Committee Opposed to Militarism and the Draft (COMD)

Articles Archive
Hits: 3610

From Draft NOtices, May - June 2003



— Mernie Aste and Molly Morgan
    

Waging empire abroad requires a propaganda war at home, and peace activists have been challenged by a powerful sound-bite blitz since 9-11. As Bush, Inc. moves from its war of conquest to occupation and exploitation, the rest of us can reframe our strategies and language, including unpacking one of the most vexing phrases —"support the troops."

For centuries a dominant feature of U.S. political culture has been dualism: framing all issues as black or white, good vs. evil, with no opportunity to be neither, both, or something else altogether. Framing debate in this way not only serves as a red herring to keep people from asking deeper questions, but is also part of a classic divide-and-conquer strategy that keeps the majority of people from making common cause against the oligarchy. Part of the brilliance of such jingoistic phrases as "united we stand," "these colors don't run," "freedom isn't free," and "support the troops" is that they are ambiguous, implying a political stance without being specific. They also allow a speaker to set a trap for responders.

Articles Archive
Hits: 3584

From Draft NOtices, May - June 2003



— Lorraine Demi
    
Studies suggest that domestic violence rates are two to three times higher in U.S. military families than in the country's civilian population. In fact, military domestic violence incidents increased from 18.6 per 1,000 marriages in 1990 to 25.6 per 1,000 in 1996. Rates then fell slightly from 1997 to 1999, but more moderate to severe incidents were reported, showing an increase in the severity of violence in military homes, even if reported incidents lessened slightly. Unfortunately, these numbers are still dramatically underestimated due to three mitigating factors: (1) the military only recognizes violence against a legal spouse as domestic violence -- so these numbers exclude violence against girlfriends or boyfriends and unmarried, live-in partners; (2) commanders often handle domestic violence cases informally, and then don't report the "resolved" cases; and (3) a certain number of domestic violence cases are not reported in civilian populations, but even more are not reported in military relationships due to fear, intimidation, and a forced code of silence.

Articles Archive
Hits: 3361

From Draft NOtices, March - April 2003

 

-— Ray Wolf
 
    

Dear Mr. Bush,

I'm writing you this letter as a United States citizen, Navy veteran and parent. I have several questions to ask you. I've paid attention to what you and members of your administration have said concerning Iraq. However, I've found considerable information that seems to contradict much of what you've said about the necessity of attacking Iraq. I've also found information that suggests that your goal is something other than the disarmament of Iraq.

Let me begin with your justifications for an attack on Iraq. In your recent State of the Union address, you said that Iraq is committing multiple human rights abuses, including the torture of children. You also said that, "International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, than evil has no meaning."

Draft NOtices

Quarterly print newsletter

Subscribe now Learn more

 

Ninth CIRCUIT COURT RULING: CONFRONTING MILITARISM BY USING EQUAL ACCESS TO HIGH SCHOOLS

When the military comes to your local high school, you have a legal right to give students an opposing view. This has been the position taken by federal district courts in Florida, Pennsylvania and Illinois and two federal appellate courts. The most broadly-worded decision came from a case that COMD took to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the 1980s. Here is the background:

Find Out More | Download PDF