Culture battle

[Administrator]

The Army, like all military organizations, is defined by its culture, and the culture is defined by the history. Its culture has been defined by its overwhelming success in World War II and shaped by a perceived history of fighting grand wars. Although the culture is consistent with the perceived history, the reality is the Army has been involved in stability and support operations, not grand wars, for almost 80 percent of its existence.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/08/2765978

[robert Shule]

This thread treads on something so delicate that normally it is not touched.

We as Americans like to think of ourselves as being on the “right side of history”. Well, as much as we like to think, all that noble rhetoric about the purity of our cause and action that resounds about us daily blinds itself to a sobering history of war and conquest by our nation.

This history includes the destruction of all major cities in Germany with incendiary and other bombs dropped by our very own U.S. Air Force that turned major population centers into infernos of death. Then there was Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There was Vietnam where more bombs were dropped on that small country than all the bombs dropped on Europe. To think that innocents were not tacit targets in these acts is simply absurd.

This ignotable history continues on in to today. U.S. military actions of the past few years in Iraq have been frighteningly similar to those that forced the Semenoles down a trail of tears, and levied the massacre of Lakota at Wounded Knee for the “winning of the West”; or the razing of Richmond, and many other cities throughout the South in name of “preserving the Union”. U.S. military action was directed not against any opposing militias, but was done upon civilian populations. Some say it was necessary to defeat Adolf Hitler, an Imperial emperor, or communists in the jungle, but mass killing of civilians never really has much to do with defeating armies. They are acts of conquest, and not national defense. That, as difficult as it may be to accept, is the true culture of our military; albeit the thinking (or rather the lack of) of many naive souls who participate within it.

To this we Americans are complacent even when considering the consequences; except for some very few amongst us. Take one Lt. Ehren Watada for example who took the courage to uphold right constitution by refusing duty in Iraq. The Army was unable to prosecute him causing his hearing to end in a mistrial. Lt. Watada is now being prosecuted on the same charges once more in apparent double jeopardy that will likely conclude also in mistrial leaving Lt. Watada for promotion to Captain, and the army giving him an honorable discharge. Lt. Watada is one who can truly wear his uniform with dignity and honor.

As for us, for want of better life, not necessarily for ourselves, but for our families and especially for our children, many of us have engaged the military or its peripheral institutions. We owe our welfare and along with that our self-esteem to our country and our military. Naturally, we give it the loyalty it demands, but how do we overlook the indiscretions. How easily we ignore obvious reason, like the pilots over Germany who prayed that the bombs they were dropping upon cities should not also hit women and children though clear sense foretold that those prayers would go unanswered. Today we finger the atrocities in Iraq on al-Qaida, Jihadists, and whatever other bogeymen there are out there. Meanwhile we neglect that it was us who created and still perpetuate the tragedy. We are still dropping bombs, and they are landing on women and children. We are still taking out infrastructure like water supplies, or at least not secure their reconstruction. People die in mass. We assuage ourselves with reason, yet smugly avoid the deep truth that we are participants in a great mortal sin; and within our deepest recesses what hatreds we must harbor for us to condemn an entire people for want of catching some troublemakers amongst them. What good senses we do not touch in fear of soiling our righteousness.

In our faiths, we are to love our neighbors and our enemies as well. Though we are taught the forgiveness of sin, that each of us as individuals have the capacity to initiate a redemption, and thus have a way out of our moral dilemma, we still scoff at the contention that we are even in one. The sacrifices being made with these wars in Iraq and the rest of the Middle-East may go well beyond just life and limb. We as a military and as a nation have been blinded, and are now stumbling down the path to perdition no longer knowing good and evil.

[djcmalvern]

Congratulations to Robert Shule for having the courage to renounce his faith in the history of the USA. But why stop there. For much of the world's history, if not all of it, is founded on the clash of doctrines and creeds such as the religion he grasps on to in his article. The destruction being vested upon Iraq, Palestine, Israel, USA, UK and so on is not a lot different to that which was laid upon Egypt, Carthage, Europe and so on because a few religious nuts in power believed their way was right and all others were wrong...or so the conventional atheist argument goes. I do not attach such lofty ideals or altruism to the megalomaniacs that have abounded through our world's history. Avarice and the greed for power are probably the simpler and more robustly arguable reasons, with religion being manipulated for the main reason of subjugating the people the monsters needed as cannon fodder. Let us now renounce all history based on religious altruism. That way might mean that Osama and his buddies will lose their platform, as would Bush and his shaky half of the USA population, along with all the other despots who tell us they are have God on their side. Some hope, don't you think?

[Boris Tiraspolsky]

One of the "useful" legends about St. George relates to his encounter with the dragon, representing devil. According to this legend, a pagan town in Libya was victimized by a dragon which the inhabitants first attempted to appease by offerings of sheep and then by the sacrifice of various members of their community to the monster. But St. George arrived, killed the dragon, and converted the pagans into Christianity.

Modern Terrorism is that dragon killed by St. George, and resurrected nowadays. The dragon-devil met the People of the United States. Therefore, it is ethically and esthetically fine not for a moment to hesitate to mop all terrorists up from the Historic Stage. The latter inherently belongs not to the dragon, but to the People!
_________________________________________

Could We Be Defeated in Modern Terrorist Warfare?

The answer is sober and straightforward: yes, we could be defeated! The United States is currently involved in ideologically charged battle, with no end on a horizon, and many unpleasant surprises ahead! We have lost people, we have lost property. The U.S. Government had not been either vigilant enough to prevent the devastating terrorist event of 9/11, no take strategic advantage of own success in early stages of military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

We shall witness new terrorist attacks against the Unites States both, domestically and abroad, because terrorists never stop their sinister actions by themselves. We shall witness new terrorist attacks, because terrorists never satisfied with what they already accomplished. We shall witness new terrorist attacks, because terrorists see an ambiguity of our political elites reflecting anti-terrorist ideological immaturity of own constituencies, and therefore, incapable of decisively combating Terrorism and stopping terrorists from attacking the Nation.

Terrorists inevitably will perform more horrible inhuman acts until we finally learn how to fight this obscure ideologically charged terrorist warfare, and eventually win it. However, at the present moment it is far ahead in Future! The problem is that terrorists are ready for a next strategic move, and we are not ready to protect our own population in possible terrorist attacks with Weapons of Mass Destruction. Could anything be done to avoid this horror?

We ought to act with no procrastination. We need intelligently regroup our existing Forces, develop our new superior ideologically charged anti-terrorist National Strategy, create appropriate for ideological war anti-terrorist Ideological Instruments and Forces. We must adjust ourselves for that new National Strategy calling for total Mobilization of the Nation in the War on Terror.

We must stop act like children entertaining the most dangerous illusion of all, that we could not be ever defeated. Alexander the Great made a fatal mistake by believing he could not be ever defeated. Where is the Alexander’s Empire? Romans made the same mistake. Where is that great Empire? Napoleon made a similar mistake. There is no Napoleon’s Empire either. Hitler made the analogous assumption of never being defeated. Where is the Third Reich now?

Should not we learn from those Historic mistakes, or for a sake of “feeling good about ourselves” we should ignore the gloomy reality of modern terrorist warfare? Time has come to say “good bye” to illusions about this war! As any ideologically charged warfare, terrorist war is TOTAL by a given. In simple words it means: either they kill us, or we kill them. And there is nothing in between, or nutrality in battle!

Yes, we could be defeated, or rather killed by terrorists in this total war, if we, as the Nation, continue to blindly believe in “humanity” of our lethal enemies and "sacred greatness” of their ideological roots. One must realize once and forever, terrorists consciously and deliberately relinquished all men properties, and turn themselves into absolute wickedness and transgression of devil.

Contributed by Boris Tiraspolsky
Founding Member of American Ideological Society
americanideologicalsociety.com

[robert Shule]

We defer to talking about dragons and things to bury the truth that the atrocity is what we ourselves commit. This attitude of we kill them or they kill us is nothing but an expression of hate. Most good men and women joined the armed forces to make something better of themselves, to to do something good for our country, and do good in this world. Right now our military is spreading much hate, death, and destruction throughout the world. Why and how does such virgin nature of love turn into this nature of hate that is so prevalent today
I feel a true soldier works for a better world. Love, not hate, should be at the root of all command and training. That is love for all. It is time to change the culture of our military from a culture of war into a culture of peace.
Hearts and minds cannot won with the butt of a gun.

[Roger]

The nature of the soldier is to fight. For Mr. Shule to misunderstand that is interesting as is his assertion that "Right now our military is spreading much hate, death, and destruction throughout the world". That is true in part but it ignores the other side of that coin which is the humanitarian actions of our military throughout the world. While to say, as Mr. Shule does, that the military should change from "a culture of war into a culture of peace" illustrates either an incredible naiveté or his lack of understanding of what a military is for. It's for when all that love fails and there are still things to accomplish. It may be distasteful to some but that doesn't make it any less necessary. Mr. Shule seems to not grasp that reality.

[Roger]

I concur with the author that the Army, a conservative and hide-bound organization if there ever was one, has failed to change with the times, though it has the tools to do so. Special Operations, specifically Army Special Forces, is designed to fight what was called a 'peoples war' using indigenous forces as combat multipliers. To take the unconventionally and indirect approach to conflict that focuses on results rather than tactics. The proponency for a UW command is a good step towards addressing the use of unconventional forces and tactics to resolve modern issues. While I do not think throwing away the 'big war' capability is a good idea I also think, as the author points out, that we have not fought a big, maneuver war against a comparable foe for quite some time. We need that big hammer, to be sure, but we also need the scalpel and, in today’s world, more so. The question is whether both the military and the civilian leadership can transition from hammer to scalpel in regards to C3I and such.

[robert Shule]

We all know that what is burned onto the retina of the eye of one man, seldom is the same as what is burned onto the retina of another man’s eye. We all do stand upon this world in slightly different relation, and therefore each of our individual perspectives would indeed also be different. Yet the stance between men is seldom so great that common truth cannot be compiled. More often, the aloofness of common truth occurs when men choose not to recognize the difficult images that are burning onto their eyes.

There is this notion that Iraq is awash in Freedom with the smell of roses in the air, and our troops are remaking Iraq into a wonderful place by fighting back some bad insurgents. However, if one for a moment can take those rose colored glasses off, they would probably see, a country that has spiraled into anarchy as a result of our military's adventure called Operation Iraqi Freedom. What we installed over there is by magnitudes more tyrannical than what was there before. We accuse Saddam Hussein of gassing some of his countrymen. Yet, we are blind to see our own actions in Fallujah, and the many other cities literally obliterated by our U.S. Forces in the name of just cause. Since when is justice served by condemning a nation for the actions of a few rogue individuals among them? The decision to invade Iraq was pre-emptive, and unconscionable considering all the other options available at the time. For all the human suffering over there, the results are indeed a human crime.

There is a difference between the crime of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and the crimes of Saddam Hussein, the crimes of the Iraqi insurgents, and the crimes of the terrorists. The difference being that the crime of Operation Iraqi Freedom is a crime that WE have chosen to commit. We should fear our God-like deeds.

Our military knows how to use a big hammer, and knows how to use a scalpel. We all know that there is a proper time and place for the application of force for the love of this world. So what is happening in Iraq that makes peace so evasive?

I feel it is the Commander-in-Chief, Mr. Bush, and not the military per se that is the essence of the problem. He is grossly misapplying our military to the point of abuse. He has our troops in a war with the intent to propagate a hate in pursuit of his own dubious purposes. He undermines not only our military, but also the people of the United States, our government, as well as the principles of the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights, in addition to international law and order, and ultimately basic fundamental human right, dignity, and value. He undermines America itself.

This issue of culture we talk about recognizing our success in World War II, and feeling our frustrations in Iraq. We see a need for something to be done, but are we not looking at the river while neglecting its source? Maybe if we do something about the source, the river of problems will quell.

[The Universal Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Administrator

Although the culture is consistent with the perceived history, the reality is the Army has been involved in stability and support operations, not grand wars, for almost 80 percent of its existence.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/08/2765978

With the rise in the ability to kill all life on earth, the likelihood/logic of "industrial war" had diminished.

At the same time the nature of war has shifted to a "war among the people".

Unfortunately the types of weapons/units most applicable to a "war among the people" aren't all that amenable to grand parades and flashy exhibitions to awe the masses.

Not only that, but the type of soldier needed to fight a "war among the people" isn't all that amenable to "traditional command structures" because they MUST be more independent, intellient, and innovative.

However, "career progression" is built almost solely on a steady climb up through a structure based on (administratively convenient) units of a traditional nature.

In short, in order to "prevail" the old forms of organization and command will almost invariably have to be scrapped. This, of course, is going to result in an incredible amount of "redundancy" - which means that it will be resisted to the death by those with a vested interest in "the system as it is". And, since the ones with the greatest amount of vested interest in "the system as it is" are those next set to assume command the result of that resistance is likely to be no change at all - until a massive disaster forces one.