west as St. Charles, and as far south as Crete, and as far east as Gary, IN.

(See What Would a Nuclear Weapon Do to Chicago? (Go ahead, guess . . . ) )







In light of the upcoming review of the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and the fact that organizations throughout the country and worldwide are organizing to press the U.S. to substantially reduce its stores of nuclear weapons, it seems like a good time to use social media to get EVERYONE on board!

(See 5 Ways YOU Can Make a Difference on #NoNukesTuesday )








"It's not enough to remember this just once a year; it's not enough that we make a single book -- Hiroshima -- required reading, and never go beyond that. There should be a whole canon that people study progressively, year by year, to grasp and retain the horror of this."

(See FIRE AND BLAST: A Curriculum that Confronts Nuclear Danger?)












Do we have a way to immerse ourselves in the experience of what the use of those nuclear weapons would really mean -- prospectively -- so that we can truly cause ourselves to confront our own inaction?

(See Stop engaging in risky behavior )

Monday, November 24, 2014

GRATITUDE: People Are Making the Difference in Eliminating Nuclear Weapons

Human Peace Sign ("ND" for Nuclear Disarmament)
Ann Arbor, MI, 2003
This is a week for thanksgiving.

This year I'm using this week to lift up the names of some of the people to whom I am grateful -- specifically, for their work in trying to bring about the elimination of nuclear weapons.

There are so many people to thank . . .

Through the visual arts ... photography ... film ... teaching ... activism ... publishing ....

So many people are making a difference in eliminating nuclear weapons . . . . 

To whom are you grateful? Please click on the #NoNukesTuesday stream, retweet some of the expressions of gratitude there, and add some of your own!

And feel free to add your comments to this post as well.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Joe


#Thanksgiving #NoNukesTuesday - to whom are *you* grateful
for their work towards elimination of #nuclearweapons?


My top ten list in progress . . . .



Trident NO Sctland YES
#1 - Faslane 365, and all the other people who have worked to make the elimination of Trident submarines from Scotland and the UK a reality.












Confronting the Risk
PAX asked "What if a nuclear
bomb exploded in Rotterdam?"
#2 - Susi Snyder and her colleagues at the No Nukes team of PAX: research, political lobby and public campaigning to achieve one goal: a world free of nuclear weapons.













Kennette Benedict and the "doomsday
clock": "It's five minutes to midnight!"
#3 - Kennette Benedict, Executive Director and Publisher, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists for keeping the message alive: the science tells us we need to disarm!









Shōmei Tōmatsu,
A Bottle that Was Melted
by Heat Wave and Fires
(from the series Nagasaki 11:02)
Nagasaki, 1961
(View larger version)
#4 - Shōmei Tōmatsu - photographer - for efforts to help us stop, look, and try to imagine the consequences of the use of atomic weapons.

















Prof. Norma M. Field
#5 Norma Field (professor emeritus, Robert S. Ingersoll Distinguished Service Professor in Japanese Studies in East Asian Languages and Civilizations, University of Chicago): through her scholarship and teaching she has shown a generation of people the power of language to convey the horror of injury atomic radiation and blast. Moreover, Norma Field's organizing efforts brought about the creation of a series -- The Atomic Age -- to continue the work of building a movement to prevent that injury.





Roger Brown,
End of the World

(See related exhibition)
#6 Roger Brown - Chicago "imagist" artist - frequently created works explicitly referencing the nuclear threat (e.g. Chain Reaction (When You Hear This Sound You Will Be Dead)), and nearly every one of his paintings features an ominously glowing horizon. Brown's public art in downtown Chicago poses the question: "Who will bring us down to earth?"












Gerald Finley in
Doctor Atomic
(Click for aria
"Batter My Heart")
#7 John Adams and Peter Sellars - who provoked America by creating a full-length opera from the story of the creation of atomic weapons -- Doctor Atomic, which premiered in 2005. (My takeaway from Doctor Atomic: "You've created this monster; you're not done 'til you figure out how to get rid of it.")












Carol Urner
(Click for full-size image of Carol
with Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton
and other colleagues)
#8 Carol Urner of Womens International League for Peace and Freedom and WILPF DISARM! chair: because she is a force of nature!











Hiroshima by John Hersey
#9 John Hersey - author, Hiroshima - for insisting that the truth of the fire and blast of nuclear weapons is something we must come face to face with.












Kazashi Nobuo
#10 Kazashi Nobuo - NO DU Hiroshima Project/ ICBUW Hiroshima Office - for inviting me, through his example, to become a "peace worker."












Related posts


In light of the upcoming review of the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and the fact that organizations throughout the country and worldwide are organizing to press the U.S. to substantially reduce its stores of nuclear weapons, it seems like a good time to use social media to get EVERYONE on board!

(See 5 Ways YOU Can Make a Difference on #NoNukesTuesday )








"It's not enough to remember this just once a year; it's not enough that we make a single book -- Hiroshima -- required reading, and never go beyond that. There should be a whole canon that people study progressively, year by year, to grasp and retain the horror of this."

(See FIRE AND BLAST: A Curriculum that Confronts Nuclear Danger?)











Make no mistake: the powers that be have know that they have cowed most of the public into being afraid to talk about what's wrong and protest and resist, and that suits them just fine. Our power to act starts with talking widely -- beyond just our usual circles -- about the way in which we're being scared ... and why a government would possibly want to scare its own people.

(See Pentecost, Guantanamo, and the Moment When Talk Becomes Priceless)

Sunday, November 16, 2014

U.S. and Its Nukes: "We just have kind of taken our eye off the ball here"

I was thinking about a focus for #NoNukesTuesday on November 18 -- when I got wind of the Pentagon press conference.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was going before the media to 'fess up to embarrassing lapses in control and administration in the U.S. nuclear program ... and to propose spending a whole lot more money to "strengthen" the U.S. nuclear weapons program.

And that was when Hagel shrugged his shoulders and said, "we just have kind of taken our eye off the ball here."

Could there be a more succinct statement of why it is urgent to move forward with elimination of nuclear weapons?


"We just have kind of taken our eye off the ball here"
(l-r) Lt. Gen. Stephen Wilson, the commander of Air Force Global Strike
Command, Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James, and Defense
Secretary Chuck Hagel (Image source: AP / Evan Vucci)

The movement for the elimination of nuclear weapons is gearing up for mass mobilizations in spring 2015, timed to coincide with the every-5-year review of the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons), to be held in May at United Nations Headquarters in New York City. One way we're getting the word out is with #NoNukesTuesday -- a weekly social media effort.

How can we reach the vast numbers of U.S. citizens who, if they comprehended the risk the world faces from U.S. (and other) nuclear weapons, would join in a mass movement for their total elimination?

 #NoNukesTuesday - what's YOUR way of mobilizing the people?


Related posts

In light of the upcoming review of the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and the fact that organizations throughout the country and worldwide are organizing to press the U.S. to substantially reduce its stores of nuclear weapons, it seems like a good time to use social media to get EVERYONE on board!

(See 5 Ways YOU Can Make a Difference on #NoNukesTuesday )









Do we have a way to immerse ourselves in the experience of what the use of those nuclear weapons would really mean -- prospectively -- so that we can truly cause ourselves to confront our own inaction?

(See Stop engaging in risky behavior )







There are three centers of power that will impact nuclear disarmament: the President, the Congress, and the people. One of them will have to make nuclear disarmament happen.

(See Countdown to U.S. Nuclear Disarmament (With or Without the Politicians) )

Thursday, November 13, 2014

Why Are These Military Experts Saying CUT CUT CUT Nukes?

I was shocked by this sentence in The New York Times four years ago:

"The Pentagon has now told the public, for the first time, precisely how many nuclear weapons the United States has in its arsenal: 5,113. That is exactly 4,802 more than we need."

(See "An Arsenal We Can All Live With" by Gary Shaub, Jr., and James Forsyth, Jr., May 23, 2010 in The New York Times.)

I was even more shocked when I read the identities of the authors:

Gary Schaub Jr. is an assistant professor of strategy at the Air War College.

James Forsyth Jr. is a professor of strategy at the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies
.

Who are Schaub and Forsyth? Why do they say the U.S. should hold no more than 311 strategic nuclear weapons -- less than 1/10 of its current levels?


Anti-nuke? Not by a long shot . . .

Gary Schaub
Gary Schaub taught at the Air Force Research Institute and Air War College, both at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama. He is currently a tenured Senior Researcher at the Centre for Military Studies of the University of Copenhagen, where he and his colleagues "conduct research-based consultancy work for the Danish Ministry of Defence and the Defence Committee of Parliament as well as scholarly research on international security issues."

Here's James Forsyth, Jr.'s profile from the Air University website: "Dr. Forsyth received his PhD in International Studies from the Joseph Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver. While there, he studied international and comparative politics, as well as security studies. He has taught at the Air Force Academy and Air Command and Staff college, where he served as Dean. His research interests are wide ranging and he has written on great power conflict and war."

Schaub and Forsyth are military experts.

And, in general, they favor the existence -- though not the use -- of nuclear weapons.

They come right out in their op-ed and say, "The idea of a nuclear-weapon-free world is not an option for the foreseeable future. Nuclear weapons make leaders vigilant and risk-averse. That their use is to be avoided does not render them useless. Quite the opposite: nuclear weapons might be the most politically useful weapons a state can possess."

Still, they have called for deep cuts in U.S. nuclear weapons.


Doing the math

Col. B. Chance Saltzman (left)
in his capacity as 460th Operations Group commander
( U. S. Air Force photo/Dennis Rogers, 7/7/2011)
Schaub and Forsyth's op-ed grew out of a paper: "Remembrance of Things Past : The Enduring Value of Nuclear Weapons", which they published in conjunction with B. Chance Saltzman (Colonel, USAF) in Strategic Studies Quarterly, Spring 2010.

Even if you are usually unconvinced by the game theory and other heuristics usually relied upon by proponents of nuclear strategy, the "Remembrance" paper is worth reading, because it does something insightful: it points to the degree to which the U.S. (and others) have been constrained by the relatively small arsenals of other countries (e.g. China). They suggest that, in fact, a significantly reduced nuclear arsenal would accomplish deterrence. 

In addition, they provide useful discussion of the need to reach reductions by steps -- i.e. steps that even those resistant to reductions can swallow.


What is "strategy," anyway?

If you're wondering what Schaub and Forsyth have up their sleeve, it may be contained in these sentences:

"We need a nuclear arsenal. But we certainly don’t need one that is as big, expensive and unnecessarily threatening to much of the world as the one we have now." (emphasis added)

Two little words -- "unnecessarily threatening" -- go a long way to suggesting why Schaub and Forsyth think the U.S. would be better off with fewer nuclear weapons.


Any advocacy for the elimination of nuclear weapons must sooner or later get around to the specifics of the steps by which we get to zero. U.S. nuclear strategists recognize that 311 is still a large number of strategic nuclear weapons for the U.S. to hold. Shouldn't our minimum demand be to get U.S. to this level (or below)?


Related posts

How do you formulate a statement that can somehow convince the United States to eliminate its threatening nuclear weapons?  How do you formulate the 10th request? Or the 100th? Knowing all the time that the United States is in the position -- will always be in the position -- to say, "No" ?  At what point does it dawn on you that the United States will never give up its nuclear weapons, because it has the power and the rest of the world doesn't?

(See 360 Degree Feedback in New York (2014 NPT Prepcom and How the World Views the United States))


There are three centers of power that will impact nuclear disarmament: the President, the Congress, and the people. One of them will have to make nuclear disarmament happen.

(See Countdown to U.S. Nuclear Disarmament (With or Without the Politicians) )








In light of the upcoming review of the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and the fact that organizations throughout the country and worldwide are organizing to press the U.S. to substantially reduce its stores of nuclear weapons, it seems like a good time to use social media to get EVERYONE on board!

(See 5 Ways YOU Can Make a Difference on #NoNukesTuesday )








Elaine Scarry demonstrates that the power of one leader to obliterate millions of people with a nuclear weapon - a possibility that remains very real even in the wake of the Cold War - deeply violates our constitutional rights, undermines the social contract, and is fundamentally at odds with the deliberative principles of democracy.

(See Reviews of "Thermonuclear Monarchy: Choosing Between Democracy and Doom" by Elaine Scarry )










Done correctly, the questioning of physicist "Ash" Carter will allow for one of only two possible conclusions: (A) The continuance of the U.S. stockpile of nuclear weapons renders the U.S. unsafe; OR (B) This Secretary of Defense nominee is not really competent as a physicist, as he claims.

(See ASK THE PHYSICIST: "Ash Carter, are we safe with all those nukes?" )










Other related links

"Even our generals are telling us we have too many nuclear weapons." Senator Diane Feinstein in the Washington Post, December 3, 2014: "America’s nuclear arsenal is unnecessarily and unsustainably large"

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

5 Ways YOU Can Make a Difference on #NoNukesTuesday

#NoNukesTuesday art ... courtesy @natriverascott


In light of the upcoming review of the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons)
and the fact that organizations throughout the country and worldwide are organizing to press the U.S. to substantially reduce its stores of nuclear weapons (see: CALL TO ACTION: Spring/Autumn 2015 Mobilisation), it seems like a good time to use social media to get EVERYONE on board!

What if we chose a day of the week -- say, Tuesday -- to join our voices and lift up the demand for the elimination of nuclear weapons? Could we help build toward a powerful spring 2015 nuclear disarmament mobilization?

The antiwar movement had a good experience with this type of social media activity in recent years with #AfghanistanTuesday . . .  in the run-up to the NATO protests in Chicago in May 2012 . . . . The time has come to turn up the volume again.

How about it? #NoNukesTuesday anyone?

Here's how you can make a difference:


(1) Tweet, Retweet, "Me-Tweet," Follow on #NoNukesTuesday

If it's Tuesday, it's time to say: #NoNukes . . .
#NoNukesTuesday
Nuclear Disarmamanet
If you can only invest a few minutes every Tuesday, you can help by going to #NoNukesTuesday on Twitter and adding your voice:

* retweet (RT) the #NoNukesTuesday tweets you find valuable

* augment/paraphrase ("me-tweet" - MT) #NoNukesTuesday tweets you find valuable

* add your OWN tweets with the hashtag #NoNukesTuesday
 
* follow others who are participating in #NoNukesTuesday

Let's go for a new form of "proliferation" -- making the nuclear disarmament message fill cyberspace every Tuesday!


(2) Pull in local organizations

What are the peace and justice organizations that you work with in your community?

Ask them to participate in #NoNukesTuesday -- and encourage them to devise a BIG presence in the spring 2015 nuclear disarmament mobilization!


"Fromm: Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament"
on the Peace Couple blog
(3) Link to your own writing on nuclear disarmament

Do you have a blog? Or have you been intending to start one? Now's the time to introduce others to what you have to say about nuclear disarmament.

Share you blog posts about eliminating nuclear weapons on Twitter using the #NoNukesTuesday hashtag.


(4) Tie in to other social media

The peace and justice movement is barely touching the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the vast array of social media that can be used to make #NoNukesTuesday big. There are all kinds of unexplored possibilities . . .

Tuesdays are the days when you can introduce others to ways to tie into the nuclear disarmament movement on other platforms: Facebook . . . Tumblr . . . Reddit . . . Instagram . . . .

Check out the #NoNukesTuesday community on Google+!


Join us! Tweeting every Tuesday in a movement to
eliminate #nuclearweapons #NoNukes #NoNukesTuesday
(5) Invite more people to #NoNukesTuesday

As everyone knows, when a genie gives you three wishes, the third wish should be . . . for more wishes.

The way to make sure #NoNukesTuesday becomes more and more effective is for EVERYONE to invite more people -- every week -- to be part of it.


These are just 5 ideas . . . I'm sure there are at least FIFTY ways all of us can make a difference on #NoNukesTuesday .

Let's get to work . . .


5 Ways YOU Can Make a Difference on #NoNukesTuesday


Related posts

There are three centers of power that will impact nuclear disarmament: the President, the Congress, and the people. One of them will have to make nuclear disarmament happen.

(See Countdown to U.S. Nuclear Disarmament (With or Without the Politicians) )








There is an eerie similarity between events in the book Paul Revere's Ride and events in our world today. I'm thinking particularly of how a network of mass resistance springs into action.

(See New World Counterinsurgency: Deja Vu All Over Again)














There are so many people to thank . . .
Through the visual arts ... photography ... film ... teaching ... activism ... publishing ....

So many people are making a difference in eliminating nuclear weapons . . . . 

(See GRATITUDE: People Are Making the Difference in Eliminating Nuclear Weapons )



People assemble every week -- in growing numbers -- to lift their voices together in opposition to continued U.S. occupation of Afghanistan.

It may get loud . . . .

(See #AfghanistanTuesday - ALL LINKS)






I've realized that when we ask ourselves, "What is it that we hope people will do?" we must include an element of recursivity: One of the things we want people to do is to involve more people in doing it. In a way, that element of recursivity -- dare I say "evangelism"? -- defines what it means for people to really become part of a movement.

(See Invite More People into Activism! (Pass It Along!) )

Monday, November 10, 2014

What Would It Take for Friendship to Trump War?


Friendship
Jim (French) and Jules (Austrian)
carry Catherine in Jules and Jim
I can't stay long - I'm rushing down to the Siskel Film Center to see Jules and Jim - part of their retrospective of WWI films.

I was trying to explain Jules and Jim to my daughter -- trying to lure her away from her college art class to see it with me, if truth be told -- and I wondered: would she be more interested in the situation of the woman character (Catherine, in an unforgettable performance by Jeanne Moreau)? Or would she, like me, be struck by the dilemma of the friends, Jules and Jim, who are called to fight on opposite sides when war breaks out?

Is Jules and Jim about romance? Or triangles? Or is it simply about friendship?

[Watching the film: this is what I was remembering . . . both of them talking about their fear that, in the course of their service, they will kill the other . . . . ]

Why do we let a thing as grotesque as war supersede that most human of impulses - friendship?


Strange meeting

Tomorrow is Veterans Day. Veterans Day falls on November 11, in recognition of the WWI armistice that came on the "11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month" in 1918.

I'm thinking a lot about -- and listening to -- Benjamin Britten's War Requiem in connection with the day. The work combines the form of a requiem mass with the poetry of Wilfred Owen. The whole work bears close study: the valiant trumpets lead the enthusiastic young fighers into battle in section 3, the true wrathful face of battle in section 9, and much, much more.


Wilfred Owen's regiment
(Source: Voices Compassion Education website)


But I am particularly struck by section 18, which quotes from a poem, "Strange Meeting", describing an encounter between the narrator and a spectre he meets after leaving the battlefield:

“Strange friend,” I said, “here is no cause to mourn.”
“None,” said that other, “save the undone years,
The hopelessness. Whatever hope is yours,
Was my life also . . .

. . . .

“I am the enemy you killed, my friend.
I knew you in this dark: for so you frowned
Yesterday through me as you jabbed and killed.
I parried; but my hands were loath and cold.

Let us sleep now. . . .”

(You can listen to "It seemed that out of battle I escaped" from the War Requiem on Youtube.)

Owen never returned from the war. He was killed November 4, 1918 - 7 days before the armistice.


Say, can I have some of your purple berries?


Purple berries

The War Requiem couldn't be more different than the music of Crosby, Stills, and Nash, and yet I find nearly the same sentiment in the song "Wooden Ships":


I can see by your coat, my friend,
you're from the other side,
There's just one thing I got to know,
Can you tell me please, who won?

Friends pick mulberries together
" . . . we stopped and had a few berries . . . . "
(Source: Pass the butter please blog)
Like Wilfred Owen talking about two former "enemies," CSN see a simple desire to live and share:

Say, can I have some of your purple berries?
Yes, I've been eating them for six or seven weeks now,
haven't got sick once.

Probably keep us both alive.

If you want to hear a really angry antiwar ballad, listen to this live performance of "Wooden Ships."

If you smile at me, I will understand
'Cause that is something everybody everywhere does
in the same language . . . .


In Chicago, there are mulberry trees that, in the summer, are filled with purple berries you can eat. I don't know how many times I've paused on a summer morning to pluck a berry, and have thought, "If you smile at me, I will understand . . . ."


TAKE ACTION



Related posts

It's time for us to get honest about the true costs of war, including the long term health consequences for people who serve in the military, and the corresponding long-term costs that our society must commit to bear.

(See How to REALLY Honor Veterans)














Have you ever wondered . . . instead of just tsk-tsking about "The Great War," why doesn't anyone actually seize the occasion to try to put a stop to future wars?

(See Everyone Talks About World War I, But No One Does Anything About It )








Today, it may seem quaint to think about the role that trains played in the cataclysms of the 20th century. Could something as simple as a bunch of trains, once set in motion, possibly put people on a course they couldn't reverse? And yet . . . what if I told you that the hyper-organized planners of the U.S. government have a timetable to make 100 drone bases operational in our country in the near future?

(See War By (Drone Base) Timetable? )