RE: [Futurework] Playing with fire

[Karen Watters Cole]

Keith, as long as US soldiers believe that they are protecting the homeland, kith and kin, there is no question of courage.    Ray is right to point out the difference the volunteer army makes here, that most are True Believers.  There will always be notable exceptions, like the morons who join so they can kill somebody, anybody, and those who are there simply for the GI Bill.  However, the preponderance of men and women in uniform today are gung ho, a military fraternity of like minds, highly trained and loyal.   However, calculating the huge collateral damage in urban guerrilla warfare should be the right reason for the generals and anyone else to have second thoughts about a prolonged military exercise.  To not have cold feet on that issue would be foolish and excessively poor leadership.  To proceed with that risk assessment one must have a clear, irrefutable imminent threat.    So if the CIA and the Pentagon are continuing their disagreement, it shows a healthy checks and balances, not lack of courage.    If the people are convinced, even if the evidence is manufactured or exaggerated, if people are convinced of the danger and of the certainty of the mission, then doubters should remember what the Japanese learned from awakening the sleeping tiger.  God help us if the same occurs now with all our new toys and skills, our situational ethics and the “ends justifies the means’ foreign policy.   But for the life of me I don’t see how Bush is going to conduct a proxy war to remove Hussein should the risk managers overcome the chickenhawks.  Would it really be possible for there to be a Prime Time Sweeps Week war for television consumption and not face the aftermath of incriminating evidence spread by the internet and independent satellites?    I would think that an American public, especially the baby boomers and older vets, much less an already skeptical European one, having had devastating nationalistic wars in their neighborhoods, would be suspicious of a Grenada-style invasion to pump up morale and flex our military muscles.  Americans are weary from economic loss and anxiety, still in shock from 9/11 and alarmed about further terrorism, more suspicious after corporate scandals, increasingly jealous of the vigor in the military-industrial-technology complex, while facing a dreary private and public work life as consumers in the cogs of the wheel of free market capitalism.     If the White House imagines that they can spin that, they certainly believe they have been blessed and ordained by God on this mission.  Let’s be clear about that.  They do believe that.     Just the same, my instincts tell me that many, many Americans are disillusioned with society and government as they know it, and that if a clear and present danger is presented, they will enthusiastically rally to participate in a cause that restores meaning in their lives, that reduces materialistic consumerism to its proper juvenile behavior, that gives vigor to the wounded spirit of America and restores honor to tarnished values.  The dead and wounded will be received as martyrs for a just cause if and when the White House taps into a common sense of purpose and shared sacrifice, just as with any other nation and its patriots.  There are too many who yearn for past glory, who despise the reality and complexity of the real world.  It will be a clash of cultures, alright, and not necessarily overseas.  - Karen     Keith said: If Saddam carries out his policy of placing his Republican Guards in the large cities and fighting street-to-street, and house-to-house, then American soldiers will either not have the courage to take part -- or they'll turn against their officers as they did in Vietnam.   You are making a big mistake Keith based upon what has been said about the past.   There are two big, I would say huge differences between the past as in "Fragging" or using granades on your own abusive officers and the incident with the 3Rd Infantry in DC.     The Old Guard was a showcase unit made up of enlisted men who were from the highest educational status in the Army.   It was considered cushey duty and was meant to do a lot of parades for the Washington Area.    There was a movie about them years ago which painted it differently but this is the scuttlebutt and we were on the same Post as they were.    Ivy League folks wouldn't shoot other students like the Ohio National Guard did.   Second, there is no longer any Draft.    Those folks were drafted into going somewhere they didn't buy into.     After that fiasco, the Republicans asked and got an all volunteer professional Armed Services.     These folks are tough, mean, well-equipped and clannish.     I have no doubt they would fire on their own if ordered and absolutely no doubt they would do what they were ordered to do.    The only hope is the upper ranks which might disagree but that has always been the case as with the WW II Generals who were independant as well.     That is why some of them were fired after the war.     But I don't think any of this has to do with refusing to fight.   In fact I think the opposite is likely.    That they will be too aggressive and looking for a fight.      REH