Quo Vadis, Aida-Misunderstood pacifism
world wars have completely changed the attitude of mankind towards war. Before World War I, although there were many big battles and small battles, in the west, the attitude towards war from top to bottom was far more positive than today. Young people are encouraged to take part in the war, put on beautiful military uniforms, and are welcomed by the people. There are also girls' kisses and flowers. If they can make contributions in the battlefield, they will prosper. This over glorified vision of war continued into the first World War.
The first World War is the first national war. War is no longer a work with clear division of labor. The boundary between professional soldiers and ordinary people has become blurred. The scope of direct participants in the war has expanded, and more and more civilians realize that the war is not as exciting as the propaganda of conscription and the boasting of taverns. People have experienced for themselves that war is the absence of arms and legs, the separation of flesh and blood, the soaring prices and famine, the endless white lice and infectious diseases, the stench of dead bodies buried too late, and the constant fear day and night.
It's better to be a peace dog than to leave others in disorder. After the two world wars, the war weariness and anti war sentiment has been rising all the way. The most capable Americans in modern times also called "make love not war" in the Vietnam War era. The people said that there would be no war, no war at all.
Under the nuclear threat, the war, which has always been a shadow of human history, has finally ceased on a large scale. Literary and artistic works from all over the world, the public opinion every year takes the trouble to punch in the seal. Love & peace is absolutely political right.
In the background of "what happened to ADA", the war broke out in such a big environment. When I was young in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, I always mentioned Milosevic and Karadzic in the news. It's hard to remember them. The war on the other side of Eurasia is too far away from us. Many details about the cruelty of the war are slowly revealed after entering the new century.
Although the Srebrenica massacre is sensational, in the 1990s, just a year later, the number of genocide in Rwanda, Africa, was even more alarming. The Rwanda massacre, which is very close to the Srebrenica massacre in time, makes the former look inferior. However, the massacre is not just a number for the victims and their families, and the sufferings suffered by the parties are never comparable.
There is a very famous film about the massacre in Rwanda, Hotel Rwanda. When I watch "what's wrong with IDA", I think of "Hotel Rwanda" several times, not only because both depict the massacre of civilians. Instead, both films highlight the inaction of UN peacekeeping forces.
First of all, I would like to explain to the UN that the UN has never been a real authority, and at best it can only be regarded as a loose organization for peace keeping. There is an essential difference between an organization and an alliance. NATO is an alliance, but UN is not. UN peacekeeping is more humanitarian. It is never UN's duty to fight against local armed forces when the unjust leader! However, it seems that many people in the world believe wrongly that if there is UN, there will be someone to tell the truth, and there will always be big powers to do justice for themselves. The question is, why does UN have to tell you?
It sounds cruel, but this is a basic truth. Responsibility and obligation are a pair of exterior and interior. If there is no obligation, there will be no responsibility. And morality is never a responsibility. The main sources of funding for UN are large countries with long-term peace and no war. For small countries with poverty and war, UN is more like a charitable organization.
Of course, some people will say that the ethnic problems in Rwanda and the division of the Balkans are all problems left over by history, and those who have done evil should be held responsible. But what should we do when the colonial forces withdraw and ethnic divisions have taken shape? The wheel of the world rolling forward does not stop for those who are morally dominant.
When ADA stretched out her arms and tried to block her husband and son in the small room behind her and yelled at the UN peacekeeping forces who didn't want to help them, I just felt pitiful. This is the sadness of trusting her life to others. Peacekeeping forces come from other peaceful countries, and blue helmets have their own lives in their respective countries. The soldier driving for the colonel in the film once said that his wife was about to give birth, and his family and life were all in Holland. Why should these foreign soldiers who eat and use their own people's taxes risk their lives for the sake of some strangers they have never met? In war-torn areas, it is common for peacekeepers to find it difficult to protect themselves.
Those who have seen the Hotel Rwanda should have the impression that one turning point in the deterioration of the massacre is the withdrawal of Belgian troops. And the reason the Belgians withdrew was because their own soldiers were killed. The Tutsi and the mu in Srebrenica face the same problem - no one is willing to protect them.
In the BIH war, the Mu people, who had the largest proportion of population, had the smallest proportion of land, had no decent army, and lacked the ability of self-defense. For fear of being killed by an acquaintance of the Serbs, ADA destroyed the photos of her family and her husband's notebook. Don't the people of Mu nationality, who were driven into the auditorium and shot by the collective, love peace? None of the three representatives of the citizens who went to negotiate with the Serbs participated in the political party. The principal only wanted to teach and the businessmen only wanted to do business. Is this not peaceful enough? But they did not escape the fate of being killed by the war.
What caused the death of these peacemakers? The answer, of course, is that a lot of people don't want to get involved in war, but one of the reasons is that we don't want to get involved in war.
After the first World War, the public's weariness of war was high, so when Nazi Germany tore up the German Polish non aggression treaty, although Britain and France had a security agreement with Poland, they still pretended to sleep all the way. Who wants to fight? Are you a war maniac? Of course, we all know the later story.
When there is no war, everyone is "no one loves peace more than us". Obedient Jews lined up to take a bath. It wasn't until the Allies broke into the camp that they found out, boy. And this? But even now, sober minded Westerners understand that the fundamental reason why the Allies attacked the Nazis was not to liberate the Jews. Even if the literary and art circles did not take the trouble to write about the concentration camp, it would not change a grim reality. Saving the Jews was only a hidden branch task accomplished by the allies by the way.
After World War II, the Jews who suffered a lot finally realized that no matter how much money they made, there was no armed protection. That was to help the next perpetrator make money. They learned from the experience and built a country of their own. Since then, there has been a country in the world with a reputation, a high degree of hatred, no political correctness, but no one dares to provoke Israel. Maybe the reality is like a Jew. If you are a Jew in the German bathroom, money may not buy peace. The love and peace that you are willing to compromise will only become beautiful flowers to decorate the grave.
In recent years, I have often seen Europeans ridicule the United States. When they hear about oil, they beat the blood of chickens, and use taxpayers' money to send their own soldiers to foreign countries to bully the people of other countries. This mockery of the United States has become a political right all over the world. We can see the world pattern without prejudice. The influence of peace loving Europeans on the world is decreasing year by year. One vacuum after another has emerged in the areas where the old forces have withdrawn. The Rwanda massacre and the Bosnian war are all disasters caused by this vacuum. Why can the Serbs hang up the more populous mu? Because there is Yugoslavia behind the Serbs, and the other two have nothing but UN's empty promises. For example, at the beginning of the film, we can't wait for air strikes.
After watching the film, I can't help thinking, if ADA's children really escape into the forest to fight guerrillas, will their survival rate be much higher than that in the refugee camp? The UN peacekeeping forces with guns and guns gave the refugees unrealistic fantasy, but let the people who had a chance to escape hand over their lives. It may be too cold and wise to say that, but there is a truth here that can't be broken - you can't help giving your life to an outsider.
After the explosion in Damascus, when makron went to Syria, he was held by the masses and sued. Syrians cried that they were fed up with the corrupt and incompetent authorities and begged the French to come back to take over. On the surface, Ma Kelong was very moved, but on the inside, he was very calculating. The era of traditional colonization has passed. It's not stupid to learn from Americans to act as an agent. When the garrison loses money, they have to be scolded by the public. It's not right to be a chivalrous dog. Why should the French maintain the stability of Syria?
As a matter of fact, more and more traditional powers have realized this, and no one wants to be thankless. Good days, however, have to be chased by their own white left media stabbed spine scold, owe not owe ah?
Why don't you love peace?
In such a peace loving environment, it is conceivable what will happen to people living in war-torn areas. People hate large-scale humanitarian disasters, but no one is willing to deal with them. It's as if in China, where there are old people who fall to the ground, there is a vacuum around them, and they dare not help them without mines. You can help me out of trouble. The judge wants to ask you, what do you support when you don't bump into it? How can you answer?
The victims of massacres are often unarmed civilians. There are thousands of reasons for massacres, but in the final analysis, there is only one. Who makes you so easy to kill. When the UN officer wanted to drive IDA's family away, he yelled at her, "do you want to put other people's lives in danger?". No matter how noble the moral sentiment is, the outsider is always the outsider. No outsider will die for you when he is full.
Money and compromise do not protect Jews, but Israel's advanced weapons can.
Our world is in an unprecedented long-term peace, which is maintained not by beautiful literary works, but by nuclear weapons. The foundation of peace building is not absolute non war, but the ability to fight without war. The unilateral initiative to lay down arms advocated by idealists will not bring peace, but may bring disaster. Pacifism is a threat to peace.