Chickenhawk Redux
By Callimachus | Related entries in WarNo, it’s not the latest MRE. Neptunus Lex (Navy fighter pilot and milblogger), notices something about those who promote the chickenhawk meme.
But then I couldn’t help remembering how many of those who essentially told non-veterans to put up or shut up were the same crowd that pretended to be shocked, shocked do you hear: To find out that certain of the soldiers behaved badly at Abu Ghraib. Oh, not many – not many indeed, taking into consideration how very many have served over there in the last few years. But enough apparently to keep waving the bloody shirt in the air, like that was the defining moment.
And so I wondered, if it’s essential to have served in combat to have a valid opinion on the GWOT which supports our national strategy, how can someone simultaneously and consistently hold the idea that military service is not required to evaluate the actions of those who were the warriors, and had to fight it?
In the coming months and years, I suspect that non-veteran anti’s will recuse themselves from any further discussions along these lines. Just to be consistent.
[Hat tip, Greyhawk]
This entry was posted on Friday, August 12th, 2005 and is filed under War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 12th, 2005 at 6:35 pm
This is so patently obvious that I wonder why I haven’t seen this point made by the pro-war side until now.
I don’t think it’s entirely correct. Or rather, it’s correct in pointing out the hypocrisy of people who oppose the war, never served, and denigrate people who support the war and never served.
My view contrasts, in that every one, civilian and military, should have a say in what wars we fight and don’t fight. On a practical note, we civilians have a stake in what wars we fight. Anyone who travels abroad has a stake. Anyone who is related to a soldier has a nice fat stake. Anyone who worries that if we expend enough of our military abroad, eventually the bad guys will invade our home territory, has a stake.
The obvious acrimony here on the part of anti-war is toward people who are gung-ho to kick terrorist ass – or rather, are gung-ho to see “our boys” kick it, while they themselves sit on their barker loungers as if this were the next NFL game. I believe they conflate this crowd (I’m sure it exists) with those like me, who support the war through more sober consideration.
Meanwhile, pro-war resents anti-war who chant “chickenhawk”, “no blood for oil”, etc., but never fought, and have no clue of the military mindset, which prescribes very precise rules for when violence is and is not called for.
As usual, this is a case of each side conflating loudmouth dummies and genuine thinkers on the other side. My side is reasoned and discriminating; your side is irrational and broad-brushed.
August 12th, 2005 at 6:50 pm
Gah. I meant to add:
I don’t necessarily believe in a Starship Troopers (book, not movie) world, where one must serve in order to even vote. (Though I might still go for it; the book makes it clear that “serve” doesn’t necessarily mean “risk getting shot at”; serving meant merely contributing to the betterment of your fellows.)
I respect the tradition we have of the Commander in Chief being necessarily civilian. Furthermore, I respect civilians who try to raise concerns about what our military does, provided I can believe the civilian in question is being honest. I feel much more comfortable debating at that level whether those concerns are legitimate; I don’t have to worry about whether someone’s being a pacifist fanatic, a warmongering fanatic, or whatever. I also give bonus points to any civilian who can indicate in their writing/speaking style that they understand the military’s disciplinary, pragmatic mindset.
Good example: “I believe our armed forces are misapplied in Iraq. Too many of them are working as nation builders – doing various tasks they aren’t trained for, such as rebuilding schools and hospitals and power stations. The administration needs to lean much harder to get either more Americans sent over with expertise in construction, health care, etc., or delegate much more of this work to the Iraqis, and at a faster rate. The White House has had over two years to observe this problem developing; I expect at the very least a more visible effort to do these things.”
August 13th, 2005 at 12:44 am
Here’s some more thoughts on the chickenhawk meme:
http://www.proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/revenge_of_the_chickenhawks/
http://www.proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/return_of_the_chickenhawks_or_how_the_left_can_give_all_us_other_chickenhaw/