'The Culture of War'

Reading 'The Culture of War' by Martin Van Creeveld I was given a perspective from which to consider the present issue of the U.S. military allowing openly homosexual soldiers to enlist-especially without any existing structure in the military to deal with the problem. It is something of a biological issue perhaps- with women being on the receiving end in sex they may lack understanding of why homosexuals allowed to serve openly with male heterosexuals could create tension. The federal judge ordering the thoughtless dumping of open homosexual enlistment probably never served herself--it is a completely abstract exercise of the privileged that should ingratiate her to party leaders.

http://www.amazon.com/Culture-War-Martin-van-Creveld/dp/0345505409

Sexed soldiers homosexually trysting behind every bush and latrine door might not be a problem for gays now of course, yet down the road some issues could arise. The foremost practical issue to the practical and neo-atheist American Democrat Party culture is that of the bloody, senseless death environment of animals in general war. I tend to believe that the joy of war and killing noted by Van Creeveld may be remote in today's volunteer military, yet that could change in the future when a draft of all Americans for a term of four years is required for financial and defense purposes. There shall be no deferments for being homosexual. Instead, those that do not serve well during their four years of active duty for 100 dollars a month will go to a military prison where they will be shot if troublemakers.

Such extreme scenarios are possible in a volatile, networked, pervasively immoral social environment. We like to reminisce with Creeveld of better times such as the glory days of Prussia and Germany before Napoleon slaughtered the Germans at Jenna.

With ancient victory early in the 18th century Prussian excelled at parade ground evolutions to such an extent that they lost the ability for competent field maneuvers and tactics; becoming a ready herd for the slaughter. Homosexuals on parade grounds today with high pay and benefits may find their choice to force an openly gay service upon otherwise tolerant heterosexual soldiers leading to a future, unpleasant environment of war without the perquisites of the volunteer era.

'The Culture of War' describes how various cultures build and reinforce the warrior mythos. The wild hordes for example are groups and ad hoc nations without significant, competent military background that tend to perpetrate the same kinds of atrocities from the French Jacqueries to all sides in the Balkans conflict of the 1990s. This subject made me think of the U.S. Americal Division formed just for the Vietnam War, with no unit tradition or history, that produced Lt. William Calley and much lack of discipline and esprit. It was disbanded after the end of the Vietnam Conflict.

Creeveld notes innumerable trivial facts of the culture of war that are yet meaningful. I had no idea that for more than 200 years many of the world's modern militaries required soldiers to wear leather neck collars four inches in height that made it impossible for the wearer to have a slouched neck posture-quite uncomfortable I'd think. This morning I saw a sloppy looking national guard recruiter exiting a dirty official vehicle on his way to the office--the first day to recruit openly gay service members. His baggy uniform pant legs were not bloused well and he was over-weight. Most drill sergeants of yore would have made the guy drop and do forty push-ups before yelling about the sloppy appearance. If I had his job I would have worn a Halloween costume.

The culture of war has attire standards that vary from era to era and circumstance. In the Vietnam War era some soldiers, Creeveld writes, wore jewelry and expensive civilian wristwatches into combat to show bravery. Today in Iraq and Afghanistan soldiers reportedly had Baskans and Robbins ice cream in 30 flavors and Starbucks coffee-yet did the military invent a good insulated field coffee cup that can be heated over a propane torch at high altitude?

Creeveld is a well-known military historian with many interesting historical insights on the culture of war. This study isn't a search for the causes of human conflict; it is an examination of the cultural practices and military institutions that create effective and ineffective militaries and warriors. Creeveld notes the well known concept that penetration is a male phenomena sometimes fulfilled with joy in veritably splitting a foe down the middle from top to bottom with a sword, bashing his brains out with a mace or shooting him with a fifty caliber bullet. The joy of war can change in an instant from the 'thrill of victory to the agony of defeat' obviously as the enemy drops the artillery shells accurately upon one's own position.

As a philosopher I tend to view war as economically wasteful and harmful to the environment. Yet within the social context of vying social groups it may be fatal or worse-such as slavery or debasement of various kinds-- to disregard the competent cultural execution of preparation for war and then practice armed neutrality. If people are stupid they will prefer bad options existentially and compel incompetent defense.

My essential criticism of 'The Culture of War' is its lack of mention of the value of competent civilian government to develop society in such a way that ecological economic civil procedures with full and satisfying individual personal rights can pre-empt and nullify the tendency for drifting into wasteful and stupid armed conflicts. The next war is likely to be a biological reduction of the human population to one billion souls. It is unthinkable that China should have too few people remaining alive to shut down its nuclear and chemical plants for example, and the possibilities for large scale conventional or nuclear war insult to the already damaged world environment is so substantial that it is unlikely to occur if people in government are intelligent…