# NLD General Peter van Uhm TED Speech on YouTube



## daftandbarmy

General Peter van Uhm. 

Outstanding  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHX5lAslnTc&feature=share


----------



## jollyjacktar

A well spoken and articulate presentation.  Bravo Zulu.


----------



## Sythen

Amazing find, thanks for posting!


----------



## daftandbarmy

Too ironic if you consider DUTCHBAT in Srebrenica in 1995 though!


----------



## Haletown

"If you want peace, be prepared for war"



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gHX5lAslnTc&noredirect=1



Lessons about having proper equipment and the care and feeding of soldiers.

A valuable and timely message.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Been shared a few places - will pull this together shortly.

*Milnet.ca Staff*

P.S. - Another reason he gets it - lost a son in Uruzgan, southern Afghanistan in 2008.


----------



## TN2IC

Ladies and gentlemen,
As the highest military commander of the Netherlands, with troops stationed around
the world,
I am honoured to be here today.
When I look around at this TEDxAmsterdam venue, I see a very special audience.
You are the reason why I said Yes to the invitation to come here today.
When I look around, I see people who want to make a contribution.
I see people who want to make a better world. By doing groundbreaking scientific work. 
By creating impressive works of art. By writing critical articles or inspiring books. 
By starting up sustainable businesses. 
You all have chosen your own instruments to fulfil this mission of creating a better world.
 Some chose the microscope as their instrument. Others chose dancing or painting or making music. 
Some chose the pen. Others work through the instrument of money.

Ladies and gentlemen,
I share your goals. I too want to make a better world.
I did not choose to take up the pen, the brush, the camera.
I chose this instrument.

I chose… the gun.
For you, being so close to this gun, may make you feel uneasy.
It may even feel scary.
A real gun.
At a few feet’s distance.

Let us stop for a moment and feel this uneasiness.
Let us cherish this feeling.
Let us cherish the fact that probably most of you have never been close to a gun.
It means the Netherlands is a peaceful country.
The Netherlands is not at war.
It means soldiers are not needed to patrol our streets.
Guns are not a part of our lives.
In many countries, it is a different story.
In many countries, people are confronted with guns.
They are oppressed, they are intimidated.
By war-lords.
By terrorists.
By criminals.

Weapons can do a lot of harm.
They are the cause of much distress.

Why then, am I standing before you, with this weapon?
Why did I choose the gun as my instrument?
Today I want to tell you why.
Today I want to tell you why I chose the gun to create a better world.

And I want to tell you how this gun can help.

(--- Wapen neerleggen op de tafel in de spotlight---)

My story starts in Nijmegen, in the east of the Netherlands, the city where I was born.
My father was a hardworking baker.
But when he had finished work in the bakery, he told me and my brother stories.
And most of the time, he told us this story:…
…The story of what happened when he was a conscript soldier in the Dutch armed
forces at the beginning of the Second World War.
The Nazis invaded the Netherlands.
Their grim plans were evident.
They meant to rule by means of repression.
Diplomacy had failed to stop the Germans.
Only brute force remained.
It was our last resort.
My father was there to provide it.
As the son of a farmer, who knew how to hunt, he was an excellent marksman.
When he aimed, he never missed.
At this decisive moment in Dutch history, my father was positioned on the bank of the
river Waal, near the city of Nijmegen.
He had a clear shot at the German soldiers who came to occupy a free country.
He fired.
Nothing happened.
He fired again.
No German soldier fell to the ground.

My father had been given an old gun that could not reach the opposite river bank.
Hitler’s troops marched on and there was nothing my father could do about it.
Until the day my father died, he was frustrated about missing these shots.
He could have done something.
But with an old gun, not even the best marksman in the army could have hit the mark.

This story stayed with me.
Then, in high school, I was gripped by the stories of the Allied soldiers.
Soldiers who left the safety of their own homes and risked their lives to liberate a
country and a people they did not know.
It was then, that I decided I would take up the gun.
Out of respect and gratitude for those men who came to liberate us.
From the awareness that, sometimes, only the gun stands between good and evil.
That is why I took up the gun.
Not to shoot.
Not to kill.
Not to destroy.
But to stop those who would do evil.
To protect the vulnerable.
To defend democratic values.
To stand up for the freedom we have, to talk here today in Amsterdam, about how we
can make the world a better place.
Ladies and gentlemen,
I do not stand here today to tell you about the glory of weapons.
I do not like guns.

And once you have been under fire yourself, it brings home even more clearly, the
notion that a gun is not some macho instrument to brag about.
I stand here today to tell you about the use of the gun as an instrument of peace and
stability.
The gun may be one of the most important instruments of peace and stability that we
have in this world.
Now this may sound contradictory to you.
But not only have I seen this with my own eyes, during my deployments in the
Lebanon and Sarajevo, and as the Netherlands Chief of Defence.
This is also supported by cold, hard statistics.
Violence has declined dramatically over the last 500 years.
Despite the pictures we are shown daily in the news.
Wars between developed countries are no longer commonplace, the murder rate in
Europe has dropped by a factor of thirty since the Middle Ages…
…and occurrences of civil war and repression have declined since the end of the
Cold War.
Statistics show that we are living in a relatively peaceful era.
Why?
Why has violence decreased?
Has the human mind changed?
Did we simply lose our beastly impulses for revenge, for violent rituals, for pure rage?
Or is there something else?
In his latest book, Harvard professor Steven Pinker, and many other thinkers before
him, concludes that one of the main drivers behind less violent societies is the spread
of the constitutional state.
And the introduction on a large scale of the state monopoly on the legitimised use of
violence.
Legitimised by a democratically elected government.
Legitimised by checks and balances and an independent judicial system.
In other words, a state monopoly that has the use of violence well under control.
Such a state monopoly on violence first of all serves as a reassurance.
It removes the incentive for an arms race between potentially hostile groups in our
societies.

Secondly, the presence of penalties that outweigh the benefits of using violence, tips
the balance even further.
Abstaining from violence becomes more profitable than starting a war.
Now, non-violence starts to work like a fly wheel.
It enhances peace even further.
Where there is no conflict, trade will flourish.
And trade is another important incentive against violence.
With trade, there is mutual interdependency and mutual gain between parties.
And where there is mutual gain, both sides stand to lose more than they would gain if
they started a war.
War is simply no longer the best option.
That is why violence has decreased.

(--- Opkomst kapitein ---)

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the rationale behind the existence of my armed forces.
The armed forces implement the state monopoly on violence.
We do this in a legitimised way, only after our democracy has asked us to do so.
It is this legitimate, controlled use of the gun that has contributed greatly to reducing
the statistics of war, conflict and violence around the globe.
It is this participation in peacekeeping missions that has led to the resolution of many
civil wars.
My soldiers use the gun as an instrument of peace.
And this is exactly why failed states are so dangerous.
Failed states have no legitimised, democratically controlled use of force.
Failed states do not know of the gun as an instrument of peace and stability.
That is why failed states can drag down a whole region into chaos and conflict.
That is why spreading the concept of the constitutional state is such an important
aspect of our foreign missions.

That is why we are trying to build a judicial system right now in Afghanistan.
That is why we train police officers, judges and public prosecutors around the world.
And that is why the Dutch Constitution states that one of the main tasks of the armed
forces is to uphold and promote the international rule of law.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Looking at this gun, we are confronted with the ugly side of the human mind.
We are confronted with the horrible things humans do to other humans.
Every day, I hope that politicians, diplomats and development workers can turn
conflict into peace and threat into hope.
I hope that one day, armies can be disbanded and humans will find a way of living
together without violence and oppression.
But until that day comes, we will have to make ideals and human failure meet
somewhere in the middle.
Until that day comes, I stand for my father, who tried to shoot the Nazis with that old
gun.
I stand for my men and women,who are prepared to risk their lives for a less violent
world for all of us.
I stand for this soldier who suffered partial hearing-loss and sustained permanent
injuries to her leg when she was hit by a rocket on her mission in Afghanistan.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Until the day comes when we can do away with the gun, I hope we all agree that
peace and stability do not come free of charge.
It takes hard work, often behind the scenes.
It takes good equipment and well-trained, dedicated soldiers.

I hope you will support the efforts of our armed forces to train soldiers like this young
captain and provide her with a good gun instead of the bad gun my father was given.
I hope you will support our soldiers when they are out there.
When they come home.
When they are injured and need our care.
They put their lives on the line for us and we cannot let them down.

I hope you will respect this soldier with this gun.
Because she wants a better world.
Because she makes an active contribution to that better world.
Just like all of us here today.
Thank you.

Quote from General Peter van Uhm


----------



## vonGarvin

> Failed states do not know of the gun as an instrument of peace and stability.


The gun is an instrument of killing.  (As is the rifle, as shown in that video).  We use the rifle when we feel that our system is better than theirs.  Let's not mince words.  The rifle is used to kill.  *Calling it an instrument of peace is complete and utter bullshit*, and detracts from the fact that sometimes, it's necessary to kill thugs who would otherwise spread their filth.


----------



## vonGarvin

To amplify my opinion, I look at my CDS commendation, and I do not see it as a reward for spreading peace, but rather as a reward for effectively preventing the spread of evil.


----------



## Bass ackwards

Not to be a troll TV (all hail!) but isn't that pretty much the same thing ?


----------



## Sythen

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> Not to be a troll TV (all hail!) but isn't that pretty much the same thing ?



Removing evil is very different from adding good.

 At the very least-and it is little-war brings hope that evil might be defeated.
- John M. DelVecchio from his book 'For The Sake of All Living Things'-1990


----------



## vonGarvin

What Sythen said.


----------



## Bass ackwards

I'm kinda dense -it's part of my charm...

That being said, I'll have to take your word for it, gentlemen- because I still don't get it. 
I'm just glad you're there -for whatever the hell reason... 

(Christ you guys! -is it that hard to say you're there to do some good...?)


----------



## vonGarvin

For me, yes it is.  I didn't do Good.  That would be a lie. I was there to destroy evil.


----------



## OldSolduer

Technoviking said:
			
		

> For me, yes it is.  I didn't do Good.  That would be a lie. I was there to destroy evil.



Josey Wales said it best:

"Some folk need a good killin"

I personally liked his speech.


----------



## Sythen

Technoviking said:
			
		

> For me, yes it is.  I didn't do Good.  That would be a lie. I was there to destroy evil.



This. 

I think TV and I share pretty much the same thoughts on this subject so I won't just paraphrase what he says as it adds nothing to the topic.


----------



## Bass ackwards

As you would have it then, gentlemen. 

I'm outta here.

With _very_ respectful regards...

Bass


----------



## Sythen

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> I still don't get it.
> (Christ you guys! -is it that hard to say you're there to do some good...?)



Just wanted to add a quick metaphor, since I like hearing myself type, for those who don't get what I mean. If there's a river flowing, and I build a dam, it doesn't create land, it merely prevents the water from inhabiting that area. What others choose to do with that land, be it cultivating it and making it able to grow food, or build a school, or even just leaving it to nature and it eventually evolves into something different. Yet no matter what happens, I have prevented that water from rendering the land unusable.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Sythen said:
			
		

> Just wanted to add a quick metaphor, since I like hearing myself type, for those who don't get what I mean. If there's a river flowing, and I build a dam, it doesn't create land, it merely prevents the water from inhabiting that area. What others choose to do with that land, be it cultivating it and making it able to grow food, or build a school, or even just leaving it to nature and it eventually evolves into something different. Yet no matter what happens, I have prevented that water from rendering the land unusable.



Whoa.. that is so, like, Dutch, man  (insert smiley with hemp inspired grin surrounded with ganjs smoke)


----------



## dimsum

TV, respectfully I disagree.  Every IED found and disarmed, every school we built, etc. meant that we did some good.  Whether that will stay in the physical sense is up for debate, but when someone notices that it doesn't always have to be "that way", we would have made our mark.


----------



## Sythen

Dimsum said:
			
		

> TV, respectfully I disagree.  Every IED found and disarmed, every school we built, etc. meant that we did some good.  Whether that will stay in the physical sense is up for debate, but when someone notices that it doesn't always have to be "that way", we would have made our mark.



The thing is, the IED's would not be there if we were not. They add evil by planting these things, and we remove evil by getting rid of them. At no time is any good added. I have never built a school in my life, but if I did I don't think a gun would do much in the building process, unless you count that guy who lost his hand hammering a nail with a 50cal round. The guns simply are there to protect those building. The guns add nothing but the threat of death to those would would try to stop it.


----------



## armyvern

Sythen said:
			
		

> The thing is, the IED's would not be there if we were not. They add evil by planting these things, and we remove evil by getting rid of them. At no time is any good added. I have never built a school in my life, but if I did I don't think a gun would do much in the building process, unless you count that guy who lost his hand hammering a nail with a 50cal round. The guns simply are there to protect those building. The guns add nothing but the threat of death to those would would try to stop it.



IEDs may not be here if we were not, but, if we were not here, they'd simply still be executing women and other innocents in stadiums; there'd be no music wafting through the air, no kids actually playing and having fun, no girls in school etc etc etc. 

*Good* not added by the presence of our boots and guns on the ground? That's just _your_ opinion; apparently you and I have very different opinions  on what is "good". Those boots and guns were certainly enablers.


----------



## The Bread Guy

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> *Good* not added by the presence of our boots and guns on the ground? That's just _your_ opinion; apparently you and I have very different opinions  on what is "good". Those boots and *guns were certainly enablers.*


Maybe it's more the difference between _first-_ and _second-_order effects of the gun?


			
				Sythen said:
			
		

> Just wanted to add a quick metaphor, since I like hearing myself type, for those who don't get what I mean. If there's a river flowing, and I build a dam, it doesn't create land, it merely prevents the water from inhabiting that area. What others choose to do with that land, be it cultivating it and making it able to grow food, or build a school, or even just leaving it to nature and it eventually evolves into something different. Yet no matter what happens, I have prevented that water from rendering the land unusable.


Without the dam, you never get the chance to use the land under the water, no?


----------



## armyvern

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Maybe it's more the difference between _first-_ and _second-_order effects of the gun?



If we had no guns here, we'd be headless and beamed on the internet. Google it. They are good.   ;D


----------



## Sythen

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> IEDs may not be here if we were not, but, if we were not here, they'd simply still be executing women and other innocents in stadiums; there'd be no music wafting through the air, no kids actually playing and having fun, no girls in school etc etc etc.
> 
> *Good* not added by the presence of our boots and guns on the ground? That's just _your_ opinion; apparently you and I have very different opinions  on what is "good". Those boots and guns were certainly enablers.



I don't disagree that if we were not there, the Afghan people would not be as well of. When I kill a Taliban fighter, I don't bring back anyone who was executed, I don't create music and I don't send girls to school. I remove that which prevents these things from happening. That is the point. I do not add anything good when I kill someone. I remove something bad, which is a totally different thing.

I don't want to get in to a discussion which will end me with me telling you to go kill a man, and tell me how good it feels. Good can come from certain elements being removed, but the removal of those elements is still an act/threat of killing. All the things you mentioned happen every day in Canada, and to bring it back to the speech by the General, when that rifle came out.. Its true, everyone sort of held their breath. People in western nations are uncomfortable around guns, and with good reason. Guns can never add good, only remove evil.


----------



## Sythen

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Without the dam, you never get the chance to use the land under the water, no?



And if the land isn't tended to, and becomes a desert is it any better off?


----------



## The Bread Guy

Sythen said:
			
		

> And if the land isn't tended to, and becomes a desert is it any better off?


Depending on the land in question, I guess it becomes like a lottery - buying tickets brings you from impossible to improbable.  Without the lottery tickets/dam, though, you remain in the impossible zone.

You are right about the will to 1)  keep the land unflooded, and 2)  the will to do something useful with the land.


----------



## HItorMiss

I'm with TV on this

In the 12 years I have been in the CF I have never done a "good" thing. I have however sought out and removed "evil" from the world with extreme prejudice. I have never built a school (tho I did help remove one being used as an C&C node) I have never handed out food, water or blankets or even very much good will. What I have done is stand in front of the encroaching darkness and hold it at bay and I would like to think maybe pushed it back a little by using extreme amounts of violence and by definition violence is never a "good" thing but often times a necessary one.

Maybe it's a glass half full\half empty sort of argument....


----------



## armyvern

BulletMagnet said:
			
		

> I'm with TV on this
> 
> In the 12 years I have been in the CF I have never done a "good" thing. I have however sought out and removed "evil" from the world with extreme prejudice. I have never built a school (tho I did help remove one being used as an C&C node) I have never handed out food, water or blankets or even very much good will. What I have done is stand in front of the encroaching darkness and hold it at bay and I would like to think maybe pushed it back a little by using extreme amounts of violence and by definition violence is never a "good" thing but often times a necessary one.
> 
> Maybe it's a glass half full\half empty sort of argument....



Well, I haven't built a school either, but I have volunteered my time in an orphanage while deployed, worked to raise funds for that orphanage and other charitable organizations in that country ... oh, and in this country too by our females here in October; $6000.00 buckaroos US BTW which will go far at that school.

That's it Canada; apparently, there's only truely "good" works done in peacekeeping missions. Wow. Never thought I'd say that.


----------



## The Bread Guy

BulletMagnet said:
			
		

> Maybe it's a glass half full\half empty sort of argument....


Maybe more chicken vs. egg - you can't have the good without the keeping evil away.


----------



## muskrat89

Remember, the General's audience. He wasn't speaking to soldiers; he was talking to civilians. Outdoor writers have this conundrum all the time - hunters "kill" animals, we don't "harvest" them, or "take" them. Some say we should not be apologists for what we do. Others say we don't win any hearts and minds in the non-hunting public by displaying a lack of sensitivity. The General I believe was making a metaphorical point to his audience - without "that" tool, or similar ones, soldiers could not bring about the intended end state - peace and stability. A good speaker tailors his/her message to the audience. I think its a bit disingenuous to crticicize the semantics of his message without considering what he was trying to convey, and to whom.


----------



## HItorMiss

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> That's it Canada; apparently, there's only truely "good" works done in peacekeeping missions. Wow. Never thought I'd say that.



I never said good wasn't being done in Afghanistan, simply I had never done any or had the time to do any in my deployments, and that those on the direct combat end of the deployment are not doing good by my mind set.


----------



## armyvern

BulletMagnet said:
			
		

> I never said good wasn't being done in Afghanistan, simply I had never done any or had the time to do any in my deployments, and that those on the direct combat end of the deployment are not doing good by my mind set.



No worries BulletMagnet, I have just mailed off my certified cheque for membership to the NDP after coming to this huge revelation.  ;D

Although, in my defence, before having seen the light and deciding to become a card-carrying member, I'd have argued that each and every time you utilized "extreme amounts of violence" in the execution of your duties while closing with and destroying this particular enemy --- you certainly did accomplish much in the way of effecting "the greater good" for mankind in a very deliberate and calculated manner.


----------



## vonGarvin

I see "doing Good" as the immediate effect of an act.  That's what I mean.  And yes, it's a good thing (small "g") that we are there, and Good (capital "G") is the result.  But I don't like messages being dressed up is all.  Because the immediate effect of an assault rifle being used in its intended role is severe trauma to a person, often resulting in death.

That's all.


----------



## vonGarvin

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> No worries BulletMagnet, I have just mailed off my certified cheque for membership to the NDP after coming to this huge revelation.  ;D



:rofl:


----------



## Harris

Good is in the eye(s) of the beholder I submit BM.  Did you never smile or give a friendly wave to an Afghan adult or child?  Surely you purchased goods from the local market which enabled the owner to provide for his family.  IMO that counts as good.  Hopefully enough simple gestures like that from enough of us would eventually contribute to those Afghans hoping for a better future.  Even hope is good in my books.  "Goodness" doesn't always have to be the cure for cancer.  The little things count too.


----------



## HItorMiss

At least the NDP will have some one with some common sense and a head grounded in the real world....  

I would agree that I stood for a good thing and a good principal but I never did good myself, Though I stood in support of the good works being done...

Really it is a muddy philosophical debate to have and I do love a well thought out debate


Harris,

Honest answer in 03-04 yes, after that no not ever... 06 was a different monster not a great deal of locals aound for the TICs, and in 09 I had no contact with locals at all other then in the execution of my duties and then no I never smiled nor talked with them, I did what I was there to do and left.


----------



## Harris

Seen.  It's unfortunate that you feel that you didn't do good.  I think you did.  Allow me to thank you for sacrificing so that people like me could do our jobs in safety.  I was outside the wire every day, but not in a role similar to yours and I was able to do some good as my freedom of movement/action was provided by guys like you.


----------



## bossi

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> Remember, the General's audience. He wasn't speaking to soldiers; he was talking to civilians. Outdoor writers have this conundrum all the time - hunters "kill" animals, we don't "harvest" them, or "take" them. Some say we should not be apologists for what we do. Others say we don't win any hearts and minds in the non-hunting public by displaying a lack of sensitivity. The General I believe was making a metaphorical point to his audience - without "that" tool, or similar ones, soldiers could not bring about the intended end state - peace and stability. A good speaker tailors his/her message to the audience. I think its a bit disingenuous to crticicize the semantics of his message without considering what he was trying to convey, and to whom.



Exactly.

Doing "good" includes deterrence (i.e. warning off, scaring off, or killing off bad guys ... or preventing "evil")

Notice also how the General gave full credit for those Allies who came and did good in the NL:
... I was gripped by the stories of the Allied soldiers.
Soldiers who left the safety of their own homes and risked their lives to liberate a
country and a people they did not know.
It was then, that I decided I would take up the gun.
Out of respect and gratitude for those men who came to liberate us.
From the awareness that, sometimes, only the gun stands between good and evil.
That is why I took up the gun.

He did good with his speech, and he was wonderful for reminding the audience about the troops.
(as opposed to how VAC is screwing over our own vets)


----------



## PanaEng

I was going to say something deep and use more metaphors but got distracted by work... ;-)
1st - as an engineer, I have to say that a dam creates a lake not land - a dyke  would create the land out of a shallow lake, estuary or flood plain;
2nd - a gun is indeed and instrument of killing (first order effect as alluded earlier)
3rd - a gun is indeed and instrument of peace as it can create the conditions for it to develop (second order...)

So, lets not get short sighted, argue about the details of what a gun represent to each one of us  and misinterpret what he was getting at: argue for better tools to do our jobs by highlighting the contributions we have and can make to society.

Chimo!


----------



## OldSolduer

Technoviking said:
			
		

> I see "doing Good" as the immediate effect of an act.  That's what I mean.  And yes, it's a good thing (small "g") that we are there, and Good (capital "G") is the result.  But I don't like messages being dressed up is all.  Because the immediate effect of an assault rifle being used in its intended role is severe trauma to a person, often resulting in death.
> 
> That's all.



And some folk need a good killin.

Its unfortunate that some good folks get killed as well.


----------



## daftandbarmy

In WW2 my Dad helped to make a whole bunch of 'Good Nazis' as he called them. His guns were of a larger calibre though!


----------



## PanaEng

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> In WW2 my Dad helped to make a whole bunch of 'Good Nazis' as he called them. His guns were of a larger calibre though!


See, fertilizer is a good thing!

Chimo!


----------



## tomahawk6

General van UHM talks about why he chose the military as a career. His son was killed in Afghanistan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LjAsM1vAhW0


----------



## Remius

Someone posted this a while ago in another thread I think.

Still worth re-posting it though.  Great video and great speech.


----------



## Armymedic

It is a TEDx presentation.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Crantor said:
			
		

> Someone posted this a while ago in another thread I think.


Correct - merging now.

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------

