Cont...

It was a truly heroic personal account no doubt replicated innumerable times throughout the war on all sides of the conflict.

It has its resonance with many Australians because of the fact we can identify with Norm. He is of our parents or our grandparents generation. We have a sense of his character, of his upbringing, of his sense of mateship. We can appreciate his efforts purely on a universal level, but they understandably speak with even greater power to those capable of more easily put ourselves in his shoes.

Therein lies the nub. Do his actions show the Australian soldier was superior and braver than the others? Do they show that Australia is a better nation? Should they drive patriotism and nationalism that stiffens our willingness for war and further glories?

The answer is patently no.

There is no reason not to feel that Norm is an exceptional fellow, he certainly is, and no reason not to have to have a real sense of pride in the efforts of he and his mates, but we have to realise that it is our understandable empathy for him that can hype such feelings, thus making them ripe for capture by the unscrupulous, the nationalist and the war mongers.

Ultimately the best way of honouring someone like Norm is to heed his call “that we stay away from wars, they are no good.” In my opinion this means being highly suspicious of those who feel we should be more like the Americans in our patriotism/nationalism because it is these people who send our young to die in far of places.

SteeleRedux "stay away from wars, they are no good...
these people who send our young to die in far of places."

No need to send them away anymore.
Your favoured ludicrous immigration policy is bringing the next war to our very own streets.
I wonder whose side you'll be on this time.

SteeleRedux wrote: Ultimately the best way of honouring someone like Norm is to heed his call “that we stay away from wars, they are no good.” In my opinion this means being highly suspicious of those who feel we should be more like the Americans in our patriotism/nationalism because it is these people who send our young to die in far of places.

Dear SteeleRedux,

Many Americans do not support US soldiers going all over the globe. President Obama has scaled back US involvement overseas and has resisted attempts for the US to get more involved in the Syrian conflict. I think what Bush did in Iraq was wrong, but please don’t forget he was supported in that by Blair and Howard.

I was in the US Army in WW2, and I rejoice in our victory over Germany and Japan. If it were not for the US the world could be dominated by Nazi Germany, imperial Japan or Soviet Russia. Would that be better? However, even in that war those Americans who didn’t want to participate on grounds of conscience were allowed to choose alternate service.

You generalised Americans as warmongers. Perhaps, it might be well to read of the many US citizens who have opposed militarism.

http://www.usip.org/publications/peacemakers-toolkit will tell you about the United States Institute for Peace.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Anti-Imperialist_League will give you info about the US Anti-Imperialist League.

The American Anti-Imperialist League was an organization established on June 15, 1898, to battle the American annexation of the Philippines as an insular area. The anti-imperialists opposed expansion, believing that imperialism violated the fundamental principle that just republican government must derive from "consent of the governed." Rather than opposing American territorial expansion on economic or humanitarian grounds, the League argued that such activity would necessitate the abandonment of American ideals of self-government and non-intervention — ideals expressed in the United States Declaration of Independence, George Washington's Farewell Address and Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

Unfortunately the voices for peace have not always prevailed, but Americans are no more warlike than Australians who have been involved in many imperialist wars.

Australians who have been involved in many imperialist wars.
david f,
but you don't mind acceping all the benefits do you ? Don't you realise that your compassion is nothing more than a fashionable fad you can afford only because those "imperialists" did all the fighting so that the likes of you can now condemn them. I'd love to see your compassion after you've lost everything you've ever been given.

Dear davidf,

I have only just discovered your post addressed to me and apologise for not furnishing a reply before now.

You wrote;

“You generalised Americans as warmongers.”

Not as such. The point I would make is that the Patriotism/Nationalism which so extensively pervades the American culture means a call for their country to go to war is not met with the same opposition that might otherwise greet the leaders of other countries.

I marched against the war in Iraq with my children on a wet Melbourne Friday with thousands of others. It was the biggest anti war protest this country had seen since Vietnam. It was the first in many events staged around the globe the largest being in Rome where 3 million people marched while 1,500,000 protested in Madrid and a million in London, yet the New York rally struggled to reach 350,000.

In my judgement there is a taste for war, for the grand, for the glory, in nearly every leader. In a democracy it is the people who check that propensity. John Howard's case for us to go to war in Iraq was centred squarely around our obligations to support the US since this was the only narrative that had any currency with the wider population.

So no I don't think the American population clamoured for war in Iraq, indeed there is a isolationist streak within it neatly articulated by Ron Paul with this ad;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxyYjNIVsT4

I do however feel they are a more compliant populous when their government wishes to lead them into war purely because of their strong patriotism, which is seemingly at odds with their purported ethic of freedom and individualism.

Ultimately though davidf the fact the American government spends over 4 times as much as any other nation on resources with which to engage in war can only lend support to the notion that American exceptional-ism includes a greater willingness to use those resources than any other developed nation.

Dear SteeleRedux,

You wrote: In my judgement there is a taste for war, for the grand, for the glory, in nearly every leader. In a democracy it is the people who check that propensity.

I agree with your first sentence. I disagree with your second sentence. Although I was one of the many who marched against the Iraq War I think we who opposed the war were in a minority. I think a lust for war goes along with democracy.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=9631 points to my essay titled "Popular democratic governments are a danger to the world".

However, the amount of money spent on preparation for war and actual war does not, to my mind, indicate a propensity for war. It indicates the fact that the US economy is a war economy. If the army were demobilised and all military contracts were cancelled the immediate rsult would be depression with a great increase in employment. The US is by far the biggest arms supplier in the world. The money the Middle East drains from the US in return for fossil fuels comes back for military equipment. I feel Obama desires peace than any recent president. However, it would be politically impossible to switch to a peace economy.