It Floats: Addendum to Clausewitz

[fastpat]

Fred Reed's keen insight on "The War", ought be communicated to every soldier you know.

Addendum to Clausewitz

by Fred Reed

It's all but official: The war in Iraq is lost. Report after leaked report says so. Everybody in Washington knows it except that draft-dodging ferret in the White House. Politicians scurry to avoid the blame. One day soon people will ask aloud: How did we let 3000 GIs die for the weak ego of a pampered liar and his desperate need to prove he's half the man his father was?

The troops from now on will die for a war that they already know is over. They are dying for politicians. They are dying for nothing. By now they must know it. It happened to us, too, long ago.

The talk among pols now is about finding an "exit strategy." This means a way of pulling out without risking too many seats in Congress. Screw the troops. We must look to the elections. Do we really want an exit strategy? A friend of mine, with two tours in heavy combat in another war, has devised a splendid exit strategy. It consists of five words: "OK. On the plane. Now." Bring your toothbrush. Everything else stays. We're outa here.

It is a workable exit strategy, one with teeth, and comprehensible to all. But we won't use it. We will continue killing our men, calculatedly, cynically, for the benefit of politicians. The important thing, you see, is the place in history of Bush Puppy. Screw the troops.

Face it. The soldiers are being used. They are being suckered. This isn't new. It happened to my generation. Long after we knew that the war in Vietnam was lost, Lyndon Johnson kept it going to fertilize his vanity, and then Nixon spoke of the need to "save face"—at two hundred dead GIs a week. But of course Johnson and Nixon weren't among the dead, or among the GIs.

I saw an interview on television long ago in which the reporter asked an infantryman near Danang, I think, what he thought of Nixon's plan to save face. "His face, our ass," was the reply. Just so, then, and just so now. Screw the troops. What the hell, they breed fast in Kansas anyway.

Soldiers are succinct and do not mince words. This makes them dangerous. We must keep them off-camera to the extent possible. A GI telling the truth could set recruiting back by years.

The truth is that the government doesn't care about its soldiers, and never has. If you think I am being unduly harsh, read the Washington Post. You will find story after story saying that the Democrats don't want to do anything drastic about the war. They fear seeming "soft on national security." In other words, they care more about their electoral prospects in 2008 than they do about the lives of GIs. It's no secret. For them it is a matter of tuning the spin, of covering tracks, of calculating the vector sum of the ardent-patriot vote which may be cooling, deciding which way the liberal wind blows, and staying poised to seem to have supported whoever wins. Screw the troops. Their fathers probably work in factories anyway.

Soldiers do not realize, until too late, the contempt in which they are held by their betters. Here is the psychological foundation of the hobbyist wars of bus-station presidents. If you are, say, a Lance Corporal in some miserable region of Iraq, I have a question for you: Would your commanding general let you date his daughter? I spent my high-school years on a naval base, Dahlgren Naval Proving Ground as it was then called. Dahlgren was heavy with officers, scientists, and engineers. Their daughters, my classmates, were not allowed to associate with sailors. Oh yes, we honor our fighting men. We hold them in endless respect. Yes we do.

For that matter, Lance Corporal, ask how many members of Congress have even served, much less been in combat. Ask how many have children in the armed services. Look around you. Do you see many (any) guys from Harvard? Yale? MIT? Cornell? Exactly. The smart, the well-off, the powerful are not about to risk their irreplaceable sit-parts in combat. Nor are they going to mix with mere high-school graduates, with kids from small towns in Tennessee, with blue-collar riffraff who bowl and drink Bud at places with names like Lenny's Rib Room. One simply doesn't. One has standards.

You are being suckered, gang, just as we were.

It is a science. The government hires slick PR firms and ad agencies in New York. These study what things make a young stud want to be A Soldier: a desire to prove himself, to get laid in foreign places, a craving for adventure, a desire to feel part of something big and powerful and respected, what have you. They know exactly what they are doing. They craft phrases, "Be a Man Among Men," or "A Few Good Men," or, since girls don't like those two, "The Few, The Proud." Join up and be Superman.

Then comes the calculated psychological conditioning. There is for example the sense of power and unity that comes of running to cadence with a platoon of other guys, thump, thump, thump, all shouting to the heady rhythm of boots, "If I die on the Russian front, bury me with a Russian c__t, Lef-rye-lef-rye-lef-rye-lef..." That was Parris Island, August of '66, and doubtless they say something else now, but the principle is the same.

And so you come out in splendid physical shape and feeling no end manly and they tell you how noble it is to Fight for Your Country. This might be true if anyone were invading the country. But since Washington always invades somebody else, you are actually fighting for Big Oil, or Israel, or the defense industry, or the sexual ambiguities who staff National Review, or the vanity of that moral dwarf on Pennsylvania Avenue. You will figure this out years later.

Once you are in the war, you can't get out. We couldn't either. While your commander in chief eats steak in the White House and talks tough, just like a real president, you kill people you have no reason to kill, about whom you know next to nothing—which one day may weigh on your conscience. It does with a lot of guys, but that comes later.

You are being suckered, and so are the social classes that supply the military. Note that the Pentagon cracks down hard on troops who say the wrong things online, that the White House won't allow coffins to be photographed, that the networks never give soldiers a chance to talk unedited about what is happening. Oh no. It is crucial to keep morale up among the rubes. You are the rubes. So, once, were we.
http://fredoneverything.net/FOE_Frame_Column.htm

[kach22i]

I feel the article explains the situation as I see it. It's a view levered by distance and history.

I'm also equally sure that most of the soldiers view is from the inside looking out, and they see a very different view from their perspective.

It's interesting to see all that mental programming unravel when the soldiers are removed from the situation. Equally interesting to see it still click in when the war drum is pounded and new fresh blood is required.

Like conditioned animals.

How long after Pavlov’s experiments did his dogs still salivate at the sound of a bell?

I have not been trained to fight war, and never bought into the Iraq mission. I almost feel pity for those who did, except they seem to hate those of us who did not drink the Kool-aid.

[m21sniper]

Kachi, i could quote some legendary Americans or other historical figures about the reasons why soldiers do what they do, but you would not understand. They would only be words to you. Words with no meaning.

You will probably never understand what makes a man live in the field for 30 days at a time in sub zero temperatures for $701.00 a month(an E-1s pay when i enlisted), but then i will never understand how a man can sit beind a desk 8 hours a day filling out paperwork like some kind of drone, or how another man can grow old in a life of boring obscurity never having known the comaraderie of his fellow brothers in arms.

Perhaps we are not supposed to understand each other, but of course you know you can stick your pity where the sun doesn't shine. You display the very condescension the article speaks of, and quite frankly, it is not very becoming.

Just be thankful that there are enough of us that will volunteer so you can sit back puzzling over what motivates a soldier. If you were capable of understanding, it would already be perfectly apparent.

"That which does not kill us makes us stronger."
~Clausewitz

[rcecale]

Originally posted by m21sniper
Kachi, i could quote some legendary Americans or other historical figures about the reasons why soldiers do what they do, but you would not understand. They would only be words to you. Words with no meaning.

You will probably never understand what makes a man live in the field for 30 days at a time in sub zero temperatures for $701.00 a month(an E-1s pay when i enlisted), but then i will never understand how a man can sit beind a desk 8 hours a day filling out paperwork like some kind of drone, or how another man can grow old in a life of boring obscurity never having known the comaraderie of his fellow brothers in arms.

Perhaps we are not supposed to understand each other, but of course you know you can stick your pity where the sun doesn't shine. You display the very condescension the article speaks of, and quite frankly, it is not very becoming.

Just be thankful that there are enough of us that will volunteer so you can sit back puzzling over what motivates a soldier. If you were capable of understanding, it would already be perfectly apparent.

"That which does not kill us makes us stronger."
~Clausewitz

WOW! Just "WOW!" Definitely worth repeating!

Another appropriate quote:

"For those who have fought for it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know."

Randy

[kach22i]

Originally posted by m21sniper
[B]You will probably never understand what makes a man live in the field for 30 days at a time in sub zero temperatures for $701.00 a month(an E-1s pay when i enlisted)

What ever gets you out of the mobile home park I guess.


I have not forgotten the generous reenlistment bonuses you mentioned in another thread either.

[oldE]

"What ever gets you out of the mobile home park I guess."
kach22i

That was a crass statement.

This discussion has been going on for centuries.
From, "Dolce et decorum est" to statements such as made by Randy.

We can I hope, understand the reflex action which leads a father or mother to leap into the path of an oncoming vehicle to save the life of their child. It is harder to understand the process which leads a man or woman to endure fatigue, deprivation or hardship to be there at the dirty end of the stick where mistakes don't get brushed off, they can kill.

I have no doubts whatever, the Spartan troops marching to battle groused about the leaders who had put their lives on the line. At one time you could, if you were part of the victorious army, rape and pillage, but that has gone out of fashion in western circles.

You may well ponder why a modern man or woman would place themselves in a position where they might be used as an instrument for a questionable purpose by their leader.

I wonder how the people who were at the top of Enron look at themselves in the mirror in the morning. They probably comfort themselves by saying, "Nobody died."

I think the difference is the soldier still believes despite the flaws in the system or leaders, there is a job to be done. It is worth doing and he/she is the best person to do it.

"On War".
"Ordinary men who follow the suggestions of others become, therefore, generally undecided on the spot; they think that they have found circumstances different from what they had expected, and this view gains strength by their again yielding to the suggestions of others. But even the man who has made his own plans, when he comes to see things with his own eyes will often think he has done wrong. Firm reliance on self must make him proof against the seeming pressure of the moment; his first conviction will in the end prove true, when the foreground scenery which fate has pushed on to the stage of War, with its accompaniments of terrific objects, is drawn aside and the horizon extended." Clausewitz

Les

[fastpat]

Originally posted by oldE

I have no doubts whatever, the Spartan troops marching to battle groused about the leaders who had put their lives on the line. At one time you could, if you were part of the victorious army, rape and pillage, but that has gone out of fashion in western circles.

The difference was the Spartans, and not much later, the rest of the Greek city-states, were actually defending their homeland from a US government type invasion.

Neither M21Sniper nor Randy defended anything other than their self perceived macho image, certainly neither was defending America.

[Eric 951]

Originally posted by fastpat
The difference was the Spartans, and not much later, the rest of the Greek city-states, were actually defending their homeland from a US government type invasion.

Neither M21Sniper nor Randy defended anything other than their self perceived macho image, certainly neither was defending America.

Your statement regarding the Spartans is false, unless specifically referring to the second Persian invasion. During the first the focus of the invasion was Athens and the Athenian homeland.
And the Peleponessian war was a war of agression between Athens and Sparta for influence over the Greek city-states.

Perhaps Les was referring to one of these events when he made his statement.

[oldE]

Eric,

Actually, I used the Spartans as an example of a warrier state. I suppose I could have used any other of dozens of 'nations' of soldiers who marched at the command of a leader. (or sailors who sailed, for that matter)

My point, (poorly stated as it was) had to do with those who remain behind, complaining vociferously as they dare of the error of it all. Fred Reed seems to have conveniently forgotten his right to complain was bought with the blood of men like those he purports to address and as they bought and paid, some other nay-sayer voiced their opinion just as loud. I suspect Reed's writings will be ignored by those whose lives are lived in boredom, "punctuated by sheer terror" and embraced by those who remain behind and murmer "I told you so."

Thank you
Les

[Eric 951]

Originally posted by oldE
Eric,

Actually, I used the Spartans as an example of a warrier state. I suppose I could have used any other of dozens of 'nations' of soldiers who marched at the command of a leader. (or sailors who sailed, for that matter)

Thank you
Les

Les,

I figured you were writing in regards to the generality of the Spartans as a true warrior society--wherein the command of the king was law, and his orders were followed wether the army agreed with it or not.

My post was directed to pastes' false assumption that the Spartans only fought to defend their homeland.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by oldE
I suspect Reed's writings will be ignored by those whose lives are lived in boredom, "punctuated by sheer terror" and embraced by those who remain behind and murmer "I told you so."

Fred Reed is a former Marine who served as a grunt in Vietnam, then returned to report on the Vietnam War as a journalist. While not as decorated as LTC. David Hackworth, he is held in high esteem by others who have served, and are serving today.

Now, wipe that "stuff" off your face before it dries.

[oldE]

Pat,

I know you think I'm simple, but let me try to explain it to you.

Mr. Reed's, writing makes it clear he was a serving soldier. If you read the whole sentence, I point out that this sort of thing has been going on for a long, long time. I suspect many serving members of the military will feel he has "gone over to the other side." His message has reached you and found fertile ground.

Thank you, however for highlighting and repeating the relevant part.

(and thanks for the laugh!)
Les

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by kach22i
What ever gets you out of the mobile home park I guess.


I have not forgotten the generous reenlistment bonuses you mentioned in another thread either.

There's more of that condescension.

Newsflash: There are no trailer parks in Philly.

I am sure you feel you are in some way superior to me, but i do want you to know that a soldier would not even consider you his peer, let alone his superior.

Yes, the US military does offer generous RE-enlistment bonuses....from a "trailer park" standpoint.

Thank you for exposing yourself in this thread though, it is always nice to know what people really think.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by fastpat
[B]The difference was the Spartans, and not much later, the rest of the Greek city-states, were actually defending their homeland from a US government type invasion.

The Spartans fought against the Persians to preserve their way of life, which was essentially the utter subjugation of the Lacedonians.

I therefore find it most peculiar that- given your clearly stated beliefs- you judge the Spartans worthy of praise.

Neither M21Sniper nor Randy defended anything other than their self perceived macho image,

I defended the man to my left and to my right, like every soldier does. I was not motivated by the accolades of the social elite or the 'unwashed throng'. No good soldier is.

certainly neither was defending America.

You are entitled to your opinion, worthless as it may be.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by fastpat
Fred Reed is a former Marine who served as a grunt in Vietnam, then returned to report on the Vietnam War as a journalist. While not as decorated as LTC. David Hackworth, he is held in high esteem by others who have served, and are serving today.

Now, wipe that "stuff" off your face before it dries.

The difference between he and you(and Karchi) is that he does not hold the soldier in contempt, or view them with an air of derision.

You are entitled to your opinion, i'd have it no other way....but opinions are like asssholes. Everyone has one, and most of them stink.

[Rot 911]

Pat's posting of the article is like most of his postings, used to troll. However in this case I am somewhat in agreement. That is, there is no doubt that the politicos are hell bent in coming up with an "exit strategy." For them, this war is over and it is time to think about the upcoming elections. It bothers me that good men and women are going to have to keep dying in Iraq, while the not so good men and women in Washington try to put a spin on things to make them look good come election time. Bring those good men and women home. Now.

[kach22i]

Originally posted by m21sniper
The difference between he and you(and Karchi) is that he does not hold the soldier in contempt, or view them with an air of derision.

I don't hold soldiers with anything you claim. Go on feel hurt and deserted, you know you want to mope. Deprogramming is painful, never said it wasn't.

Can't a guy make one trailer park joke?

What's next, will Rednecks will be off limits?

[m21sniper]

Your condescension is as unwarranted as it is apparent.

I have no problem with trailer park jokes, if they actually make sense in the context you're using them..Next time, try "Housing project" or something.

And no Kach, i am not hurt by your comments or your opinion, i'm merely put off by your attitude.

As is my right.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by oldE
Pat,

I know you think I'm simple, but let me try to explain it to you.

You make yourself simple, it's not what I think or do, it's what you do.

Mr. Reed's, writing makes it clear he was a serving soldier. If you read the whole sentence, I point out that this sort of thing has been going on for a long, long time.

I mentioned David Hackworth, called "Hack" by men in uniform. You look him up. No legitimate accusation was ever made about either "going over to the other side", whatever that may mean in your world.

I suspect many serving members of the military will feel he has "gone over to the other side." His message has reached you and found fertile ground. Thank you, however for highlighting and repeating the relevant part. (and thanks for the laugh!)
Les

You laugh much as the classic village idiot does, you know those depicted as sitting on a fence at the edge of a village, giggling to themselves at things see only by them. Laugh away.

[sammyg2]

That is the true tragedy our heroic sodiers face: by default they fight not only for those of us who understand and are grateful, but for the faste-pastes of the world who take for granted the sacrifices made and tarnish the good intentions through ridiculous lunatic rants and posts.