The last time a mainstream presidential candidate really talked about ending a war was the duplicitous Richard Nixon, who sabotaged Lyndon Johnson’s almost-done-deal peace treaty to end the Vietnam War in order to keep Hubert Humphrey from winning the 1968 election. During that campaign, Nixon claimed to have a secret plan to end the war. No such plan, secret or otherwise, existed, and the war dragged on another five years. (In a final irony, Henry Kissinger, who had masterminded Nixon’s treachery, won the Nobel Peace Prize.)

“Collateral damage.” On October 3, 2015, the US bombed this Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, killing at least 22 civilians. (Médecins Sans Frontières/Andrew Quilty)

Although this 2016 election season seems especially weird, outrageous and perversely entertaining (in the way I suppose people used to find executions great sport), from the point of view of this old seventies Nuclear Freeze peacenik, it feels very much like business as usual. To wit, no mainstream candidate seems to be particularly bothered by our perpetual (since 1991) at-war status. We’re currently warring in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Libya, not to mention having military bases in three-quarters of the world’s 206 UN-recognized sovereign states. 

By “mainstream” candidates, I mean of course those of the two dominant parties: Trump, Cruz and Kasich on one side; Clinton and Sanders on the other. Correct me if I’m wrong (I know you will), but none have made any meaningful promises to get us the hell out of our foreign entanglements. For that, you have to head over to Jill Stein’s Green Party.

To be specific about Bernie Sanders — because I hear much about his peace credentials — true, he annoyed the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) by questioning Israel’s iron-fisted approach to the desperate plight of four million Palestinians in Gaza and the remnants of the West Bank. (The other four candidates seem to believe “Bibi” Netanyahu can walk on the water of the Sea of Galilee.) However, Sanders’ actual voting record is almost as hawkish as that of the other candidates. “I am not a pacifist,” he said at the first Democratic debate last October. “I supported the war in Afghanistan. I supported President Clinton’s effort to deal with ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. I support airstrikes in Syria…” And despite railing against defense contractors, he continues to support Lockheed Martin’s $1.5 trillion boondoggle, the F-35. 

U.S. Navy variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the plane that, according to a RAND analysis, “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run.” (Public domain)

Realistically, I don’t expect, in my lifetime, a pacifist for President. What I do hope for — is it too late this go-around? — is a pragmatic national leader who recognizes that some fights just aren’t worth it and our military participation can too easily exacerbate an already fraught situation. Someone who understands that:

  • we should be very sure of our interests before inserting ourselves into overseas conflicts. For instance, we never had a compelling interest in who governed Vietnam south of the 17th Parallel (the whole “Communist Domino” theory was dreamed up by hawkish policy wonks, and Communist China invaded Vietnam six years after our ignominious exit);
  • Middle East oil isn’t worth the chaos and bloodshed our addiction to the stuff has caused in the region, starting in 1953 when the CIA incited the overthrow of Iran’s democratically-elected reform government;
  • our active support of Saddam Hussein in the 1980s brought us three more Gulf Wars;
  • our current interference in Syria is unlikely to bring a faster conclusion to that country’s civil war, if history is any guide;
  • supporting Israel to the tune of $8 million daily (one-fifth of our entire foreign aid budget) is tacitly endorsing apartheid in that troubled part of the world;
  • our unofficial role as the world’s policeman is far too easily abused.

 Over a million Vietnamese (civilian and military) died in the Vietnam War. Ten thousand are buried here in the huge Truong Son cemetery, near the 17th Parallel which once divided North and South Vietnam. (Barry Evans)

With our current intermeshed global problems, the world needs peace like never before. Instead of calling for building walls (Trump), bombing ISIS “until the sand glows in the dark” (Cruz), “intercepting the ships that are leaving North Korea,” (Kasich), threatening Iran (Clinton), increasing our NATO troop levels (Sanders), can we not at least discuss the possibility of sitting down with our adversaries and turning a few of those damn swords into plowshares?

All we are saying is