"People say 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens. But it is never gone. You just learn to accept the reality."
~A fellow widowI know I've talked about it before, but it drives me crazy when people try to compare to the loss of a spouse to any other kind of loss, be it the loss of a child, the loss of a parent, or the loss of a friend. Each loss is awful in its own unique way, and trying to make one kind somehow sound less awful than another doesn't help or provide comfort. Even worse is when people play the comparative numbers game. A friend recently posted an article entitled "More Killed in Chicago This Year than Afghanistan." Um, so what? It's not a competition. I'll never understand what the authors of these proclamations are trying to get at. Numbers are numbers, but each of those numbers (be it in Afghanistan or Chicago) represents a person with a family whose lives are forever changed. I doubt this was the author's real point, but comparing the numbers comes across to me as "see? The war isn't that bad because there aren't really THAT many people who have been killed." In reality, though, it doesn't matter if it's 1 or 1,000 - somewhere, someone will forever be missing and missing and loving that one person.
The only solace I can derive from an article like this is the fact that law-enforcement officers in cities like Chicago continue to fight crime even after personally witnessing their comrades pay the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty. I think I've said before that people often react with surprise when I tell them I'm still serving in the Army on active duty, yet to me it's really not as surprising as it may seem - I need to feel a continuing sense of community, a sense of support in a familiar context, and I've been told by many of my friends who have since transitioned out of the Army that little things, like the sense of humor and comaraderie associated with military life, are unmatched on the outside.
Furthermore, from an academic perspective, the simple fact is that the current war cannot be compared with the likes of Vietnam, World War II, or even the contemporary American city. Although ROTC programs and other Army training schools still teach Soldiers basic Vietnam-era battlefield tactics, these lessons are more a test of leadership than an indication of what today's Soldiers should expect to see on the modern battlefield. Soldiers used to line up shoulder-to-shoulder in a straight line and charge straight towards the enemy, guns ablazing, and many of them would become "cannon fodder" when they were unlucky enough to be in the wrong line at the wrong time. Today, however, we have incredibly sophisticated equipment that allows us to target specific individuals based only on their body heat from miles away, which, in turn, translates into the individual Soldier occupying a much larger personal space on the battlefield. If Soldiers were being killed by the tens of thousands in the current war with the all advantages of our weapons systems and advanced technology, we'd be doing something very wrong...and, no doubt, losing the fight to the enemy. It's true that the total number of Soldiers killed in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars totals approximately 6,440, a far cry from the 58,209 casualties of the Vietnam War or the 405,399 from World War II. Yet, any comparison is inherently unfair to every Soldier who has lost their life fighting for what they love and swore to defend. The times were different, the tools were different, but the result for the Soldier who doesn't come home to see his or her children grow up is just the same.
Hence why I don't like to play the war numbers game. Putting all intellectual and academic rationales aside, there is no replacing a human life. For those families left behind, one is one too many.
and what about the innocent civilians killed in an attempt to detect "specific individuals based only on their body heat from miles away"? are their lives less valuable, and their families less hurt?
ReplyDeleteWhat a stupid rhetorical question anonymous. To which I will answer in the most shocking way I can in order to teach you a lesson about asking stupid rhetorical questions-for the most part, yes. Why? For one their productivity is way below that of Americans, secondly their average life span is lower and familial and cultural value of human life is generally lower. This all comes with the circumstance of their existence in a perpetually unstable part of the world and is as much a fact of the universe as gravity. Now, should we treat them as less human or disregard their loss? Of course not, every innocent killed is an affront to God, and we strive to be moral in the eyes of God. So we take painstaking measures to avoid killing innocents. Take it from someone who actually has looked at the enemy in infrared from several kilometers away and has not fired even to avenge the death of two American pilots for fear of causing civilian casualties- we take every possible and even absurd precaution to avoid killing innocents. So stuff your blithe academic piety somewhere else. You know nothing of how the real world works.
ReplyDeletefunny how your condescension to "teach me a lesson" about the "real world" basically boils down to you teaching me a lesson about how, in the "real" world you live in that the lives of brown people just aren't worth that much. nice randian "productivity" argument as to why it's OK if they die. guess if I work part time at autozone I can be next on the drone kill list.
ReplyDeleteyou're truly a monster, you know that? you dig deep in the thesaurus and throw out some biblical mumbo jumbo but it just boils down to ... not that killing innocent civilians is an unfortunate and lamentable part of war, and they have families too and we should be in sympathy with them ... but that their lives aren't worth that much, so screw 'em. they chose to live there (because they can just drop it all and move to the hamptons, right?) and hey, we sorta tried to not kill, what more do you want from me?
I don't know, how about base level human empathy? I guess that would be too much to ask for from an emotional mutant like yourself. not like I'm asking you to empathize with the families of the terrorists, but the families of the innocent civilians! not only can't you muster that much decency, but insult me for even suggesting that anyone should feel bad for them!
then again, I guess you're just an internet bully and coward in real life because when it came down to it, you just couldn't cowboy up and wax those lil' brownies who had nothing to do with the American lives that were lost, but hey, they were brown and they were nearby and their lives aren't worth as much as an American so who gives a fig.
so you're a self-appointed hero and the bigger man for not killing innocent people. where I come from that might be construed as "common human decency," but I guess it's a feather in your cap in whatever bizarre alternate reality you're living in.
Although I originally refrained from posting any commentary on here in response to this thread, I now have to ask this this blogsite no longer be used for the exchange of political commentary, personal insults, or debates on the relative value of humanity. As you probably know, I'm an active duty Army officer, so I'm sure some of my biases and the experiences I've had over the past few years come across in the context of some of my entries. But that was never the intended point of this blog, so if I've veered too far off course in that direction, I apologize. My family and friends read this blog to reminisce over the stories I share of my husband and to keep his memory alive. As you'll see in the "About Me" section, I continue to write these entries as a form of self-therapy as I try to work through the grief I've suppressed over the past few years and, while doing so, I hope to help others who find themselves in the impossible position of losing someone they love. I have maintained my blog publicly until now so that anyone who wishes to can read it. However, I can restrict access to the site if it becomes necessary, though I hope it will not come to that. You are more than free to continue this debate - that's your prerogative - but I simply ask respectfully that you do it elsewhere. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I request that it be voiced in an alternate forum; this is neither the time nor the place for this kind of debate. Thank you for understanding.
ReplyDelete