Cold Bewilderment
Having been an imperial grunt for the better part of a decade, I watched last summer’s humiliation in Afghanistan unfold with a lurid fascination. To be more precise, I spent the first several days of our national disgrace angry and seething. As every good soldier knows, animosity drowns out heartbreak—sometimes even guilt. But anger doesn’t last forever. It certainly can’t outlast the Taliban. And so as the days dragged on and the world witnessed a tribal army humiliate the mightiest nation on earth, my indignation slowly dissipated and I was left cold and bewildered.
Of course, for those who gave their pound of flesh to the Afghan War the collapse of this $2 trillion Potemkin village was foreordained. Any private with an ASVAB waiver could have prophesied it. The Afghan Army’s limitations were widely known and Kabul’s corruption was the talk of chow halls from Bagram to Baumholder. The lowliest grunt had good reason to doubt the wisdom of the planners, experts, and managers who quietly steered America’s war machine. The hands learned early on that they couldn’t count on the brains.
But for me this ignoble conclusion was more than a national defeat. It was the unofficial end of a quixotic crusade against terrorism and the last, tragic gasp of America’s traditional warrior caste.
Cold bewilderment.
Benign Neglect
Long after the failed Afghan War has fossilized under years of benign neglect, a body of journalists and scholars will attempt to write the definitive history of the Global War on Terror. Surely they will condemn four US presidents while reserving the mildest rebuke for Barack Obama. There will be some criticism of the generals, managers, planners, and experts who tinkered us to failure—though not enough—but make no mistake, the bowties will reserve their most cruel denunciations for American society. They will attack our chauvinism, naiveté, and lack of “cultural awareness,” while shaming the American people for ignoring wars the world forgot.
If contemporary accounts are any guide, future chroniclers will take a lighter touch with the soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen who fought and died over the past two decades—with an important caveat: to escape censure or a worse fate of being deliberately forgotten, the GWOT veteran must bow to those who betrayed him, enlist in the demoralization campaign against the folks back home, or embrace being forever broken and make the most of his five minutes of pity.
Outside detached commentary on the GWOT’s steady trickle of death, the “military-civilian divide,” and mental health, I doubt much ink will be spilled exploring the real toll of these Indian wars on those who fought them and the spirit of the nation. Most of us still live in the 20th century and see the world through the eyes of beancounters and bureaucrats—15,000 dead nobodies on the frontiers of the American imperium hardly seems like much of loss when stacked against two world wars and two costly “police actions.” What’s more, for the average American, conflict and death are best passively consumed when not actively avoided. Most Americans have had their fill of spoiled wars in the Middle East and Central Asia, but the edacious American is always hungry for some new banquet of bloodshed—perhaps a proxy war in Ukraine or maybe even a war against unruly peasants in his own country. Anything that makes him feel righteous without having to ask himself why.
What it Gave
It’s hard to imagine many of my brothers-in-arms taking such accounts seriously. These Indian wars are damn near indiscernible even to us, much less the uninitiated. And no matter how many bowties swarm around it, the longest global conflict in American history will never be understood as we understand it. The GWOT may have been a con of sorts, and as time drags on it’s harder to say the past 20 years were worth $8 trillion and the best blood of a generation. But as much as the GWOT took, it also gave. And I would be lying if I said I regret meeting that heartless mistress.
The years I spent tramping around the world with a rifle were by far the most enriching of my life. Even when I was soaking wet and freezing, or baking under a ruthless foreign sky—when I was tired, starving, sick, scared, and every inch of my body screamed at me all at once—I knew I was living. For men like me, to feel alive for even a moment is worth a hell of a beating. We will sweat for it, bleed for it, and make others bleed—all to feel that we are doing what we were made for. Sure, you do it for your brothers. They make the agony and the absurdity and the cruelty and the futility bearable. Their joy is yours. Their suffering is yours. Their life is your life. You hold it all in the palm of your hand, and you would have it no other way. You are alive together.
Everyone tumbles into this world hardwired for life, but at some point you find yourself condemned to a small desk in a small room under the watchful eye of an underpaid woman eager to usher you into the world of the dead. The journey takes several years, and there is always a little kicking and screaming, but when you do arrive you quickly forget what came before. It’s a strange place—sleepy, slow, and sticky-sweet, where basketweavers and witch-doctors enjoy complete sovereignty and shame lurks behind every interaction. There are no warriors, heroes, or men you can respect in that place. A numb stupefaction settles in.
Few escape the land of the dead, but for many of us the GWOT was a rare ticket out. It was a treacherous road, but we grew strong, and years of quiet frustration finally became intelligible. We lived the full measure of our creation. And thank the Lord for that.
Fighting Alone
America has a warrior caste. It’s collapsing now, along with everything else, but it’s still there. To comprehend what’s left of this caste and where it goes from here, one has to lift a curtain of lies to gaze at the ugly heart of this regime, which is no easy task.
Most of us saw behind the curtain early enough to know that we’d be fighting alone, and that our fight was not the same as granddad’s. For those of us who held the lives of others in our hands, at some point it was no longer about Toby Keith, the adventure, the benefits, or the laurels: it was us against the world—and we'd rather be damned than let a brother take the burden alone.
Does this make us “dupes?” Perhaps. But I think there’s a bit of wisdom here that just might do you some good, dear reader.
We are all in the middle of a war now. This is not the terrain of our choosing, our enemy has superior firepower, and our leaders are feckless, weak, and don't hesitate to betray their own. It's us against the world. At this point loyalty matters more than just about anything. It’s what made so many of us veterans step forward time and again to fight a determined enemy despite knowing we’d be without vision or support from the planners, experts, and managers back home.
There are few choices left, and what remains is dwindling. But if I know anything—if the GWOT has some lesson to impart—it’s that you can’t fight this alone. Loyalty is everything, and it might be all you’ve got.
Mr. Lee,
Over the past twenty-five years of serving the Suck, I've ridden the road that you deftly described: from buying into the Neo-conservative "cause" of bringing Lockean republicanism to the benighted, to realizing that the government's heart isn't really in it, to seeing the corruption from within, to finally realizing that the only thing of any worth in the warrior caste are the warriors themselves. It's why I make my living now, training combined arms at the tactical level, attempting to ensure that my friends and their Marines are adequately trained to save one another as the empire marches on. It sounds like rationalization, and I'm humble enough to admit it. I've spent a lot of time over the past ten years wondering why I am how I am, and I think I've come to a conclusion that makes sense.
Some of us refuse to become domesticated.
In their natural state, animals are feral. To be feral in a manner that is successful enough to reproduce and survive through generations, one must have two principle attributes: the ability to effectively identify threats and the freedom to choose proper threat mitigation. Removing those attributes results in an animal that is dependent on someone else. After enough generations pass in those conditions, domesticated animals become completely unable to do anything for themselves besides consume and reproduce. Thus, a wild turkey who is sensible, tactical, and wily becomes fat, slow, stupid, and will panic to the point of killing itself when faced with the random threat of harm from a predator.
I think this feral archetype runs deep within us and will take many more generations to evolve into absolute domestication. Those who feel it more keenly will join and fight simply out of a need to express that ferality. Jung and Neumann identified it as a "shadow", I think, but I believe their conclusions, that the "shadow" must be confronted and made a necessary part of a man's character, are also true. However, for the first time in the history of this nation, we see a society at-large that has, as Dostoevsky described, "nothing else to do but sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with ensuring the continuation of world history and even then man."
In such a situation, young men are caught between society and their genetic predispositions. War is an outlet for the latter, maybe the best outlet, and in the current society maybe the only outlet. I think conversations that get to these bald facts are too few. Even more importantly, the "cause" that we swore an oath to has to be as "just" (if such a thing is even possible) as our sacrifice would entail. Reform is paramount, and perhaps that may serve this end. If the goal is to refine threat mitigation and preserve freedom of choice within an environment of relative prosperity, then we need to focus on the former while expanding the latter at all costs.
I enjoy reading your missives, and I wish you all the best. -Unclean
I’ve thought a lot about the “military/civilian divide”. A few of my opinions:
It ultimately comes from the all volunteer force and then the reduction in the all volunteer force that has taken place since the end of Desert Storm/Shield in 1991. Maybe for the younger crowd, they do not realize how much smaller the military got after 1991. But, back to the point, the smaller the force, the less American society has to participate in it. A contrast to Vietnam – every family in America that had an 18-21 year old son in the mid 1960s-1973 had to worry about them being drafted and likely to be in Vietnam. And Vietnam was beamed into their homes every night – at a time when people only had network TV and newspapers for news outlets – the public couldn’t not passively take it in. When I say every family, I mean every family had to either worry about being drafted or was hard at work getting deferments and other work arounds (Guard, Reserve..etc). When the casualty figures eclipsed 10,000 per year, the public got tired of the war and protests broke out. The public also got tired of the Iraq War, (also it pushed Afghanistan into the background to where that war got very little press – even less so than the small amount Iraq was getting.
As for the public “not caring”…a couple things: because both wars were sold as fighting terrorism and to not “let the terrorist win”; there is a belief among some that you cant let the terrorists change your way of living. So President George W. Bush said on TV something like: Go about your daily lives like normal – and implying the military would take care of things and everyone just go back to normal. I get why he did that, but that is also a reason the public put that into the back of their mind. Also, the public has to be fed news. News of casualties was not front page news. Generals when they were on TV, were saying how well the wars were going, forever having “turned the corner”.
There was definitely a time – and I was guilty of it myself – of thinking that anyone who didn’t support the war efforts (no matter the why) robustly was not patriotic. Now, I think it is really Pro-American to make sure that if we are going to send our troops into harms way that it must be as a last resort or actually extremely vital to our security interests.
Back to the “warrior class”. I saw a couple of years ago that 82% of active duty military had a close relative who had been in or was also currently in the military. Well that pretty much spells out “warrior class” or a more negative word that you use “caste”. And not only that…the Southern states are way overrepresented in where people come from that join the military. There are a couple of reasons for that…1. Since we previously mentioned that so many military members had immediate relatives also in the military…the biggest military bases are in the South…Benning and Bragg to mention just a couple. Therefore, these areas have the big numbers of military families to feed into the next generation of troops. Also, Southerners have always generally been geared to like the military.
Another thing…and I think this a double edge sword – civilians are discouraged from having an opinion on anything military related by having their opinions met with “but did you serve?” I actually have said that myself…but I also realize it just makes each side retreat further away from each other.
A lot of disjointed thoughts above, but I do wish someone smarter than I would really delve into the military/civilian divide. I personally think it as I said in the first paragraph. A professional military – which is what an AVF breeds – also isolates itself. And to honest, the military flag officer class has as much to do if not more, for America being in “forever wars” than anyone else. I mean the last thing the public is to do is question the generals. Just look how Trump was treated for questioning the generals. And the generals believe in forever war. Again a double edge sword,,,should the public revere its generals (one would think, “Yes!”) and give them blank checks? or should we inject some skepticism in our views of the generals.
Oh, one last note: as the military got smaller, the Guard and Reserve became active participants and carried a significant burden of the GWOT. This was not the case in Vietnam, as the Guard and Reserve almost exclusively did not participate. I still remember when some reserves were activated and sent to my base in the ME during Desert Storm – reservists who in the 80s had joined for extra money and college tuition assistance – actually uttered the words “I did not join the Reserves for this”.
I may have more thoughts on this, but for now this is it.