University of Virginia Library

Walter Bardenwerper

The Absurdity Of The Calley Trial

When President Nixon compared
the first manned moon landing to
The Creation, he resurrected a
phenomenon which had been
dormant since "the war to end all
wars." It is that habit of gross
overstatement that I tried to avoid
in describing the events in My Lai
during March, 1968. However, I
could not resist the comparison of
the My Lai case to some of those
other mind-boggling events. It
seems that it ranks with Creation,
Auschwitz and the landing of the
Eagle in magnitude.

A common characteristic of this
type of event is the tendency for it
to be either incomprehensibly
tragic or incomprehensibly
beneficial to mankind. Creation
could fit into either category,
depending upon your viewpoint.
The discovery of fire or the landing
on the moon should generally be
considered good; Auschwitz or My
Lai should be unanimously
considered horrible.

The complexities of the My Lai
case often obscure the radical
problems it presents. The trial of
Lt. Calley has further highlighted
the details and revealed the few
certainties of the case.

The details are ghastly, If one
desires to condemn only Lt. Calley
and the organization he represents
(The U.S.Army) one can consider
only the descriptions of the murder
of 102 helpless people by some
American soldiers. The picture of
innocent, terrified, human beings
herded into a trench and ruthlessly
"neutralized" makes us sick of Lt.
Calley, his men, his superiors, and
the war.

Moral Traps

If one desires to divide the
blame fruitlessly among the officers
in the chain of command, he can
consider the legal and moral traps
of military law as witnessed at
Nuremberg.

If one desires to be ruthlessly
even-handed in his condemnation,
he will consider a very average
American male, joining the army to
fulfill what he has been taught is his
duty; being trained to "waste,"
"neutralize," and "buttstroke,"
before someone does these things
to him. He sees the boots of his
friends with the feet still in them,
remains of buddies "neutralized'
beyond recognition. He is ordered
to "waste" a strategic hamlet, and
remembering what he has seen
happen to others, he obeys the
orders. With this idea in mind, one
can condemn the NFL, North
Vietnam, war, and ideologies.

Place Blame

All attempts to place blame
seem totally absurd. Lt. Calley, in
admitting to kill one of these
people, is a murderer. It was a
morally indefensible act. But so are
the executions of every innocent
villager and there have been
thousands who have been killed.
The point is that there is no one
person, who, through his
punishment, will bring salvation to
the thousands of others who are
implicated in his action. Likewise,
there is no way to punish all the
people on both sides of the war for
doing what they feel is necessary to
save mankind.

What is more amazingly
disgusting are the open expressions
of affection shown to Lt. Calley as
if he were a national hero. No
matter what position one takes
regarding that war, there is no
justification based on rationality
for praising this man. While I do
not see any gain to be made for
mankind in executing or
permanently imprisoning him. I
cannot imagine how anyone could
praise him. The tragedy which he is
alleged to have caused is a
monumental triumph of depravity
of the human condition. My Lai is
the disaster of the decade — and it
is a disaster for all mankind. No one
can praise the major protagonist
without denying that the tragedy is
his also.

Blame Ideologies

The blame for this tragedy is
rightly placed only on an abstract
thing. The certainties the My Lai
case presents reveal the true source
of the actions there, and the area in
which blame certainly should
reside. The real scapegoat must be
dogmatic ideologies. The
continuance of war, especially this
kind of war, is due in large part to
the unbending ideological
ambitions of the principle actors.

My Lai is the result of men and
societies professing to know THE
right course the world should
follow. It stems from average men
pretending they are omniscient
philosophers or even deities. Just as
Woodrow Wilson might be upset to
know that everyone does not agree
with the rightness of democracy,
Chairman Mao would disagree that
possibly some Asian countries do
want constitutional democracy.
Both positions are dogmatic and
ideological. Both naturally
contribute to the ultimate conflict
that neither really wants.

Ludicrous Situation

When men believe strongly
enough in an ideology to
perpetuate a war such as the
Indochina war, they are inviting
My Lais. In carrying on a war where
human interests are secondary to
political principles, both sides have
placed their people in a position
where they must "neutralize" any
mere human being which stands
between that nation and ideological
victory. How, then, can a
belligerent state attempt to soothe
itself by prosecuting one small
actor in a belligerent action that the
state supports? The whole situation
is ludicrous.

The ultimate human tragedy of
the entire affair is that both sides
have invested so much in the war,
and placed much greater than real
stakes on the outcome that neither
believes it can afford to extricate
itself unconditionally.

That this conflict is bound to
follow the course intended by the
President seems quite certain
regardless of most possible
contingencies. It will always stand
as an example of the most absurd
of all human conflicts - one which no
one on either side fully understood.
Our goal must now be to prevent a
recurrence.