Citizens vs. Soldiers: The Growing Cultural Divide

[ODB]

Ok...since there's a fair amount of what seems to be civilian-bashing included in this thread, let's take a moment to examine how some folks end up interacting with military personnel. Perceptions go both ways, you know.

Take "Joe Smith," for example. He grew up in a smallish town just down the road from a major military installation. When he was in high school he had to compete for dates with high-paid (compared to what he could make in his after school job) military types who liked to date high school girls. They had cars, they had beer...you name it. Later, "Joe" marries and has daughters...who he's now afraid will get knocked up by some over-testosterone endowed military type from down the road who will then cop an immediate assignment elsewhere leaving him holding the bag. He's not a fan of the military, and feels that he has every good reason to feel that way. Never mind that his experience has been limited.

Overdrawn? Sure...but no more so than some of the rants about "typical" civilians I've seen here. It's those "typical" folks who some people seem to despise who pay for all your entitlements...and don't kid yourselves: military compensation these days is damned good...better than it ever has been and far better than you'll see in the real private sector. For the most part they pay without complaining (Nixon's "silent majority" comment has a great deal of validity) and certainly don't treat military members like they did sixty years ago. It's easy and tempting to cherry-pick your examples, and I could point out a number of military types I've seen over the years who were just getting over on the government...and an equal number of civilian types who did more or less the same thing.

But there are always the good ones out there, and the folks who may not fall into either camp but will offer you a military discount even though their store is in trouble and you make more than they do.

Point well made. I may be an exception to many. I hate the Soldier at the mall, Wal-Mart, Lowe's etc.... in uniform. Especially PT uniforms. Unlike many who believe this projects a good image for the military. Generally the ones I see doing it are not the ones you want projecting that image, but save that for another day and another time. However this does coincide with your getting over statement, when it is 1100 a.m. and they are cruising the mall in uniform. Great role model!!!! Ever seen the UPS, FEDEX, Postal Worker cruising around after work in uniform? Wonder why?

As far as military discounts are concerned.....never take them and never will. It's my job, does not make me one bit more special than the next guy. I guess it comes down to personalities, I'm not the guy who needs the big parades, speeches, and recognition. Unfortunately some feel civilians owe them that.

Final comment, is my military compensation enough for the times I've missed? Been home for 2 of my daughters 10 birthdays and missed 5 of the last 7 Christmases? Again not complaining one bit because I agree that we are being paid well and I did volunteer, but just thought about the compensation.

[Steve Blair]

Final comment, is my military compensation enough for the times I've missed? Been home for 2 of my daughters 10 birthdays and missed 5 of the last 7 Christmases? Again not complaining one bit because I agree that we are being paid well and I did volunteer, but just thought about the compensation.

Quite true, and it's also important to remember that there are a number of private sector jobs that hit people with the same sorts of thing (or private sector jobs that don't go far enough and people have to take two jobs or more to make ends meet...not an uncommon thing at the institution I work for). Not saying it's a good thing in either case, but just sayin' that it's not unique to the military. No compensation is good enough to deal with that, IMO, but as the old saying goes it comes with the territory. And unfair territory it often is.

[Wana88]

Quotes from Col Bogdanos's piece:

"Just as "Semper Fidelis" (always faithful) is not merely the Marine Corps motto but a way of life, so is honor a form of mental conditioning -- a force-multiplier: Decide in advance to act honorably, and you know without hesitation what to do in a crisis. Codes of conduct are society's version of the same conditioning."

"During the darkest days of World War II, George Orwell allowed that "we sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to do violence to those who would harm us."

"But if we limit the warrior ideal's physical courage to an isolated subculture of military, police and firefighters, focusing them solely on this virtue, we risk cultivating doers less tolerant of different lifestyles or ways of thinking. And if we limit aesthetic appreciation to the world of academics and economic elites, never encouraging them to roll up their own sleeves, we risk fostering gifted thinkers great on nuance but subject to paralysis by analysis.
Or worse."

"War is an ugly thing," British philosopher John Stuart Mill wrote about the American Civil War, "but not the ugliest of things: the decayed . . . feeling which thinks nothing worth war is worse."

"We must, instead, face terrorism's cult of death with hard steel, informed strategies and a rock-solid code of shared societal behavior to defeat those whose defining feature is the absence of honor."

"The solution is an educated citizenry that understands its soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines -- understands that we are you."

The comments have been lively here, with some diatribes thrown in for good measure (free therapy some would call it), but I fear the essence of what this honorable Colonel is trying to inform us on has been somewhat neglected in this discourse. A divided citizenry cannot successfully defend our way of life against enemies both foreign and domestic. As the comments here have duly noted, there is a chasm between those in uniform and the rest. It is this very chasm that our enemies seek to exploit through varied means.

If we focus on the insignificant like dress code violations, salary benefits or not and other such mundane matters, we miss the salient: we are all in this together. Our freedom as envisioned by the founding fathers depends on sacrifice by all for the common good. I fear it is this ethos that seems lost today within the general public.

As a student of the first civil war (our revolution), it is never lost on me how giants (Washington, Adams, Samuel Adams, Franklin, Jefferson et al) risked everything to serve in the name of liberty and to throw off tyranny. They knew they would hang if they failed yet these leaders shared their respective skills and wealth (these were not "welfare recipients") for liberty and freedom. Some were in uniform led by Washington himself; others duties ran the gamut from diplomacy (seeking foreign aid) to raising money for the cause of freedom. There were no guarantees and nor were they the stronger party to the conflict but their honor propelled them to live free or die.

"Dutied that are best shared" if we are to become better citizens (than the growing numbers who seek govt bailouts/handouts) inherently involve supporting/defending both our constitution and our military in whatever capacity that we are able. "Citizenship" should be earned through self imposed duties. There are countries that require two years or more of "national service" that involve a choice of duties (military included). JFK established the Peace Corps with this in mind.

The concepts of "honor, duty, responsibility and sacrifice" are learned. As parents we must teach these every day to our children. Now I'll get off my soapbox and end my diatribe.