According to Title 4, Section 7 of the U.S. Code, flags in the United States are only supposed to fly at half-mast under certain circumstances. For that reason, when I pulled into the parking lot this morning at work and noticed that the flags were flying at half-mast I naturally wondered what the occasion was.
As I browsed through my most trusted news sources, I didn’t find any mention of fallen presidents or other principal figures of the United States Government (I guess Cheney is still hanging on), but I did come across a couple of references that reminded me that today, December 7, is Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. Further research informed me that the President had issued a proclamation stating that flags should be flown at half-staff in commemoration of that day today.
As I read the President’s proclamation, my feelings were mixed. My opinion about our head of state is less than generous and as a result, most of the time I regard any word that comes from his mouth with hostility. Nevertheless, though my grandfather was not at Pearl Harbor on that fateful day, he did fight in the Second World War and so naturally on this day my thoughts drifted to him.
During the War Grandpa was a medic stationed in France and even though he lost one of his brothers to the fighting, he never spoke (to me at least) of the War with regret. He believed the things he fought for were just and that after the War was over the world was a safer place in which to live.
But even as I remember my grandfather, the men and women who died in the attack on Pearl Harbor, and all the other men and women who served our country following it, I can’t help but wonder how one determines the morality of a war.
If one believes that involvement in a certain war is “right,” how did he or she reach that conclusion and does that mean he or she is required to believe that involvement in other wars is right as well? Is it right to support (or not) a war based upon personal politics? Is it hypocritical to change one’s opinion about a war based on the fact that things do not develop as planned? Is it acceptable to enter a war based on retaliation or self-defense only to use it as an excuse to attack others? Do the ends justify the means?
I do not have answers to these rhetorical questions today and I may never have them, but one thing I know for sure is that if it weren’t for the actions that came as a result of the attack on Pearl Harbor I might not have the luxury today to even consider them.
Laughing Muse says:
All I know is that we seem to be doing a less-than-stupendous job taking care of those who volunteer/are sent off to fight for our country.
Okay. Dude. Someone has the selflessness to give up time with their family, put their own life on hold, possibly put their life into serious jeopardy, and we get wanky when they need hospitalization and medical care in their later years? Regardless of how our policymakers determine to use (or grossly misuse, or even abuse) the tool of the military, our society needs to recognize that we have to take better care of folks who are willing to work for the larger goal of our country’s security.
7 December 2007 at 17:47
Sweet Pea says:
Your post reminded me of something I’ve said more than once. Someday, there will be generations for whom 9/11 is a history lesson and it won’t have the same impact on them as it does on those of us who were old enough to comprehend what happened that day. For us, 9/11 is going to carry a deep, emotional meaning for the rest of our lives, and we’ll never have to look up why flags are flying at half mast on that day. It won’t be, Oh yeah, today is that day.
And it’s hard to think of it like that, but I imagine that’s how the generations who remember what happenend the day Pearl Harbor was attacked feel. 12/7 evokes the same response in them that 9/11 does in us.
7 December 2007 at 18:18
Sue says:
As the Marines say….whooo-rah! I am in 100% agreement with you and thanks for the post.
7 December 2007 at 19:21