support for the War
On C-SPAN today, I was watching coverage of yesterday's rally in support of the war in Iraq. The rallies against the war are generally not interesting because I've heard it already and I already agree with it.
But listening to the speakers in support of the war and support of the troops is interesting because I try to figure out what they want. I have concluded that some people just like to fight and to die.
Yesterday, I took the girls to gymnastics practice at a local rec center. I overheard a group of a few guys talking about their service in Iraq. They had been there and one or two were on their way back. They were in general agreement that life was easier over there than it is here. They said that in Iraq, everybody is your friend and there is always some to protect your back, both literally in battle and personally while off-duty. Here, back home, they agreed that kind of support was missing. While on duty, soldiers were not as personally close and supportive. They had wives and families to attend to and other issues like paying the mortgage, making car repairs, etc. I got the idea that they appreciated the simplicity of life in a war zone. They also appreciated the strong friendships that develop during the intensity of war.
I recently finished reading The Longest Winter by Alex Kershaw. It's about a platoon of US Army soldiers during and after the Battle of the Bulge in the winter of 1944-45. It covers their actions from basic training through the end of the war. Many of the soldiers, interviewed long after the war, commented that their comrades in battle remained their best friends for the rest of their lives. Throughout American history, there have been many stories like that about all our wars. The book ends with the story of a ceremony honoring those soldiers at Yankee Stadium in the 1970s. The soldiers received a long standing ovation from a packed stadium.
Not only do soldiers form strong, lasting relationships during battle, but long after wars are over, there is strong public support for the soldiers, marines, sailors, and airmen who fought those wars. We build national monuments to them and communities all over the country build their own local monuments.
So, why do some people, given the same information and observing the same events, support the war in Iraq and others oppose it? Why do some mothers, who have lost children killed in battle, join organizations to oppose the war and other mothers of dead soldiers join organizations to support the war? Why do some politicians, educated and experienced, oppose the war, and other politicians, also educated and experienced, support continuation of the war? Why do some soldiers, after returning home, volunteer for another tour of duty, and other veterans leave the service and actively oppose the war?
I believe those differences result from people's basic personality differences. Some people, when faced with the trauma of war, and sometimes death, are predisposed to look for simple answers, while others are inclined to examine the complex relationships between history, politics, economics, religion, and psychology that lead to war in the first place.
No parent, faced with the death of a child in war, would willingly admit that it was a senseless death. In listening to mothers of dead soldiers speaking in support of the war, I think they believe that the best way to honor their child is for the Unites States to win the war because with victory comes honor. Whether or not the war is worth winning is not a relevant question to those parents. It's a very simple view: My son died, therefore, we must win so he won't die for a losing cause. Losing is bad.
For soldiers, some men simply prefer the clarity of living in a combat zone. Men, of course, miss their wives and children while stationed overseas, but they do not miss mowing the lawn, taking out the trash, changing diapers, paying bills, doing dishes, folding clothes, and all the other daily chores required for managing a household. While overseas, these men do not have to worry about all those domestic duties. They get to experience the emotional rush of men in combat and they get to expend their male energy in acceptable ways. During peace time, back home, fighting is not acceptable, except during organized contact sports. These men also get to experience the pride of serving their country. It's a simple life; dangerous, yes, but simple. These men would never admit that they like to fight and they appreciate the break from the mundane tediousness of life at home. They will support the war because it validates their personality. Like their mothers, these men are not interested in asking if the war is worth winning; that doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that we are at war and we must win. Whether or not they die is not an immediate concern. And, for those who have died, the war must be an honorable one. And, in a simple view of war, winning is honorable.
People who support the war and people who oppose the war are not focusing on the same issues and are not asking the same questions. People who support the war generally are predisposed to have a simple, personal view of the world around them. Whether or not the war is good, just, or even necessary, is not a concern. Those are complex issues with complicated answers.
Daniel
But listening to the speakers in support of the war and support of the troops is interesting because I try to figure out what they want. I have concluded that some people just like to fight and to die.
Yesterday, I took the girls to gymnastics practice at a local rec center. I overheard a group of a few guys talking about their service in Iraq. They had been there and one or two were on their way back. They were in general agreement that life was easier over there than it is here. They said that in Iraq, everybody is your friend and there is always some to protect your back, both literally in battle and personally while off-duty. Here, back home, they agreed that kind of support was missing. While on duty, soldiers were not as personally close and supportive. They had wives and families to attend to and other issues like paying the mortgage, making car repairs, etc. I got the idea that they appreciated the simplicity of life in a war zone. They also appreciated the strong friendships that develop during the intensity of war.
I recently finished reading The Longest Winter by Alex Kershaw. It's about a platoon of US Army soldiers during and after the Battle of the Bulge in the winter of 1944-45. It covers their actions from basic training through the end of the war. Many of the soldiers, interviewed long after the war, commented that their comrades in battle remained their best friends for the rest of their lives. Throughout American history, there have been many stories like that about all our wars. The book ends with the story of a ceremony honoring those soldiers at Yankee Stadium in the 1970s. The soldiers received a long standing ovation from a packed stadium.
Not only do soldiers form strong, lasting relationships during battle, but long after wars are over, there is strong public support for the soldiers, marines, sailors, and airmen who fought those wars. We build national monuments to them and communities all over the country build their own local monuments.
So, why do some people, given the same information and observing the same events, support the war in Iraq and others oppose it? Why do some mothers, who have lost children killed in battle, join organizations to oppose the war and other mothers of dead soldiers join organizations to support the war? Why do some politicians, educated and experienced, oppose the war, and other politicians, also educated and experienced, support continuation of the war? Why do some soldiers, after returning home, volunteer for another tour of duty, and other veterans leave the service and actively oppose the war?
I believe those differences result from people's basic personality differences. Some people, when faced with the trauma of war, and sometimes death, are predisposed to look for simple answers, while others are inclined to examine the complex relationships between history, politics, economics, religion, and psychology that lead to war in the first place.
No parent, faced with the death of a child in war, would willingly admit that it was a senseless death. In listening to mothers of dead soldiers speaking in support of the war, I think they believe that the best way to honor their child is for the Unites States to win the war because with victory comes honor. Whether or not the war is worth winning is not a relevant question to those parents. It's a very simple view: My son died, therefore, we must win so he won't die for a losing cause. Losing is bad.
For soldiers, some men simply prefer the clarity of living in a combat zone. Men, of course, miss their wives and children while stationed overseas, but they do not miss mowing the lawn, taking out the trash, changing diapers, paying bills, doing dishes, folding clothes, and all the other daily chores required for managing a household. While overseas, these men do not have to worry about all those domestic duties. They get to experience the emotional rush of men in combat and they get to expend their male energy in acceptable ways. During peace time, back home, fighting is not acceptable, except during organized contact sports. These men also get to experience the pride of serving their country. It's a simple life; dangerous, yes, but simple. These men would never admit that they like to fight and they appreciate the break from the mundane tediousness of life at home. They will support the war because it validates their personality. Like their mothers, these men are not interested in asking if the war is worth winning; that doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that we are at war and we must win. Whether or not they die is not an immediate concern. And, for those who have died, the war must be an honorable one. And, in a simple view of war, winning is honorable.
People who support the war and people who oppose the war are not focusing on the same issues and are not asking the same questions. People who support the war generally are predisposed to have a simple, personal view of the world around them. Whether or not the war is good, just, or even necessary, is not a concern. Those are complex issues with complicated answers.
Daniel
posted by Daniel | 12:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home