Peaceful Protest in Baghdad

Often times the news reported out of Iraq and Afghanistan is littered with violence, assassinations and other clear signs of war. However there are those, though they may not receive the spotlight, which seek peace and hope for change in non-violent ways.

On Monday, February 14, 2011, about 200 such peaceful protesters gathered in Tahrir Square in Baghdad Iraq to demonstrate their hope for change in a Valentine’s Day protest. This square is a small plaza located next to a traffic circle. Soldiers and policemen were present in case violence broke out. But there was no need. In the place of guns and homemade bombs, the protesters peacefully waved red balloons and silk roses in the air. Their cries were of love for Iraq and the necessity of economical change.

It is reported that the demonstrators’ goal was not violence or to overthrow the government administration. Instead, they admitted they could live with the current government, but they want employment, more consistent electricity, cleaner streets and better security.

It is reported that one out of every five Iraqis is unemployed. They only get electricity a few hours a day. There call is for the government to truly mean the necessities of the people.

At the same time some speculate trouble since the majority of the unemployment is among the youth. With the current news of violence in surrounding countries, many wonder if the youth of Iraq may follow suit. They often vent their feelings on Facebook and have organized Facebook groups with names such as “Blue Revolution” and “Streets of Baghdad for Change.” As the newly established government takes full reigns and listens to these chants for better jobs and electricity, change can be peacefully brought about.

These protesters stance is a symbol that people can express their feelings in non-violent ways and still gain the attention of the press. While some may feel that the only means of turning a tide is through weapons or damaging actions, there are many that do believe that peaceful organization can help change the world and overcome the need for war.

Filed Under: Protests, War Tagged With: , ,

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

When someone thinks about a person dealing with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) he or she may consider the soldiers who have been to war and now have bad thoughts or dreams from fighting in this battle. This is what post traumatic stress disorder can be. It does occur from other situations, and mainly results after someone has had or seen some trauma in their life. It can leave the person without the ability to cope after this.

Thus it is possible to have PTSD after experiencing a war or on return as a veteran. How PTSD Affects When looking at how this affects someone, it is possible to see that PTSD is categorized by certain symptoms and signs. A doctor will need the details of the the traumatic event that happened to you. For a few people who have gone through this trauma, they can develop various signs and symptoms of PTSD that show mental, physiological or social changes. When people have PTSD they might state that they have nightmares constantly.

This can result in them being afraid to close their eyes at night. They can relive the traumatic event that they experienced. A person can have some form of anxiety that makes them refuse to even want to watch the news about any fighting or wards. In some cases, the sound of a car “back-firing” or a sudden pop of a balloon can trigger the memory of gunfire during the war.

This can lead to someone becoming withdrawn, sad, and feeling very low. At other times they feel nervous and uneasy. They can be quiet tired if they experience nightmares that keep them awake at night. The person might even feel nauseous. Keep in mind that this does not take minutes for PTSD to develop. In some people, it might show up after a few years. If you have a loved one like this, encourage them to get help.

Filed Under: War Tagged With:

The Costs of War

War is bad. That’s an insanely easy thing to say, but why is it bad? We like to rail against war because it kills people, but can we list specifics to explain or detail our views? Here is a list of a few wars and why war is bad.

  • World War II. Dozens of nations involved. 1939-1945. Cost up to an estimated 72,000,000 lives.
  • An Shi Rebellion. Within China. 755-763. Cost an estimated 36,000,000 lives.
  • The conquest of the Ming dynasty by the Qing dynasty in China. 1616-1662. Cost an estimated 25,000,000 lives.
  • Taiping Rebellion. Within China. 1851-1864. Cost an estimated 20,000,000 lives.
  • World War I. Dozens of nations involved. 1914-1918. Cost an estimated 20,000,000 lives.
  • The Second Sino-Japanese War. China with foreign support against Japan. 1937-1945. Cost an estimated 20,000,000 lives.
  • The Thirty Years’ War. Various European nations against the Holy Roman Empire and allies. 1618-1648. Cost up to an estimated 11,500,000 lives.
  • The Russian Civil War. 1917-1921. Cost up to an estimated 9,000,000 lives.
  • Chinese Civil War. People’s Republic of China against Communist Party of China. 1928-1949. Cost up to an estimated 6,100,000 lives.
  • Napoleonic Wars. Over two dozen nations involved. 1804-1815. Cost up to an estimated 6,000,000 lives.
  • Vietnam War. North Vietnam and allies against South Vietnam and allies. 1945-1975. Cost up to an estimated 3,800,000 lives.
  • Korean War. United Nations against North Korea and allies. 1950-1953. Cost up to an estimated 3,500,000 lives.
  • Afghan Civil War. Within Afghanistan. 1979 – Present. Cost up to an estimated 2,500,000 lives, so far.

In just the above listed wars, up to over 230,000,000 lives were lost. Many of these lives were not soldiers. The civilian lives lost during World War II alone were almost 50,000,000. These numbers are staggering. So much so that the human mind can’t really wrap around them. These are the costs of war.

Filed Under: War Tagged With:

Coping with PTSD

Posttraumatic stress disorder is an anxiety disorder caused by exposure to psychologically traumatizing events. These events overload the mind’s ability to cope with them and alter the biochemistry of the brain. This can lead to a variety of problems like aggression, irritability, flashbacks and more.

Treating PTSD should be done carefully. Some sufferers attempt to self-treat with a number of self-destructive behaviors. Some suffers may try to alleviate the psychological problems with alcohol or narcotics. Some also try to cope by retreating from the world and isolating themselves socially. Anger may be used to push the world away.

There are a number of healthy ways to cope with PTSD. Many of them include some sort of social interaction. Joining a PTSD support group can help suffers with their own problems by sharing and listening to other suffers talk about many of the same things that they may be experiencing. Members of such a group can rely on and lean on each other for support. Maintaining personal relationships with friends and family or speaking with a counselor can also help.

In addition to social coping practices, there are a number of personal practices. Those individuals with PTSD can educate themselves out it and learn relaxation exercises. They can also do things to distract themselves from certain thoughts and feelings by reading, watching non-threatening movies or television, and exercising. Spirituality has been shown to help people with PTSD.

As PTSD can alter brain biochemistry, medication can be beneficial. There are a wide variety of medications designed to combat the symptoms of PTSD like anger, flashbacks, nightmares, irritability, social anxiety, exaggerated startle response, etc.

PTSD can be dangerous. Its effects on people, their lives, their friends, family, and jobs can be complex and stressful. Treating PTSD should be done with care. Suffers should not think that there is no help out there for them or that they are alone. The help is there and waiting.

Filed Under: War Tagged With: , ,

Two Methods of Avoiding War

Atomic bombing of Nagasaki on August 9, 1945.

Image via Wikipedia

Negotiation and deterrence: two of the more often used methods for avoiding war. Both have seen success and failure throughout history. Let’s take a look at both negotiation and deterrence and evaluate their pros and cons.

Deterrence

A deterrent is something that prevents someone from doing something. In terms of keeping the peace, deterrence generally means having a bigger stick than the other guy. Hoping that, upon viewing your position of strength and ability to defend yourself, the other guy won’t want to attack.

  • Pros. The nuclear bomb kept the peace, on a large scale, for decades. The Cold War was a nuclear stalemate between the United States and the Soviet Union. The threat of nuclear retaliation and mutually assured destruction kept the two superpowers in a nervous relative peace for over thirty years. Military buildups can also make the other guy think twice about attacking.
  • Cons. Deterrence makes assumptions about an opponent. It assumes that the other side is well enough informed about your own strengths to want to avoid a fight. It further assumes that the other guy is as interested in keeping the peace as you when, in fact, he may not be and your own strength is irrelevant.

Negotiation

Negotiation is discussing something to come to an agreement. It’s an attempt to resolve a contentious issue through discourse, not armed conflict.

  • Pros. When conflict is avoided by (or limited to) words, the various ravages of war like lost lives and economic stresses are also avoided.
  • Cons. Like deterrence, negotiation can make assumptions of an opponent. One side may use negotiation simply to delay a war until they can strike. In WWII, Japan and America were engaged in talks right before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Negotiation can also become unending capitulation as one side takes advantage of the other’s desire for peace.

Negotiation and deterrence have historically been used to avoid fighting, but, unfortunately, neither is perfect.

Filed Under: War Tagged With:

When is War Ever an Option?

Naval photograph documenting the Japanese atta...

Image by The U.S. National Archives via Flickr

Ideally, there would be no war. Ideally, rational discussion and give-and-take negotiations would prevent any armed conflict. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world. We live in a world where disagreements over any number of things can often degenerate into open conflict. But under what circumstances, might war even be considered an option?

Could a war against oppression be a justifiable war? The American Revolution could be a sort of war against oppression. In the late eighteenth century, the young United States was bucking against the oppressive English government – a government in which they had no representation that held complete sway over them. Petitions for changes weren’t working and it eventually took the Declaration of Independence and a war to throw off the English rule.

Is war an option if it is retaliatory? If it is meant to prevent what happened from happening again?  In 1941 America declared war on Japan following a devastating attack on Pearl Harbor. Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001 was, at least initially, America responding in retaliation to an attack by extremists.

Can war be an option if it is in self-defense? During WWII, France, other European nations and England fought a Germany that had already violently attacked its neighbors and looked to continue expanding. Choosing not to fight in self-defense could have been choosing total defeat.

Is war an option if it involves coming to someone else’s aid? In WWII, Germany never attacked America, but America entered the war and helped defend European allies and England against probable defeat.

War should never be a means of forcing a way of life on someone or punishing them for not sharing a way of life. When negotiations fail, when pleas fall on deaf ears, when capitulating becomes only temporary appeasement, and when an unchecked force would cost lives…only then can war, as bad as it is, even be considered an option.

Filed Under: War Tagged With:
Newer Posts »