The Fall of Rumsfeld: the True Nature of American Society Creeps Dangerously Close to Becoming Revealed

"Fighting the war with the military we now have, for our wishes have been fulfilled; 'someday' has arrived. Rumsfeld's cold, dispassionate reassurances have at long last been rejected; a military without Rumsfeld is the military many servicemen have been dreaming of for many arduous nights."

This afternoon, the American Public was informed that Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, will step down from his post. Donald has been described as the first "political casualty" of the Iraq War. I wouldn't describe him so; he hasn't had any limbs blown off or sustained any other traumatic injuries. Physiologically speaking, he looks fine to me. I will say though, he may rightly become a casualty, even so far as the physical sense, if justice continues to unfold as it ought to. We brought the Nazis to trial; we had better bring Rumsfeld and all his compadres to trial as well. You will find few men alive in the world today who answer for as much senseless violence and are responsibility for such large-scale loss of innocent life (succinctly put: genocide) as Rumsfeld does. Those few who can compare to him in this prestigious measure are most likely awaiting court-ordered death, and many believe Rumsfeld belongs beside them. I, personally, do not have a belief regarding whether or not the man should be allowed to live; frankly, I believe it is beyond what I am morally capable of deciding. I am firm in my belief, however, that if the death sentence handed down for Saddam Hussein is morally appropriate, then such must also be the case for Rumsfeld. Either the mass-murder of innocent people carries with it the penalty of death because it is seriously wrong, or it does not because it is not. Depending upon which of these camps you identify with, you either believe that the two men may live or that they both must be put to death. I don't see that killing these two men necessarily improves the world in any way, but -at least regarding Hussein- the wisdom of this American culture suggests otherwise, and I find this intriguing.

Saddam Hussein has been murdering innocent people for decades; maybe it was wrong of him to do so, but that surely didn't bother many people on this side of the Atlantic until very recently. Today, Americans want blood; they want to see this man swinging lifelessly from a tree, and maybe that is wrong as well, but I confess I am far beyond my province to say one way or the other. To strengthen our sense of moral clarity and build confidence in our judgment, let's take a look at some historical facts.

It was by complete coincidence that in the past few weeks, I happened across the specifics of the largest mass-execution in American History. 38 Santee Sioux were hanged in Mankato, Minnesota on the day after Christmas, 1862. Because I must have been absent from school the day this was taught in social studies class, I was ignorant of it and felt I needed to further investigate.

It appears that Whites and Native Americans had been peacefully coexisting in the Minnesota region thanks to two treaties. These treaties effectively turned nine tenths of the Native Americans' land into settlers' land; in exchange, the Native Americans were to receive provisions which they needed for survival. The onset of the 1862 winter approached after a sparse gaming season and meager harvest that left the Native Americans completely dependent on those provisions. The settlers, presumably having been adversely affected by the dire hunting and farming conditions as well, withheld the provisions and the Natives Americans began to starve. Little Crow, a Native American and Chief of the Mdewakantons, led his people to appeal peacefully before the 'Upper Agency' for what was rightfully theirs. They were denied; the resulting forced-hunger imposed onto the Native American culture caused the erosion of their peace-loving tradition and philosophy. So began the historical "Dakota Wars". After a deplorable but characteristically American chain of events transpired*, the crux of which was the Americans’ devaluing of a peaceful native culture's citizens' lives, the 38 Santee Sioux were put to death, hence the greatest mass-execution in America’s history.

The historical accounts I found citied a book by Vine Deloria, entitled "Custer Died for Your Sins"; it is worth looking through if you have the time, but I'm including the cited passage in case you don't.

"When one examines the history of American Society one notices the great weakness inherent in it. The country was founded in violence. It worships violence and will continue to live violently. Anyone who tries to meet violence with love is crushed, but violence used to meet violence also ends abruptly with meaningless destruction."

The author continues with a conceptual interpretation of American Military History, highlighting our war-fighting style and emphasizing that we have never 'lost a war'. Shifting his focus to peace, he writes:

"But name, if you can, the last peace the United States won. Victory yes, but this country has never made a successful peace because peace requires exchanging ideas, concepts, thoughts, and recognizing the fact that two distinct systems of life can exist together without conflict. Consider how quickly America seems to be facing its allies of one war as new enemies."

-Consider that these words were written nearly forty years ago but imagine they were written 40 minutes ago. Fascinating, isn't it? It leaves a lot unanswered about Rumsfeld, what the world ought to do with him, and even if what he did was, at least in our cultural context, morally wrong. This is the danger hidden in examining history, our culture, and the ugly truths embedded in both. Revealing facts may undermine the pretenses on which we’ve been operating the past 230+ years. Have we got the stomach to face ourselves in the mirror? I suggest we do so and find out.


*brilliantly articulated by "NACF Kilia"
See - http://nativenewsonline.org/history/hist1226.html