My Generation at War: Overcoming the Media's Expectations
I read Genevieve Long's “Another War-Torn Generation” this week, and as someone deployed in Iraq would like to respond. A very well written article, yes, but perhaps she should have talked to the soldiers she saw in the airport. She might have learned why their boots were so well taken care of--“you can tell the quality of a soldier by the shine on his boots.” There is a certain pride that is associated with wearing the uniform and accomplishing the mission of a U.S. Soldier, Sailor, Airman, or Marine. A feeling that one who has never stood a watch will most certainly find it hard to understand.
Long’s interpretation of the Marine’s mantra “get some” is along the lines of the media’s doom and gloom outlook when it comes to the War on Terror and it is completely understandable why she would come to such a conclusion that it means kill or be killed. No question, the Marines are some of this country’s toughest warriors but they are first and foremost motivated professionals. Spend a day with any group of Marines and you will see the mantra “get some” takes on a broader meaning that is more along the lines of “if you want it, go get it.” And though I am a Navy man, I am confident that if you asked nearly any Marine what their mantra is you will be guaranteed to get a proud, “Semper Fi.” Always faithful.
My generation is not a “War-Torn Generation.” Talking to my friends and family back home, I’m pretty sure they are not losing sleep over the possibility of having their draft number pulled and finding themselves on the front line. We are a completely volunteer force, unlike the U.S. military during the Vietnam War. From a political perspective and from an operator’s perspective, you cannot compare today's military forces generally, or more specifically those who serve in Iraq and Afghanistan, to Vietnam. Nor is it a measure for how these wars will affect my generation.
As somebody who is currently deployed in the War on Terror, it makes me a little sad to hear somebody say that my generation will “probably learn very little" from our struggles overseas. Our generation did not deploy ourselves; we were deployed in this war by the Baby Boomer generation, the Vietnam War generation. And they deployed us with prior memories influencing their decisions. No draft, and thank God for that. Lessons are being learned by our generation. You cannot be deployed to this part of the world to "stand the watch," and not have some part of you changed.
Long’s point of view that many American soldiers are “mostly young, restless, maybe a bit underprivileged and needing a back door out of a tough situation” is true. But most of them joined the military because the proverbial glass ceiling within this organization does not exist to the extent it does in the civilian world. I truly believe these underprivileged individuals will take the lessons they are learning in this tough situation, along with their special training, to develop into great leaders for our generation.
If one bases their knowledge on what CNN is broadcasting then you will learn very little of reality. The legacy for our children will not be, “sullied boots returning from wars on foreign shores or dead bodies.” It will be the exact opposite.
Our generation stands on the verge of greatness and if you have been fortunate enough to serve with the men and women in our Armed Services and witness them perform in this War on Terror, you would agree. Had Long spoken to some of those soldiers in the airport, she should have asked, “What have you learned?” not “Are you scared?” I think she would have gotten a very unique perspective from some very unique individuals.
If you enjoyed this piece on those serving in the U.S. military, take a look at this article on the war in Afghanistan.
(U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Mario A. Quiroga)
Framing & Perspective is Everything
"From a political perspective and from an operator’s perspective, you cannot compare today's military forces generally, or more specifically those who serve in Iraq and Afghanistan, to Vietnam. Nor is it a measure for how these wars will affect my generation."
Well said! That's why its important that the real reporters (the people on the front lines) report on their experience, and not let the narrative be melo-dramatized or romanticized by aspects of the media. Let the better question of "What have you learned" instead of "Are you scared" be asked indeed.
How We Fight Wars and Who Fights Them
My friend, Jesse Nankin, sent me your article, "My Generation at War: Overcoming the Media's Expectations" and I replied to her with a few reactions. She asked if I'd like to post them and she showed me how...so here is what I said to her:
"Dear Jesse...
Thanks so much for sending me this email. As you might expect I have multiple reactions to it as someone that was involved in war where the bad guys were shooting at me and wanted my comrades and me dead.
Reaction #1: There seems to be such an emphasis on those that were killed and maimed, and while there certainly was/is that danger in both wars (Vietnam and those wars today), what enabled me to get through all that without undue emotional stress is the knowledge that the vast preponderance of those of us in combat did and will come back whole...and that there are certain sections of our urban society (both then and now) where citizens living in their communities have a worse risk of being killed/maimed that those of us in combat.
Reaction #2: The author praises the fact that we no longer have a draft. I do not agree. From an operational standpoint it is certainly easier to administer and lead an all volunteer armed force than one composed o draftees. The quality and motivation of those involved is clearly superior. No question about it. On the other hand, we are starting to engage in armed conflict that drags on for many years and perhaps decades....and the people who fight in those wars and who risk their lives in harm's way are bearing a disproportionate amount of the national risk....and that is simply not fair i my view. Because of the lack of a draft, our public now looks at wars as those things that the military fights...not the country at large fights..and I think that is harmful to our national purpose and our national interest. We now have generations of civilian elected officials in all branches of our federal government that are responsible for sending our military in harm's way...who have never served in military uniform. While serving in uniform is certainly not a prerequisite to being qualified to participate in the decision of sending our troops into war, it certainly makes that decision significantly better informed if at least some involved in that decision process did have military experience.
Reaction #3: The article did not deal with this directly, but I think our country has become too accustomed to the concept of limited war. And in my view that concept is oxymoronic. It probably happened as the result of the frightening possibilities of weapons of mass destruction, so it is understandable. If our enemy knows that we will not use whatever it takes that we have to win a war against it, it puts our country at an extreme disadvantage and costs unnecessary lives on our side of the war. It also leads us to look at wars as if they were sporting events where a tie is OK .....and it is bad form to deal with an enemy with such an overwhelming force that the winner looks like a bully and did not give its opposition a sporting chance. We did that incremental approach in Vietnam when we could easily have gone in with overwhelming force and eliminated all North Vietnamese capacity to produce or receive war making material, resulting in a relatively quick win at great expense to the North Vietnamese...and we ended up losing the war and wasting something like 65,000 American lives and millions of South Vietnamese lives. We did the same thing in Iraq. We went in on the cheap instead of with overwhelming force and we almost got knocked out of the box.
We are currently involved in Afghanistan where we are rationing our troop strength and following rules of engagement designed primarily not to produce collateral damage at the expense of not killing our enemy. Wars are not fair...and when they occur, innocent people die. That is why they should be avoided if at all possible. But when the decision is made to go to war, the priority of killing our enemy should trump not producing civilian casualties. We should be known for being ferocious in our pursuit of our enemies such that no one would ever want to consider being one....or being around them. Ultimately such a policy of strength and the willingness to use it when provoked would significantly reduce the probability of wars and save lives. Ironically there are many in our country that think just the opposite...that having a vast preponderance of military power relative to our potential enemies encourages us to go to war. Those who are professional warriors are the last people who want to use that military power in warfare.
Anyway ...these are my reactions and I thank you for sending me that email.
Don
Post new comment