A Film About War

FRI., JAN. 26, 1990, 6:48 AM
FARM, STUDY

A powerful statement about war. Yes, o son, you did experience such a film, and therefore you must be interested in My reactions and interpretations. It was not a holy film; it was sacreligious. I was rejected, and yet, say I, I was there in the midst of all the conflicts.

I have told you many times that rarely is a war truly worthwhile. Wars do serve purposes, but rarely are these noble, all in all. In the war on which this film focused your country was not the victor, despite your powerful military. You did not lose, in the classic sense. You just quit and came home, leaving the small country to be united in the way against which you fought.

Young men were killed and wounded in the military of both sides. Many innocent villagers also were killed or maimed, and the countryside was damaged. Your country’s participation had a certain vague nobility to it – the premise of defeating godless communism, so that I, Almighty God, might be acknowledged, at least in some way. Yet the fighting of the war had little true religious quality to it. The noble goal was lost in the brutality of the battles, and the attitudes of most of the participants, as portrayed, were far from high and holy. There were spots of heroism and concern for others, but these were not dominant.

You considered that you could have had the experience of the father in the film. A son of yours could have gone to that war and could have come back as maimed and confused as the young man Ron. You wonder how you would have handled the pain, the profanity, the anger, and the violent outbursts. Yes, you did have some hard years as a parent of developing males, but you were spared such experiences. I sound callous when I say that such a time of life could have been a means of spiritual growth. It is an unwelcome truth.

The powerful, positive message of the film was that a diverse group of people, joined together can overcome a government’s desire to continue a war. When Ron came to see that the memories of killing Vietnamese villagers and even one of your own men were more powerful than any good that was done his actions turned to protest against continuation of the war. The patriotism of fighting and dying for your country or for what your country stands for was overwhelmed by the reality of what actually was happening to lives. And few people, back home, were in favor of the war… yet there was reluctance to oppose the government’s position.

You see now that there was a quiet and sometimes not so quiet, heroism in bringing a duly elected, democratic government to withdraw from a war, admitting it could not win. Patriotism is powerful, but so is conscience, and I am generally more involved in conscience.

I am not responsible for wars, and there are many conflicts that I have helped resolve without bloodshed. I have been successful in preventing the use of nuclear weapons, even as I realize that some use, despite the terrible consequences, might have speeded the destruction of such weapons. I am not impotent, but I value the principle of interfering minimally in earth life. By definition, My actions, to do or not to do, are perfect… just as they should be. So, yes, I saw more value than harm in the war you saw pictured. May it continue to be, in memory, a deterrent to your country’s desire to have the world just the way you want it.

Here’s an interesting question, the answer to which you shall know only if you do return to the earth in the future: in several hundred years will this Vietnam conflict be remembered, by other than Vietnamese and a few American’s? It was not a popular war. Will it become a forgotten war, for many of the same reasons that changed Ron’s attitude?