Have Yourself a Non-Warrior Little Christmas

--A Charlie Brown Christmas 

I got to keep my image
While suspended from a throne
That looks out upon a kingdom
Full of people all unknown 
--I'm a Man,
Spencer Davis Group

Have yourself a merry little Christmas,
Let your heart be light
From now on,
our troubles will be out of sight 
--Merry Little Christmas 

He who, conscious of being strong,
is content to be weak,
He shall be the paragon of mankind

--Lao Tze   

I've got to leave before I start to scream
But someone locked the door and took the key
You feelin' alright
I'm not feelin' too good myself 
--Feelin' Alright, Joe Cocker
 ____________________

As an extension of the previous post (God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen), the labels and identity of our soldiers -- both external and internal -- is a confused matter, adding to the fragmentation that many feel after their service.

The U.S. Army's Soldier's Creed morphed into a Warrior Ethos creed in 2003, and the oath is now a confused amalgam of the two concepts. A dialog on the topic began at the now-defunct site, "IntelDump", and Ranger will attempt his own definition via comparison now. (We also invite original participants and friends FDChief and Publius to continue in the discussion):

A soldier is conflicted by his wartime memories; a warrior exalts in them.

A soldier is shamed by violence; a warrior takes pride in and is defined by his violence.

A soldier fights to end wars; a warrior revels in them.

A soldier fights for humanity, and a warrior, for glory.

A soldier fights for country; a warrior, for his master and/or profit.

A soldier suppresses his memories; a warrior revels in them.

A soldier is self-effacing and humble; a warrior, brash and prideful.

A soldier values life; a warrior, only the life of  his leader.

A soldier fights as a team member; a warrior fights solo [this idea is confused in the 2003 Soldier's Creed, which states, "A warrior fights as part of a team.]

A soldier fights for duty; a warrior sees the fight as the end game.

A soldier's job is discrete and ends with the completion of the mission; a warrior accepts endless war as a way of life.

A soldier retains his humanity; a warrior tortures, takes hostages and assassinates.

A soldier is repelled by the suffering he inflicts; a warrior glories in carnage.

A soldier kills to fulfill a realistic objective; a warrior kills for no purpose beyond the kill.

A soldier tells his story with regret and humility; a warrior composes odes to the violence.

A soldier is mission-oriented, his acts conscribed by law; a warrior is lawless, unbound by civilized thought.

A soldier is committed to his community; a warrior, to his violence.

A soldier's life is not war; a warrior's life is war.

A soldier's death is lamentable; a warrior's death is meaningless.

A soldier acknowledges his weakness; a warrior destroys weakness.

A soldier respects law and authority; a warrior operates outside of the law, and has no restraint.

A soldier mourns the death of his enemy; a warrior kills sans remorse.

A soldier seeks to protect women and children; a warrior inflicts suffering on all, without discretion.

A soldier gives; a warrior takes.

A soldier fights in spite of his leader's lies; a warrior fights for his leader's lies.

A soldier does not endeavor to be a warrior; a warrior may never be a soldier.

Soldiers love; warriors, hate.

A democracy needs soldiers; an autocracy needs warriors.

Soldiers want their children to never know war; warriors raise their children to fight.

Soldiers bury the dead; warriors defile the dead.

Soldiers have sympathy; warriors extinguish their sympathy.

Soldiers defend civilization; warriors destroy civilization.

Historically, those sent into battle were kept apart from the general population for varying periods of time. The Greeks saw the fighting class as unfit for family life. After a probationary period as a soldier, some of these men could then enter the political arena. The Japanese Samurai was the prototypical lone wolf, an entity removed from and unruled by the constricts of his society.

Our Native American societies performed rituals to allow those returning from battle to become eligible to re-enter society. Reader MinstrelBoy, of White Mountain Apache background, explained that process here at RAW. Upon his return from serving in Vietnam, he partook of such a ceremony to assist him in his transition, and felt that the lack of such a passage for most soldiers leaves them with an open psychic wound.

This is not comprehensive, and your views are solicited.

Merry Christmas.

To a Young Man

--The Magpie, Claude Monet

Change your heart
Look around you
Change your heart
it will astound you
--Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime,
Korgis

I will not serve that in which I no longer believe
whether it call itself my home, my fatherland,
or my church: and I will try to express myself
in some mode of life or art as freely as I can
and as wholly as I can, using for my defense
the only arms I allow myself to use
– silence, exile, and cunning
--Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man,
James Joyce

I used her, she used me,
but neither one cared,
we were getting our share
--Night Moves, Bob Seeger
_________________

[As I enter Ranger's thoughts addressed to a friend, he is en-route to a reunion of instructors at Ft. Benning. There is no doubt he enjoys the camaraderie shared with fellows of times past, but there is also a sense of betrayal by the system in which they spent so many years.]

So here are Ranger's thoughts to a young man wishing to join the service, solicited by his father and one of Ranger's contemporaries:

This story revolves around a dog, my old college friend Ron Moor and his son. The thoughts jelled after reading the book, War Letters, a collage of notes from World War II Soldiers to those back home.

Ron is a peaceful man, a healer and a minister who has dedicated his life to the forces of life. Ron was a classmate and we became re-acquainted at our 40th class reunion. Ron was drafted and served accordingly, and now his son wants to join the USMC. But let us start with the dog.

A few days ago a bulldog, bred, born and trained to fight to the death, washed up onto my back porch, bearing the wounds of his recent past life. This dog was abandoned and discarded like a sack of shit after he ceased to be a fighting machine, or he escaped. His front leg has bites through to the bone, and his back legs are weak and he limps.

Though trained to kill, the dog is sweet, gentle and loving. Unfortunately, my dog is guarding his territory and so attacks the new dog incessantly, instinctively. The bulldog will not attack, but he will defend, and he does so brutally as is his training. Placing the bulldog in a loving home will be problematic due to his killing instinct, if provoked. How does one responsibly place a creature that is a killing time bomb?

In War Letters, the brutality of WW II combat training is discussed. Ranger thought about his training, proclivities, and how he differs from a man like Ron Moor. While we both eschew violence and know it is never a solution to a problem, Ranger will often take the violent response as it is programmed into me, like the pit bull enjoying a bit of a haven.

But what to do with the sweet killer on my back porch? The sheriff's office tells me the usual approach to found pit bulls is to euthanize them. Like the dog, many of our returning soldiers cannot go back to pre-training status, but how can we deal with them?

Thinking of my friend now brings me to Christian platitudes like, "Thou shalt not kill" and The Golden Rule, and those who live by the sword shall die by the sword. So it is a choice, to be a peacemaker or a sword-wielder. Choosing the latter places one in opposition to the former.

Were to speak to Ron's son I would ask him to think about the pit bull on the back porch. One can only walk one trail: That of affirming life, or dealing death. Once you take a step, you can't rewind and erase.

Life is about keeping an escape and evasion plan, which means keeping your escape routes clearly indicated and properly secure. I know Ron's son will enlist and become a Marine, much as Ranger followed his path. One is either called to this lifestyle or not. Ron, this one is not on your shoulders, and this is difficult for me to write.

Lisa observes:

Just because one suffers conflict does not necessarily mean he is wrong. Tension is inherent in most undertakings of any meaning. Lack of unity simply suggests that the conciliation has not yet been made; the tension in thought serves a purpose. Ranger now questions most wars, yet he still embraces his training and finds succor with his Army fellows.

We are not supposed to love things that do great harm, and yet we do. How we reckon with that gives contour to our future conduct. RAW friend Deryle recently quoted Tolkein's, "Not all who wander are lost." That is true in the long view, for it is through wandering that we are found. Sometimes it takes 40 days in the desert; sometimes you figure it out at home.

Perhaps some day people shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more (Isaiah 2:4). That day is not now.

The Conflict Overseas

Terminate the, enemy
Eradicate the hated enemy
I am an enemy
My very greatest enemy
--Conflict, Disturbed

Eyes may open but cannot see
Torn open to a bleak reality
The silent waves of a pitch black sea
Laying waste the last of me
--Words Mean Nothing, Veil of Sorrow

After serving in the conflict overseas.
And the time that he served,
Had shattered all his nerves,
And left a little shrapnel in his knee
--Sam Stone, John Prine

Ranger Observation:
Calling a war a conflict is like
calling a sniper a people person
_________________

After watching viewing several memorial Day programs stating how we honored our dead from foreign conflicts, the word began assaulting my ears.

Conflict (n): A state of disharmony between incompatible or antithetical persons, ideas, or interests; a clash. A state of open, often prolonged fighting; a battle or war.

Why do we use the word "conflict" to describe the brutal fact of war? It seems too mild a word when the result is the reality of combat deaths. Since WW II the U.S. somehow lost the will or ability to declare war, even when our armies were locked in deadly conflict. Even when 35,000 Soldiers died in Korea or 58,000 in Vietnam, we could not bring ourselves to call the deadly activity for what it was. They were conflicts, altercations, scuffles . . .

Why do we have an overseeing agency called the Department of Defense? Why not call it the Department of Overseas Conflict? Then our wars would be simple matters of conflict resolution, with our Soldiers becoming arbitrators. The Combat Action Badge (CAB) could then morph into the Conflict Arbitration Badge, with the Combat Infantry Badge (CIB) becoming the Conflict Infantry Badge.

The next logical step would be to amend The Constitution to legalize the concept of endless conflict by granting the President the authority to declare CONFLICT, thereby simplifying the whole shooting match by making WAR obsolescent. Congress would be disburdened of a duty they are clearly too timid to exercise.

It is so simple: In a snap of the finger war becomes truly a thing of the past. Simple, except the dead patriots in the cemeteries will still stay dead a long time.