Since shortly after September 11, 2001, Americans have been bombarded with imagery of World War II, the Good War, the war that was fought for the rights of humanity. Images of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were utilized in the same manner as images of Hitler and Tojo were once utilized. Recalling the popular mythology of a patriotic and united home front, Americans were once again called upon to unite to fight a collection of evil leaders who threatened freedom and democracy worldwide.

Americans do not seem to need the true historical record; images and sound bytes seem to suffice. The Bush Administration, in fact waging a little noticed war to reconstruct the teaching of history while all eyes are on the real war, has utilized the ignorance of history and continued to promote a revival of World War II. The failure of reconstruction in forgotten Afghanistan not considered, recently the rebuilding of Iraq has been compared with the success of the Marshall Plan, the financing and rebuilding of destroyed European nations after 1945.

In conjunction with the better known events of the brief 1898 Spanish-American war in the Caribbean, the United States rushed to the aid of the Filipino independence movement. After quickly defeating the Spanish in 1898, the United States refused to recognize the new republic formed by the Filipino people, or even acknowledge Emilio Aguinaldo, the 28-year-old leader of the independence movement who was to become president. Despite his hope for a peaceful resolution, the disrespect and violence against the population by US soldiers - who, of course, did not speak the language - as well as absolute disregard by the US leadership, caused Aguinaldo to take to the hills and begin a guerrilla resistance movement. In a familiar scenario to us today, the occupying soldiers, unable to tell friend from foe, could not distinguish between civilians and guerrilla fighters, solving this problem at times by destroying and burning whole villages and slaughtering the men, women and children who lived there. The military directive was to take no prisoners.

Letters from the Philippines by US soldiers at the turn of the century reflect the confusion they felt about their mission. “I am not afraid, and am always willing to do my duty,” wrote Sergeant Arthur H. Vickers of Nebraska, “but I would like someone to tell me what we are fighting for.”

Another soldier from Nebraska wrote home of the personal conflict the war caused him:

We came here to help, not slaughter, these natives; to fight the oppressor Spain, not the oppressed. It strikes me as not very fair to pursue a policy that leads to this insurrection, and then keep us volunteers out here to fight battles we never enlisted for. I cannot see that we are fighting for any principle now.

	Soldiers Speak  From Iraq
“What are we getting into here? The war is supposed to be over, but every day we hear of another soldier getting killed… The locals want us to leave. Why are we still here?”  – Sergeant from the US Army’s 4th Infantry Division, The American Cause (founded by Patrick Buchanan), June 30, 2003  “At night time you think about all the people you killed. It just never gets off your head, none of this stuff does. There’s no chance to forget it, we’re still here, we’ve been here so long.” – Cpl. Richardson, The Evening Standard, June 19, 2003

Other soldiers, put in that situation by their government, became more concerned for their lives. Like soldiers in Vietnam or Iraq, they were unable to identify a clear enemy, and following the lead of their commanders, suspected that the danger lay in the entire population. “We make everyone get into his house by 7 p.m.,” wrote one soldier about night patrols in villages, “and we only tell a man once. If he refuses, we shoot him. We killed over 300 men the first night… If they fire a shot from a house, we burn the house down, and every house near it, and shoot the natives; so they are pretty quiet in town now.”

Like the US soldiers who went into Iraq believing they were fighting for the freedom of the Iraqi people, many soldiers went to the Philippines believing they were fighting for democracy. Once Spain was defeated, and the soldiers were required to turn their weapons on the Filipino people, many did not understand why they could not just go home. “The soldiers are getting sick of fighting these heathens,” wrote Tom Crandall, “and all say we volunteered to fight Spain, not heathens. Their patriotism is wearing off. They will be fighting four hundred years and never whip these people… The people of the United States ought to raise a howl and have us sent home.” Soldiers began realizing that they were then involved in a war with no end, a war that contradicted their own views of democracy. “They will never surrender until their whole race is exterminated,” wrote Ellis Davis from America’s original quagmire. “They are fighting for a good cause, and Americans should be the last of all nations to transgress upon such rights. Their independence is dearer to them than life, as ours was in years gone by, and is today.”

Davis was far-sighted in his comments. The original Filipino resistance was defeated in 1902, but guerrilla resistance movements resurged throughout the 20th century, even after the Philippines gained official independence from the United States in 1946, when the Huk fighters who had been US allies against the Japanese took to the hills, believing that the new government was merely a puppet of the United States.

Americans should look at history - not the history of George Bush that compares his war on terrorism with World War II, but the true history of US military involvement around the world. Today, we are presented with a Philippines swarming with “Islamic terrorists,” people who seem to be rootlessly spreading through the world on a vague religious mission. A closer look at history would show that Islam predates the Spanish in the Philippines; and Islamic fighters can trace their origins back to the Spanish colonial period, when, like other Filipinos, they fought first against Spain, and then the US occupation. As was projected by many soldiers who fought in the Philippines over a hundred years ago, the issues of the independence of the Philippines have not ended. The government of the Philippines is today a close ally of the United States, but as the huge demonstrations that accompanied Bush’s recent visit illustrate, as well as the extraordinary security measures required to protect his life, there are many Filipinos who have not forgotten the true history, Muslim and Christian alike.

Note: The letters from American soldiers in the Philippines were collected and published in a pamphlet by the Anti-Imperialist League in 1899. These letters are made available by historian Jim Zwick in a large collection of essays and documents. To read more of the letters, or to learn more about the history of the Philippines and the history of Islam in the Philippines, and its status today as a target of the war on terrorism, please visit the site at: http://www.boondocksnet.com/centennial/contents.html

Jeri L. Reed is a PhD candidate in history at the University of Oklahoma and member of Military Families Speak Out, a group of families with loved ones in the military who have opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Jeri is the mother of Cody, a US soldier located at the Abu Gharib prison on the outskirts of Baghdad, Iraq. Click here to read a live dialogue with Jeri L. Reed.