Thanking Vets for Service?

This came out a few days ago in the Times, and provides an interesting insight into why many vets are disconnected from society that sent them off to war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/sunday-review/please-dont-thank-me-for-my-service.html?_r=0

The premise of the article is that the author found that while working with a group of veterans there was an obvious discomfort when he thanked them for their service. It seems a simple salutation, little different from, "Hello," or, "How are you?" The real problem however is that this often the full extent of the discussion of the war and what our troops went through overseas. This is not our grandfather's war, not by a long shot. It is often brutal, morally challenging in that it happens right in the middle of villages filled with innocents, with unclear objectives, and sense of extraordinary sacrifices born for goals that many of our veterans have come to be totally disillusioned about. Their voices and concerns on the battlefields of Afghanistan often silenced or ignored (think about how the VA treats our vets), as our get tough leaders push for more violence and our country cheers them on.

As a veteran of just about every operation the US military has been involved in over the past twenty years, I can tell you that there is a sharp disconnect between veterans and the larger American society. I can sit down with men like my Grandfather, a combat vet in his own right, and explain the larger policy issues in a cogent, unemotional, and straightforward manner. Yet, over the Holiday's, my wife and I attended a cooking class in New Orleans (highly recommended BTW), and as the chit chat between the various couples started with inquiries into what people did for a job. Eventually you disclose your service, and the question come about whether you served in wars - followed immediately by the thank you for your service ... and then awkwardness. People literally have no idea how to respond to beyond that. Attempts to explain it, without graphic detail mind you, and illicit a discussion about the larger issues makes people in general extremely uncomfortable. Its very clear that for most Americans the war is ... for someone else. Few even know enough to have an informed opinion about the conflicts that we are involved in, and fewer still even known how its conducted or the implications of its conduct on something as simple as their pocket book and taxes/debt. Few can even name the who the key players in the defense arena are, the Joint Chiefs of Staff? (Oversees 600+ billion dollars a year in expenditures, and few people know why or what?) Few people can name the Commanding General in Afghanistan right now. Few can name the Secretary of Defense.

In short, for many Americans, "thank you for your service," is an expression of detachment. Its an acknowledgment that we, collectively signed up our young men and women to do something dangerous and incredibly difficult in places that few people would ever go into. Beyond that, there appears to be little desire the know what we asked our troopers to do, and what the consequences of their actions were and will be. For those who made those sacrifices, "thank you for your service," followed by an uncomfortable silence is open acknowledgement of of how little our fellow Americans know about what we did ... and how little many of them care.

I find it hard to thank people for their service when they really haven't done a damn for anyone. I prefer kissing the asses of those who deserve it. The people who deserve to be thanked are significantly undervalued, whereas the military is often composed of highschool social rejects who want too shoot a gun and compensate for their sad pasts. Or even the people with half witted brains who are too idealistic for their own good, so they decide to glorify violence like it will accomplish something.

Real veterans haven't been in our midst for a long time. The people fighting today are hopeless. If anyone were to be silenced in our government, it should probably be the supporters of pointless wars. America has lost faith in its military, and for good reason. The american military has done nothing but involve itself in acts of heinous evil and stupidity lately, and I would long for a return to the days when we had sensible people worthy of wearing a military uniform.

I guess my feelings are summarizing just how much America doesn't care about its "veterans." The only people who are worth my time in the military are those who remember real practical values and just how delicate running an army of trained killers is (and proper training is something American killers are lacking). It seems we're content on taking in any half wit among are ranks.

For the time being I will continue to not care about the military, and a lot of people will join me. It isn't the responsibility of "Veterans" to beg for our undeserved sympathy, but to do something honorable to make our thanks actually mean something.

Wow THAT escalated quickly!

I don't feel as strongly as Stag, (although that's probably a lot to do with the fact that I'm not American, so the US Military doesn't represent me.) however I know what you mean and to an extent I think I agree with your summation.

I think that MOST of the US public don't really know how to think about the Military and those who serve. I think we'd all agree that TV and Movies shape much of the minds of Americans today, and for decades, this massive machine has been pumping the message that Government is not to be trusted, and War is bad. The same machine also teaches us that the actual men and women who are on the ground are good. Basically the lower down you are in the ranks, the more "good" you are, and the higher you are in the ranks, the more corrupt you are. I can cite thousands of episodes, shows and movies to back this up.
So the average American has this internal conflict. They "know" that war is bad and governments are corrupt, and they don't want to endorse that, but they also "know" that soldiers are good, patriotism is good and they do want to endorse that.

The result is, "Thank you for your service".

You'd see the same thing if the situation was that they wanted to back their team, but they didn't actually want them to be playing the game. In that situation what do you do? There's no point bagging out the players - it's not THEIR decision, but it's hard to know how to address them.

The closest real life situation I can think of for me, is when someone sacrifices something to bring you something that you actively don't want. What do you do?
You can't NOT thank them, because you see that's it's cost them; but at the same time, you don't want to send them a message that you approve of it, or else they'll take it as vindication that they were right to do it.

Thinking about it further, the more simple explanation might be that they feel like they need to thank you for serving, but they're confused because they don't actually see what practical benefit THEY get from your service.

I'd imagine that the reaction would be a lot different if the US was being directly invaded. Then they'd know that you were actively working for them. As it is they have to make these convoluted connections as to exactly how fighting in Afghanistan helps America. Since most of them would struggle to pick Afghanistan out on a map, they're not really going to make those connections strong.

nzlockie: The closest real life situation I can think of for me, is when someone sacrifices something to bring you something that you actively don't want. What do you do?
You can't NOT thank them, because you see that's it's cost them; but at the same time, you don't want to send them a message that you approve of it, or else they'll take it as vindication that they were right to do it.
Wow, my internal struggle. I've learned to call things by what they are.
You would not believe how much of a social expectation there is here to worship the militarily in America. We're worst than the Nazis in that regard.

The US military has devolved from a great service to a worthless entity sustained solely to keep blind patriotism and nationalism alive. Few in the US military are worthy to put on that uniform. Those who do wear it as a shadow of the men who wore the uniform in the past. It is outright disgraceful and pretty damn disrespectful.

US command is completely shit.
US soldiers are completely shit.
Military values are completely shit.

I'm not a perfectionist by any means, because the US military is no where close to perfect. All this reading might be going to my head, but I know enough to know the US military needs some serious work. A lot of work and a lot of people laid off at that.

What of all the people being drained of their welfare to keep soldiers happy lugging around a gun in some god forsaken desert? Soldiers are doing a great disservice to America by trying to be help. Whatever the intention, it needs to stop. I understand soldiers do not control the fate their superiors destined them to, but at least use your head next time you devote your life to killing people on the command of power hungry politicians looking for re-election.

Americans complain about welfare, and have to look no further than the US military. A bed and three meals a day for doing something no one needs or wants, while real men starve trying to keep their family and livestock warm and fed. While real men do real work, wannabe heroes kill people who honestly need to be left alone.

I am ashamed of the US military. I am ashamed of the self destructive behaviors the US military engages in every day. I want it to stop, but no one listens, as long as there are "Islamic" vermin to kill, elections to be won, and hero wannabes looking to compensate for their sad existence.

Blackflag: Are you stalking me?

No one gives a crap about your opinion of Soldiers, the discussions about the integration of Soldiers into their former society. Your personal opinion, and this personal attack on service will be reported. Which is all this is.

At least Soldiers are not trolls.

nzlockie: It escalated quickly because Stag is mad that he doesn't know how the UN works and made a fool out of himself. After repeated entreaties to avoid going personal, for exactly this reason, you can see why I refuse to share personal information with trolls. Even the most generalized admission of service becomes fodder for personalized smear. Oh well, its reported.

As for the 'how to think' that is exactly the problem. Both Afghanistan and Iraq were started with large majorities of US support. Its quickly faded into the background for most Americans, to the point where, honestly, a discussion about the actual policy that drove us to invade, re-engage in Iraq vice ISIS, and with Carter Ashton, apparently rev up the Afghanistan War again. These are decisions that cost hundreds of billions of dollars, and literally send Americans into harms way - yet for the average American ... its ... incomprehensible.

There is a disconnect between Americans who find it 'right and necessary' to send Americans into harm's way and then avoid the discussion with vets that go there and come back. Most Afghan vets are deeply troubled about continued service in Afghanistan for example. What exactly are we attempting to accomplish there? And when for 12 years you bang your head up against the proverbial wall, and only NOW does someone seem to notice that China has incredible influence in Pakistan ... are we seeking their help to force Pakistan to comply with efforts to negotiate a peace with the Taliban (who are suddenly not terrorists?) You would think it would be someone besides the vets that asks the questions about how its gone from, "We don't negotiate with terrorists," to this? Hundreds of billions of dollars later and a couple thousand dead ... and we still can't figure out what the heck we are doing?

Its kind of a striking dissimilarity wit Vietnam, where at least the American public was clearly stating that the war was 'wrong' in the aggregate. If blaming the Soldiers was not the correct way to disagree, at least there was a desire to challenge the basis of a major National Security Issue. Now? Its literally ... avoidance. And when civilian control of the military is a constitutional thing, that can be worrisome on many levels.

Yet American 'patriots' just keep signing us up for more? Few can explain why other than not wanting to look weak ... so long as someone else does the fighting? I would argue that a Nation that readily signs itself up for fights but only send 1% to do the fighting is not exactly ... strong.

For those who do answer the call, it can be very jarring to see people demand more war when they know so little about it.

nzlockie: I'd imagine that the reaction would be a lot different if the US was being directly invaded. Then they'd know that you were actively working for them. As it is they have to make these convoluted connections as to exactly how fighting in Afghanistan helps America. Since most of them would struggle to pick Afghanistan out on a map, they're not really going to make those connections strong.

Well, in this manner I will both agree and chastize military leadership. The US Military does two things wrong here:

#1 - We are overly secretive. Even when we do things right, there is a cultural tendency toward secrecy (I mean you don;t want to tell your enemy where your troops are), but that cultural tendency is made worse when we are not doing the right things. Then the cultural tendency becomes an absolute and inviolate law. Abu Garhib (for example) was leaked by a whistleblower, and there was acknowledged rancor as result (as well there should be). Tactically, its not like the Iraqi people are stupid, and the more that happens, the more insurgents you crate. Keeping it secret has little effect, and actually makes things worse over the long haul. the military result? The Strategic Specialist (one of the lowest ranks in the Army). Rather than acknowledge that the problem was the torture, the problem became the Whistleblower and low ranking personnel who 'get into the press'.

This institutional gut reaction of secrecy can make it hard for the average American to see what is happening (something we vets perhaps take for granted as its not hidden from us).

#2 - I was in the middle of the debate about the way forward on Afghanistan. The choice was between selling it to the American people to garner support (the aim I advocated), and keeping it al quiet so we could continue the war ... on the down low if you will (the side that won). It's kind of hard to track major security events when the decision is made to make it difficult to do just that (but please hand us billions more dollars! And BTW, we are going to reduce death benefits to the families of the fallen because its too expensive). I have seen a couple of the generals involved in the decision subsequently turn around and attempt to blame the shortcomings on Afghanistan on a failure to support the strategy and American diffidence about the war - and to Obama's credit, very one of them that voiced that sentiment after their own support for the decision to 'hide' the war from Americans has been shit canned in short order.

So, we vets also have a role here as facilitators. The problem, as the New Orleans incident suggests, is that even when engaged in policy level illumination, most Americans, IMO, can only see the death and destruction of combat. Clausewitz was clear (and I agree with him), that war is politics by other means - and its very dangerous to let a military play in that arena without oversight.

@gree0232 - Lol, admin doesn't care if I hold a personal opinion you do not like.

Yet American 'patriots' just keep signing us up for more? Few can explain why other than not wanting to look weak ... so long as someone else does the fighting? I would argue that a Nation that readily signs itself up for fights but only send 1% to do the fighting is not exactly ... strong.

For those who do answer the call, it can be very jarring to see people demand more war when they know so little about it.
Patriots do not support what the service does. It is selfish at best.


So, we vets also have a role here as facilitators.
Of death and destruction. It is in the job description.

The problem, as the New Orleans incident suggests, is that even when engaged in policy level illumination, most Americans, IMO, can only see the death and destruction of combat.
Because war IS destruction and combat. Painting destruction and combat as something glorious is an affront to the nation and its people.

BTW, I'm deeply sorry if the truth offends some people's falsely perceived sense of reality. In my opinion of course.
I would prefer my charges be defended as is proper in a debate, but I cannot require anyone to properly debate.

-- POST HIDDEN AS THIS USER IS BLOCKED --

Shockingly, people don't just have to sit around and listen to deliberate flame bait from a poster whose sole 'opinion' is attack the one thing about another poster that he knows - service. I have asked you repeatedly to stop with the personal pot shots and to stay on target, and all you can do is hurl invective from the safety of internet anonymity?

Fortunately, this site allows some measure of control for those who clearly cannot control themselves.

Again, I have pointedly asked you to stop with the personalized antics and the trollish attempt to justify it as merely an 'opinion'. Its just trolling. Goodbye Stag.

Oh, I see now. You thought my views on a governmental insitution were bluffed for the sole purpose of insulting you.
Well don't flatter yourself, I really do believe everything I've said, but I guess it is easier to mark it off as "flamebait" than a legitimate argument. Less time consuming.

-- POST HIDDEN AS THIS USER IS BLOCKED --

I am not quite sure why you would continue after people have asked you not too? I am sorry you were wrong about the UN. Now please, leave me alone.

BTW, why is this in the religion forum?