Disturbing

They equate the capacity for violence that warriors have with the violent natures of the wolves...

Wow. Well-said, fdcol63.

Ooh, and John says it even better. Heh. I should just take down that post and let you two discuss amongst yourselves. :P

One of the main questions for me, though, is this: At what point can, or will, our "superior" discipline actually become a weakness that can be exploited by an enemy who may seem inferior due to a limited ability to look beyond our traditional, primarily Western, warrior code?

I'm not certain about the word "unscathed" used. Perhaps some are but not all from what I have seen. But I understand the sentiment. We all have the capacity for violence. If you look within you can see your own 'wolf'. Not the word I would use. It's rooted very close to our survival mechanisms. And you could use it too indeed let it out to play if you desired. Quite a few rather nasty people do that. Sometimes it can come out instinctively, and then there are the warriors and others that use it well. It can be used without letting it out too you know. Sometimes I think it is this aspect of themselves those who pretend to higher morals fear. Because then they would have their judgments about violence reflected back to them. They would *be* all those things. So they project the fear against those they feel are that wolf. Denial is very dangerous stuff. And ignorance isn't much better. Guess the warriors channel it into focus and control and hopefully good purpose. Though it is true that that is the hardest thing to do of all. Doing good i mean. No it sounds easy but actually it's harder than pulling hen's teeth. Us and Them indeed. I also respect that self control and focus because I know what it takes. fdcol never underestimate an opponent. You can be realistic about their weaknesses but don't generalise it into inferiority. How long ago did Rumsfield talk about dead enders? The never ending dead enders. Never underestimate and opponents never 'seem' inferior. For discipline to become a weakness there has to be reason chaos is better than order. Chaos too is powerful but for chaos to be better then the goals of the Disciplined have to be worse than what randomness would provide. I'm off the garden path again. What I am getting at is that it is the quality of your orders that matter. The arrangement of your discipline not the discipline itself.

John and Trias, I think I was alluding to both of your points. I was trying to highlight that I think we'd be making a huge strategic mistake if we got so mired in our traditional, Western notion of what we consider to be "disciplined" (and "good") that we failed to consider the cultural differences between Us and Them. I have no doubt that the other side also believes that their side is good, and that they think they're fighting a "just" war to preserve and expand their own culture and influence as we are. Just as the Germans, Japanese, and every other enemy does and has done. Their people thus view them as the good sheepdogs, as John mentioned. This opinion is often based largely on whatever propaganda or (mis)information/psyops is fed to the populations on both sides in the period immediately prior to and during conflict. As in cases of "projection" where a regime attempts to divert attention away from domestic or internal issues by creating an external boogey-man or conflict to rally its population against. However, it is also based on firm, solid, and concrete awarenesses of the differences between the combatants - in all facets of life: culture, religion, political views and goals, as well as economic and financial factors. War usually results when adversaries have reached a point where further diplomatic efforts at a peaceful resolution to conflict have reached an impasse. Getting back to John's point about "good" and "bad" armies, I think we can get into a cyclical and never-ending "moral equivalence" debate about how exactly those terms are defined - especially that word "moral". Whose morals? Ours ..... which are largely shaped by our Western, European, and New World experiences? Or (in the context of our current conflict) Theirs .... shaped by a much different culture that is still mired in a 13th century perspective that has not experienced its own forms of Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, Colonialism, World Wars, etc.? I agree, John, we've already seen examples of where the "noble", "chivalrous", and Western warrior code of our own sheepdogs has led to temporary tactical victories by our enemies, who don't have to worry about obeying the constraints of the Marquess of Queensbury Rules or the Geneva Conventions. It's hard to always fight with one-hand tied behind your back by things like Rules of Engagement, when your enemy can find sanctuary in mosques and among the sheep in the battle space. It's a great hat they continue to exhibit the morality we see from them, even as they suffer the consequences and continue to pursue their mission. We hope that someday, by this persistance - by continuing to exhibit the moral, mental, and physical discipline you mentioned, John - we can prevail in this struggle, that we can convince the Iraqis and others in the Muslim world that our system and lifestyle is better than the alternative that our enemies are trying to establish. Our discipline has served us well in the past, John. And it will continue to do so as long as we, as Americans, continue to share the same goals and ideals. The same "morals". But what happens when that "commonality" is undermined? What happens when we allow ourselves to become so "diverse" and "tolerant" that we become sold on the Salad Bowl Theory, and fragment and balkanize ourselves along cultural, ethnic, class, and religious divisions? Will our sheepdogs still exhibit the same discipline? America's military is a microcosm of the larger America. What happens to it when the rest of America buys into Reverend Wright's "God Damn America!" mentality, or when it eventually succumbs to the liberal notion that there's nothing inherently better about America that's even worth fighting for? We'll always have a fringe of society that believes this. We can only hope that it remains on the fringes! Our enemies are far from inferior or stupid. Sure, we've had great successes against thousands of poorly organized and poorly trained, drug-addled and naive, undisciplined jihadis. What happens, though, when Islamist leaders decide that, strategically, they should avoid the flytrap of direct conflict in Iraq or Afghanistan, and demonstrate their renowned patience while we rot from within? Our Islamist enemies come from a very patient culture that still fosters grievances from the Crusades, and is not bothered by 2-4 year election cycles, 24-hour news channels, and instant gratification. They're not focused on whether or not everyone else in the world likes them, and they are very determined to achieve their goals. What if their long-term strategy shifts to use these very Western weaknesses against us, while we lose the "commonality" and "good morality" that binds us? Perhaps their strategy will become to simply stoke enough chaos within our own borders, with low level terrorist attacks, that this process is accelerated as we turn on each other in our attempts to address the security threats? They've already seen how divided we've become over post-9/11 attempts to do so, with our divisions over the Patriot Act, leaks from the CIA/FBI/State Dept/etc., and the hyper-political partisanship that no longer ends "at the water's edge". They're basically colonizing Europe and Canada, settling into unassimilated, semi-autonomous conclaves where "oh-so-sophisticated" and nuanced pacifists are afraid to confront their demands for Sharia and are too willing to allow their own civil liberties to be whittled away in the name of "tolerance". At current rates of Muslim immigration and birthrates, combined with declining native European birthrates, Europe will not be European in a generation or two. And whatever "traditional" alliances may have existed between the US and Europe will be forever altered as a Muslim-majority Europe tilts more and more towards our Islamic, Russian, and Chinese adversaries, while also thus becoming increasingly more anti-Semitic. My fear is that we'll become complacent in the smugness of our "moral discipline", never believing that we can actually become TOO much of a balkanized plurality while the majority of Americans come to accept the Leftist rejection of American exceptionalism, all at the same time that Europe becomes a Muslim-majority annex of the Middle East. Sorry this became such a rambling, pessimistic mess.

Awesome comment, KCSteve! Thanks. Btw, as I read these comments here, I keep thinking how I'd rewrite parts of this to shade it a bit more strongly toward what I was trying to communicate. For example, rewrite the part Steve quotes to more clearly say that it seemed the parents thought he would turn needlessly/senselessly violent at any moment.

Although I never had the privilege of serving in the 27th Infantry, I prefer to think of myself as a wolfhound, not a wolf. My role is to hunt down and kill the wolves that would like to prey upon the sheep. Of course I have to admit to prejudice here, as the wife and I used to raise Irish Wolfhounds.

I think Col. Grossman has it wrong there, in theory, if not in practice. A healthy productive citizen is not a sheep, but an earnest amateur soldier, according to classical republican theory. An un-armed peasant is a sheep. The Founders intended that none of us be sheep, and thus would have not need for sheepdogs. Humans at their best, I think, are more like wolves, except for some of us, who are more like cats. Yes, humans at their worst are like sheep, and sheep-like behavior is not a good thing among voters in a republic. There is a lot of sheep-like behavior among the voters in our republic. (Why I drink too much, reason #493)

(Why I drink too much, reason #493) Oh. We need reasons? LOL

I see what you mean, now. I think you make a good point. I believe all people have a theoretical capacity for violence, it's just more deeply buried in some than others--the meekest mother can be motivated to deadly force if it involves protection of her child, to give just one example). Perhaps Grossman has simplified things a little too much... I remember a discussion (here?) that concluded that even those in the role of sheep can be roused to violence when necessary, but that their function and tendencies are much more toward non-violence. Hence, they are firmly sheep, but capable of acting like a sheepdog under unexpected or extreme circumstances Not all soldiers are sheepdogs, either. I think Grossman's sheepdogs--by definition--come through killing and other violence without as much trauma as many others do (not to say they are not traumatized at some level, but that it's not as severe). Whenever talk turns to a person like that, I think of the milblogger Lt. Prakash, who seemed born to the life of a combat soldier, unfazed by any of his combat experiences. This seems to be the iconic version of a sheepdog that Grossman is talking about when he says "undamaged." Hmm... that comment wandered a little...

FbL - The favorite Naval Consort has spotty access. He could read this, but was unable to comment. He requested that I convey his appreciation to you for the post.

I posted this comment over to Fbl's place. Figured I might as well post it here. ----------------- Fuzzy, Even God saw fit to post angels with flaming swords to guard the perimeter of Eden..... There is always darkness in some folk's soul, a darkness that can never be pierced by the light of civilization, of education or of simple kindesses. It is because of that flaw that we need our own angels, angels of our better nature who also understand that the darkness never dies, but simply fades away, always waiting to envelop the light and extinguish it. In truth, if you return to the original language(s) of the bible, the commandment does not read "Thou Shalt Not Kill". It reads:"Thou Shalt Not Murder". When you hang around a young soldier and see the warface gentled by the laughter of a child, or the playfulness of an animal, it's easy to understand where God finds his angels. They live among us, some more polished than others, some with a bit of tatter to their wings or courseness to their voice, but angels all. In that we are indeed as a nation blessed, sometimes more than we deserve. Nice post.

Fuzzy, I believe this has been a true watershed moment in our Great Nation's History. Don't you dare change anything! You have started a process, you've done the impossible. You have actually got us to start THINKING. Sometimes, I think there is some kind of health warning something like this, "WARNING: THINKING MAY BE INJURIOUS TO YOUR HEALTH." You have done it in such a way, that people will begin to actually put their thoughts into words and sentences which will help us to understand the VERY LARGE PICTURE. There was an old saying, "You want your friends close, but you want your enemies closer. You want them so close, that you are inside their heads." You want to be thinking their thoughts before they think them. But the only way for this to occur is for us to begin the process of understanding our adversary. This means we must LEARN. This learning is not an end unto itself. It is a never ending process. It is interesting, I hear the word "disciplined" versus "undisciplined" used in the discussion. But is our adversary undisciplined? First, let's look at the word, it is derived from the word "disciple" or follower. There are 2 aspects of being a follower, the first is intellectual or learner the second is experiential or behavior. They are taught to apply what they are taught. Yes, they are disciplined. They just march to different drummer. But as we look at the whole subject, we will be asking some very tough questions not just to the Iraqis, but to ourselves. As the American people expect the Iraqis to grow up and take responsibilities and we should do the same. Fuzzy, MANY THANKS, for your courage and insights. Thank you, Grumpy

Fuzzy, No, I stand by the "Watershed part". I agree you have some GREAT commenters, but you are not exactly innocent. The reason for my comment is extremely important. Many people look at warfare as if it is only on one level or theatre of operations. The problem is most people, "just don't get it!" Warfare is multi-dimensional, it covers every sphere. This would include the blogs, it does many things. It gives the troops a place to "talk", but it also gives the vets a place to "talk." I believe many vets would say something like this, "Be creative, make your own mistakes, not ours!" But in my mind's eye, I can hear one of them saying, "Grumpy, you are not giving them any space. We've made all of the possible mistakes, plus every variant of each of them. I was lucky, I had a brother who had been in the Military before me, the irony is we did the same job. I didn't find out for 20 years. When I came home, my brother took some vacation time and we spent a week in the woods camping on private property. The weather was relatively warm, but the night sometimes got chilly. We always had a campfire and a brewing coffee pot. He would often use the phrase "coffeepot and campfire discussions". This was a time to catch up and in a sense, let go of your mind and let it get lost in the fire. I relish those talks. I can not do those things physically, but I can still do them in my mind. This camping trip took place nearly 40 years ago. This is the importance of this place. You remind me of that camping trip and I'm never without my trusty cup of coffee. Grumpy