Of War and Peace, Here and There

Maureen Dowd writes about a controversy concerning Fort Stevens, a Washington, D. C., site where Lincoln stood, at some peril, to watch a Civil War battle. A local church wants to build a community center next door, but the Civil War Preservation Trust claims the church's building will "cast a shadow" on the historic site. A friend of mine, a frequent commenter on Times op-ed columns, wrote that not much could be said about Dowd's column, which is partially a memorial to her youth, lived near to Fort Stevens. The Constant Weader, as ever, rose to the challenge:

As the Shadow Turns

Is sanctifying yet another memorial to the Civil War really more important than helping needy people of today? Since the church's planned building only casts a shadow on Fort Stevens & does not actually encroach upon the land, how terrible is that? Lord knows Mr. Lincoln's war cast a dark shadow on the nation. Which is worse -- for a church to cast a shadow on a war memorial or a war to cast a shadow on a nation?

If Civil War monuments were established to remind people of how terrible a war among brothers is, they might be of value. Unfortunately, they are more about glorifying war. They have inspired men with too much time on their hands to get into costumes, arm themselves with paint guns & re-enact the glory days of war.

I've been to Washington, D.C. many times & have never stood at Fort Stevens to wonder at the spot where a tall, distracted President made a target of himself while checking on the progress of his disastrous war. Now that I know about Fort Stevens, I might enjoy a brief visit, another chance to shake my head at man's inability to settle disputes in rational ways. I hope when I get there the Emory Methodist Church center is up & running. I'll drop in & make a small donation in tribute to people who are doing something positive for the country.

Perhaps some of those Civil War buffs will do the same. It's time for folks to put away their uniforms & cast their lot with progress. The Civil War has been over for 145 years. It's shadow is far too long. 

British baritone Benjamin Luxon sings the original "Johnny, I Hardly Knew Ya." The song, with altered lyrics published in 1863, became "When Johnny Comes Marching Home," a rousing hit for both sides in the Civil War:

Meanwhile, Tom Friedman casts his shadow on the longest war -- the one in the Middle East. Friedman repurposes a 2002 conversation he had with then Prince, now King, Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, in which Tom & the Prince agreed on a peace plan which required the Israeli leader to come to Riyadh to "accept" a Saudi peace proposal. Friedman sees the "emotional" benefit of such a scenario.

The Constant Weader comments:

Ah, Tom has been to Riyadh to see the King. Now that Mr. Friedman & King Abdullah have come to an agreement on just how the peace process should proceed, it does seem important for the Tom Friedman Peace Initiative to go forward. And such a good idea! Any plan that requires the slightly proud Bibi Netanyahu to go hat-in-hand to Riyadh is bound to be a winner.

Since you & Abdullah have shared such pleasantries over your initiative, Mr. Friedman, why not call of Mr. Netanyahu & suggest it? You could get several more columns out of your personal negotiations with the Prime Minister. As for your proposed theatrical review in Riyadh, I don't know how "emotional" such a song & dance would be, but for overblown theatrics I'd give it high marks.

Or here's another idea. Why not let the peace process, as conceived, continue? There are already plenty of players at the table. I'm sure they'd all be happy to read any faxes King Abdullah sent their way.

There won't be much glory for Tom Friedman if the current scheme succeeds, so I suppose that makes the peace process seem a bit dull & "unemotional." But in the end, what's more important? (1) Middle East peace for the first time in the history of the world, or (2) Tom Friedman?

Friedman & I may not agree on the answer to that question.