[An audio version of this article can be played below.]
How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth! - Isaiah 52:7
Almost all wars are the result of personal enmity. Esau and Jacob. Nephi vs. Laman and Lemuel. Add an “ite” to the end of a name, and it turns a family feud into a national one. Tragically, others are recruited to choose sides in personal fights—to make the injured parties pride their battle as well.
In the latter part of the Book of Alma, the reluctant Laminates get conned by Amalickiah to fight against the Nephites. Dispensing with the unimaginative Laminate methods in the past that resulted in failure, Amalickiah comes up with what he thinks is the perfect man-made strategy— Apostate Zoramites with former knowledge of the Nephite defenses will lead the Lamanite forces to attack the weakest positions. Furthermore, he copies Moroni’s use of body armor. He assumes like Zerahemnah, a Laminate general previously beaten by Moroni, that military technology, i.e., breastplates and shields, and not divine assistance, is the formula for success. (Alma 44:9)
Imagine the Zoramite captains surprise when they came up against Moroni’s newly established fortifications:
Now at this time the chief captains of the Lamanites were astonished exceedingly, because of the wisdom of the Nephites in preparing their places of security. Now the leaders of the Lamanites had supposed, because of the greatness of their numbers, yea, they supposed that they should be privileged to come upon them as they had hitherto done; yea, and they had also prepared themselves with shields, and with breastplates; and they had also prepared themselves with garments of skins, yea, very thick garments to cover their nakedness. And being thus prepared they supposed that they should easily overpower and subject their brethren to the yoke of bondage, or slay and massacre them according to their pleasure. But behold, to their uttermost astonishment, they were prepared for them, in a manner which never had been known among the children of Lehi. Now they were prepared for the Lamanites, to battle after the manner of the instructions of Moroni. And it came to pass that the Lamanites, or the Amalickiahites, were exceedingly astonished at their manner of preparation for war.
I wish our erstwhile leaders would be as astonished at our lack of success in Afghanistan. Perhaps they would reconsider their strategy and foreign policy. Amalickiah‘s reaction to his army’s failure to defeat Moroni is less than accommodating:
And it came to pass that he was exceedingly angry with his people, because he had not obtained his desire over the Nephites; he had not subjected them to the yoke of bondage. Yea, he was exceedingly wroth, and he did acurse God, and also Moroni, swearing with an oath that he would drink his blood; and this because Moroni had kept the commandments of God in preparing for the safety of his people. And it came to pass, that on the other hand, the people of Nephi did thank the Lord their God, because of his matchless power in delivering them from the hands of their enemies. And thus ended the nineteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. Yea, and there was continual peace among them, and exceedingly great prosperity in the church because of their heed and diligence which they gave unto the word of God, which was declared unto them by Helaman, and Shiblon, and Corianton, and Ammon and his brethren, yea, and by all those who had been ordained by the holy order of God, being baptized unto repentance, and sent forth to preach among the people. (Alma 49: 5–9, 26–30)
Like a spoiled child, Amalickiah learns nothing from this experience, and blames others for his failure. His pride wounded, he continues to pit his wrathful will against an obedient people supported by an Omnipotent God, in order to conquer them for his own selfish purposes. He also seeks revenge on Moroni, and desires to drink his blood—no matter how many Laminites or Nephites must bleed and die to accomplish his petulant desire.
Sadly, the stress of war affects even the good guys’ better judgment. The Nephite general Teancum is a tragic example. A tough hombre that ever hefted a sword, his elite troops were the scourge of Laminates and King-men alike. Often at night Teancum would go into Ninja commando mode, and infiltrate an enemy camp to assassinate their leader. Amalickiah was the first to meet his end at the point of Teancum’s sharp javelin. But the law of averages caught up with Teancum, when in a fit of anger he went to take out Ammoron. He succeeded, but Ammoron raised the alarm before he died, and Teancum is cornered and killed.
Now it came to pass that when Lehi and Moroni knew that Teancum was dead they were exceedingly sorrowful; for behold, he had been a man who had fought valiantly for his country, yea, a true friend to liberty; and he had suffered very many exceedingly sore afflictions. But behold, he was dead, and had gone the way of all the earth. (Alma 62:37)
I sense in the last line in this eulogy the sad disappointment of Moroni and Lehi that their brother-in-arms let his anger get the best of him, and threw his life away for personal revenge. No doubt Ammoron’s death did affect the Laminates morale, but the absence of Teancum’s leadership at the final battle was as great, if not greater, than the loss for the Nephite army.
Collective wars subsume the individual for the sake of defeating a chosen personality—as if the fate of democracy, freedom, and Mom’s apple pie all depend upon terminating with extreme prejudice that one bad guy. This is the inverse of Connor Boyack’s theme in his spot-on essay, Presidential Idolatry. In peace, individual leaders are credited for the prosperity of the nation—Five Year plans, Great Leap Forward, The New Deal, The Great Society, ad nauseum. In war, a leader’s persona is stamped upon his soldiers and civilians, making them whipping-boy proxies to suffer the physical consequences of his political decisions. War propaganda symbolizes the enemy in the public mind as a singular entity to defeat, such as the customized playing cards designed with “wanted” photos of Saddam Hussein and his lackeys for the second Gulf War. Just collect all 52, and the world will be safe from terrorism!
Ironically, while the names of leaders are touted in the media and everyday conversation, the common soldiers on both sides are collectively referred to as Grunts, Huns, Nips, Gooks, Ragheads, Yellow Yankee Dogs, or Hajji. I think the worse designation is “The Unknown Soldier”. Millions of soldiers—individual human beings—are made eternally anonymous by death by a collective war, while the names of vain tyrants are recorded in the history books. That’s why egotists like Hitler fight to the bloody end, because there is no such thing as bad publicity, only being forgotten.
Turning a collective war into a personal vendetta results in a “Kill them all, let God sort them out” strategy that plows through innocent bystanders on both sides in a single-minded pursuit of the enemy. Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Pakistan are examples of ransacking one’s neighbor’s homes while pursuing a criminal. When the news media trumpeted the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaida in 2006, one would have thought the war on terror was a WWF event, and our side scored a major smackdown. Never mind one of al-Zarqawi’s lesser-known lieutenants merely took his place, and here we are, still in Iraq. For every enemy leader the noble Teancum took out, another took his place, and in turn sought personal “payback”.
Ether’s account of the final pathetic battles between Coriantumr and Shiz and their dwindling troops illustrates the sick mentality “There can only be one” in war. Compared with the ideals proclaimed with Moroni’s title of liberty, it should be clear what constitutes a just war, and what does not. Sadly, nations often choose Shiz’s philosophy, usually disguised under the sacred name of “honor”.
You can kill people, but you cannot kill an idea—- except by conversion through human or divine persuasion. Re-read Alma 39:40—The Nephites understood that this was the true method to lasting peace. The message of the Savior, Joseph Smith, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and others continue to live on after their murderous removal by their enemies. The Book of Mormon was preserved for our day to restore the Gospel and warn us against the personal vanity and grudges that destroyed an entire nation by genocidal war. Wars may start over ideology, but always turn personal, leaving a legacy of emotional tinder that will ignite the next one.
Great article. Except I would have left the Marxists Gandhi and Martin Luther King out of it.
Was Gandhi a marxist (private) or a Marxist (public)? Of course, Marxism requires violence, something I understand Ghandi to oppose. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Yes, great article, even if a couple of the examples had questionable ideologies, the point remains.
Skyler, Marxism requires a dialectic. A Thesis, Antithesis, and synthesis. And of course there are different variations of Marxism. Gandhi developed his own brand of Marxism, known today as Gandhian socialism. Nester Webster, in her book, “Surrender of an Empire,” chronicles Moscow’s financing of Gandhi’s activities.
Steven,
I think its small-minded to dismiss the contributions of MLK and Gandhi, because of their Marxist leanings. India’s caste system, among other cultural traditions, would ensure it would never become another communist USSR or Red China, especially with the mild brand of Marxism that Gandhi espoused. Would you have preferred a bloody rebellion for India’s independence, like we did in 1776? In either case, it was all about self-determination.
The alternatives for waiting for the leader with the correct ideology to combat the social injustices in America is the having the Black Panthers and Malcolm “By any means necessary” X gain the ascendancy as the only option available. Notwithstanding MLK socialist leanings—and he had his criticisms of the Soviets system—-his peaceful movement prevented a violent uprising in this country. He provided a much better method, don’t you think?
One can look among the founding Fathers, and find plenty of personal political beliefs (Hamilton central government and national banking) and practices (Jefferson owning slaves) that are not kosher with the principles espoused by the Constitution. Shall we damn them as well, even though they as imperfect men freed us from Britain?
I think the Lord inspired MLK and Gandhi for a good purpose. Whatever imperfections or incorrect ideology they had, they were superior to the western nations that stood idly by and did nothing to correct these injustices, except wring their hands and vaguely promise some day to do something.
This just in:
Targeted Killing Is New U.S. Focus in Afghanistan
WASHINGTON — When President Obama announced his new war plan for Afghanistan last year, the centerpiece of the strategy — and a big part of the rationale for sending 30,000 additional troops — was to safeguard the Afghan people, provide them with a competent government and win their allegiance.
Eight months later, that counterinsurgency strategy has shown little success, as demonstrated by the flagging military and civilian operations in Marja and Kandahar and the spread of Taliban influence in other areas of the country.
Instead, what has turned out to work well is an approach American officials have talked much less about: counterterrorism, military-speak for the targeted killings of insurgents from Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Faced with that reality, and the pressure of a self-imposed deadline to begin withdrawing troops by July 2011, the Obama administration is starting to count more heavily on the strategy of hunting down insurgents. The shift could change the nature of the war and potentially, in the view of some officials, hasten a political settlement with the Taliban.
Based on the American military experience in Iraq as well as Afghanistan, it is not clear that killing enemy fighters is sufficient by itself to cripple an insurgency. Still, commando raids over the last five months have taken more than 130 significant insurgents out of action, while interrogations of captured fighters have led to a fuller picture of the enemy, according to administration officials and diplomats.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/world/asia/01afghan.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print
Funny. Even the Lord himself knows not to pluck the tares from the wheat, lest he destroys both. But government obviously thinks it can do so.
“Funny. Even the Lord himself knows not to pluck the tares from the wheat, lest he destroys both. But government obviously thinks it can do so.”
Love the analogy!