Re: More School of the Americas
Victor O. Story (story@kutztown.edu)
Thu, 18 May 1995 23:22:01 -0500
Wilkins below plays the typical game of misinformation. The debate over
the SOA is not over the school's curriculum. It is over the informal
network building that goes on there and the way the US government
promotes and finances repression in Latin America through networks that
are in part maintained through institutions like SOA. These are the real
issues, and the ones Wilkins seems unable to grasp. It is also a false
argument to go into the heart-rending stories of what wonderful but
misunderstood men we have in uniform - Wilkins is right, they are
nincompoops just like the rest of us, so what? Then he points out that
most of us know nothing. That is really his point, the military is so
understood, and us pinheaded geek intellectuals are so out of touch with
reality, and our closed minds are so made up already, that all the
criticism about SOA should be ignored. What an argument he makes. The
public knows what lies the government told us about the Vietnam war, yet
if we listen to guys like Wilkins, we'll be believing that was a just
war, and that the US has been building democracy in Latin America. This
debate on this list has been going on for months now, maybe that is good,
I hope I am not boring the rest of you to death, sometimes it does get
repetitive, but some of you probably do not know that I have received
many email notes from people who have appreciated my comments, and my
point here is this - I have to agree with Wilkins that there are some
thinking people in the US military - about half of the messages I get
that say they appreciate my argument are from retired MILITARY people,
many retired Vietnam vets, who are sick and discusted with the lies and
repression perpetrated by our government and military. If there is
anywhere that I can agree with Wilkins, it is on the point that the
military is not primarily responsible for the crimes our government has
perpetrated in Latin America - our military is made up of men who do what
they think is their duty - the criminals are the businessmen and
politicians who direct that policy. The SOA was not created by the Army,
it was created by the US government, which is run by civilians. That is
why we who criticize the SOA have not been attacking the military, in
spite of Wilkins trying to make it seem that way - our argument is
against the policies that make it a School of Murderers, the informal
crimes it encourages, which originate in offices of men in suits, not
uniforms.
Victor Story
Kutztown University
On Thu, 18 May 1995 Wilkins94@aol.com wrote:
> The amount of ignorance and animosity displayed towards the US military
> by some members on this net is disheartening, to say the least. My point was
> that most people who discuss the SOA on this net are already polarized over
> the issue and are not open to any intellectual discussion regarding the
> school, especially the cause and effect relationship between the curriculum
> of the school and the track record of its graduates (both good and bad).
> Most of those who summarily dismiss the relevance of SOA in the post cold
> war era wouldn't know about the formulation of our hemispheric security
> policy if it bit them on the rear. Everyone already knows the "truth"
> Either its the "school of assasins" or "an absolutely integral part of our
> hemispheric defense policy." The rhetoric against the school is so shrill
> its become mere "background" noise to those in whose hands the school's
> future belongs.
>
> I still contend that an outside look at the school, even by agovernment
> contractor, is a positive step. Those who argue that military men, even
> retired ones, are incapable of original (even controversial!!) thought are
> simply wrong. When you think of military men, the picture you should envision
> should be the General Marshall or General Powell, not the characature of
> napalm dropping, baby killing storm troopers that some would have you
> believe. Our military is made of people like you -- racially, socially,
> economically, ethnically, and yes -- politically. And if you think that
> defense contractors and military officers simple kiss the ring of their
> government master, read some of Rand Corporation studies on a wide array of
> security issues, or some of the studies on US strategy in El Salvador written
> by Army Lieutenant Colonels and Colonels while studying at the JFK center ar
> Harvard during the mid-1980's. You would be surprised at the range of
> opinions and options debated in free and open forums before reaching a
> decision on policy matters. But some of you have it right about one aspect
> of the miitary, when a policy decision has been reached and when our civilian
> leaders have given us the order to carry it out -- we do. That is what
> separates a constitutional military from a mob.
>
> Maj Mark Wilkins
> Ft. Leavenworth, KS
> Wilkins94@aol.com
>