Worries and War

[unspeakablehorror]

I'm kind of getting a weird feeling about the stuff circulating Tumblr saying 'don't worry, there won't be a World War III' and assuring people of this by saying no one's going to attack American soil and there won't be a draft.

Here's the thing. Americans getting it in their head that they're going to be nuked or bombed or whatever and freaking out about that doesn't have any historical basis, and I would agree is exasperating to see. But...there were no major attacks on US soil during World War I or World War II either. Major in terms of civilian casualties that is--I don't think it makes any sense to equate Pearl Harbor with the destruction and death other countries saw. And those other countries saw--so much destruction and death. That's why it was a World War. Not because Americans were being bombed in their country.

I also thought the draft was abolished after the Vietnam War anyway (EDIT: the draft stopped being employed, but it was not abolished in the sense of there being any law to prevent it from being employed again--see eg. https://www.politico.com/story/2012/01/us-military-draft-ends-jan-27-1973-072085). Not that that's stopped people from signing up to 'protect Americans' or 'bring democracy' or whatever other lies and propaganda people uncritically accept from the military apparatus or the media. But how many people in other countries have to die, how many cities demolished, and how many countries have to be involved, before something is considered a World War? Is it only a World War if first world countries are being bombed? Is that something likely to happen in a post-nuclear world?

The US has been at war constantly with multiple countries around the world for so long now that there are adults who were born into this world of near-constant war. The US is at war with the world. Can it not be that this already *is* World War III and, I say this as an American, we're the bad guys?

Comments

[tobermoriansass]

Completely agree! I've seen the wwiii stuff come up in the context of people telling Americans to sit down and stop making this about them, but I think that in itself has geared the conversation in a particular way which still puts the US front and centre.

[unspeakablehorror]

Yeah, I think there's an intent with that sort of thing to get people to stop focusing on these unrealistic worries and instead pay attention to what's going on in the rest of the world, but the phrasing of "there's not going to be a WWIII" in that context just kind of implies that those US-based events would be how someone would determine the situation was bad enough to warrant such a name. Which ends up making the situation again all about the US.

[chamerion]

How many people in other countries have to die, how many cities demolished, and how many countries have to be involved, before something is considered a World War? Is it only a World War if first world countries are being bombed? Is that something likely to happen in a post-nuclear world?

The US has been at war constantly with multiple countries around the world for so long now that there are adults who were born into this world of near-constant war. The US is at war with the world. Can it not be that this already *is* World War III and, I say this as an American, we're the bad guys?

I don't even have much to add here except wholehearted agreement, because this is a perfect summary and I would kind of like to tattoo it to my forehead.

[unspeakablehorror]

A lot of times I have difficulty articulating what bothers me about something, but this was one of the times I was actually able to put that into words. My biggest hope is that more people stop centering the US, and first world countries in general, whenever they think about war and human suffering.