A Jarhead Loses His Rose Colored Glasses

[jclay]

I've been trying to come up with a pithy intro but its not happening so I'll just say that this is worth reading, from stem to stern.

Base Culture | Issue 33 | n+1

[Too Tall]

It is a very personal and honest portrayal of the author's struggle. I'm going to appreciate it for exactly what that is and nothing more.

[bigbill]

This is a good read as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educa...=.ee524475c277

[thollandpe]

This is a good read as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educa...=.ee524475c277

That is a good read. And I can't agree more that we need veterans in our schools (and our offices, hospitals, town halls, etc.) but not because of some Safety Report that imagines using them as undercover security agents or sleeper cells that spring to life in a terrorist attack or active shooter situation. It's because they'll make damn good teachers (and engineers, administrators, town managers, etc.). A teacher's job is already hard enough and important enough.

Veterans working inside schools is not about safety and security.

"It’s about creating informed citizens who can sustain a free society. Such citizens need to be familiar with the military and those who serve and sacrifice in it." -- Brian M. Thompson

Yes we do.

TH

[Too Tall]

In the between talking about chainrings and planning bike frames we are pretty OK.

[bigbill]

In the between talking about chainrings and planning bike frames we are pretty OK.

And while I was posting the above, I was going back and forth with Garro about my new bike. I had to make a decision on rear dropouts, it wasn't tough. Low mounts with boost spacing.

[72gmc]

We need to stay aware, as a society, of the sacrifices that support our standard of living.

We also need more pictures of Mr. Garro's bikes.

Thanks for posting these articles.

[jclay]

It is a very personal and honest portrayal of the author's struggle. I'm going to appreciate it for exactly what that is and nothing more.

It's a lot more than I think you imply. Few, service members or not, adequately appreciate the destabilization and human misery (and monumental hypocrisy) that our foreign policies and MIC have brought to enormous portions of the world, all in pursuit of economic and resource hegemony. It is refreshing to hear a service member make such observations.

If you don't want to wade through Chalmers Johnson's writings try this guy's articles: Major Danny Sjursen is a U.S. Army strategist and former history instructor at West Point. He served tours with reconnaissance units in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Danny Sjursen | Authors | TomDispatch

We need to stay aware, as a society, of the sacrifices that support our standard of living.

Folks in other countries are making most of the sacrifices and our standard of living isn't sustainable.

If some other country was doing to the US what the US has been doing to many tens of countries for the past 70 years or so, not one of us reading this post would stand for it. Not for a second.

I'll leave it at that.

[jclay]

That is a good read. And I can't agree more that we need veterans in our schools (and our offices, hospitals, town halls, etc.) but not because of some Safety Report that imagines using them as undercover security agents or sleeper cells that spring to life in a terrorist attack or active shooter situation. It's because they'll make damn good teachers (and engineers, administrators, town managers, etc.). A teacher's job is already hard enough and important enough. Veterans working inside schools is not about safety and security.

"It’s about creating informed citizens who can sustain a free society. Such citizens need to be familiar with the military and those who serve and sacrifice in it." -- Brian M. Thompson
TH

I am puzzled by that paragraph. Lots of the male teachers I had were vets. It wasn't even a thought; I mean it didn't move the needle to know that Misters Ballard, Howard, Bradford and numerous others were combat vets. Lota workers, across the spectrum of work, were combat vets. And going back to school? When we left Cherry Point both of my parents went back to university. Lots of their friends did as well. My father was resident manager of Mabry Heights, the on-campus housing for married with kids, while he went to FSU. When teaching in grad school I doubt that many of his students were very sympathetic wrt his experiences flying against the Japanese & N Koreans. He went back to flying for a living after a Masters in Anthropology (big surprise). My carrier skipper maternal GF, later a two star, went to work at a bank in Pensacola after retiring as Chief, Naval Basic Training there.

So who says that vets aren't represented as teachers, students and work/biz people at concentrations that are, MOL, proportional to their percentage of the whole?

We also need people in the military that aren't exactly enamoured with what the US has been doing to the rest of the world....kinda like we had in Viet Nam. The worst root-change to the military, from the point of view of having it's members fail to represent our broad range of socio/political perspectives, was the change to an all volunteer force. It's great for war fighting effectiveness and attenuating political opposition to wars but it's terrible socially and globally.

[choke]

That was an interesting read. While I agree with some of his views, I'll just say that as a graduate of MCRD I'm glad that he was never my Platoon Commander.

As regards the draft in your last post....I agree with you that its end meant that the societal cross-section isn't as wide. But I think ending the draft was the correct thing to do; many years ago a gent on another forum made a good argument that it was little more than indentured servitude and I've come to agree with him. I know that I'd much rather have someone in the next foxhole who wanted to be there rather than someone who was forced.

[jclay]

But I think ending the draft was the correct thing to do; many years ago a gent on another forum made a good argument that it was little more than indentured servitude and I've come to agree with him.

Functionally that's kinda what it is now. What with the loss of decent paying jobs & health care benefits for low skill/education folks we find ourselves with a desperate demographic. And the military can be a real good financial/educational deal, particularly for the majority who don't have an MOS that makes them the sharp end of the stick.

I know that I'd much rather have someone in the next foxhole who wanted to be there rather than someone who was forced.

But it would be less likely that you and your buddy would be in that foxhole in the first place; and if history is any indication, participating in actions that are likely not anything we'd tolerate being visited upon us by other powers.

[mzilliox]

i dont understand the military at all, and i never will. But like police and doctors, I am glad there are humans who can do the things which I cannot. My brain simply would not continue being me if i were in the military. There is no other way to put it. this story is chilling, and refreshing.

[choke]

Functionally that's kinda what it is now. What with the loss of decent paying jobs & health care benefits for low skill/education folks we find ourselves with a desperate demographic. And the military can be a real good financial/educational deal, particularly for the majority who don't have an MOS that makes them the sharp end of the stick.

I disagree. Sure, some people may join the military because they feel they have no other choice but I can't imagine it's that way for the majority. People join for all kinds of reasons....patriotism, a sense of duty, etc. And even those who do join because they feel there's nothing else still make a choice to join; that wasn't the case during the draft.

But it would be less likely that you and your buddy would be in that foxhole in the first place; and if history is any indication, participating in actions that are likely not anything we'd tolerate being visited upon us by other powers.

Yes, we send the military to other countries far more than we should. That's really nothing new though...as Gen. Smedley Butler (awarded 2 Congressional Medals of Honor) noted in 1933:

War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

He also wrote a short book in 1935 - War Is A Racket, by Major General Smedley Butler, 1935

[thollandpe]

I am puzzled by that paragraph.

I’m in agreement with the author of the washpost article that the demographics of military service are changing, being distributed over a smaller and more focused segment of the population. And that’s not good.

I suspect we grew up in similar times, but I was more-or-less unaware of the veterans around me, or what differentiated them. They were in my family and certainly among my teachers, and one was my most important mentor. But the benefit from their service was more abstract, I certainly never saw their combat training or experience in action. That Safety Report imagines that we employ vets in schools as if they’d be on a security detail.

Dawn Hochtsprung, the principal at Sandy Hook, died in her attempt to engage the shooter. She was not a Marine, nor a ninja, she had no body armor, nor a weapon. You cannot write what she did into a job description for a school administrator.

Antoinette Tuff, a bookkeeper, in another incident, engaged a school shooter who had an AK-47 and 500 rounds of ammunition, talked to him for a half hour and convinced him to surrender. This after he had already fired his weapon. At the police. She had training, but not police or military training. She told the shooter she loved him. She is a hero.

That “Safety Report” was a farce, and used veterans as a prop.

[bigbill]

I’m in agreement with the author of the washpost article that the demographics of military service are changing, being distributed over a smaller and more focused segment of the population. And that’s not good.

I suspect we grew up in similar times, but I was more-or-less unaware of the veterans around me, or what differentiated them. They were in my family and certainly among my teachers, and one was my most important mentor. But the benefit from their service was more abstract, I certainly never saw their combat training or experience in action. That Safety Report imagines that we employ vets in schools as if they’d be on a security detail.

Dawn Hochtsprung, the principal at Sandy Hook, died in her attempt to engage the shooter. She was not a Marine, nor a ninja, she had no body armor, nor a weapon. You cannot write what she did into a job description for a school administrator.

Antoinette Tuff, a bookkeeper, in another incident, engaged a school shooter who had an AK-47 and 500 rounds of ammunition, talked to him for a half hour and convinced him to surrender. This after he had already fired his weapon. At the police. She had training, but not police or military training. She told the shooter she loved him. She is a hero.

That “Safety Report” was a farce, and used veterans as a prop.

The general public and Hollywood broad brush Veterans. I served 27 years and 20 deployments. I was qualified several different weapons but can count on one hand all the times I was issued a gun for any appreciable amount of time. I'm not a security expert as far as weapons or overpowering a bad person. I am a big guy, I would have that going for me. What I do have is an ability to assess a situation, do root cause analysis, a good insight into human nature, and "read" people. I got this in the military because of my job and the extremely broad experiences shared with people from all over the country/world. I've been all over the world, lived in Sardinia, stationed on both US coasts and Hawaii, and spent about equal time on ships above the surface as below. I have an extensive engineering background that started in electrical as an enlisted man, transitioned to a Radiological and Chemistry Controls as an officer, did project management in a shipyard doing submarine upkeeps, closed a NATO base in Italy as project manager, and finished up my career as a department head for all mechanical systems and diesel engines.

Because of my service I'm in high demand. I started an Engineering Manager job last summer because of my background and leadership. Got that in the military. My son is attending a service academy and my service helped him get an appointment. As a military brat, he goes in with eyes wide open about what he'll have to do. I'll likely work another 4-5 years before retiring completely.

I didn't enlist in the military because I had no other option. I did it because I really didn't know what I wanted to do and knew the military would give me exposure to many different opportunities. I was the classic underachiever that scored high on IQ but made straight C's in school. I found my place in the military, I was good at being an electrician, never would have known that, I found that I could lead people and make good decisions, that I could qualify quickly in the submarine environment, moved quickly up the ranks, and after 4 submarine and 1 instructor tours, I was given a commission as an officer. I did college on my own time and dime. I was saving my GI Bill for my son. I'm thankful for the opportunity and the people I served with. It's not an exaggeration to say I truly loved the people around me and would do anything for them because they would do the same. That's hard to relate.

[jclay]

I disagree. Sure, some people may join the military because they feel they have no other choice but I can't imagine it's that way for the majority. People join for all kinds of reasons....patriotism, a sense of duty, etc.

This certainly isn't a statistically sound data set but of the dozen or so enlisted people I know, or have met socially over the past few years, virtually all of them indicated that the pay and benefits package was far better than they could have gotten in the private sector, and was either their primary reason for enlisting (and staying in) or one of two primary reasons with the other being the need for structure/time to grow up. One of them mentioned the September 11 attacks as being the catalyst.

And even those who do join because they feel there's nothing else still make a choice to join; that wasn't the case during the draft.

They do but I think that for a meaningful percentage it isn't much of a choice.

I can appreciate your foxhole example but I think the issue of larger import is that society (and the world) is better served by a military that's politically/socio-economically diverse. For me that trumps, no pun intended, the guys in the foxhole.

As a related note: In an age having the weapons to destroy the globe it's insanity to do anything but consistently work with other countries to reduce conflicts, arms of global consequence and sizes of military forces.