Marking Armistice Day- in name only

On the anniversary of the day marking the end of "the war to end all wars," I take somber pause when I open up my local newspaper only to see that there were no less than five references to ongoing wars and conflicts taking place across the world. Today's paper even included a special feature entitled, "At War: Notes from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and other areas of conflict in the post-9/11 era." Perhaps most distressingly, Blackwater is admitting to bribes and payoffs amounting to over $1million (sounds far too conservative of an estimate) to silence criticisms over the massacre of 17 innocent Iraqi civilians at Nisour Square. Despite such damning allegations, "Since 2001, Blackwater has undergone explosive growth, not only from security contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also from classified work for the Central Intelligence Agency that included taking part in a now defunct program to assassinate leaders of Al Qaeda and to load missiles on Predator drones." (Times, 11/11)
So it seems that our story, with its now predictable ebbs toward collective chaos and flows toward collective compassion, will be forced to accommodate yet another incarnation of Armistice Day and our grandchildren will beg the question: wasn't one enough? Reading the following explanation of the day, we should all feel troubled by this blatant example of our unparalleled inability to heed history's teachings.

This from the Times, "Across Europe and other parts of the world, people gathered Wednesday to commemorate the end of four years of fighting between 1914 and 1918 in which millions of lives were lost in what are now depicted as strategically ineffective battles of the trenches in which neither side gained significant territory as each lashed the other with artillery fire and often futile infantry charges." (Times, 11/11)