‘Flags of Our Fathers’: Clint Eastwood scorns ‘futility of war,’ but misses what causes war and what might end it

Clint Eastwood can’t be pigeonholed as someone who opposes fighting tyranny, but in promoting his new World War II movie, “Flags of Our Fathers,” his thoughts on war and peace get lost in the Hollywood smog.

In an interview with USA Today, the film director suggests he doesn’t support the liberation of Iraq:

“I’m happy to not be of the school that thinks we should be democratizing another country that obviously doesn’t care that much about it and doesn’t seem to be suited for it,” he says.

Salutes WWII. Eastwood speaks of “the futility of war,” but he also says “Flags of Our Fathers” is not his way of saying the United States should have stayed out of World War II.

“This thing isn’t anti-war in terms of ‘We shouldn’t have done it,’” he says. “[World War II] is one of the wars we should have done, and we did the best we could with the knowledge we had at the time. Even today, we’re doing the best we can with the knowledge we have, but obviously we don’t have enough knowledge.”

Eastwood, apparently a pensive fellow, doesn’t seem to have thought much about why “we should have done” World War II, and what about winning that war made it worth the sacrifice.

Why not Iraq? In “the Good War,” Americans fought against fanatics who attacked us and against fascists who had abused their own citizens, invaded other nations and broken solemn international agreements. Is there no similarity to our battles with al-Qaida and the Baathists?

We’ll assume Eastwood supports the liberation of Afghanistan, but why not Iraq, too? In 2003, didn’t we know more about Saddam’s genocidal acts than we knew in 1941 of Hitler’s Holocaust? What does “Never again” mean?

More importantly, Eastwood should be asking what made the post-World War II peace stick. What pacified west Germany and Japan? It was the United States democratizing other countries that obviously didn’t care that much about democracy and didn’t seem to be suited for it.

Calm of democracy. With freedom, West Germany and Japan quickly became peaceful nations. Why? The openness and accountability of democracy have a de-fanging effect.

Look at 20th century history. Democracies almost never went to war with each other, and not once did a democratic government murder its own people by the hundreds of thousands or millions. That 100 years of experience is a pretty good argument for freeing the world faster.

Says Eastwood:

“World War I was there, and that was going to be the one to end all wars.  And then World War II came along and that was going to be the war to end all wars. Then, five years later, Korea. Not too many years after that, Vietnam. And all the little skirmishes, Yugoslavia, Gulf War I, Gulf War II ...

“It doesn’t speak well for mankind. It seems like it’s just inevitable that they’ll go on forever.”

What Eastwood ignores is the general trend. As more of the world is democratized, wars are less bloody and less frequent.

Futility of repression. Some believed Koreans were ill-suited to democracy, but look today at the difference between the North Korean police state and a free South Korea. Today, South Korea’s life, liberty and active creativity are the direct result of America standing firm against totalitarianism, in war and in peace.

There’s nothing good about a war except ending it with a victory in freedom’s favor. But war usually is the effect of a more basic cause – tyranny.

The aftermaths of World War II and the Korean War certainly aren’t evidence of “the futility of war.” Wars, however, are evidence of the futility of human oppression.

Frank Warner

* * *

Update: Clint Eastwood's interview Feb. 8, 2007, with Neil Cavuto revealed he has a more balanced view of the Iraq war than the earlier interview suggested. He does contend President Bush was too optimistic about expecting democracy "overnight" in places like Iraq, but he recalls that people also thought Japan could never accept democracy, and they were all wrong.

Comments

[Nicholas]

So, if Iraqis aren't interested in democracy, why did so many show up to vote?

[Frank Warner]

Good point. When in history have so many people, faced with credible death threats, stood together for democracy?

[jj mollo]

I kind of doubt that the good citizens of the US, being a disputatious and fanatically religious lot, were ever exactly "suited" to democracy. Somehow we have managed to muddle through, and every once in while things actually improve.

[jj mollo]

That being said, Clint Eastwood is someone I take seriously. It is my impression that he is a thoughtful man and capable of listening as well.

[Frank Warner]

Agreed. But I can't help but be disappointed in his throw-away line about a country that doesn't seem suited to democracy.

Which country is suited permanently to dictatorship? And who says so? The dictator?

[Christopher Taylor]

I think Mr Eastwood would listen... had he anyone talking sense to him. He's in Hollywood, the man is surrounded by the likes of Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins.