The Truth of War Stephen Miranda
How do people see war? What is the truth of war for a soldier? Why do most people see war as the most evil thing that humans have ever partaken in? They see war as murder; the killing of innocent people. Although war is seen in a negative light by the majority of people, others see it in a positive way. Some people see the military power as an inspiration for themselves. Others have morale standings that allow the killing of ones enemies. There is also the outlook from a soldiers point of view. A veteran of war sees it differently than one who has recently enlisted or had been recently deployed. Veterans see war with more respect while newly enlisted men may see it more of a test of man-hood. Veterans have seen the suffering that goes on in combat. War has been the most controversial topic among people. The topic segregates people by their ideals. It is important to be able to see war in a way that others do. But what is the truth of war for a soldier? The truth of war for a soldier is the constant wave of low and high points; the contradiction of love and hate.
Although they still despise war, many deployed soldiers see war as the best thing that had ever happened to them. In his writing Why Men Love War, William Broyles admits, “I miss it because I loved it, loved it in strange and troubling ways.” William Broyles Jr. was a veteran of the Vietnam War who feels that he cannot tell anybody about how he feels about war. The quote comes from a section of his writing where he tries to explain the feelings that are bound by the “civilian language.” Broyles states that the limits of “civilian language” restrict oneself from explaining your feelings to someone who has never experienced them. The whole article is about men seeing war as one of the best things that could ever happen to them. “...men who didn’t go to war but now have a sort of nostalgic longing for something they missed, some classic male experience,” Broyles states, “the way some women who didn’t have children worry they missed something basic about being a woman, something they didn’t value when they could have done it.” For a lot of men war is a calling, something that fills an unexplainable void. It is something that men felt the need to take part in since the beginning of time. The men who have experienced this have loved it and it turns war into something men want.
War brings men to a state of survival, an adrenaline pumping, emotionless, worry free, state of mind where instinct completely takes over. Broyles states that in war men have no limits: “War cloaks men in a coat that conceals the limits and inadequacies of their separate natures. It gives them all aura, a collective power, an almost animal force.” (Why Men Love War, William Broyles Jr.) This is an experience that makes men look back on war afterwards and realize they miss it. It is also described by veterans as an addictive feeling that they wish they could have again. Men love this feeling because it brings them back to a natural state that civilians can never feel. The people who have never experienced it yet despise it should look at it through another point of view. One from someone who did love it and experienced it themselves.
War has the greatest downfall of anything in nature: death. The mass amounts of death that war puts our world through is amazing. Broyle explains war as a game. The best game ever where you either survive or die. If you can survive unbroken to tell your story you have succeeded but many survivors come back broken. In Kurt Vonnegut’s novel “Slaughterhouse Five” the main character Billy Pilgrim has gone insane after experiencing the firebombing of Dresden, Germany in World War II. In the novel, Billy Pilgrim travels through time experiencing his life through his new mindset, seeing things how he had not before. The quote “So it goes” appears several times throughout the text showing Billy’s new care-free attitude on life. This quote turns up whenever Billy experiences death or something very negative. Seeing what he had seen that day in Dresden had changed his life forever. Being broken after war isn’t just told through this story; in All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque the narrator Paul goes on leave from the Western Front in World War I. While at home he finds his old book collection. He longs to have the same feeling about them that he did before the war but cannot: “I cannot find my way back, I am shut out though I entreat earnestly and put forth all my strength...I am a soldier I must cling to that.” Countless times has this story been told about a soldier coming home after his experiences in combat. They cannot seem to bear with their old ways of living. The simple life at home for a lot of soldiers is a slow paced, mind deadening line of events interwoven with the remembrance of how things used to feel. In combat soldiers are forced to make life-death decisions everyday and the instinctive adrenaline rush that combat puts one through. Once back to a normal civilian life when most choices have very little impact on anything you do it drives many soldiers insane to the point of reenlistment.
Being a soldier is not always about the negatives; enlisting gives many men amazing experiences that they would have never had in civilian life. In “All Quiet on the Western Front” camaraderie plays a key role between Paul and his friends. Throughout the novel the amount of trust between the men is amazing. While sitting by a fire with Paul and the other characters roasting a recently caught goose, a character named Kat states, "We don't talk much, but I believe we have a more complete communion with one another than even lovers have." Camaraderie is more than just being friends. A comrade is someone who you fully care about as they do you. Broyles states in his writing, “The enduring emotion of war, when everything else has faded, is comradeship.” It seems to be the most important thing to have during a soldiers time away from home. Boosting morale is a huge part of needing comrades. Without anyone very close to you war can seem multiple time more evil than it really is. Enlisted men who feel the real need to have someone close have a very high chance for suicide unlike men who share close experiences. The intense emotions that sweep through someone while in combat lets them see who they can fully trust.
We need to make normal life better for our soldiers returning to their homes. Better support for them to make it in simple life once again. Civilians need to be more accepting about the feelings that veterans express about war. Broyles writes about this in his essay; with him being a veteran his opinion is something we can take to change their lives for the better. Building small communities where veterans can constantly visit are already available but we need something better. Something where veterans and their families can find old comrades easily not just in their area but around the country. War is something that effects all of us differently but to truly feel the truth of war for a soldier, we have to be one. The contradiction of war tackles everyone differently.
Bibliography
Vonnegut, Kurt. Slaughterhouse-Five. New York: Dell Publishing, 1991
Remarque, Eich Maria. All Quiet on the Western Front. New York: Random House, 1982
Broyles Jr., William. Why Men Love War, November 1984
http://www.wsu.edu/~hughuesc/why_men_love_war.htm
Project Poem
Stephen Miranda
Men give their country their offering
The greatest gift of all,
A gift of their bravery, their suffering.
A gift of their life if they fall.
Loosing touch with all reality,
Leaving behind all signs of sanity.
They are told they could see the world, from country to country,
Although these are not lies, its just evil bribery.
People of the world committing mass butchery,
Acts of murder and inhumanity.
News corporations telling their story,
Taking meaning away from the men’s torment,
Telling the world of all their glory.
Turning it in to just another news event.
That addictive feeling that war gives men,
Is the thing that brings them back to it, again and again.
“I missed it because I loved it...”
That time in their life is described as the best of days.
Nearly no other feeling is put above it.
“...Loved it in strange and troubling ways,”
The truth of war is a huge contradiction,
But our beliefs as civilians are probably just fiction.
Truth of War Reflection
The assignment for this project was to come up with either a piece of writing or art to depict the truth of war. Before beginning this project the class read two books that explained the feelings of soldiers during war: All Quiet on the Western Front, and Slaughterhouse-Five. After reading these two novels we wrote an essay about our beliefs on the truth of war.
The Habit of Heart and Mind that i had used most in this project is perseverance. The reason for this is because I had started my project writing a story. Near the deadline of the project I had switched ideas and wrote a poem instead. I had to work very hard to redo the project in a couple days which should have taken me a couple weeks of in-class time. The reason for me changing projects at the last minute was because I didn’t feel that my first project was depicting my ideas clearly to the audience.
My final essay hadn’t changed much from my other drafts discarding grammar and spelling issues. My ideas changed from talking about the truth of war from a soldier’s and civilian’s point of view but ended up just talking about the soldier’s point of view. Organization was also a very large revision I had made. I feel that the structure I had made of positive outlook then negative, etc. made my point come across strong to my audience.
If I had another week to work on this project I would definitely make my poem longer with more ideas in it. Right now it’s about a page long but I can fit more in if I had the time. I could also fit more Ideas into my essay and word it better than I had to make it sound more professional.
Veteran's History Project
For this project we planned to interview veterans to get a better idea of what their opinions were and to hear some of their stories. We scheduled interview times and acquired all the paperwork on our own. After the interview we submitted them to the Library of Congress.
Project Reflection
This interview really went with my opinion on what the truth of war really is. After my interview and watching the videos from other students, everyone seems to have different opinions on the topic. The veteran I interviewed personally was in a naval unit in North Vietnam. He did not think much of the war but saw his time there as more of an exciting job than something evil.
The most interesting thing I had learned from my veteran was the job he had during his service. He would fly over North Vietnam in a jet and take photos of key locations. He said that he was taking fire the whole flight every day but was never in any real danger.
If I was a historian I could definitely use this interview along with others to see how people felt about the draft and the war altogether. The draft was a powerful thing that most people felt strongly about and seeing the draft through the eyes of a veteran would be something very helpful.
In my opinion the best part of this project were the connection to the real world. This is very important to me because I usually feel that school work has no affect on anything except for the grade book which kills my motivation for the project.
Gulf of Tonkin Writing
Although the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a tragic event according to the US government, there are still many reasons to believe that it never actually happened, and if it did happen it was not a good enough reason to invade Vietnam. The US government announced the attack happened on August 4th, 1964. Supposedly there were two ships involved. The first to be attacked was the U.S.S. Maddox. Two days later, on the 4th, the U.S.S. Turner Joy was allegedly attacked. This was a problem because these two ships were attacked in neutral waters. Secretary of State Dean Rusk told an NBC-TV journalist, “...our vessels were being attacked on the high seas by these boats and we had to do something about it.” Reading the rest of this interview I found that Rusk continuously stated that there is no explanation for what had happened. He never seems to make an attempt to estimate their reasons throughout this interview making me think that he’s leaving things out or hiding the found reasons. This idea brought up another question for me. The US might have known what was going on and why the attack happened but didn’t want to release it to the public for the reasons of rejection from the people. (Doc. 2)
In another recorded conversation President Johnson sits down with Robert Anderson, a former secretary of state. In this conversation President Johnson unwillingly gives a reason for the attack. Johnson starts off with: “There have been some covert operations in that area that we have been carrying on - blowing up bridges and things of that kind, roads and so forth. So I imagine they wanted to put a stop to it.” Hearing this provides us with more reason to believe that this actually happened but was retaliating like the US did a justifiable action? Johnson continues on with, “What happened was we’ve been playing around up there and they came out, gave us a warning, and we knocked hell out of ‘em.” The way he explains the situation seems legit but shows that the US had an overwhelming amount of false power and used it to unreasonably retaliate against the enemy. (Doc. 3)
They did provide some evidence, however its still not enough. What was provided was a log of calls from Captain Herrick, the commander of the U.S.S. Maddox. Although Herrick was probably more likely to side in his own defense, he admits that details could not be disclosed properly saying: “Details of action present a confusing picture although (I am) certain that the original ambush was bona fide.” In this quote Herrick explains that the first ambush was genuine although says nothing about the second that had happened two days later. With the sources I am provided with to make this argument, I have no evidence of the second attack. (Doc. 7)
The US congress made sure that the problem of rejection wasn’t in their hands. On August 7th, 1964 congress passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution in which the said, “...Congress approves and supports the determination of the US president, as commander in chief, to take all necessary measures...” This statement gave the president the blame to carry on his back. Any blame on the president could be fixed for the US government with the next presidential elections. (Doc. 1)
Going to war with Vietnam because of this was a horrible idea. The way President Johnson explained the situation to Robert Anderson makes the US seem ignorant and full of snobs. (Doc. 3) McGeorge Bundy gives his ideas to President Johnson saying that what we had done was not right. He explains that we should not have retaliated in the way we did but should have strengthened our leadership efforts. Bundy explains that “a move in this direction would be regarded as betrayal by the new regime in Saigon and by all anti-Communist Vietnamese.” After reading Bundy’s words to the president, my opinion holds nearly the same. We should have entered the situation in a different way and “ If we neutralize, it should not be because we have quit nut because others have.” (Doc. 4)
Korematsu v. U.S. (1944)
In this assignment, we were told to start off by reading a book called "Snow Falling on Cedars." It is about a Japanese man who is arrested and tried for murder shortly after the events of Pearl Harbor in WWII. This novel explores a verity of themes especially that of racism towards the Japanese. Once this novel had been read, we sought out to recreate an event that was very similar to the one in the novel, it was the case of Korematsu vs the United states. For the main part of this project, we would be assigned to a major role in the case, such as an attorney or witness, and reenact the case without a scripted outcome. By doing this, we learned what these different roles do in preparation to a case and how a case plays itself out.
A lot of teamwork went into this, especially for the role I was assigned. I was assigned to be a lawyer and had to work wit four other people assigned to the same role. We all took on separate jobs to research and question different witnesses. It was very interesting working with the others to try to win over this case and it was not without it's challenges. These challenges consisted of communication and organization issues.
There was a lot of refinement that went through in this project, especially with my cross-examination questions of Korematsu and Hoover. This is mainly because new evidence was always rising. As soon as I thought I was done, I had found something new that could be used against them. The quality of the questions had definitely gone up throughout the project from questions asking about their personality to questions about secret underground societies.
In overview, I really enjoyed this project. It really taught me more about the legal system than any other written project would have, especially having actual lawyers come to talk to our groups individually. If I were to give future students advice for this project, it would be to make sure you ask Ashley as many questions as possible. I didnt really start asking many questions until the very last second and I can see how she could have helped me a tremendous amount. This project was a great, I thoroughly enjoyed it!
