Strategic Thinking for the Less Educated...

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4011
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Strategic Thinking for the Less Educated...

Post by Sertorio » Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:32 pm

Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:54 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:12 am
Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:08 am
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:44 am
Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:09 am
The OP article is the sort of pretentious, lazy pastiche that can impress certain people but it mostly appears here because
[RT's] overarching narrative is a tale of the west’s unrelenting decline.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/ ... ssia-today
In case you missed it:
About the author of the article quoted by me:

"Danny Sjursen is a retired US Army officer and regular contributor to Antiwar.com. His work has appeared in the LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Truthdig, Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge. His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War, is available for preorder on Amazon."

Also: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/l ... story.html - for an autobiographical view...
The only pretentious party here is you who can't recognize a competent comment from a "lazy pastiche"... But I suppose any opinion which differs from yours will be a "lazy pastiche" in your eyes. Or maybe you are already too old to learn anything different and prefer to repeat the same erroneous views over and over again...
Ad hominem with no attempt to engage the topic, again.
You keep criticizing the sources of news or comments you dislike, without any consideration for the quality and experience of the writers. Had you taken the time to read the biographical note I posted, you would have seen that there wasn't anything pretentious or pastiche in the author of the opinion quoted by me. But I suppose it is a lot easier to declare the incompetence of those writers than to counter their views. To say that you are the incompetent party is not an ad hominem comment, it is the plain truth.
OK, he's a passed-over-major who can't sell his ravings to a real periodical, so he's posting on a no-name blog.

Any better?
Since you can't follow a link, here goes the full article published by the Los Angeles Times:
I was an Army grunt at the pointy end of the American spear. But no longer
By DANNY SJURSEN - MARCH 31, 2019 3:15 AM

I’m one of the lucky ones. Leaving the madness of U.S. Army life with a modest pension and all of my limbs intact feels like a genuine escape. Both the Army and I knew it was time for me to go. I’d tired of carrying water for empire and they’d grown weary of dealing with my dissent and with footing the bill for my PTSD treatment.

I entered West Point in July 2001, a bygone era of relative peace, the moment, you might say, before the 9/11 storm broke. I leave an Army that remains, remarkably, engaged in global war, patrolling an increasingly militarized world.

In a sense, my early retirement is an ignominious end to a once-promising career. Make no mistake, I wanted out. I’d relocated 11 times in 18 years, often to war zones, and I simply didn’t have another deployment in me. Still, I wouldn’t be honest if I didn’t admit that I mourn the loss of my career, of the identity inherent in soldiering, of the experience of adulation from a grateful (if ill-informed) society.

I hope more serving officers and troops gather the courage to speak their minds and tell Americans the score about our brutal, hopeless adventurism.
I recognize that there’s a paradox at work here: The Army and the global war on terror made me who I am. Deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan in particular turned a budding neocon into an unabashed progressive, an insecure aspiring dealer in violence into a pacifist, or as near to that as a former military man can get. What the Army helped me become is someone whom, in the end, I don’t mind gazing at in the mirror each morning.

Should I thank the Army then? Maybe so. It’s hard, though, to thank a war machine that dealt death to so many for making me who I am. And no matter how much I tell myself I was different, the truth is I was complicit in it all.

I wonder whether something resembling an apology, rather than a statement of pride in who I’ve become, is the more appropriate valediction. Some peers, even friends, may call me a heretic — a disgruntled former major airing dirty laundry — but I plan to keep explaining that we are engaged in Orwellian forever wars that professional foot soldiers make possible while the rest of the country goes to work, tweets, shops and sleeps (in every sense of the word).

I am not sorry to leave behind the absurdity I witnessed.

Farewell to the generals who knew tactics but couldn’t for the life of them think strategically. Who were unwilling or unable to advise policymakers about missions that could never be accomplished. Who shamelessly traded in their multi-starred uniforms for six- and seven-figure gigs on the boards of corporations that feed the unquenchable appetite of the military-industrial beast.

So long, too, to the chauvinism in the senior ranks that asserts a messianic American right to police the globe. Farewell to the faux intellectualism of men like former Gen. David Petraeus who have never seen a problem for which improved counterinsurgency tactics wasn’t the answer and are incapable of questioning the efficacy of force, intervention and occupation as ways to alter complex societies for the better.

Goodbye to the devotees of American exceptionalism who filled the Army’s ranks, and to the hypercapitalism and Ayn Randian conservatism among officers in what is the nation’s most socialist institution. Godspeed to the often-hypocritical evangelical Christianity and the rampant Islamophobia infusing the ranks. Ciao to the still-prevalent patriarchy and homophobia that affects everyone in uniform.

Ta-ta to officers who put “duty” above “ethics,” and to the troops who regularly complained that the Army’s Rules of Engagement were too strict — as if more brutality, bombing and firepower (with less concern for civilians) would have brought victory instead of stalemate.

Sayonara to the adrenaline junkies and power-obsessed freaks atop so many combat units, folks who lived for the violence, the rush of nighttime raids without a thought for their often counterproductive and bloody consequences. It’s a relief to leave them behind as they continue to feed the insurgencies the U.S. battles far faster than they kill “terrorists.”

Toodle-oo to the vacuous “thanks-for-your-service” compliments from civilians who otherwise ignore soldiers’ issues, foreign policy and our forever wars.

Maybe it’s hopeless for a former Army major to fight American militarism. Still, I plan to keep attacking in that lost cause. I’ll be here, speaking up, as a counterpoint to a system that demands compliance. And here’s the truth of it: I’m not alone in my views; as supportive texts and emails to me have made clear, there are more silent dissenters in the ranks than you might imagine. I hope more serving officers and troops gather the courage to speak their minds and tell Americans the score about our brutal, hopeless adventurism.

I was one of them, an obsequious grunt at the pointy end of the spear fashioned by a warlike government ruling over an apathetic citizenry. But no longer. The burdensome, the beautiful, the banal and the horrific — that was my war story and it is still the nation’s. Goodbye to all that, and hello to what’s next.
Since ideas do not mean anything to you, maybe the fact that those ideas were aired by a major US paper will make an impression on you...

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4011
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Strategic Thinking for the Less Educated...

Post by Sertorio » Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:36 pm

neverfail wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 3:42 pm
Okay Sertorio: since my participation on this website is not a gainful occupation where I am paid by the hour but a pastime where I volunteer my free time (such as I have available - which it not a lot); I only speed read through sections of your opening quote in order to get the "drift". Likewise I did not pay particular attention to other links provided since.
I can sympathize with your shortage of time, but then why did you bother to post your reaction to something you didn't read?...That's the Milo way, but I didn't think it was yours...

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Strategic Thinking for the Less Educated...

Post by Milo » Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:57 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:32 pm
Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:54 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:12 am
Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:08 am
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:44 am
Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:09 am
The OP article is the sort of pretentious, lazy pastiche that can impress certain people but it mostly appears here because



https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/ ... ssia-today
In case you missed it:
About the author of the article quoted by me:

"Danny Sjursen is a retired US Army officer and regular contributor to Antiwar.com. His work has appeared in the LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Truthdig, Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge. His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War, is available for preorder on Amazon."

Also: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/l ... story.html - for an autobiographical view...
The only pretentious party here is you who can't recognize a competent comment from a "lazy pastiche"... But I suppose any opinion which differs from yours will be a "lazy pastiche" in your eyes. Or maybe you are already too old to learn anything different and prefer to repeat the same erroneous views over and over again...
Ad hominem with no attempt to engage the topic, again.
You keep criticizing the sources of news or comments you dislike, without any consideration for the quality and experience of the writers. Had you taken the time to read the biographical note I posted, you would have seen that there wasn't anything pretentious or pastiche in the author of the opinion quoted by me. But I suppose it is a lot easier to declare the incompetence of those writers than to counter their views. To say that you are the incompetent party is not an ad hominem comment, it is the plain truth.
OK, he's a passed-over-major who can't sell his ravings to a real periodical, so he's posting on a no-name blog.

Any better?
Since you can't follow a link, here goes the full article published by the Los Angeles Times:
I was an Army grunt at the pointy end of the American spear. But no longer
By DANNY SJURSEN - MARCH 31, 2019 3:15 AM

I’m one of the lucky ones. Leaving the madness of U.S. Army life with a modest pension and all of my limbs intact feels like a genuine escape. Both the Army and I knew it was time for me to go. I’d tired of carrying water for empire and they’d grown weary of dealing with my dissent and with footing the bill for my PTSD treatment.

I entered West Point in July 2001, a bygone era of relative peace, the moment, you might say, before the 9/11 storm broke. I leave an Army that remains, remarkably, engaged in global war, patrolling an increasingly militarized world.

In a sense, my early retirement is an ignominious end to a once-promising career. Make no mistake, I wanted out. I’d relocated 11 times in 18 years, often to war zones, and I simply didn’t have another deployment in me. Still, I wouldn’t be honest if I didn’t admit that I mourn the loss of my career, of the identity inherent in soldiering, of the experience of adulation from a grateful (if ill-informed) society.

I hope more serving officers and troops gather the courage to speak their minds and tell Americans the score about our brutal, hopeless adventurism.
I recognize that there’s a paradox at work here: The Army and the global war on terror made me who I am. Deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan in particular turned a budding neocon into an unabashed progressive, an insecure aspiring dealer in violence into a pacifist, or as near to that as a former military man can get. What the Army helped me become is someone whom, in the end, I don’t mind gazing at in the mirror each morning.

Should I thank the Army then? Maybe so. It’s hard, though, to thank a war machine that dealt death to so many for making me who I am. And no matter how much I tell myself I was different, the truth is I was complicit in it all.

I wonder whether something resembling an apology, rather than a statement of pride in who I’ve become, is the more appropriate valediction. Some peers, even friends, may call me a heretic — a disgruntled former major airing dirty laundry — but I plan to keep explaining that we are engaged in Orwellian forever wars that professional foot soldiers make possible while the rest of the country goes to work, tweets, shops and sleeps (in every sense of the word).

I am not sorry to leave behind the absurdity I witnessed.

Farewell to the generals who knew tactics but couldn’t for the life of them think strategically. Who were unwilling or unable to advise policymakers about missions that could never be accomplished. Who shamelessly traded in their multi-starred uniforms for six- and seven-figure gigs on the boards of corporations that feed the unquenchable appetite of the military-industrial beast.

So long, too, to the chauvinism in the senior ranks that asserts a messianic American right to police the globe. Farewell to the faux intellectualism of men like former Gen. David Petraeus who have never seen a problem for which improved counterinsurgency tactics wasn’t the answer and are incapable of questioning the efficacy of force, intervention and occupation as ways to alter complex societies for the better.

Goodbye to the devotees of American exceptionalism who filled the Army’s ranks, and to the hypercapitalism and Ayn Randian conservatism among officers in what is the nation’s most socialist institution. Godspeed to the often-hypocritical evangelical Christianity and the rampant Islamophobia infusing the ranks. Ciao to the still-prevalent patriarchy and homophobia that affects everyone in uniform.

Ta-ta to officers who put “duty” above “ethics,” and to the troops who regularly complained that the Army’s Rules of Engagement were too strict — as if more brutality, bombing and firepower (with less concern for civilians) would have brought victory instead of stalemate.

Sayonara to the adrenaline junkies and power-obsessed freaks atop so many combat units, folks who lived for the violence, the rush of nighttime raids without a thought for their often counterproductive and bloody consequences. It’s a relief to leave them behind as they continue to feed the insurgencies the U.S. battles far faster than they kill “terrorists.”

Toodle-oo to the vacuous “thanks-for-your-service” compliments from civilians who otherwise ignore soldiers’ issues, foreign policy and our forever wars.

Maybe it’s hopeless for a former Army major to fight American militarism. Still, I plan to keep attacking in that lost cause. I’ll be here, speaking up, as a counterpoint to a system that demands compliance. And here’s the truth of it: I’m not alone in my views; as supportive texts and emails to me have made clear, there are more silent dissenters in the ranks than you might imagine. I hope more serving officers and troops gather the courage to speak their minds and tell Americans the score about our brutal, hopeless adventurism.

I was one of them, an obsequious grunt at the pointy end of the spear fashioned by a warlike government ruling over an apathetic citizenry. But no longer. The burdensome, the beautiful, the banal and the horrific — that was my war story and it is still the nation’s. Goodbye to all that, and hello to what’s next.
Since ideas do not mean anything to you, maybe the fact that those ideas were aired by a major US paper will make an impression on you...
And when the OP article gets in the LAT I will be impressed.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4011
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Strategic Thinking for the Less Educated...

Post by Sertorio » Sun Feb 09, 2020 5:06 pm

Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:57 pm

And when the OP article gets in the LAT I will be impressed.
The article published by the LAT was a lot more important than the one published in the Antiwar blog. But maybe you failed to notice that...

neverfail
Posts: 5813
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Strategic Thinking for the Less Educated...

Post by neverfail » Sun Feb 09, 2020 5:54 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:36 pm
neverfail wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 3:42 pm
Okay Sertorio: since my participation on this website is not a gainful occupation where I am paid by the hour but a pastime where I volunteer my free time (such as I have available - which it not a lot); I only speed read through sections of your opening quote in order to get the "drift". Likewise I did not pay particular attention to other links provided since.
I can sympathize with your shortage of time, but then why did you bother to post your reaction to something you didn't read?...That's the Milo way, but I didn't think it was yours...
I did read through it but not in detail.

Separately from that, was their anything in my post that you disagree with?

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Strategic Thinking for the Less Educated...

Post by Milo » Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:07 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 5:06 pm
Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:57 pm

And when the OP article gets in the LAT I will be impressed.
The article published by the LAT was a lot more important than the one published in the Antiwar blog. But maybe you failed to notice that...
But you chose the less important article.

Post Reply