mbarrick: (Default)
It's Remembrance Day again. In some past years I've made posts about my father's service during WWII (2001, 2003 repost, 2005 repost, 2008) and at other times I've written about some of the horrors my mother and father survived during WWII. And one year I had a few things to say about why it's important to remember war. Let me reiterate and expand on those thoughts:

This is not a day to sing the praises of war. This is a day to remember the horrors of war, honour those that endured them, and in so doing remember and learn that war is not to be entered into lightly. This is not a day to glorify war, this is a day to glorify peace. It was hoped that November 11, 1918 would be not only the end of the World War I, but the end of all war.

The creators of wars always claim one noble ideal or another as the motive, but the real cause is and has always been over resources. If there was enough space, food, and energy to go around there would be no war. Each tribe is trying to ensure its own survival. The noble words about gods and ideologies are just ways to delineate one tribe from another. It's a nice ideal to cherish diversity but when the cold creeps in or the food runs out there will always form an "us" and a "them" to fight over what's left. War ends and tolerance of diversity only happens when there is enough to go around.
These days, thanks largely to the overflow of American propaganda and neo-con sensibilities, Remembrance Day seems to have lost all this. It's not only easy to laud the virtues of war when you are the winner, it's also necessary to do so when you are the "us" and you are swinging the "big stick" at "them."

The problem is, someone is always at the short end of the stick. There is always the "them." With my white skin and English surname you'd probably assume my family was on the "us" side when it comes to the First World War. It's not the case. My father changed his name. All four of his grandparents came from a village in what is now part of Ukraine, but at the time was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. They came to Canada in the late 19th century to find freedom and fortune (and, no doubt, to get away from things like the Austro-Hungarian forced relocation of ethnic Ukrainians in Galacia.)

Ukrainian and other internees at the Castle Mountain Alberta internment camp in 1915
After Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated and the Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war on Serbia, causing Germany, the British Empire, France, the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire and the other powers of Europe to all pick sides and declare war on each-other, what it got them, as former Austro-Hungarians, was declared "enemy aliens." Unlike the Japanese internments in WWII, the Ukrainian interment of WWI is not so well known. The government destroyed most of the record of the First National Internment and it's not something my father ever talked about, so I don't know if my grandparents and great-grandparents on his side of the family were among the 6,000 interned and used as forced labour (building, for example, Banff National Park) or the 80,000 forced to register and report. Either way, even after serving Canada in WWII, it's no surprise my father chose to change his name to something English after the war and moved away from the Prairies when the Soviet Union (containing what at that point was the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) became the "bad guy." Being ethnically Ukrainian could have easily once again have meant having ones freedom severely restricted or even getting shipped off to a labour camp.

Then there is my mother's side of the family. She's from Belgium. Belgium was neutral at the start of WWII. They were first, technically, invaded by Allied forces. Then the Germans also invaded to fight the invading Allies, at which point Belgium sided with the Allied forces but was overpowered by the Germans. My mother was ten years old when Nazis overran the country. Her family endured hardships. My namesake uncle René fled on bicycle to Free France to avoid Nazi conscription. Her father fought in the resistance and saw comrades sent to concentration camps. Many of my mother's friends were killed by v-bombs. All for the unfortunate circumstance of being in a country that did not want to fight, but was unfortunately caught between the countries at war.

And this, of course, was the same boat Belgium was in during the First World War. Belgium was neutral then as well, but ended up being Germany's path to France. Belgium was occupied. Food supplies were seized for the German army and the civilian population starved. Thousands fled to refugee camps in the Netherlands. My mother's mother was 10 when that war started.

After history repeating itself like this there is little wonder that my mother left Belgium at the first opportunity once the war was over?

Even those that stayed, like my great-uncle Floran (who lived through both wars) never really trusted there wouldn't be another. Even though his position as the mayor-for-life in the small town where he lived afforded him a car and driver as a perk of the office, he kept and maintained a car of his own until he was too old to drive it just in case he should have to flee another war.

I am here because the (mis)fortunes of war drove my parents to this "safe" place.

And my wife's history isn't much different. Like me she is half Ukrainian, and the other half is Scottish. Ukrainian I have already covered. Need I go on about Scottish fortunes at the hands of the English for the last thousand years or so?

So even though my father was a soldier, even though I once upon a time volunteered and said my oath to the queen, even though I carry a Legion membership in my wallet, I remember this on Remembrance Day: while a soldier can be noble, armies are the blunt instrument of the state, and they are often used to roll over and cast aside innocents that happen to be in the way of or undesirable to the state; war makes the rich richer and the poor dead; above all war is to be reviled and avoided.
mbarrick: (Default)

Most Vancouverites are aware of the two "bunkers" at Tower Beach and the "Siwash Bunker" in Stanley Park. The Siwash bunker is a WW I relic, originally housing a 4" gun, and as such can be properly referred to as a "bunker." The towers at Tower Beach, however, built for WW II, never were gun emplacements and were never manned, and as such are not really "bunkers" at all. More on that after the cut.


A walk along Tower Beach and what is left of the Point Grey Battery )
mbarrick: (Default)

For most people I know my age and younger it is their grandparents or even great-grandparents that were involved in WWII. Unlike today it was very unusual around the time of my birth for people in their late 30's or early 40's to be having children but that's precisely what my parents did. For that reason I'm only one generation removed from what is still referred to at "the war." It's not the distant past for me. It's my parents. My father fought in North Africa in Italy. My mother lived in Belgium during the German occupation.

Below are some tattered old ribbons from another century that I keep in my father's old jewelry box. The medals they represent are long gone, the corresponding images are from the Ministry of Veterans Affairs website:


The 1939-45 Star
Awarded for a minimum of six months active service in the army in Europe


Defence Medal
Awarded for a minimum of six months overseas service in an area under enemy threat


War Medal (1939-1945)
Awarded for full-time service during WWII

mbarrick: (Default)

The "War to End All Wars" passed out of living memory last year. This Remembrance Day is the first one since the inception of the holiday where there is no one left alive that directly remembers fighting in World War I. It's more important than ever to remember now: remember what the holiday was created for.

This is not a day to sing the praises of war. This is a day to remember the horrors of war, honour those that endured them, and in so doing remember and learn that war is not to be entered into lightly. This is not a day to glorify war, this is a day to glorify peace. It was hoped that November 11, 1918 would be not only the end of the World War I, but the end of all war.

The creators of wars always claim one noble ideal or another as the motive, but the real cause is and has always been over resources. If there was enough space, food, and energy to go around there would be no war. Each tribe is trying to ensure its own survival. The noble words about gods and ideologies are just ways to delineate one tribe from another. It's a nice ideal to cherish diversity but when the cold creeps in or the food runs out there will always form an "us" and a "them" to fight over what's left. War ends and tolerance of diversity only happens when there is enough to go around.
mbarrick: (Default)

My mother sent me an e-mail of stories and pictures from a website detailing the V-bomb attacks on Antwerp late in World War II.

Imagine this: you are a fourteen year-old girl. It's a couple weeks before Christmas and all your friends want to go to town to see the new movie. They want you to come too. You say you can't afford it and want to save the money for Christmas. They plead with you and try to get you to come along and won't take "no" for an answer. You have a hard time convincing them (and yourself) that you don't want to come, but eventually they give up trying to drag you along and go without you.

The cinema gets hit by a bomb and all your friends die.


That's one of my mother's stories. This is the cinema:

The Rex Cinema, Antwerp, Belgium. December 1944.


The article my mom sent me today )
mbarrick: (Default)
By now you have probably seen the Bush Arrested for War Crimes hoax page. The world-cnn.com page is registered to one "Phineas Liu" of New York - who doesn't exist. The fictional Dr. Phineas Liu has a weblog as part of the "RYU Hospital: Dwayne Medical Center" website. The Dwayne Medical Center, "synonymous with the world's most innovative and extraordinary healthcare," features "All the Miracles of Modern Medicine™" including genetically customized babies, male pregnancy, and a mouse as smart as  human (Mr. Frisby? Brain?), and is actually a work of "web art" belonging to Virgil Wong.

Now, even more interesting after all those layers of deception, is the fact that the fake CNN site is, in fact based on truth. Lawyers Against the War, based right here in Vancouver, actually filed torture charges against George W. Bush under Canadian Criminal Code exactly as mentioned Virgil Wong's art in B.C. Provincial Court on the 30th of November. The charges were accepted by a Justice of the Peace and the court date will be set on Monday the 6th for a hearing to determine if a warrant of summons will be issued. The Attorney General of Canada has to determine if the proceedings will continue and the question of whether Bush's diplomatic immunity will apply has to be determined. This is real and you can read the press releases and the detail of the case via the link above.

And now back to Virgil Wong... I did a great deal of digging and checking of references from his artist's résumé before becoming convinced that he is a real person. Kind of a weird way to spend the evening, but it got my mind completely off work, which is a good thing.
mbarrick: (Default)
I downloaded some of stats from the CIA Factbook and did some number crunching: at roughly 32 million people, Canada is only 36th most populous country on Earth. Other countries with equivalent populations are Algeria, Morocco, and Sudan. Canada, however is 19th in the world for military spending ($7.9 billion USD), placing us in the neighbourhood of Israel ($9 billion), Spain ($8.6 billion), Turkey ($8.1 billion), Taiwan ($8 billion), the Netherlands ($6.5 billion), and North Korea ($5.1 billion)- and just over six times the military budget of Iraq ($1.3 billion).

While sipping on your cup of shut-the-fuck-up, you can stick this in your pipe and smoke it.
mbarrick: (Default)
In this article (Sorry, but you may need to register to view the whole article) reported Clifford Krauss notes:
Two days before the first day of allied bombing in Iraq, Mr. Chrétien finally defined Canadian policy by saying no Canadian troops would fight in the war. Still, more than 50 Canadian air and ship technicians and liaison officers are stationed at the allied headquarters in Qatar and at sea with American Navy ships. A Canadian destroyer and two frigates are also patrolling in the Persian Gulf, available, Canadian military officials say, in an emergency.

It is a quiet effort, but more significant than those of most of the nations explicitly backing the war. Meanwhile, the Canadian Army will send 2,000 troops back to Afghanistan later this year, freeing American forces for operations in the Persian Gulf.
Further going to show that all the "disappointment" at Canada's lack of support is really only about the fact that we failed to condone unilateral agressive action. Why should our sanction even matter to the U.S.? I don't hear a lot one way or the other about Mexico not being on board (incidentally Mexico has three times the population of Canada). Why? Because Canada has an earned reputation for even-handed diplomacy and the resultant respect of a great many nations. What we say matters to the rest of the world.

And just how much more are we doing than the countries that have expressed support? Only Britain, Australia, Denmark and Albania have comitted troops to the war. And only Britain has more people there than Canada does.

The list of disclosed supporting countries is: Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Britain, Bulgaria, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Palau, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Turkey, Uganda, and Uzbekistan.

There are other countries that are undisclosed but presumed to be on the supporters list because they are providing bases including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt

Notice how Israel isn't on either list? Talk about waffling! Here we are willing to say that we don't condone this agression but all the while still supplying material support (which, if we had said nothing would have put us on the latter list), yet Israel which was bombed by Iraq in the last Gulf War won't stand up to say that anything or offer any material support.

Any what about that disclosed list? A bit padded, I'd say? Let's look at some of the padded entries:

Afghanistan: They don't even have a proper government yet. The provisional government is U.S. appointed.
Albania: Millitary expendature roughly eqivalent to the snow-removal budget of Montréal. They've offered 70 men.
Azerbaijan: their primary industry is oil and they are trying to move into the European and American markets
Columbia: The current government has been under siege for 40 years and relies heavily of US support to stay in power. The US maintains support to control the drug trade that funds the rebel groups.
Costa Rica: No standing army, 52% of GDP comes from US trade.
El Salvador: current government backed by US in order to overthrow communist rebels.
Eritrea: Separated from Ethiopia in 1991, desperately poor and still in the processes of defining how its government is going to work.
Iceland: The total population of Iceland is about 275,000 people and they don't have an army. The defense of Iceland is handled by a US-manned force.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia: Do I really need to say anything about the crushing military might and massive economic influence of this triumvirate of Baltic super-powers?
Kuwait: Well, duh.
Macedonia: Claim to fame, "At independence in November 1991, Macedonia was the least developed of the Yugoslav republics, producing a mere 5% of the total federal output of goods and services." (CIA Factbook)
Marshall Islands: OK, this one made me laugh out loud. A bunch of coral atolls. Total population 77,000. Main source of income: US aid and restitution for US atomic testing.
Micronesia: No military. Population 111,000 and I'll let the CIA Factbook speak for itself on this: "In 1979 the Federated States of Micronesia, a UN Trust Territory under US administration, adopted a constitution. In 1986 independence was attained under a Compact of Free Association with the US. Present concerns include large-scale unemployment, overfishing, and overdependence on US aid."
Nicaragua: Quothe the factbook: "Nicaraguan aid to leftist rebels in El Salvador caused the US to sponsor anti-Sandinista contra guerrillas through much of the 1980s. Free elections in 1990, 1996, and again in 2001 saw the Sandinistas defeated."
Palau: Another set of coral atoll that used to be a US trust and are totally dependent on US aid. No army. Population 11,000.
Rwanda: Home of some of the worst massacres since WWII. A military budget that about the same as Montréal's snow removal budget. Population just under the population of the island of Manhattan. Current government targeted by an Islamic rebel group.
Solomon Islands: Another highly influential bunch of South Pacific islands with no army.
Uganda: Right up there with Rwanda.
Uzbekistan: Quothe the Factbook: "the country seeks to gradually lessen its dependence on agriculture while developing its mineral and petroleum reserves. Current concerns include insurgency by Islamic militants based in Tajikistan and Afghanistan, a nonconvertible currency, and the curtailment of human rights and democratization."

So there you have it, the bulk of "The Coalition of the Willing" are either U.S. vassal states, desperately poor, have no army, or have human-rights problems that make Iraq look like paradise.

The list comes from this New York Times backgrounder. Most of the country information comes from the CIA Factbook and general knowledge.
mbarrick: (Default)
As usual we are, despite all the flack for "doing nothing" quietly doing more than expected, more than we said we would, and doing it right. The headlines on all the papers today are about how "disappointed" the American government is with us, yet the American embassador to Canada, Paul Celucci, also had these words about our naval presence in the Persian Gulf which is still there because we are still in Afghanistan:
Ironically, because of the presence in the Persian Gulf, they will provide more support for this war in Iraq indirectly than most of those 46 countries that are fully supporting us. It's kind of an odd situation.
So, to those that are "ashamed" of our "lack of involvement" - shut the fuck up. Our government did the ethically right thing by staying in line with our prinicples regarding the UN, international law, and peacekeeping. Never forget that Canada invented peacekeeping and ever since we first distinguished ourselves in the Boer War, Canadian soldiers have continued to earn and maintain the respect of friends and enemies alike. General Rommel, the German commander of the North African theatre in WWII, said that if he had Canadian soldiers with American equipment he could win the war. In the first gas attacks of WWI at Yprès, it was the Canadians alone that held the line while everyone else ran and died. Canada was in WWII two years ahead of America and it was the Canadians (including my father) who spearheaded the invasion of Italy in WWII and cleared the way for the Brits and Americans. It was Canadians (again including my father) that landed at Dieppe and prooved that the invasion of Normandy, while difficult, was not impossible. Our peacekeepers were in Korea and, despite the reputation garnered from American draft-dodging, our volunteer millitary was in Vietnam. And in the first Gulf War it was Canadian fighter jets that were sent in first, specifically to be shot at, so the Americans could come in with relative safety to take out the anti-aircraft guns.

Be proud of Canada. Be proud that we have the guts and moral fortitude to finish wars and ethics enough not to start them.
mbarrick: (Default)
Bombs Away
Bombs Away
© 1992 Michael R. Barrick

I slapped this together to stick up on a bulletin board in the SFU fine arts studio when the Gulf War broke out. I rediscovered it while digging through an old portfolio for some old drawings I wanted to show somebody.
mbarrick: (Default)
I am supremely choked this morning. Probably every Canadian has seen this in news already, but I doubt this is going to show up much in the American media. One of your fuck-head, ill-trained, trigger-happy soldiers dropped a bomb on us, killing four and seriously injuring eight others. This happened in a training area, not a combat zone. Let's take a look at how we've been treated by the U.S. government over the last few months:
  • First the U.S., taxes the living shit out of our wood simply because we produce it more efficiently, all the while paying lipservice to "Free Trade"
  • Then, after 9-11, Bush completely fails to mention us in his speech despite the fact that we took in all the grounded planes after the airports were shut down and we lost people in the WTC as well, nonetheless we send troops to Afghanistan to help out.
  • Meanwhile, we continue to get shit on over the lumber tariff, and
  • we get threatened with wheat tariffs.
  • The U.S. wrongfully arrests and convicts one of our citizens simply for legally doing business with Cuba (in what is probably some twisted political manoever to try and win the next election in Florida without cheating)
  • Bush just assumes we'll play ball with his energy plans,
  • and he tries to further walk all over our sovereignty (at least we said "fuck off" to this one)
  • and then, we get a fucking bomb dropped on our soldiers!
What does the American millitary have to say about this? How about this:
"We are in a very, very dangerous business," Maj. Bryan Hilferty, a U.S. military spokesman, told reporters at Bagram Air Base north of Kabul. "We play with stuff that kills people."
Play? Play?! That's the bloody problem, American soldiers are, generally speaking, badly trained, given a whole crapload of technology, and they think they are playing a damn video game. An incident like this happened in the Gulf War as well, but to the British. Two thirds of British casualties in ground operations in the gulf were caused by Americans. Most American casualties are caused by Americans.

And the Americans wonder why the rest of the world either hates them or sees them as a fucking unfunny joke.
mbarrick: (Default)
OK, we took all your planes on September 11th, we have troops in Afghanistan, we even lost some of our own people in the WTC and this is what we get for helping. Bad enough that your dumbass president forgot to mention us in his speech on September 19th, but now, after all our help we're just getting fucked over. We should cut off all the electricity we export. See how things change when L.A. and NYC go black...
"Our forest dependent communities and forest dependent families are under attack by a hostile foreign power," said De Jong, who was at the negotiation table when talks failed. "It made everyone in that room in Washington sick to their stomachs to watch that unfold."

He suggested that American negotiators may have misplaced Canadian compassion and generosity after the September 11 terrorist attacks in Washington and New York.
-- BC Forestry Minister Mike De Jong (CBC)

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Page generated Jan. 26th, 2026 08:20 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios