Reposted from the American Left History blog as addition material for this book review, None of Us Were Like This Before by Joshua Phillips, from the Vietnam War era.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
From The Archives Of The Vietnam G.I. Anti-War Movement-"GI Voice"-The Spartacist League's Anti-War Work Among GIs-"New Ball Game" (Nixon's Escalation Into Cambodia, 1970)
Click on the headline to link to the GI Voice archival website for an outline copy of the issue mentioned in the headline. I am not familiar with the Riazanov Library as a source, although the choice of the name of a famous Russian Bolshevik intellectual, archivist, and early head of the Marx-Engels Institute there, as well as being a friend and , at various points a political confederate of the great Bolshevik leader, Leon Trotsky, sits well with me.
*******
G.I. Voice was published by the Spartacist League for about one year starting in 1969 and ending in 1970. They published 7 issues total and represented the SL’s attempt to intervene with their politics inside the U.S. Army then occupying and fighting brutal war in Vietnam. There was a growing G.I. anti-war movement and this was in part the SL’s attempt to win over militant G.I.s to the views of the SL.
—Riazanov Library******
Markin comment on this series:
In a funny way this American Left History blog probably never have come into existence if it was not for the Vietnam War, the primary radicalizing agent of my generation, the generation of ’68, and of my personal radicalization by military service during that period. I was, like many working class youth, especially from the urban Irish neighborhoods, drawn to politics as a career, bourgeois politics that is, liberal or not so liberal. Radicalism, or parts of it, was attractive but the “main chance” for political advancement in this country was found elsewhere. I, also like many working class youth then, was drafted into the military, although I, unlike most, balked, and balked hard at such service one I had been inducted. That event is the key experience that has left me still, some forty years later, with an overarching hatred of war, of American imperialist wars in particular, and with an overweening desire to spend my time fighting, fighting to the end against the “monster.”
Needless to say, in the late 1960s, although there was plenty of turmoil over the war on American (and world-wide) campuses and other student-influenced hang-outs and enclaves and that turmoil was starting to be picked among American soldiers, especially drafted soldiers, once they knew the score there was an incredible dearth of information flowing back and forth between those two movements. I, personally, had connections with the civilian ant-war movement, but most anti-war GIs were groping in the dark, groping in the dark on isolated military bases (not accidentally placed in such areas) or worst, in the heat of the battle zone in Vietnam. We could have used a ton more anti-war propaganda geared to our needs, legal, political, and social. That said, after my “retirement” from military service I worked, for a while, with the anti-war GI movement through the coffeehouse network based around various military bases.
During that time (very late 1960s and first few years of the 1970s) we put out, as did other more organized radical and revolutionary organizations, much literature about the war, imperialism, capitalism, etc., some good, some, in retrospect, bad or ill-put for the audience we were trying to target. What we didn’t do, or I didn’t do, either through carelessness or some later vagabond existence forgetfulness was save this material for future reference. Thus, when I happened upon this Riazanov Library material I jumped at the opportunity of posting it. That it happens to be Spartacist League/International Communist League material is not accidental, as I find myself in sympathy with their political positions, especially on war issues, more often than not. I, however, plan to scour the Internet for other material, most notably from the U. S. Socialist Workers Party and Progressive Labor Party, both of whom did some anti-war GI work at that time. There are others, I am sure. If the reader has any such anti-war GI material, from any war, just pass it along.
*******
Markin comment on this issue:
Individual action vs., collective action? Most of the time, while I respect individual heroic efforts (or just great individual achievement), collective action turns the tides of history, and for lots of people not just a few. As far as my own military service time, which included heavy, heavy for the military, anti-war work one of my great regrets is that I did not spend more time arguing against those politicized and radicalized soldiers that I ran into by the handfuls on the issue of staying in and fighting the brass. No re-ups, christ no, but just finishing their tours of duty. More importantly, to stay in and raise anti-war hell (oops!), I mean “serve” in Vietnam if the fates played out that way. A few more radicals over there and who knows what could have been done especially in the very late 1960s and very early 1970s when the American Army even by important elements of its own brass was declared “unreliable.” That “unreliable” mass needed us to help figure things out. And to act on that figuring out.
Alas I was not Bolshevik then, although I was working my way, blindly, fitfully, and haphazardly to that understanding of the struggle. Moreover, I had not access to those who were arguing for a Bolshevik position on anti-war GI work, although I did have a few vicarious links to the U.S. Socialist Workers Party that organization was not strongly committed to keeping anti-war soldiers in to fight the brass but rather was more interested in having such GIs stand at the head of their eternal, infernal, paternal “mass marches.” My thinking, and those around me civilian and military, in any case, was dictated more by the “hell no, we won’t go” strategy of the anti-draft movement extended intact to the military theater than any well thought out notion of “turning the guns the other way.”
********
Hard to Read--But Should be Read
by ELLEN NESSUNO
None of Us Were Like This Before by Joshua Phillips (Verso Books, 2010) is not easy to read – not because of style, which is eminently readable journalism, but because of the content. But for that very reason, we recommend that you do read it.
Phillips is a journalist who has reported from Asia and the Middle East and is no newcomer to war and its many horrific consequences. He started to report material for a book and documentary film on interrogation and torture, but meeting with the family of Sergeant Adam Gray caused him to change focus from what was done to detainees to its impact on those who were involved in the abuse of prisoners in Iraq.
Phillips started out by interviewing former detainees through the Middle East and Afghanistan and heard from them how they were mistreated, and sometimes tortured. In spring of 2006, Phillips met soldiers from Battalion 1-86 who were not trained interrogators, but tankers. Yet, when Battalion 1-68 had captured Iraqis in 2003, they started a small jail where they terrified the detainees with mock executions, punishing physical exercise, sleep deprivation, and water torture.
Sergeant Gray committed suicide at age 23 after a nearly one-year tour in Iraq. He had returned to the US, went to a base in Alaska for more training, and was found dead in his barracks in August 2004. The Army ruled his death accidental, but his family was convinced that something significant had happened to him, based on the change in him upon return from Iraq. Phillips wanted to get to the bottom of it, too, particularly after the suspicious death of Jonathan Millantz, another Iraq combat vet. Both young men were tormented by their own abusive actions and by witnessing abuse of many prisoners. Both of them spiraled down into a world of drugs and mental illness. None of Us Were Like This Before documents much of what they experienced.
Phillips discovered that ordinary soldiers, not only CIA agents or prison guards, were expected to engage in interrogation and torture. Adam Gray told his family that soldiers in his battalion performed water torture by pinning down detainees and pouring water other their mouths and noses to make them feel as though they were drowning. Detainees were also tied by their hands to the highest rung on the prison bars and kept hanging there for a couple of days without food, water, or sleep. Jonathan Millantz told Phillips that solders kept detainees up all night with loud noise and physical exercise. As a medic, he was charged with checking prisoners’ vital signs to make sure they were not dying.
In spite of what they had experienced, both Gray and Millantz had wanted to continue as soldiers – as they had dreamed since childhood - but the memories of their experiences were so tortuous to them that they drank and drugged to hold the images at bay. In both cases, even if their deaths were due to accidental overdoses (which is still questionable), the real question is what drove these formerly committed soldiers into depression and substance abuse.
The National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study (NVVRS) was initiated by Congress to research PTSD in Vietnam vets. The study produced a little publicized finding: “abusive violence” perpetrated by soldiers resulted in a high correlation with diagnosed PTSD, and that torturing POWs could have even greater impact than combat violence.
While it is important for abusers to get help quickly, their same prevents them from reporting what they did and seeking help. Soldiers can also fear the retributive actions the military may takeagainst them for confessing their misdeeds. This particularly creates a quandary for medical personal such as Millantz because the Department of Defense compels military medical personnel to report prisoner abuse, per a regulation passed in 2006. Phillips quotes Darius Rejali, a professor of political science at Reed College: “The first step … is to recognize the … conditions they put these boys through. …It requires us to acknowledge that we asked things of soldiers that went well beyond asking them to fight on behalf of their country…”
Once again, the military attempts to deny the effects on soldiers of wars with dubious missions and unacknowledged criminal actions. Perhaps Eli Wright, who went through combat medic training with Millantz, best expressed the sad reality of the effects of war when he told Phillips after Millantz’s funeral, “We lost more guys in my unit after we got back from Iraq than we lost in Iraq as a result of suicide, reckless behavior, ODs, whatever else. And those guys didn’t die in honor of their service. They didn’t die as patriots and defenders of freedom. Those guys died because they were trying to drown out and hide from the reality that that war had dug into their hearts.”
No comments:
Post a Comment