Soldiers Cannot Fight Against Backstabbing from Home
As soldiers, we have two enemies that should our allies in the war on terror. I am not referring to the negative nature of journalism, or the sedition of those who release classified information. Although those do complicate our lives, they are to be expected. After all treason was old when Alcibiades defected, and even the best battles in war are going to look bad in full color, live. Instead, there are two former allies that have defected: higher education, and mass media (specifically film).
Let us treat these one at a time. Higher education is at its pinnacle in the United States. Not only do places like Yale and Harvard still hold tremendous power in our collective consciousness, but also pretty much every town in the US, of any size, has a college of some sort. As much as CNN would try and spin it negatively, even the Chinese Communist People's Daily admits that the United States is still a place many serious foreign students come to learn, especially for advanced degrees, with more that half a million foreign students studying here every year. If those students were fed a serious education that included the value of American society, and an honest look at our virtues that would be roughly 120,000 non-Americans that would have a pro-American, and presumably anti-terrorist outlook on the world. Instead, they are fed Anti-American and ant-Western vitriol such that on American Campuses they welcome and defend former members of the Taliban while ejecting American military recruiters. Who do they want to win anyway?
The second should-be, once-was ally is American film. While there are many Arab films, they do not achieve the notoriety in their own country that American films do. American films, and to a lesser extent television, are pervasive throughout the Middle East. How do I know that? Because Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al Zarqawi keep complaining about it, and even referring to them! And why not? American movies are generally more numerous, and often better produced than films in the Middle East and elsewhere (although we are starting to see more, and better films from all over the world). This should be a huge advantage to us, since it could portray the Americans positively, an American perspective if you will. Instead, what do they get? Terrorists as the real victims, even heroes! Americans as the enemy of Democracy! Americans are racist! American’s hate gays! Americans hate Muslims (admittedly this one is a stretch, but it is not lost on the locals)! Americans want to impose a Christian Theocracy on Britain (also only by implication)!
I realize that educators and filmmakers fear that they could be perceived as propagandists of America. But right now they are viewed in America as propagandists for Islamofascism, and is that any better? (Have some values!)
This would not be hard to do either. There are lots of things that are really good about America. After all American film and higher education did spring up there, and they seem to have a pretty high opinion of themselves. Look at all the great things that have happened here, and the great things that we have done. If you have a hard time thinking of them then perhaps your education is lacking.
I am not saying to overlook the bad things either, but the real story there is that bad people ultimately lose in America. Afterall we started out with slavery, patronage, and property requirements for voting, and those are all gone. And we are still a work in progress, but we have made more progress in American society in 200 years of history, than much of the world has in 2000. You could even still tip a hat to all those wing bat causes (and be a little forward thinking in you preemption of problems) by making a movie about Chavez’s hero, Simon Bolivar, and how he idolized George Washington so much he wore a medal of his image whenever he made a public appearance. How great would that be!
All I am saying is this: we are in a fight to the death with Osama and his ilk, and actually most people seem to realize that. This is a fight that the army cannot win alone. I am a soldier, and frankly I do not want amateurs and draftees fighting with me. We do just fine on the battlefield as professionals. But is it too much to ask that these industries contribute what they are good at to the war effort. If the media and academia are so worried about losing the freedoms that America provides for them, is it too much to ask that they do their part to defend them, by telling the world how great those freedoms are, and what they need to do to get them? I can fight terrorists ‘til the cows come home, but I have no idea how to fight hatred of America, especially when it comes from Americans.
posted by David Benson | 4:28 AM
19 Comments:
Re: the media, they are fickle. In March 2003, when the media were beating the war drums, I was one of 250,000 people to march in NYC against invading Iraq, and the only news most people saw of that march was that 7 people (or 3/1000's of 1%) were arrested after the march was over. Nobody reported that 99.997% were peaceful and law-abiding.
I don't object to leakers so much as I object to my government torturing ACCUSED terrorists and operating secret prisons. Someday, you might be accused of something you didn't do. How would you feel if you were locked up, denied access to a lawyer, maybe not even told specifically what the charge is? It's happening now. How do you think that's going to sway people who are thinking about becoming jihadists?
Yes, I remember 9/11. I was six blocks away from the Twin Towers with my daughter, on her fourth day of kindergarten. Like millions of New Yorkers, we lived with the stench of the smoldering wreckage for months afterward. I truly believe that we can't end terrorism with bombing and killing. That's what terrorists do, and I don't want to be like them.
Good luck in Iraq. I hope you come home soon.
This soldier doesn't mention if he is one of the 75% who mistakenly think the Iraq war is payback for 9-11. Rice said it the clearest when she recently answered Blitzer's question:"Did Saddam Hussein and his regime have anything to do with 9/11?
SECRETARY RICE: Saddam Hussein, and we have said this many times, as far as we know, did not order September 11, may not have even known of September 11."
There are no WMDs and the UN inspectors on the ground just weeks before the war said so. There are no ties to 9-11 and everyone now says so. This war can physically be won, as you guys are the best equipped and trained force on earth. But we at home must establish the actual truth of this war in order to be able to define what victory is.
Given that 45% of all Iraqis think killing American soldiers is justified, victory can only be defined as the killing of 45% of all Iraqis, which of course, no one wants. But anything short of that means we are pulling out short of victory, and all remaining "insurgents" will have won, a ridiculous scenario from all perspectives.
The liberation of Iraqis has also been predictably undermined by the new theocratic constitution, which has destroyed women's rights in Iraq, as per this new report:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IRIN/767bd3d9a1638f01dce848492b62005e.htm
If this link doesn't work, just Google search "womens rights iraq reuters".
It is also ridiculous to blame academia for your troubles. They absolutely DO NOT teach hatred of this country. They teach math, and physics, and philosophy, and medicine, and engineering, and economics, and political science, and U.S history, and computer science, and ceramics that make your body armor, and chemical technology that makes your weapons work. You are pointing fingers where they should not point, because you cannot point them where the real problem lies: at your superiors, namely the commander in chief, who has fomented a war on false pretenses.
I'll understand if you censor this post. I'll be disappointed, because debate is truly the highest form of free speech.
"Yes, I remember 9/11. I was six blocks away from the Twin Towers with my daughter, on her fourth day of kindergarten. Like millions of New Yorkers, we lived with the stench of the smoldering wreckage for months afterward. I truly believe that we can't end terrorism with bombing and killing. That's what terrorists do, and I don't want to be like them."
I am sorry to hear that you had such a horrible experiene on September 11th, and even sorrier that this is possibly the biggest common history that we share in America. I didn't really address the other issues in this commentary, but you are right that the Media is fickle, and it is always important to be vigilant against abuse. We are very vigilant, whether you believe it or not, and it is most unfortunate when innocent people suffer.
The final point that you made, is actually the point of this article. The only war you ever truly win is the war you never have to fight. For every soldier, and every innocent civilian that has paid a very high price, this will never seem like a win. Out soft power, like movies and education is our power, and that is our best bet for winning the war on terror with less (since blood has already been shed) bloodshed. However, we are not winning on that front.
"Good luck in Iraq. I hope you come home soon."
Thank you. And good luck in New York, I hope you find happiness.
This is in answer to Richie Campbell
who said (amongst other things)
"This soldier doesn't mention if he is one of the 75% who mistakenly think the Iraq war is payback for 9-11."
I don't really like it being implied that I don't read the newspaper, but I understand what you are saying here. Unfortunately what you are refering to is a leadership failure at lower levels in the military to properly define the task and purpose of our actions to our soldiers. In my mind it was always to topple a dictator, much in the same way we took out Noriega. However, it is true that publicly there have been other justifications. In fairness, the only sources that I know of who have claimed that Saddam Hussein were involved in 9-11 were Czech intelligence.
"There are no WMDs and the UN inspectors on the ground just weeks before the war said so. There are no ties to 9-11 and everyone now says so."
True, however, prior to the invasion the only people who said there were no WMD's were the UN inspectors, and given the UN's sketchy past at enforcing regulations, I think that I can be forgiven for doubting them. However, for me it was always that Saddam Hussein was a very bad man, and he needed to go away. While I will not form an opinion just yet on what international political lessons can be learned from this, as I am currently too close to see clearly and the mission is on going, it would be very difficult for me to go back as say we shouldn't have done this. I have many friends here who are very grateful that we are here, and there lives are noticably better.
"This war can physically be won, as you guys are the best equipped and trained force on earth."
I agree, as long as you limit it to the conflict in Iraq. The over all war on terror, which even if Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with Abu Musab al Zarqawi certainly does, cannot be won by bullets alone. As long as people are willing to blow themselves up, there will be suicide bombers. Therefore we need to address an idea with another idea. I can only physically fight physical threats, and I would rather it end sooner rather than later.
"But we at home must establish the actual truth of this war in order to be able to define what victory is."
If what you mean here is that we need to define our goals clearly, then I couldn't agree more. If you mean that an investigation of all things past, I think that historical inquisition is good, but not necessary for victory.
"Given that 45% of all Iraqis think killing American soldiers is justified, victory can only be defined as the killing of 45% of all Iraqis, which of course, no one wants."
Not necessarily. The converse could be true, that 45% of all Americans believe that killing Iraqi's is OK, but not all of them are actually doing it, not even a majority of soldiers are doing it. There is a difference between condoning and participating. Even among the Iraqi's who participate, many are motivated more by money than ideology. Only the ones who are absolutely irreconcilable need to be eliminated. That does not necessarily mean killing, in can include arresting or even marginalizing. Thankfully, the 'true believers' are not numerous as a percentage.
"But anything short of that means we are pulling out short of victory, and all remaining "insurgents" will have won, a ridiculous scenario from all perspectives."
Again I agree that we need a defined goal, and frankly turning things over to the Iraqis is a good goal. They are really doing quite well. True they are no where near American standards, but they aren't fight the Spetznas. I don't know what general american perceptions are but in most areas the "terrorists" are little more than thugs. (That is not true in Al Anbar, but we are likely to maintain some presence there for longer.)
"The liberation of Iraqis has also been predictably undermined by the new theocratic constitution, which has destroyed women's rights in Iraq..."
The constitution actually guarantees freedom of religion, and therefore is not theocratic. I can neither confirm nor deny an improvement in women's conditions, since I only know what it is like now. I don't much care for it. But to say that democracy has been totally undermined because of inequality is a red herring (or maybe a straw man, I can never keep them straight). Prior to Saddam there was no democracy, no one could vote, nothing. Now everyone can vote. If women are more oppressed because of religious extremism, which is a relative statement as I pointed out earlier, that is not good. However it is not a necessary condition of democracy, and we, and more importantly they, should work to remedy that.
"It is also ridiculous to blame academia for your troubles."
I don't. Terrorists are bombing me, not academia. We all need to remember that they are people who choose to do their evil, and they alone are responsible for their actions.
"They absolutely DO NOT teach hatred of this country. They teach math, and physics, and philosophy, and medicine, and engineering, and economics, and political science, and U.S history, and computer science, and ceramics that make your body armor, and chemical technology that makes your weapons work. You are pointing fingers where they should not point, because you cannot point them where the real problem lies: at your superiors, namely the commander in chief, who has fomented a war on false pretenses."
It sounds like you are frustrated, and I understand. I really have no complaint with higher education in general, and I hope to return to the "Ivory Tower" myself, as soon as possible. They do a fine job, as implied by the fact that hundreds of thousands of people flock to the US every year to study there. However, in general they are not on the team when it comes to advancing the cause against terror. When students get assailed with politics it should be more pro- than anti- western. How about an anti-terrorism protest for a change, just to keep variety going. I don't think that is too much to ask.
For example, I am not surprised that there were problems at UCSC. This may have changed, but just a couple of years ago a quite liberal friend of mine pointed out to me that at UCSC there was no US History classes, there was only "African Americans in America, Women in America, A History of Prejudice in America" and many other such topics that broke our history into groups, but none that taught a unified history of America. That is a problem. I am not suggesting that these specialty classes should not be taugh, but we are one people, with a unified history and the only people who benefit from a belief contrary to this are political opportunists and the terrorist.
"I'll understand if you censor this post. I'll be disappointed, because debate is truly the highest form of free speech."
I don't know if debate is the highest form of speech, but it is definitely a very important form of speech, and one I thouroughly enjoy. Hopefully you at least understand a little better where I am coming from. I hope that you are pleased to see your publication here, and will comment in the future.
Hi friend. I'm an American living in the Czech Republic on the border with Austria, right there on the wrong side of the former Iron Curtain. Look here, sport, we need you out there. No place would be safe if you weren't. It's not just Americans and Iraqis. You're fighting for me, for us. Don't forget. I won't. Good luck and God bless.
I live in NYC and lived through both attacks upon the WTC. If America had fought (as in: war) against Jihadism back in 1993 then the 2001 attack would never have happened.
I object to Americans who ACCUSE America of being an imperialistic hegemony when all the evidence states otherwise.
I object to Americans who ACCUSE America of instigating war when the Jihadism has been waging war against America for over three decades.
Most importantly, I object to Americans who ACCUSE America of acting like terrorists when the facts are America is the most benevolent, generous and humane nation on planet Earth.
I lived in Moscow, Russia in 1991 and back then I knew just how much information the American media was not telling the American public. Up until the common person created the blogsphere the media had monolithic control over the microphone and the message. Today, because of strict adherence to controlling the masses, the mainstream media is dying like the dinosaur because it could not evolve in our brave new world.
In 2003, I met some Russians who had migrated to America in 1992. The reason why these Americans stand and fight for America today is because, in their words, "if America falls there will be no place left to find freedom's santuary"
Throughout history the cause of Pacifism has always led to greater destruction. Between 1993 and 2001 America did not pick up the sword of war, remained pacified, give billions in humanitarian aid and yet America suffered the most destructive attack instigated upon her soil in an unprovoked war targeting civilians.
Thank God and America for the US Armed Forces: The True Freedom Fighters.
Susan
NYC, NY
Thank you for your service and your willingness to sacrafice, so that the rest of don't have to...I'm sure that the news from home must feel like the naysayers have the upper hand...but, rest assured that there are plenty of us here fighting that...I'd like to tell you that We've got your back...stay safe, finish the job and come home...Our prayers are with each and every one of you.
The Conservative Army.
"We do just fine on the battlefield as professionals"
I don't think so. The entire military from Rummy on down to the lowest ranking white trash, has proven to be nothing but ncompetent.
I need only one example to point this out. Oil production is less than half it was when Saddam was in charge.
What are you clowns doing over there? Obviously not what you should be.
You are all the dregs of our society!
Excellent post! Things are really topsy-turvy in this country when hatred for or fear of our defenders is preached in our schools. Distorting our history and current events to suit a political agenda should be outlawed, but not enough people are aware or not enough care - or both.
I'm grateful for your hard work and sacrifice on our behalf and extremely proud of all of you. Thank you!
At first I thought your commentary about the Hollywood films was satire, and I thought it was pretty funny...then...I realized...you were SERIOUS!
I think you read more into those films than what was there. "Munich" wasn't pro-terrorism; "Syriana" wasn't anti-American, and I hate to tell you this, but Americans for the most part dislike homosexuality, and attacks on gay people are hardly rare. (They even occur here in New York City--Sodom of the East Coast). The world is a very complicated place.
I allowed this post even though it violates my deliberately insulting rule, because it illustrates a point.
Anonymous said...
"I don't think [you do just fine as professionals]. The entire military from Rummy on down to the lowest ranking white trash, has proven to be nothing but ncompetent."
I cannot gainsay your opinion on the secretary, as he is subject to intense scrutiny by the media, and therefore you have at least a modicum of information on his capability. However, unless you have been on patrol with us, and have prior military experience I don't see how you could pass judgment on the "lowest ranking white trash." Does that include the lowest ranking "Asian trash"? How about "hispanic trash"? By the way there is an (I) in "ncompetent".
"I need only one example to point this out. Oil production is less than half it was when Saddam was in charge."
This actually illustrates a fundamental problem. I am a soldier, not an oil pipeline repairman, or a futures economist. Evaluating military efforts based upon economic returns is like saying, "your a good doctor, please fix my car."
"What are you clowns doing over there? Obviously not what you should be."
What should I be doing? I really would love some ideas, because I do want this effort to succeed.
"You are all the dregs of our society!"
Perhaps. But I am as proud of these "dregs" of society as any parent is of their honors student. No less a luminary than John Stuart Mill said, "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing is worth a war, is much worse."
For more of that quote and context see
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill
In response to Elizabeth, I must confess: All of those movies, with the exception of "Traffic," were released after I had left for Iraq, and so I have not seen them. I was therefore relying on the opinions of other people. (Hangs head) I know , I know, you have to see things to know what they are about. I would normally agree, but I wanted to remain current in my commentary. I could have used other older movies, but that didn't seem to have the snap, and not having any movies at all seemed like I was not able to justify that case I was making.
In the end, I did not want to write a screed against the film industry. The point that I was trying to make is that movies could be a powerful tool towards decreasing hatred towards America, by presenting Americans as more sympathetic, in otherwords the way we really are. America is by and large a much more accepting society, made up of honest, nice people, than people in other countries realize. If you took most Americans and place them with most other people they will be as polite as they know how, which is sometimes limited, but they try. I just want more movies about that. (BTW, WWII and Viet-Nam have been done to death.)
I neither wish to comment on the morality of any sexual conduct, nor do I wish to down play the attacks that anyone may face. I hope that someday we can all express our views safely. Only in an environment of free exchange of ideas can we ever hope to discover truth. While we do have a long way to go, I thing the United States is closer than most in that goal.
At the least, I hope you laughed loud when you thought it was funny. There is nothing better than a good laugh.
Not to got off topic but I must point out to Elizibeth that if one goes to LIPS in NYC's greenwich village one will find that Homosexuals do not even believe heterosexual females exist. Forget the sexist antics of mimicing the 'black mistrel' by mimicing the heterosexual female all for entertainment and ridicule but if one were to use the bathroom the choices are "The Men's Room" and "The Other Room". Poor gays they are allowed to discriminate against heterosexual females while at the same time deny out existance.
Hollywood is America's bejewelled bottomfeeders, the reigning royality of useful idiots who enjoy the luxury of security provided by the US Armred Forces, the very people the bottomfeeders mock and demean.
Lets all learn to play nice. I may have started down a slippery slope by allowing mean coments about me, and my brothers and sisters in arms. But if we could refrain from calling each other the dregs of society, and bottom feeders. I appreciate the race to my defense, but becoming mean spirited hurts the originator more than the target.
That is a very fair critique, and a lesson learned for me. It is the dichotomy of the internet though. Before it was civil, but no one read, now people are reading, but civility has declined. I threw the title out as a piece of red meat, and now, debate has descended into name calling.
Hopefully, a few people will stick around, and we can have that civil discussion.
David, a few points about your comments regarding America's image:
Actually, most people in other countries like Americans as people. It's the U.S. government's policies they don't like. (example: I know someone who's from Egypt--he said Egyptians generally prefer Americans to Europeans, who, they tend to think, have superior attitudes).
I don't think showing people Hollywood movies portraying Americans as nice people is going to be taken seriously. On the contrary: I think probing and controversial films about U.S. foreign policy by U.S. filmmakers is what really shows the rest of the world our values--free speech and the ability to criticize the government. It's those films that help people in other countries understand and respect American values.
First of all, thank you for your service. It's well appreciated. I think that you're missing a few things. Higher education is in the sad ideological shape it's in because of the communist "long march through the institutions". We're actually past the peak of suck on this front but not so far past that things aren't still bad. New schools are being formed as alternatives, old schools are getting sued for their punishing conservative students for ideological nonconformity, things used to be worse.
As for movies, the big problem is that wide distribution is still largely the province of certain gatekeepers who tend to favor films that will get them social points with their "in" crowd (that trends very far left) over profits. This too is getting somewhat better and it looks like things will continue to improve as the Internet improves. As IPv6 deploys (courtesy of the big guns in the US armed forces IT departments) we're finally going to get a platform sufficiently robust to end-run those gatekeepers.
All we have to do is hold firm as our own long march fixes what has been broken. We can do this. I may even still be alive when the work is done.
And now for the comments:
richie campbell - There are still new discoveries being unearthed in Nazi archives. We've hardly touched the surface of the Soviet archives and certainly not dealt with the facts of how right the anti-communists were during the McCarthy era. The Iraqi archives, we've not even started and already we know things like how Saddam passed out a call for suicide personnel to sacrifice themselves to fight US interests at an Iraqi air base in June of 2001. We'll eventually get to the bottom of what, exactly, was Saddam's relationship to Al Queda and whether there was knowledge or involvement. We honestly can't say we know yet.
elizabeth - When you take something evil and nuance it to the point that audiences start feeling sympathy for it, you're doing PR for that cause. "Scorpions in a bottle" was objectively pro-soviet meme in the 1970s because they were evil in a way that we were not. Things have not changed too much since then. The same tired voices are doing the same rehab jobs for evil. What's changing is that new distribution outlets are coming and they won't have the stage to themselves anymore.
I was debating whether to state the obvious in reply to the last comment...why not...not everything is obvious to everyone, so here goes:
Art is all about nuance. If you take the nuance away, it isn't art. It is propaganda.
I understand the fear of being viewed as a propogandist. However, every movie presents a point of view. And, to be fair, there are movies that present pro-american points of view. However, they aren't usually that good (perhaps because they aren't nuanced.) I do think that there has not been a movie that has accurately portrayed the modern military. It seems to me that whenever someone is in dress greens (the modern uniform) they are always about to do something really stupid (like in Evolution). The rest of the time, they are either victims of hopelessly bad leadership (Tears of the Sun, Black Hawk Down) or criminals (General's Daughter, The Presidio). While I admit that those are positive portrayals of soldiers the military as a whole looks bad.
This is a big problem, because the narrative of "The little guy who over comes" is really popular all around the world. So when you have films like "North Country" which portray an individual as good, the "Big Guy" necessarily looks bad. (This is not a commentary on "North Country." I have never seen it and it may be an excellent movie. I do know it follows the Erin Brokovich model/story style of redemtion though, which is a common thread.) In order to tell this story the system itself has to look bad, and that projects poorly on America. Of course if there were equal numbers of movies equally honest from all countries, then perhaps there would be a representative set of stories like that throughout the world. Unfortunately, there is not, and so most of the stories end up being about the evils of the American System, which the audience who is going to see the movies first.
I realize that basically, I have set up a circular problem here that says taht essentially if we tell stories about America, ultimatly it will reflect poorly on the American System. However, during World War II, the movies realized that then was not the time for such films. Most of them trumpted the virtues of honest living and freedom, regardless of where they were set. It may be too much to ask to expect a similar reaction now. However, where is the modern "Duck Soup." The terrorists are almost parodies of themselves. They are a perfect target for such a film. Instead we get the rather uninspired (or so I hear) "American Dreams."
(In retrospect the modern Duck Soup may be Team America, and that was a parody of both sides, which really did convey a pro-American message quite well.) Comments?
Post a Comment
<< Home