Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/12/the-tragedy-of-the-american-military/383516/

This article is quite long, but I thought it was very well written and made excellent points (some of which I have thought for some time but never really managed to put into words). I'm guessing that knowing what I know about most Dakka members this will be preaching to the choir, but if anybody wants to read or skim this and has some thoughts to share feel free.

Most of what i'm reading there isn't a problem with the military, but everyone else's perceptions and attitudes towards it. I do tend to agree though.

Indeed. Its not a problem with the military, its a problem with everyone else and how our political leaders are treating the military.

I dont agree with the thesis that this is a military problem (or only an US one for some parts at that). On the issue of technology, well the military has always wanted more funding (which army doesnt?), it is the job of people in government to distribute it in such a way that it is used resposible. In the Netherlands we have the opposite problem, a lack of funding and politicians that just want to keep cutting down on expenses (instead of the US opposite of not caring and approving). We seriously had to have a discussion if the removal of helicopters (medivac) attached to missions for financial reasons was worth the lives of soldiers (the argument was that other nations could provide medivac, instead of embedded ones that almost certainly could have been deployed faster).
The author also seems to neglect some points in technological innovation and other countries, but I guess thats obvious. Funnily enough one of the part factories for the F-35 in the Netherlands is just two towns over.

I believe that public perception of the troops is just a consequence of a professional army. Yes, less people serve and therefore fewer people know active members. People just dont care anymore, even in the Netherlands. To be clear, every combat death we suffered in our comparatively small contributions in Iraq and Afghanistan was highlighted on the national news, with name, cause of death etc. Yet people just dont care anymore, the trend just increases to the individual instead of the community. I dont think those bonds can be restored between military and public. Just to compare, as a relativly small country with a small population, we no longer care about soldiers that live 3 hours drive away at max, nothing compared to the distance between Guam and New York.
The part about the strategy/tactics and all those issues in wars for this generation has been done to death, so I wont comment on that.

I just want to end by saying that in a democracy the military is a tool for the government elected by the people, it is not the fault of the tool that it is used incorrectly, perhaps politicians (and the people) should not forget that.

A good article indeed. “A people untouched (or seemingly untouched) by war are far less likely to care about it” is certainly one thing Europeans can notice. We're still digging up WW2 bombs here whenever there's digging to be done in any city old enough to be bombed back then. We're not interested in getting bombed or rebuilding whole cities again. But many random (American) guys in cities that haven't seen war since the Civil War ended are all too happy to see "our boys" go in and take out some bad guys somewhere far away. It's not like they know either the US soldiers or the people they're shooting at. They'll cheer if it's a win and disapprove if not.

Or so it seems when watching from the frozen north, where many of our veterans fought first the Soviets and then the Germans because it had to be done. I'm too old to be called up first if it goes to hell but it'll be children of my friends and family. I'll happily pass on living to 100 if we can have peace for that long instead.

I cannot believe you guys missed the most important thing in the article. The air force was making noises like the aliens from H.G Wells' War of the Worlds. The aliens have infiltrated the US military and are waging a war on all of us by proxy! I guess that puts the kibosh on the whole " the chances of anything coming from mars are a million to one " theory.
Now I wonder if there is any red weed left....

The American public and it is political management can do anything at all for your military besides take it seriously. It's wise a chickenhawk country where reckless investing as well as ideal folly blend in order to lure The united states into endless conflicts this can?¡¥t win.

As a contractor myself I focused in on the F-35 part of it. I'm just glad the Navy LCS project didn't get mentioned. It's basically just as bad as the Air Force one (seriously, they couldn't even decide on a hull design, so they just commissioned one of each design and called it "operational testing"). It also suffers from the problem of trying to do everything and doing it very badly.

I only just barely started at this job but I can see how the way contracts are assigned is, well, it's a joke honestly. Companies charge 10x what a part is worth, from screws and bolts all the way up. And people pay it because, I really don't know, how else is the military going to get supplies?

Also the part about pensions and "career protection" was very accurate.

All in all I thought it was a pretty well written critique of a lot of things surrounding the military. I just wish there was some way we could get it changed but i can't imagine what it would be.

Not going to typed this in any way possible

US Military is taking for granted

Edit

Not meant as degrading

It seems as though people see in the article what they want, a sort of 'Rorschach' journalism.

I saw way to much to read, and stopped about 1/8th of the way through it.

Read about 7/8's of it, watch Pentagon wars says it all.
Anyway the wars that the American military have fought recently are not for tactical values but are for political and monetary reasons only.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Read about 7/8's of it, watch Pentagon wars says it all.
Anyway the wars that the American military have fought recently are not for tactical values but are for political and monetary reasons only.

If it helps you any war for political reasons isn't new, or even recent.

 Ahtman wrote:
It seems as though people see in the article what they want, a sort of 'Rorschach' journalism.

Welcome to statistics and/or politics, where one can take anything and make it look like anything else .

I don't think there has ever been a war that wasn't intrinsically tied to politics in some way.

I don't even know what a war fought for "tactical values" would even be. What does that even mean? All wars are connected to politics and policy. All wars influence and are in turn influenced by economic factors.

I must be tired. Unsure what Tactical Values is. I do know Tactical Advantage.

I think he meant strategic value.

I think he mean that he bases his opinions off random movies that fits in with confirmation bias of his ideology.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Read about 7/8's of it, watch Pentagon wars says it all.
Anyway the wars that the American military have fought recently are not for tactical values but are for political and monetary reasons only.

War is an extension of policy by other means, it is always fought for political or monetary reasons

EDIT: But yeah Pentagon Wars is a funny look at everything wrong with the US military

 Ahtman wrote:
It seems as though people see in the article what they want, a sort of 'Rorschach' journalism.

I saw that. I read the article about a week ago, and considered posting it in the OT, but decided not only was it too long for people to read but that the articles gist is spread out too far. I think a lot of people are only going to read the first third and miss all the criticisms that come later.

 Torga_DW wrote:
I think he meant strategic value.

So... Politics?

"War is the continuation of politics by other means." Clauswitz 101 people

Basically this is americas 'perpetual war' doctrine - be at war constantly in order to have veterans and funding.

 Soteks Prophet wrote:
Basically this is americas 'perpetual war' doctrine - be at war constantly in order to have veterans and funding.

We're just laying down the foundation for the Imperium of Man

 Jihadin wrote:

 Soteks Prophet wrote:
Basically this is americas 'perpetual war' doctrine - be at war constantly in order to have veterans and funding.

We're just laying down the foundation for the Imperium of Man

Can't conquer the galaxy if you don't have the industry to support it.

I have a hard time that people in America don't care about troops. At the very least they're respected by everyone, everyone from WWII Veterans to to Iraq vets get saluted, honked at (if they have a bumpersticker), thanked for their service, etc.

I think it's more of a bureaucratic problem with the VA then the actual citizenry. The VA is just utterly fethed as an organization and is more inept and incompetent then the goddamned Imperium in 40k. They can't do anything right and because of their failings, veterans across the states are suffering dearly because of it.

The only way I'd say the citizens are to hold any blame is a lack of fury over the gak the VA keeps pulling, and a lack of large protests because of it.

 Wyzilla wrote:
I have a hard time that people in America don't care about troops. At the very least they're respected by everyone, everyone from WWII Veterans to to Iraq vets get saluted, honked at (if they have a bumpersticker), thanked for their service, etc.

I think it's more of a bureaucratic problem with the VA then the actual citizenry. The VA is just utterly fethed as an organization and is more inept and incompetent then the goddamned Imperium in 40k. They can't do anything right and because of their failings, veterans across the states are suffering dearly because of it.

The only way I'd say the citizens are to hold any blame is a lack of fury over the gak the VA keeps pulling, and a lack of large protests because of it.

That's the thing, though. We don't care about the troops. We respect them, aye, but we don't actually care. If you hear about a squad of Armydogs getting slaughtered by ISIS, you think "oh, how sad" and you get on with your life without actually feeling even a tinge of sadness or regret.
Also, I agree, the VA sucks. There are SO many veterans taking advantage of it and using it despite having no need whatsoever for government assistance. Take my great uncle, for example. He was a cook in the Navy, and he slashed his foot on the lid from a con on accident and received the Purple Heart for it, and now (despite never seeing combat) he is receiving disability checks the VA due to his claim of PTSD.

 Wyzilla wrote:
I have a hard time that people in America don't care about troops. At the very least they're respected by everyone, everyone from WWII Veterans to to Iraq vets get saluted, honked at (if they have a bumpersticker), thanked for their service, etc.

There was a time in the not so distant past where this simply wasn't true.

 whitedragon wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
I have a hard time that people in America don't care about troops. At the very least they're respected by everyone, everyone from WWII Veterans to to Iraq vets get saluted, honked at (if they have a bumpersticker), thanked for their service, etc.

There was a time in the not so distant past where this simply wasn't true.

60-70 time frame there Zilla

Edit

Wrong name mention

The 'everyone hated the troops in Vietnam' is also a myth. Historians have looked into it in the past and those actually looking rather than just repeating the classic lines never found any real evidence that troops from the Nam war were treated substantially differently back home than troops from WWII, Korea, Afghanistan, or Iraq. There's nothing but anecdote and Vets convinced that they suffered unduly at the hands of an uncaring public.

 Jihadin wrote:

 whitedragon wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
I have a hard time that people in America don't care about troops. At the very least they're respected by everyone, everyone from WWII Veterans to to Iraq vets get saluted, honked at (if they have a bumpersticker), thanked for their service, etc.

There was a time in the not so distant past where this simply wasn't true.

60-70 time frame there Zilla

Edit

Wrong name mention

Actually I was thinking pre-2001.