Categorizing War

Sitting peacefully by the waterfront pondering what are the answers? But what are the questions? Are the ripples on the water the answers or the questions? Is the stone that made them the real problem?

That is hardly over dramatic, considering the circumstances or news feeds.
It strikes me as odd that for years we have been accused of being Russian trolls only to come face to face with real Russian propaganda. It is even worse than the fear mongers perceptions of it were. But forget past accusations, even NYT admitted denials about Biden were lies. It takes a war to uncover that bullshit.

Even a 4-year fake narrative – concocted by media and operatives here – was widely accepted by some until recently. But debunked doesn’t make it into the narrative.

Now we got a glimpse of what Russia and Putin are actually up to. It is so bad that some don’t even want to believe this reality could be true. There is a lot of denial out there – whatever the origins. Stories even surface of Russia abducting children from Ukraine.

So we have two factions, according to public consensus in media anyway. One side is anti-war and the other being the neo’s – with each side being defined by their opponents respectively.

It boils down to anti-war siding with Putin, they claim, and the other war faction opposes him. Things are not always what they appear.

One thing I despise is broad brushing large groups, just like pigeon-holing people into identity groups. Even when they don’t fit. Also some of us want to oversimplify, even when it is as complex as war. Yet some wars defy all those stereotypes.

The two sides, under their paradigm, come down to two quandaries. The anti-war side saying no war at any cost. The other neocon (neoliberal) side presumably sees no war it can refuse. Both stereotypes are a mission impossible to me.

The antiwar side must realize there can eventually be conditions which you cannot repel from a war. And the neo-side must realize that there are times when you have to resist the impulse to go to war. Those sound more authentic than their common ideological perceptions.


On the upside, it has to be an incredibly interesting time to be a psychologist or therapist today with this plethora of issues on which to blame human behavior problems or anxiety. I mean is this a rich climate or what? It is a psychological smorgasbord out there, probably no better time for psychology.

That is not to make light of mental problems. Though the war stand is a fascinating thing to the human psyche.

I saw one man talking about how he was always an ideological antiwar guy but he finally rejected that position and went to Ukraine to help. He said the antiwar stand no longer made rational sense to him, and never will again. I can understand that.

Still there is the other neocon side. They are fighting the impulses to see the reasons to jump headlong into a hot war. Because, with the dismal record over the last 20 years, they cannot now justify a pro-war position.

But one area everyone seems to agree on now, from both camps, is doing what they can do to help the victims of this unjustified invasion. Give them real aid and supply what they need to repel an invasion.

There are many who believe in negotiating at all costs to bring a solution, to be agreed on by both sides. But what if you have one party who is unwilling to agree on anything? That party, the invader, wanted war from the beginning and why they declared it.

Antiwar idealists have to come to terms that doing nothing in the face of this evil is condoning it, maybe even perpetuating it.

Then you have those idealists who say continuing aid and supplying victims only draws out the “inevitable” result. But isn’t that the same as conceding to the evil? The only benefit they point to is that it ends quicker and maybe not as many people are killed.

The bitch of all this is that we have seen all these conditions before but we looked the other way and ignored them – genocides and brutal slaughters, besides WWII. But they still happened. True we never got involved in those the way we are getting involved helping the Ukrainians. So this is a bad thing? It doesn’t follow.

Apparently much of the world knows this will not end well if we just sit back and do nothing. Again, that is not a bad thing to accept.

Sure, we have our own problems at home too. Well, you could probably always make that claim. We have severe problems. No, I don’t want to see this become only a diversion from those problems. But I don’t want those other problems to make it impossible to do what we can in this war. I guess by now you can see I am trying to be objective, even if I know one side is correct.

There is also another matter. I’ve seen lots of newsletters from Christian organizations who claim to see it one way too. They only accept the antiwar side as moral. I have problems with that. I heard it from the same folks before, no war is ever justified.

There were plenty of them around at the time of the Revolution who said just chill and stay with the King. That is best. So why is it they cannot oppose authoritarian power? How is that God’s will? But during the Revolution some sided with the King, making them opponents to settlers. They were not conscientious objectors; they actively opposed a new free country. Consequences of actions?

The details of the Ukraine invasion are bad enough on a daily basis, but the circumstances are just as bad.

For instance, a man takes his army into another country and starts making all kinds of demands. He declares the country needs to be demilitarized and denazified. He bombs and destroys large swaths of its structures killing thousands of civilians. He particularly aims at civilians, hospitals etc. He pushes millions of the residents out.

He claims the reason he is doing it is due to threats he perceives from them and his neighbors. He plots to kill the leaders of the country or run them out. He wants to install his own people. (Democracy and sovereignty be damned) He dictates the conditions on anyone giving them aid, or interfering. In effect, he acts like he owns the place without having any legitimate authority.

He claims the sovereign country has no right of self-determination at all.
Where have I heard that?


Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 — (New King James Version)

“To everything there is a season,
A time for every purpose under heaven:
A time to be born, And a time to die;
A time to plant, And a time to pluck what is planted;
A time to kill, And a time to heal;
A time to break down, And a time to build up;
A time to weep, And a time to laugh;
A time to mourn, And a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, And a time to gather stones;
A time to embrace, And a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to gain, And a time to lose;
A time to keep, And a time to throw away;
A time to tear, And a time to sew;
A time to keep silence, And a time to speak;
A time to love, And a time to hate;
A time of war, And a time of peace.”

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2022

One comment on “Categorizing War

  1. Bullright says:

    Some Doom and Gloom (circa 2012)



Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s