Love 2 U

In the words of a broken heart its just emotions
Taking me over
Tied up in sorrows
Lost in my soul
--Emotions, Bee Gees

You see I wanted her real bad
and I was about to give in
that's when she started talkin' true love
started talkin' about sin
--Keep your Hands to Yourself,
Georgia Satellites

You've got your nuclear boots
And your drip dry glove
Ooo when you bite your lip
It's some reaction to love, o-ove, o-ove
--My Best Friend's Girlfriend, the Cars

Self-denial
Is never easy baggage
But come next Monday
I'm gonna give up on you
--Come Next Monday, K. T. Oslin
_____________

A recent RAW post by Lisa discussed the concept of love as imposed by the AP upon Obama's mama's marriage to Kenyan Mr. Obama. Several readers had visceral reactions to the piece, saying Ranger should write about what he knows best. Which leads me to make comment. Without further adieu: Love, a Ranger homily.

Ranger would rather sandpaper his ass and sit in salt than write about emotions. This is written under duress.

The discomfort with even mentioning love is based upon the unwillingness of some readers to examine issues that relate to emotions. Most RAW readers are former military veterans. Ranger would not attempt to speak for these distinguished persons; my comments are personal.

My discomfort in discussing emotions stems from the fact that this is a feature of my person that has been suppressed since my early manhood. That is a large part of successful Army indoctrination -- to use one's reason to make rational decisions, versus emotional ones.

Emotion carries a strong distaste when applied to most things in life, for me. My opposition to the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©) grows from the observation that the entire ball of wax is an emotional reaction to a very rational set of circumstances. Ranger would rather be logical and wrong than emotional and correct. A PWOT based on emotion is a loser from Day One.

Wars should be based upon cold, hard reason and objective facts. The reason the U.S. can not succeed in COIN operations and the PWOT is that emotion is not a military construct. Campaigns do not hinge upon emotions. They are based upon objective, verifiable facts and logical thinking. War should not be not an act of revenge -- it is a reasoned national policy leading to an achievable goal.

From the first day of basic training we are taught the things that will help us survive, and they are devoid of emotion: rifle marksmanship, bayonet drill, hand-to-hand close quarters combat, silent kill techniques and explosives. Survival depends on emotionless execution of the subject matter. Accurate rifle fire is delivered in a cool, reasoned manner. Anger or hatred in close quarters combat can get one killed. Snipers deliver death in a calm, reasoned manner.

All military schools remove emotion from the decision-making process. Even leadership is an emotionless exercise. Leadership means maximizing human assets to achieve a realistic military goal. It is not based upon warm fuzzy feelings. It is cold and objective. Leadership is not being a lovable fellow.

We coordinate fires, maneuver to close with and destroy the enemy, do contingency planning for nuclear, biological and chemical warfare annexes to operational orders. Ranger and all Special operations Forces military schooling actually beat the emotion out of our minds and souls. We become killing machines, which is exactly the goal of training. Feelings are irrelevant.

And then what happens? We are belched back into society and our wimmins and others expect us to be warm, feeling beings blissing out on the love in the universe. Some of us return to emotional footing, and some do not. The comments on "Love?" show the divide: Minstrel Boy, FDChief and tw seem to be returnees, to varying degrees. The rest of the Ranger audience is more comfortable navigating the terrain we were trained to traverse.

Ranger's discomfort is with a military, press and politics which have all become exercises in emotion, rather than disinterested exercises of reason. Emotion in the public sphere is not a formula for success. Emotion. . . feh.

[I think what Ranger wants to say is, he's back in control of this ship, and if any emotions (Eeowww!) intrude upon the writing they will not emanate from him. He will remain true to his U.S. Army training, and keep troublesome emotions at bay, at all costs.

My previous point was simply, emotional overlays have no place in formal reportage. --L.]