We are becoming too pro-military in the US

Great Debates
21

I can only provide a few points that may or may not mesh into a coherent argument.

  1. People like to quote Clauswitz as gospel because he is quotable, but his theory isn’t the only one. After all, Clauswtiz was a German general who spent most of his life in exile in Russia because Germany(Prussia) at the time had been conquered by the French(:)). I am more inclined to side with John Keegan’s theory that war is an extension of social and cultural circumstances, not political machinations, but that is a different thread entirely.

  2. We in the West have entered a period where a culture of entitlement and “need for SUVs” is the norm. That someone could choose a life of adversity in military service for a higher ideal seems particularly praiseworthy precisely because of how few(relative to the population) middle class people actually pony up and do it. Rightly or wrongly people who have not served in the military have a view of military life shaped by movies like Full Metal Jacket. Up here in Canada, we have the best paid army in the world (A Corporal with 2 or 3 years experience can clear almost C$50k tax free for 6 month of work in Afghanistan, if it was his/her first tour), and yet people still seem to think that the army guys need donations and such (hence all the sales of magnets). This isn’t exactly analogous ot the US situation but it does sort of show how a modern Western society responds in time of war.

  3. Most people who join the army WANT to do their jobs, politics be damned. This is something that those outside the military have the greatest difficulty in grasping, because they all seem to think that soldiers join the army hoping that they never have to actually go into battle. That may have been true during the 1959s when wars would have been fought by nuclear exchange, but it certainly isn’t true now. I personally think that the Iraq war was a terrible idea and that GWB is a terrible leader, and I will tell that to anyone who cares to listen, but had I been in the US army, or had Canada decided to join the Coalition of the Willing I would jump at the chance to go to Iraq and do my job. A lot of military members here might try and grasp for political defence of the Bush Doctrine, I’ve tried and I can’t find one, but I would kit up and go in an instant if asked. When I signed up I agreed to be an instrument of my nation’s democratically determined foreign policy. I am reasonably confident that I will not be party to anything that would compromise my personal moral code (murder, rape and such) and overall I would have no personal qualms about doing my job. It might interest me as a passive Doper observer whether the war is “just” or even advantageous in the greater geo-political scheme, but that’s not my day job. The leaders of my nation are responsible for that, and as they say, in a democracy, people get the goverment they deserve. The American voter is no less responsible for the policies of GWB than the American soldier is.

I’m sure if you nitpick it enough you can find some kind of inconsistency in my above views, I’d be happy to discuss it, but I doubt that my mind would be greatly changed.

22

My father spent three years in the Army, then 20 years in the Navy (becoming a ‘mustang’), and then 22 years in the FAA. Most of his life was spent in the service of his country in one way or another. I spent a lot of time as a child at NAS Miramar, worked for four years at Edwards AFB, and for nine years with a military contractor. From my perspective growing up, San Diego was a Navy town; and my teen years and early adulthood were lived in an Air Force town. I’ve been around the military a lot for a civilian. So I have a lot of respect for the military. I believe that most military personnel are honourable people who have chosen to do a job for the good of the country. (And rememeber I’m a Liberal almost to the point of Socialism, in some people’s minds. :wink: )

I’m old enough to remember the opposition to the war in Vietnam. I remember when Jimmy Carter cut the B-1 bomber project. I remember the ‘Peace Dividend’, where many of us in the military aerospace industry lost our jobs. During my formative years there was a lot of distrust of the military; and, as a result of the Watergate scandal, of the government in general, which continues to this day. Then came Gulf War I. With all of the talk about the war being for oil, the way I saw it was that we were putting an expansionist dictator back in his place. And we went in with the support of the world. Our military might, and that of our international allies, made it a short war with relatively few casualties (on our side). It was then that I began seeing American flags springing up everywhere.

11 September 2001. We were attacked. We rightly attached the Taliban. I was okay with that, and if the government had said, ‘Johnny L.A., we need you to fly a helicopter for us,’ I would have gone in a hearbeat.

And then there’s Iraq. I think most of us here at the Dope understand the difference between fighting against those who were behind the attacks on our country, and initiating a war against a country that had nothing to do with it. But in my experience The Public don’t. Maybe it’s because I was working in Orange County – ‘Reagan Country’ – at the time, but my coworkers said things like this when I said I opposed the plans to invade Iraq: ‘Do you want to wait until Saddam launches a nuclear missile at us?’ My coworkers seemed oblivious to the fact that Iraq had no way of delivering such a weapon. To my satements that I thought we should wait for the UN to finish its inspections (and at the time I really did think they’d find WMDs, though I wanted them to finish their job first), they countered: ‘You want to wait until they drop a nuke on us before you would support going to war?’ I pointed to the CIA study that said that Saddam was very unlikely to attack unless we attack first, and that he still had no missiles capable of reaching us.

But the Public, and it seems most of America, were blinded by fear. American flags and yellow ribbons popped up like dandelions. Rationality flew out the window. ‘If yer not fer us, yer agin us!’ I agree with FairyChatMom that unthinking patriotism became fashionable. And Americans being what we are, we tend to take outside critisism badly. It just makes us more nationalistic.

In my experience military officers generally have a decent handle on what’s right and wrong. But they’re still officers and are bound by law and honour to do as they’re told. They may not like it, but it’s their job. I’m pro-military. I think we should have the best military we can have with our technology and industrial strength. I think we should respect those people who put their lives on the line. But I also think that the military should be used judiciously. ‘Speak softly and carry a big stick.’ That is, we should only use violence when necessary; not like Yosemite Sam, who shouts, ‘Well I speak loud and carry a bigger stick!’ The best warrior is the one who does not have to fight.

So I say we give our pilots the best aircraft, our sailors the best ships, and our troops the best guns. But let’s use the military to prevent war wherever possible, and get rid of the warmongers in the government. There is a time to fight. The trick is knowing when that time is, which is something our government and many of us in this country seem not to have figured out.

That’s my opinion, and you’re welcome to take it or disregard it as you please.

23

[QUOTE=Wesley Clark

-people forgetting that the military is just a branch of politics and blurring blind support for the military with blind support of politics [/QUOTE]

I think this is the crux of the “Support the troops” bunch’s argument, namely that the military as a policy making tool is intimately intertwined with politics, BUT the soldiers themselves should not be penalized for participating in something politically motivated.

Which makes sense, because if nothing else, many enlistments and officer terms overlap presidential terms, and most (all?) overlap congressional terms, meaning that they might get sent to do something that wasn’t conceived of when they joined up.

24

So says Al Franken, of all people, who has endured his fair share of hazards to do USO shows for our troops in combat overseas.

He’s right. I don’t care much for the man himself, but he’s absolutely right. I don’t think that showing support for the troops themselves is anything to be alarmed about. Hey, they probably didn’t want to go to Iraq either, but they didn’t have a choice, right? I believe someone in this thread already mentioned the National Guard, many of whom joined up so that they could help out at home. If there is blame to be assigned here, it should be assigned to this corrupt administration who placed the troops in Iraq, not to some poor ground-pounder following his lawful orders. (I’m not talking about the Abu Ghraib gang, of course. Those guys absolutely should shoulder the blame for their abuses.

I’m stealing this line from someone else in another thread, but I remember reading that blaming a soldier for the war in Iraq was like blaming a traffic cop for enforcing the speed limit. You might be right to complain, but they’re not the ones you should be complaining to.

25

http://www.ilaam.net/Sept11/AmericanWars.html First lets face who we are. We have been interfering in soverign states for a long time. We are aggressive and always have been. When I grew up I was told we only fought when we were attacked. There is a book out now that says we have been involved in 14 regime changes in the 20th century alone.Hawaii.Iraq ,iran. most of South America and Central America.
This is a colonial war now. There is a huge embassy the size of the Vatican being built and 16 permanent bases. They follow the oil pipes perfectly. Must be a cooincidence.
Iran was an elected government in 1953 until they decided to nationalize the oil. We threw over their government.How differerent would the middle east have been.

26

There exists a huge number of citizens who equate the word “freedom” with “military superiority” and have no inkling that “freedom” has alternate meanings.

And at the same time we celebrate freedom, we pay enlisted soldiers and their families nearly poverty-level wages with abyssmal medical care for veterans.

The US excessively pro-military? Always.
Pro-soldier? Never enough.

If war is politics by other means, the military is classism by other means.

27

I disagree with this. I would say that a huge number of citizens (myself included) think that freedom depends in part upon–although is not the same as–military superiority. You can have military superiority without a free country, but you can’t have a free country without military superiority.

Again, I disagree. The problem with class in the military is the problem with class in the United States and–for that matter–the world. You’re lumping in a whole bunch of ancient problems and slapping a military label, I’m afraid.

Though I do agree with you when it comes to handing veterans and military members the shit end of the stick, I don’t think the entire military can be defined by what is essentially a global condition.

28

I have a deep respect for those who choose the military way of life. I do because as a young son of naval officers, I admired the military’s exploits, bravery, and esprit de corps, and also, as I got older, because I knew I was not cut out for that way of life. No value judgment there; most of us are not cut out for something or another.

I miss the idea of the citizen-soldier – and yet I don’t. The fact that we don’t have a huge draftee military anymore is a good thing. We don’t need one and we sure as hell don’t want one. But the result is that we have something of a warrior caste. GI Joe is not the boy next door anymore to a lot of us. He’s poorer and less educated when he goes in – and even after he graduates basic, he has a lot more in common with his fellow servicepeople than with you and me. War is harder now. Training is harder – maybe not tougher, but more indoctrinating. The first battle every soldier wages is with his civilian self, and victory must be total.

If I have a beef with the military, it’s that development of a warrior caste. Our servicemembers are a lot more alike now than they were in Vietnam, Korea, WW2. Except for the color of their complexion and the twang, burble or rasp of their regional speech, they look more alike, they talk more alike, they think more alike. The haircuts are tighter. The faces are harder. The speech is faster and less inflected. The impression is more of soldier-citizens than citizen-soldiers. (And some soldier’s aren’t citizens yet. The Marine Corps, at least, offers a fast track to citizenship for enlisted personnel. You might be forgiven for asking where these young Americans-to-be feel their primary loyalty - to the country or to the Corps?)

A lot of surveys are showing more political sameness among military folks – their feelings of patriotism and duty to country are more often expressed in terms of being loyal to the president and party in power. In the Air Force and Marines, especially, there is apparently social pressure on the officer corps to conform to conservative Christianist beliefs about the roles of men, women, government and society.

Now, I don’t suggest that we’re breeding an isolated class of militarists liable to foment coup or civil war. Our military, unique I think in the world, swears allegiance to our Constitution – not to any person, ruler, or God. But I do wonder whether the military culture has become too isolated and too uniform – not reflective enough or in touch enough with all the many things America is.

It used to be that career servicepeople shied away from political stances until retired, because there was an understanding that certain matters - like the defense of the country - must be above politics because the armed forces stood for all the country. That’s not so true since Vietnam, the all-volunteer force, etc. The difference with the Iraq war is that the military enjoys more public support than at any time since Vietnam – even though it is more political, more isolated from, and less representative of the country.

I have no idea what to do about any of this. I just think it’s worth serious discussion as we try to integrate our returning veterans into civilian life, and think about the role a peace-loving country really wants for its armed forces, and for the citizens that are a part of them.

29

Sweden has freedom without militarism. In truth militarism removes freedoms. Eisenhower when he left office warned about the military-industrial complex. They have gotten together and it is bad. It needs permanent war to be sated. Chaney said we cane expect in America to be at war for the foreseeable future. The cost is our freedoms. Any questioning of the cabal is seen as unpatriotic. It is becoming our definition.

30

There’s that, too.

For instance, why hasn’t word one (to my knowledge) been said on the Dope about the mistreatment of wounded combat veterans recently exposed at Fort Sill? Think about going to Iraq or Afghanistan, being in harm’s way, and getting RPG’d or IED’d or whatever –and what you get on return is demotion to sub-grunt status (with rank), and some sociopathic drill sergeant kicking your stitches loose? Thanks of a grateful nation…

31

Wesley Clark, may I shake your hand? That’s probably the best single thread-starter post I’ve ever read in my seven years here.

My idea of supporting the troops means first of all remembering they are human beings just like you and me. Not fighting machines. Not terrorists. Just regular working folks from Anytown, USA. The grunts in Iraq have been put into an impossible position through no fault of their own. Bring them home, boost their back pay and benefits, upgrade their medical care, finish paying for their education–and put the jerks who sent them to Iraq on trial for war crimes.

32

I hadn’t heard anything about it. Do you happen to have a link?

33

Becoming more pro-military, have you ever heard the words to the National Anthem?

34

Anti-war, liberal sailor chiming in.

America has never been pro military. America has been pro-weapon and pro-war. From troops in the Spanish-American war dying more often from tainted rations than bullets, to MacArthur’s repellent treatment of the Bonus Marchers in Washington D.C., to our current Congress funding weapons systems with one hand and cutting money from veterans healthcare with the other, the country’s political infrastructure has had a lasting obsession with violent power, and a passing disregard for those called to wield it.

Personally, I in my short time haven’t gotten much in the way of public support. Standing around in my dress whites looking all snazzy, I’ve been nudged aside by people looking to shake the hand of the male sailor next to me. I suppose a woman in uniform doesn’t do much for the warrior myth.
My fellow liberals don’t do much better. Shopping in Whole Foods wearing a Navy sweatshirt, or sitting in uniform at the local coffee shop, I catch uncomfortable stares from the folks in town, like I farted in their lattes or something. They quickly look away, no doubt pitying me for my presumed hard luck upbringing in a small town in a red state.

And finally, the “common knowledge” gems I’ve grown to despise:

-The troops are uniformly conservative
Political opinions range the full gamut from “nuke the whales” conservatives to lefties like me who voted for Nader twice. These surveys cited tend to be concerned with Army infantry and Marines, a small slice of the Dod whose commande structure tends to lean heavily on grunts to speak acceptable opinons.

-We’re ignorant and mercenary. The merciless wiles of recruiters easily outmatch our blue-collar provincialism, rendering us helpless to an enlistment contract.
My detachment has an average enlistment bonus of $20,000, largely because 75% of us have undergraduate degrees. The Navy doesn’t pay for morons.

-In supporting the Navy, we support Dubya & Co. Myth, myth, myth! The only public figure here more univerally despised than Jane Fonda is Donald Rumsfeld. We swore an oath to the Constitution, not G.W. A large portion of us are here for the public service, an opportunity to be a part of something larger than ourselves.
That our civilian commanders are currently morons is something everyone is responsible for, not just the military.

-The military is culturally homogenous. Now really, whose fault is that? With a culture that considers the running of a society something best left to paid professionals, the best and brightest seem to have decided that participating in civil society is no longer their responsibility. If there really is an army of poor, brown, ignorant, hyperreligious zealots defending us, then it’s because the rest of us have given it over to them.

Just because something is repeated over and over again, does not make it true.

35

I had the story somewhat wrong. Those mistreated were not combat veterans, but wounded in training.

Link

I guess now I’m open to criticism along these lines: “Who cares if someone is wounded in training? Real war is so much worse that they deserve and need tough treatment.”

Discuss? Or digression?

36

So there are no free countries in the world without exceptionally powerful armed forces?

37

I’m sorry, Johanna, but “bring them home” is likely the most condescending thing you can possibly say to a soldier deployed. I’m not in the US military but I have spent much of my career serving alongside them and will do so in the future. Let me say this again: people who join the army WANT to be able to do their jobs. If we didn’t then we would not have joined. The meme that those who join the armed forces must have done so out of desperation or poverty and need to be babied and kept out of harms way is the single thing that liberals (and I’m a liberal) simply cannot seem to get away from. I get the same kind of talk up north here with our deployment to Afghanistan. Please, I have an undergraduate degree in a sought after field in a booming part of a booming country, no one forced me to join the army. almost every one of my collegues going on the upcoming deployment will be giving up higher paying, safer jobs for the opportunity to do their jobs and make a difference in the world.

So guys, complain about your leadership, complain about soldier’s benefits, complain about foreign policy, but please don’t get the mistaken impression that soldiers are deployed against their will or are misguided children who need to be kept out of harms way for their own good. You’ll only further alienate the otherwise sane and liberal military members here.

38

And how many thought their job was to protect America, and not invade other countries that aren’t a threat to us ? If they want to be there then they are just as evil as those who gave the orders.

Yes, making it worse.

39

If you think your job is to go to Iraq to help fight a foolish elective war that is jeopardizing US security, then yes, you are naive and misguided. It is the job of the responsible, informed voters among us to try to bring you home.

And if you are capable of resenting people trying to save your stupid neck while you’re out there playing bang-bang, then you really aren’t sane or liberal enough for me to worry about alienating.

(and I speak as former military, so do not even think about pulling that card on me).

40

I apologize in advance for reviving the hijack about trainee abuse, as it evidently isn’t of much concern to anyone as an issue.

But if you go here, you can read what some old soldiers feel about the topic. Many feel that destroying a few weak bodies or minds in training is a small price to pay for saving lives in combat. But I wonder.