When I tell people I was a Navy brat growing up, if they are civilians and always have been, they react either with incomprehension or the "oh, you poor dear" type of condescension. But if the person was a service brat him- or herself, or is in the service or has been, they ask, among other questions, what rank my parent was. When I say my dad retired as an 0-7, they grow quiet. I grew up on officers' row on bases throughout the Pacific and west coast. In fact, I was born overseas and never set foot in CONUS for some years.
It's common for civilians to put down those in our armed forces, and to hold the most negative views of them, commonly thinking they all come from "the lower classes," whatever those are. This despite the fact that, much to the dismay of the armed forces themselves, 75 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24, the most likely time to join, are not qualified to serve. Only A and B high school students have a chance of being accepted providing they also possess a whole series of requirements most can't meet. The requirements have risen over the years, and many who were accepted into the service in the 1980s, even the 1990s, would never get in today. And studies have shown repeatedly that those who join up are middle class or higher in social rank, well educated, physically fit, emotionally stable, drug- and alcohol-free. In other words, among the best the country produces.
So why so much denigration of such people? An easy answer would include the words envy, jealousy, resentment, unwelcome realization that they couldn't do what our service members do every day, that they're simply not good enough.
But I'm not convinced that's more than a partial answer applying to some. A different reason is people getting sick of the forced "patriotism" of military displays at sporting events and the like, as well as the "thank you for your service" fake gratitude that is pushed. Personally, I think it's good that society not worship the military or war heroes. After all, you only have war heroes if you have wars, and I'd prefer we not have those. And about the resistance to "thank you for your service," I think it's pretty well understood that most jobs in the armed forces are non-combat support-side stuff -- maintenance, supply, administrative, and so forth. Why thank people for having a routine, albeit necessary, job? Then, of course, for what I think may be the majority of people, they are just not interested in the military life and can't understand why anyone would be. They hear about homeless vets and vet suicides (the numbers of both wildly exaggerated or misrepresented). They assume those who join up can't find any other work. Not true, of course, and easily proven to be untrue because almost all who join do one hitch and then go on to a typical civilian life, except with a lot of cool stories about that time on liberty in Marseilles or this one time that...
Unfortunately, despite the high standards of recruitment, there are still those who were not doing well in life before they enlisted, performed adequately, but no more, in some routine support job, then after discharge went back to not doing well in civilian life. Whatever troubles and failures they have are not the result of their military service, they are the result of their own personalities, decisions and actions. It's just like anything else involving people, some are failures even if they come from privileged backgrounds and some are successes even though they come from the most miserable circumstances. I know immigrants with no particular job skills, talents or education who, through perseverance and hard work have become very successful and they love America. I also have some slight acquaintance (I avoid losers as soon as I recognize them) with immigrants who have utterly failed, ending up as bums and barflies, working menial jobs for years with no effort to advance in life. They blame America for their failures and are bitter and resentful. That's the way life is. It's no brilliant insight to point it out. "Root hog, or die," used to be a popular expression. It's still true.
 |
| The Reagan sailing past Iwo Jima |
Despite all this, our armed forces get some of the very best of our young people to serve. Very often these days, they come from families with a tradition of service and so it is a natural thing for them to do. They are smart and dedicated and very capable. I have no doubt that our armed forces are staffed by better people than in any other country's military. That's not boasting. The British may have the best of the European armed forces, but in Iraq and Afghanistan they performed miserably, having to be rescued in Basra by the Iraqi army, they were so incapable, and saved by the US Marines in Afghanistan, a place the Brits asked to be sent to make up for their humiliation in Iraq to prove they could at least handle goat fuckers. But they couldn't. They ended up trapped in their outposts, unable to do anything. And we are talking about British elite units like 40 Commando. When the US Marines came, the Brits were close to being overrun and annihilated, but the 3/7 attacked within 24 hours of arriving and drove out the Taliban. There was some very heavy fighting, but the outcome was never in doubt. Some time later, in what was, under the watchful eye of our Marines, a pacified and peaceful area, a combat outpost was turned over to a company of volunteering Estonian soldiers, Estonia being a new member of NATO that wanted to carry its weight. Alas, as soon as the Marines left, the Taliban, always lurking, always watching, attacked and overran the outpost, killing and wounding some 22 Estonian soldiers. The Marines had to return and repacify the area. The Estonians never again volunteered to do anything.
These days I read a lot of uniformed but highly opinionated comments about how the Chinese Navy will destroy the US Navy. Apparently, even at least some high-ranking Chinese believe this. Maybe so. Hopefully, we will never find out. But history being what it has been, and humans being what they are, I suppose the time will come when we do. But having seen something of how the British and Australian navies operate, and more how the Japanese and South Korean navies perform -- more than adequate but without the top-notch personnel we have -- I can't imagine the Chinese will be better than they are, let alone us. And, yes, I know about the disasters and fiascos our navy has experienced. Operating a world-wide blue-water navy 24/7/365 year after year, is not easy. (And you don't think other navies have suffered serious troubles as well? Really?)
Navy has never participated in any form of combat at all. Even before the communist revolution, the Chinese had no naval tradition to speak of. As unimpressive as the Europeans and Japanese navies may be compared to ours -- and they are not bad, far from it, especially the Japanese Maritime forces shine, but we are just better -- the Chinese are much worse. And all the America-allied countries have strong naval traditions and have fought and won major sea battles. The Japanese alone could wad the Chinese navy up, from what I have observed. If the Chinese want a no-ROE fight with the USN, believe me, they will face a crew of the best there is ready to rock and roll.
Oh, right. The Russians. No comment. None need be expressed.
Of course, in war contingency and luck play enormous roles, so who can say what the outcome of any naval war might be. But if it comes to it, I'll not only put my money on the United States Navy, but also my life. Actually, I already have. More than once. If I have to, I'll do it again. How about you?
