Dissent At the War Memorial

As I write this, the sounds of the World War II Memorial celebration in Washington, D.C., are still in myhead. I was invited by the Smithsonian Institution to be on one of the panels, and the person who called toinvite me said that the theme would be "War Stories".  I told him that I would come, but not totell "war stories," rather to talk about World War II and its meaning for us today.  Fine, hesaid.

I made my way into a scene that looked like a movie set for a Cecil B. DeMille extravaganza--huge tents pitched here and there, hawkers with souvenirs, thousands of visitors,many of them clearly World War II veterans, some in old uniforms, sporting military caps, wearing theirmedals. In the tent designated for my panel, I joined my fellow panelist, an African American woman who hadserved with the WACS (Women's Army Corps) in World War II, and who would speak about her personal experiencesin a racially segregated army.

I was introduced as a veteran of the Army Air Corps, a bombardier who had flown combat missions over Europein the last months of the war. I wasn't sure how this audience would react to what I had to say about the war,in that atmosphere of celebration, in the honoring of the dead, in the glow of a great victory accompanied bycountless acts of military heroism.

This, roughly, is what I said: "I'm here to honor the two guys who were my closest buddies in the AirCorps--Joe Perry and Ed Plotkin, both of whom were killed in the last weeks of the war. And to honor all theothers who died in that war. But I'm not here to honor war itself. I'm not here to honor the men in Washingtonwho send the young to war. I'm certainly not here to honor those in authority who are now waging an immoralwar in Iraq."

I went on: "World War II is not simply and purely a 'good war.' It was accompanied by too manyatrocities on our side--too many bombings of civilian populations. There were too many betrayals of theprinciples for which the war was supposed to have been fought.

"Yes, World War II had a strong moral aspect to it--the defeat of fascism.

But I deeply resent the way the so-called good war has been used to cast its glow over all the immoral warswe have fought in the past fifty years: in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan. Icertainly don't want our government to use the triumphal excitement surrounding World War II to cover up thehorrors now taking place in Iraq.

"I don't want to honor military heroism--that conceals too much death and suffering. I want to honorthose who all these years have opposed the horror of war."

The audience applauded. But I wasn't sure what that meant. I knew I was going against the grain oforthodoxy, the romanticization of the war in movies and television and now in the war memorial celebrations inthe nation's capital.

There was a question-and-answer period. The first person to walk up front was a veteran of World War II,wearing parts of his old uniform. He spoke into the microphone: "I was wounded in World War II and have aPurple Heart to show for it. If President Bush were here right now I would throw that medal in his face."

There was a moment of what I think was shock at the force of his statement.

Then applause. I wondered if I was seeing a phenomenon that recurs often in society--when one voice speaksout against the conventional wisdom, and is recognized as speaking truth, people are drawn out of theirprevious silence.

I was encouraged by the thought that it is possible to challenge the standard glorification of the SecondWorld War, and more important, to refuse to allow it to give war a good name. I did not want this celebrationto make it easy for the American public to accept whatever monstrous adventure is cooked up by theestablishment in Washington.

More and more, I am finding that I am not the only veteran of World War II who refuses to be corralled intojustifying the wars of today, drawing on the emotional and moral capital of World War II. There are otherveterans who do not want to overlook the moral complexity of World War II: the imperial intentions of theAllies even as they declared it a war against fascism, and for democracy; the deliberate bombing of civilianpopulations to destroy the morale of the enemy.

Paul Fussell was an infantry lieutenant who was badly wounded while a platoon leader in France in World WarII.

"For the past fifty years the Allied war has been sanitized and romanticized almost beyond recognitionby the sentimental, the loony patriotic, the ignorant, and the bloodthirsty," he wrote in Wartime.

It was easier, after the end of World War II, to point to its stupidities and cruelties in fiction ratherthan in a direct onslaught on what was so universally acclaimed as "the good war." Thus, JosephHeller in Catch-22 captured the idiocy of military life, the crass profiteering, the pointless bombings. AndKurt Vonnegut, in Slaughterhouse-Five, brought to a large readership the awful story of the bombing ofDresden.

My own delayed criticism of the war--I had volunteered and was an enthusiastic bombardier--began withreflecting about my participation in the bombing of Royan. This was a small town on the Atlantic coast ofFrance, where several thousand German soldiers had been overrun and were waiting for the war to end. Twelvehundred heavy bombers flew over the vicinity of Royan and dropped napalm, killing German soldiers and Frenchcivilians, destroying what was once a beautiful little resort town.

Recently, a man wrote to me who had heard me speak on the radio about that bombing mission and said he wasalso on that mission. After the war, he became a fireman, then a carpenter, and is now a strong opponent ofwar. He told me of a friend of his who was also on that mission, and who has been arrested many times inanti-war actions. I was encouraged to hear that.

World War II veterans get in touch with me from time to time. One is Edward Wood Jr. of Denver, who uponhearing I was going to be at the Washington Memorial, wrote to me: He said, "If I were there, I wouldsay: As a combat veteran of World War II, severely wounded in France in 1944, never the man I might have beenbecause of that wound, I so wish that this memorial to World War II might have been made of more than stone ormarble. I mourn my generation's failures since its victory in World War II . . . our legacy of incessantwarfare in smaller nations far from our borders."

Another airman, Ken Norwood, was shot down on his tenth mission over Europe, and spent a year as a prisonerof war in Germany. He has written a memoir (unpublished, so far) which he says is "intentionally ananti-war war story." Packed first into a box car, and then forced to march for two weeks through Bavariain the spring of 1945, Norwood saw the mangled corpses of the victims of Allied bombs, the working classneighborhoods destroyed. All his experiences, he says, "add to the harsh testimony about the futility andobscenity of war."

The glorification of the "good war" persists on our television and movie screens, in the press,in the pretentious speeches by politicians. The more ugly the stories that come out of Iraq--the bombing ofcivilians, the mutilation of children, the invasion of homes, and now the torture of prisoners--the moreurgent it is for our government to try to crowd out all those images with the triumphant stories of D-Day andWorld War II.

Those who fought in that war are perhaps better able than anyone to insist that whatever moral standing canbe attached to that war must not be used to turn our eyes away from Bush's atrocities in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Howard Zinn, the author of  A People's History of the United States, is a columnist for TheProgressive. Courtesy, Znet.