Welcome to Gaia! ::

I've been reading a very well written novel about the Mexican American War and a battalion of Irish Catholic men led by a John Riley, all of whom deserted from the American military to get away from Protestant West Point officers who treated them like dogs.

The novel's called, "Saint Patrick's Battalion" and it's written by James Alexander Thom, who has written such epics as "Follow the River" and "Panther in the Sky". I have the pleasure of knowing him and his wife well.

It's a very good book but it's brought up some interesting points in it.

There were officers in the book (such as Lt. Ulysses S. Grant) who said that they should not be fighting Mexico because the war had been trumped up and in many ways false, and that it was an act of unwarranted aggression. Also there are views in the book that suggest that they were in violation of international law.

Sound familiar?

It gets better.

They had qualms about President Polk leading men so blindly to war when Polk himself had never been in battle (Wow this is sounding familiar).

The book's very good but I'd like to discuss with everyone comparisons between the past and present in wars in particular and WHY we haven't learned from them.

All I have to say about the Bush comparison is this:

Well, I find it rather hard to believe American blood was shed on Texas soil by the Mexican military. But I find even harder to believe that 9/11 never happened.