Some do join the Military out of a Desire to Kill

[cthulu2016]

Last edited Mon Mar 19, 2012, 07:10 PM - Edit history (4)

This one of those unavoidably true things we are supposed to pretend just don't exist, but there are very few jobs where you have a chance to kill someone within the law and they will attract a disproportionate number of people with an interest in killing. Voluntary soldiers and police are more violent-minded than the average person, but that doesn't mean they cannot be very good people. That soldiers are more violence-oriented is obvious and should be uncontroversial. (This just in—people in the NFL, NHL and boxing are also more violent-minded than average.)

I am not suggesting that only sociopaths join the mlitary. Far from it. And the military tries to keep obviously kill-happy psychos out. But people who join the military motivated by revenge in war-time are likely to want to kill somebody.

Given human nature, societies that did not nurture some degree of chaneled murderousness in service of the state ceased to exist. I'm not knocking it.

But since society tries to depress murderousness most of the time we have to rationalize that (necessary) impulse in war in bizarre ways. And we give the label "Patriotism" to such chaneled murderousness.

Case in point, how would this be for a headline?

Man who joined Army in order to kill Afghans shocks everyone by Killing Afghans

It's Onion-worthy, but that is essentially what USA TODAY said today in asking how Bale's "patriotism" morphed into murder. The cited proof of his patriotism is that he voluteered for the military right after 9/11.

Patriotism brought suspected shooter Robert Bales into Army

In his mind, Staff Sgt. Robert Bales' motives were noble. He enlisted in the Army in the throes of patriotism on Nov. 8, 2001, just two months after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

"That is the primary reason he joined," his attorney Emma Scanlan said Sunday.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-17/robert-bales-background/53593992/1

Why did he join the military right after 9/11? Well, a hell of a lot of men joined the military right after Pearl Harbor and they were not joining to stand guard at the US Consulate in Honduras. They joined to kill Japanese people, and if you had told enlistees that there was no chance of them ever killing a Japanese or German many would have reconsidered enlisting. And we consider those bloody-minded men heros, and with good reason. (Imagine the propects of a nation where Pearl Harbor provoked a big yawn.)

If your reaction to watching 9/11 unfold on TV was, "I want to kill some people in response to this" then the thing to do was to join the army. This is not a slander, it is obvious, and shouldn't be controversial. (Joining the military was a more responsible within-the-system expression of a revenge impulse than fire-bombing the local muslim-owned market.)

And many such men who join are disappointed if they make it through the war without killing anyone. Everyone understands what they are there to do... "kill people and break things."

So USA TODAY's head-scratching puzzle is how a man strongly motivated to kill Afghans within the scope of his orders ended up killing Afghans outside the scope of his orders. Some drone operators and bombadiers have surely killed even more civilians out of error or indiference, but within the scope of their orders. Is the real question, "how did his man become a killer?" or is it, "How did this man come to disregard orders and rules and laws of war?"

He became a killer because we trained him to be a killer. Combat soldiers trained primarily in etiquette won't last long in the field. We also trained him to be disciplined and that's what broke down. He bcame an uncontrollable killer.

And USA TODAY presents it all as a contrast... a puzzle. Man bites dog. As if the military was somehow the very last place you'd ever expect to find someone shooting up a bunch of people. (I consider it a miracle, and a tribute to our military that this sort of thing doesn't happen more often.)

I am not saying anything against the typical soldier here. These bloody-minded impulses, many of which I lack, are sometimes necessary and even admirable. (I would rather be in a foxhole with a marine than an ethics professor.) A nation of 300,000,000 Cthulu2016's might not last long.

My objection is the definitive cultural equation of "patriotism" and "a desire for revenge acheived through homicide" as obvious synonyms, and pretending that a desire to kill in war is utterly seperable from a generalized desire to kill.