...or "Why You've Never Seen a Picture Of Someone Pinning a Bronze Star on General David Petraeus"
Phony soldiers are built because soldiers are very effective propagandists. You look at a soldier and you can't help but think of what it might feel like to have a large number of people shooting at you. Nobody wants to be in that place.
We have never been there. We don't want to go there. That soldier has been there and acted bravely. It gives them an enormous, inarguable credibility. And so political parties have always built up soldiers to make their points for them. And it's very irritating to to other side. It seems dishonest. It is dishonest. But there are two methods. You decide which one is better.
Let's call the first the "Democrat Method". And we'll take the example of a very junior officer who served in Viet Nam. He had taken enemy fire that could easily have killed him, been lightly wounded, had comrades killed and wounded around him, commanded with daring in the face of mines and bullets and even pulled a comrade out of the water with a bloodied arm.
He was ambitious. He wanted to be in the fight and he darn well wanted to get credit for it. He did not mind being called a hero. Like other foolish young officers he wanted to make his reputation or die in battle.
I am bound for many reasons to risk something....I mean to play this game out and if I lose, it is obvious that I could never have won any other....I am more ambitious for a reputation for personal courage than anything else in the world. A young man should worship a young man’s ideals - Winston Churchill
This Navy career of the young Lieutentant of whom I speak - John Forbes Kerry - was used by his party to create a spokesman and politician of great power. He began as an anti-war spokesman at which he was exceptionally effective. As a decorated veteran, it was almost impossible for proponents of the war to argue with him or undermine his credibility. He showed a fighting soldier's bravado as he leaped into the debate, unafraid to be controversial and even outrageous. He drove his opponents insane.
And so the "Democrat method" of creating a "phony soldier" is to take one of these brave, idiotic, young, fighting officers who manages to survive his war, channel his ego and daring and make a politician of him: Churchill, Kerry - there are other examples, like this young fella.
The theory is that they will grow into the job.
The other way to make a phony soldier we'll call the "Republican Method". You find another ambitious young officer. Perhaps he's even the type to woo and marry the Superintendent's daughter at the military college he's attending - West Point, for example. As a captain, he might even become the aide-de-camp, or personal assistant, for the commanding general. He'll always be doing training and taking classes - always racking up those merit badges.
His pursuit of degrees and qualifications will keep him out of most of the shooting, although the military is a dangerous place and he may get accidentally shot during a live fire exercise, which is a little embarrassing - reputation-wise. But he will recover, stay in shape with many push-ups and much running. His career will almost certainly focus on "operations", at which he will become an expert and a noted pain in the ass. But he'll be popular with military writers and the press. A novelist like Tom Clancy might even write a book about his brigade's training cycle.
He will always be doing his push-ups and running. He'll get more degrees and merit badges and possibly even be sent to safe operations headquarters near places where there is fighting. He will always act in operations, but the desire to make himself appear tough will force him to take a certain number or risks in civilian life and he might even do something like break his pelvis jumping out of an airplane for fun while his troops are doing it because it's their job. Because he's a military bureaucrat now and they're still fighting soldiers, like these young fellows back in Vietnam.
No bodyguards for these two sailors when they captured these enemy weapons.
But there must be that final step for the "Republican Method" phony soldier. All the merit badges in the world won't make you a persuasive phony soldier unless you get "into combat". You've got to get those last merit badges. But that's where the embarrassing bit happens: even though you're a 54-year-old Major General who never shoots his gun at the enemy, never gets near any enemy fire to speak of and has bodyguards, for pete's sake,
Note the many Americans behind the General, nervously scanning the crowd. If you look carefully, you will recognize Special Forces, Military Police and a couple very Blackwater-ish types. Bodyguards
But you have to have that merit badge.
But a medal for valor in mortal combat is not a merit badge. It represents the physical spilling of blood - the risking and taking of life. It is an apology to those who have faced this terrible thing, and a mark of gratitude for their courage and determination and selflessness in the face of violence.
But you have to have one to be cool like the other guys. So you get yourself a Combat Action Badge - even though they started being handed out in 2005 and you were "in" combat in 2003. And, most pathetically of all, you get yourself a Bronze Star......for Valor. Because you've got to testify before Congress and your party has to be able to use those words "war hero". Let other people fight and rescue people and get their hands blown off for the Bronze Star for Valor. You can get one too, because Dad said so.
All you have to have is no shame, ethics or respect for the soldiers you command - then you can wear that medal.
The officer corps in Iraq have created a quiet scandal in their awarding of medals - inconsistently and far too often to themselves. General David Petraeus is the most egregious example. Entering combat in 2003 for the first time, as a 54-year-old Major General, he received a hero's combat medal. (Note young Marine Cpl. James Wright's saluting hand - other one's gone, too.). Petraeus biographies have him under fire in Najaf. No serious incident other than the 30 March mortar shell is described by either V Corps embed Komarow (now a senior editor at AP) nor Rick Atkinson, Pulitzer-prize embed with the 101st Airborne and Petraeus's constant companion. Disturbingly, the Army describes the incident quite differently. Even if conceivably true, this patently silly propaganda story would not rise to the risking of blood and bone associated with the Bronze Star for Valor. Scandal and propaganda having denied credibility, reason and decency insist that the medal Petraeus wore before the Congress was a cynical, fraudulent misrepresentation of combat valor for the sake of ambition and political convenience.
Update [2007-9-29 20:4:41 by dlawbailey]: Always expect me to use my grandfather's old trick to keep us awake during his slide shows. I will usually include a tasteful photographic study in one of my later comments - to keep you alert.