Thursday, February 9, 2012
The Rhetoric of the Military
Is the American Military really protecting our borders throughout the world or are we considered a super power to many because the military itself acts as a business that requires profits? This week in my Media and Democracy class (Comm 110) we discussed the difficult relationship between the U.S. Military and the U.S. Media across history and across many points my professor allowed me to see differently regarding the Military and why we have so many military bases throughout the world. One of the points raised was that lobbyists rally in Congress to have war or to be situated overseas to acquire defense contracts or for CEO's to obtain large bonus for their companies, but what is the percentage of the those in Congress and CEO's of large companies that have family members fighting overseas? It is only somewhere between 1-2%.
Many would also say that it benefits not just companies and their employees, but also Americans because it produces jobs on both ends in the private sector and in the military. However, do the costs outweigh the benefits? First I would like to note that I hold members of our military in the highest of regards and I have the most respect for them for what they do for our country, but is war really the answer? When we did not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Why did we stay? Could it of been because we wanted to maintain a sphere of influence in Iraq.
My professor told us a personal account of his father and the Post Traumatic Disorder he acquired while fighting in World War II. It was pretty emotional and difficult for my professor to describe events and situations in which he had to help his father go through. I will not go into the gruesome details that our professor explained to our class, but I will say that his religious father is unable to accept the fact that he killed 11 men. He told us that he had to wake up his father from numerous dreams in which he was back in the war. For many religious Christians, there is an afterlife. He is afraid of going to hell once his time comes. PTSD is very common from those that come back from war, but can PTSD be prevented for many if there were no agendas in Congress to fight overseas. Formally we have not been in a war since World War II, but thousands have given their lives for their country since then and many have returned home with PTSD. The Military is not to blame at all whatsoever. It is Congress and its agenda. The military answers to them not the American people.
http://www.alternet.org/story/47998
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with your statement that the military doesn't answer to the American people but instead to Congress. It is sad when one thinks about it about how even when there is nothing to wage war about, American lives are still being lost overseas. Iraq is a prime example because though we found nothing there we still stayed there just to maintain our sphere of dominance in that area of the world. I believe that since Congress members don't have anywhere near family members in the military they cannot relate to the regular American about how it feels to lose a family member overseas. This fact is awful and it is really sad to see the military have to respond to this type of Congress.
ReplyDeleteWe have so many military bases around the world because we were the victors in WWII. Think of where the bulk of our military overseas is stationed(outside of combat zones)--Germany, Japan, and Italy. That is no coincidence. Although I do think that lobbyists have far too much bearing on defense spending, I don't think that the military is run for the benefit of the CEO of Blackwater.
ReplyDeleteConcerning Iraq, the fact that weapons of mass destruction were not found is irrefutable. However, how can the United States simply pack up and leave after we have invaded a country and completely dismantled the government that was in place. Considering Iraq's oil reserves, this would not have made sense from a strategic or practical standpoint. The U.S. was right to stay in Iraq for as long as it did to maintain stability and help guide the Iraqi government, just as it was right to leave at the end of this past year, on schedule. Our work was done.
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder(PTSD) is a terrible affliction. Unfortunately, in the military it is considered a sign of weakness to admit you have it. Many guys don't believe it is an actual disorder. Hence the steady rise in suicides and divorces among servicemen.
Creation of jobs through warfare is interesting because it makes it difficult to balance cost and benefits of war. But as for the Iraq war, people CHOOSE to join the army. Many people go into the army for the pure love of their country, others choose to go into the army because they want to straighten out their life. So in a way, soldiers choose their own fate. I have a friend who is an Amry Ranger NCO and he loves what he does for the Army. He goes overseas twice a year and full heartedly enjoys it.
ReplyDeleteThe Army is not for everyone, but we all have a choice to join or not. And therefore I don't know if it matters who the Amry is "paying attention to" (Congress or Americans). I think we stayed in Iraq because we needed to maintain our "superpower." In my International Politics class we learned that the SAFEST and most PEACEFUL way to live is to have ONE superpower....because once countries start competeing for power, chaos occurs. And I think Iraq was therefore necessary.
I truly believe that the United States is always trying to stick its nose in something it does not belong in or give a helping hand when we have nothing to give. Therefore I think that we stayed in Iraq so we can feel like we had more power trying to re-establish a government or add a touch of our influences and customs. I think when we try to "help" we sometimes intimidate other countries in which started wars that were not really necessary had we not added our input.
ReplyDelete