{"id":12322,"date":"2011-05-16T12:00:18","date_gmt":"2011-05-16T11:00:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=12322"},"modified":"2011-05-16T03:18:17","modified_gmt":"2011-05-16T02:18:17","slug":"the-war-lovers-why-it-feels-so-good-to-be-embedded-with-the-u-s-military","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2011\/05\/the-war-lovers-why-it-feels-so-good-to-be-embedded-with-the-u-s-military\/","title":{"rendered":"The War Lovers: Why It Feels So Good to Be Embedded with the U.S. Military"},"content":{"rendered":"

Objective reporting on the SEAL team that killed bin Laden was as easy to find as a Prius at a Michele Bachmann rally. The media simply couldn\u2019t help themselves. They couldn\u2019t stop spooning out man-sized helpings of testosterone — the SEALs\u2019 phallic weapons<\/a>, their frat-house<\/a>, haze-worthy training, their romance-novel bravado<\/a>, their sweaty, heaving chests pressing against tight uniforms, muscles daring to break free…<\/p>\n

You get the point. Towel off and read on.<\/p>\n

What is it about the military that turns normally thoughtful journalists into war pornographers? A reporter who would otherwise make it through the day sober spends a little time with some unit of the U.S. military and promptly loses himself in ever more dramatic language about bravery and sacrifice, stolen in equal parts from Thucydides, Henry V, and Sergeant Rock<\/a> comics.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m neither a soldier nor a journalist. I\u2019m a diplomat, just back from 12 months as a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) leader, embedded with the military in Iraq, and let me tell you that nobody laughed harder at the turgid prose reporters used to describe their lives than the soldiers themselves. They knew they were trading hours of boredom for maybe minutes of craziness that only in retrospect seemed \u201cexciting,\u201d as opposed to scary, confusing, and chaotic. That said, the laziest private knew from growing up watching TV exactly what flavor to feed a visiting reporter.<\/p>\n

In trying to figure out why journalists and assorted militarized intellectuals from inside the Beltway lose it around the military, I remembered a long afternoon spent with a gaggle of \u201cfellows\u201d from a prominent national security think tank who had flown into Iraq. These scholars wrote serious articles and books that important people read; they appeared on important Sunday morning talk shows; and they served as consultants to even more important people who made decisions about the Iraq War and assumedly other conflicts to come.<\/p>\n

One of them had been on the staff of a general whose name he dropped more often than Jesus\u2019s at a Southern Baptist A.A. meeting. He was a real live neocon. A quick Google search showed he had strongly supported going to war in Iraq, wrote apology pieces after no one could find any weapons of mass destruction there (\u201cIt was still the right thing to do\u201d), and was now back to check out just how well democracy was working out for a paper he was writing to further justify the war. He liked military high-tech, wielded words like \u201cawesome,\u201d \u201csuperb,\u201d and \u201cextraordinary\u201d (pronounced EXTRA-ordinary) without irony to describe tanks and guns, and said in reference to the Israeli Army, \u201cThey give me a hard-on.\u201d<\/p>\n

Fearing the Media vs. Using the Media<\/strong><\/p>\n

Such figures are not alone. Nerds, academics, and journalists have had trouble finding ways to talk, write, or think about the military in a reasonably objective way. A minority of them have spun off into the dark side, focused on the My Lai, Full Metal Jacket<\/em>, and Platoon<\/em>-style psycho killers. But most spin in the other direction, portraying our men and women in uniform as regularly, daily, hourly saving Private Ryan, stepping once more into the breach, and sacking out each night knowing they are abed with brothers.<\/p>\n

I sort of did it, too. As a State Department Foreign Service Officer embedded with the military in Iraq, I walked in… er, deployed, unprepared. I had never served in the military and had rarely fired a weapon (and never at anything bigger than a beer can on a rock ledge). The last time I punched someone was in ninth grade. Yet over the course of a year, I found myself living and working with the 82nd Airborne, followed by the 10th Mountain Division, and finally the 3rd Infantry Division, three of the most can-do units in the Army. It was… seductive.<\/p>\n

The military raised a lot of eyebrows in my part of the world early in the Iraq invasion with their policy of embedding journalists with front-line troops. Other than preserving OpSec (Operational Security for those of you who have never had The Experience<\/em>) and not giving away positions and plans to the bad guys, journalists were free to see and report on anything. No restrictions, no holding back.<\/p>\n

Growing up professionally within the State Department, I had been raised to fear the media. \u201cDon\u2019t end up on the front page of the Washington Post,\u201d was an often-repeated warning within the State Department, and many a boss now advises young Foreign Service Officers to \u201cre-read that email again, imagining it on the Internet, and see if you still want to send it.\u201d And that\u2019s when we\u2019re deciding what office supplies to recommend to the ambassador, not anything close to the life-and-death stuff a military embed might witness.<\/p>\n

When I started my career, the boogieman was syndicated columnist Jack Anderson<\/a>, then Washington Post <\/em>columnist Al Kamen<\/a>.\u00a0 Now, it\u2019s Jon Stewart and Wikileaks. A mention by name in any of those places is career suicide. Officially, State suggests we avoid \u201cunscripted interactions\u201d with the media. Indeed, in his book on Iraq and Afghan nation-building, Armed Humanitarians<\/em><\/a>,<\/em> Nathan Hodge brags about how he did get a few State Department people to talk to him anonymously in a 300-page book with first-person military quotes on nearly every page.<\/p>\n

So, in 2003, we diplomats sat back and smugly speculated that the military didn\u2019t mean it, that they\u2019d stage-manage what embedded journalists would see and who they would be allowed to speak to. After all, if someone screwed up and the reporter saw the real thing, it would end up in disaster, as in fact happened when Rolling Stone\u2019s<\/em> Michael Hastings got Afghan War commander Stanley McCrystal axed as a \u201crunaway general.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n

We were, however, dead wrong.\u00a0 As everyone now agrees, journalists saw what they saw and talked to whomever they chose and the military facilitated the process. Other than McCrystal (who has since been redeemed<\/a> by the same president who fired him), can anyone name another military person whacked by reporting?<\/p>\n

I\u2019m waiting.<\/p>\n

I saw it myself in Iraq.\u00a0 General Ray Odierno<\/a>, then commander of all troops in Iraq, would routinely arrive at some desert dump where I happened to be, reporters in tow.\u00a0 I saw for myself that they would be free to speak about anything to anyone on that Forward Operating Base (which, in acronym-mad Iraq, we all just called a FOB, rhymes with \u201ccob\u201d). The only exception would be me: State had a long-standing policy that on-the-record interviews with its officials had to be pre-approved by the Embassy or often by the Washington Mothership itself.<\/p>\n

Getting such an approval before a typical reporter\u2019s deadline ran out was invariably near impossible, which assumedly was the whole point of the system. In fact, the rules got even tougher over the course of my year in the desert.\u00a0 When I arrived, the SOP (standard operating procedure) allowed Provincial Reconstruction Team leaders to talk to foreign media without preapproval (on the assumption that no one in Washington read their pieces in other languages anyway and thus no one in the field could get into trouble). This was soon rescinded countrywide and preapproval was required even for these media interactions.<\/p>\n

Detouring around me, the reporters would ask soldiers their opinions on the war, the Army, or even controversial policies like DADT.\u00a0 (Do I have to freaking spell it out for you? Don\u2019t Ask, Don\u2019t Tell.) The reporters would sit through the briefings the general received, listening in as he asked questions. They were exposed to classified material, and trusted not to reveal it in print. They would go out on patrols led by 24-year-old lieutenants, where life-and-death decisions were often made, and were free to report on whatever they saw. It always amazed me — like that scene in The Wizard of Oz<\/em> where everything suddenly changes from black and white into color.<\/p>\n

Fear Not: The Force Is With You<\/strong><\/p>\n

But the military wasn\u2019t worried.\u00a0 Why?\u00a0 Because its officials knew perfectly well that for reporters the process was — not to mince words — seductive. The world, it turns out, is divided into two groups, those who served in the military and those who didn\u2019t. For the rare journalists with service time, this would be homecoming, a chance to relive their youth filtered through memory. For the others, like me, embedding with the military felt like being invited in — no, welcomed — for the first time by the cool kids.<\/p>\n

You arrive and, of course, you feel awkward, out of place. Everyone has a uniform on and you\u2019re wearing something inappropriate you bought at L.L. Bean. You don\u2019t know how to wear your body-armor vest and helmet, which means that someone has to show you how to dress yourself. When was the last time that happened? Instead of making fun of you, though, the soldier is cool with it and just helps.<\/p>\n

Then, you start out not knowing what the hell anyone is saying, because they throw around terms like FOB and DFAC and POS and LT and BLUF and say Hoo-ah, but sooner or later someone begins to explain them to you one by one, and after a while you start to feel pretty cool saying them yourself and better yet, repeating them to people at home in emails and, if you\u2019re a journalist, during live reports. (\u201cSorry Wolf, that\u2019s an insider military term. Let me explain it to our viewers\u2026\u201d)<\/p>\n

You go out with the soldiers and suddenly you\u2019re riding in some kind of armored, motorized monster truck. You\u2019re the only one without a weapon and so they have to protect you. Instead of making fun of you and looking at you as if you were dressed as a Naughty Schoolgirl, they\u2019re cool with it. Bored at only having one another to talk to, fellow soldiers who eat the exact same food, watch the exact same TV, and sleep, pee and work together every day for a year, the troops see you as quite interesting. You can\u2019t believe it, but they really do want to know what you know, where you\u2019ve been, and what you\u2019ve seen — and you want to tell them.<\/p>\n

Even though you may be only a few years older than many of them, you feel fatherly. For women, it works similarly, but with the added bonus that, no matter what you look like, you\u2019re treated as the most beautiful female they\u2019ve seen in the last six months — and it\u2019s probably true.<\/p>\n

The same way one year in a dog\u2019s life equals seven human years, every day spent in a war zone is the equivalent of a month relationship-wise. You quickly grow close to the military people you\u2019re with, and though you may never see any of them again after next week, you bond with them.<\/p>\n

You arrived a stranger and a geek.\u00a0 Now, you eat their food, watch their TV, and sleep, pee, and work together every day. These are your friends, at least for the time you\u2019re together, and you\u2019re never going to betray them.\u00a0 Under those circumstances, it\u2019s harder than hell to say anything bad about the organization whose lowest ranking member just gave up his sleeping bag without prompting because you were too green and dumb to bring one with you.<\/p>\n

One time I got so sick that I spent half a day inside a latrine stall. What got me out was some anonymous soldier tossing a packet of anti-diarrheal medicine in. He never said a word, just gave it to me and left. He\u2019d likely do the same if called upon to protect me, help move my gear, or any of a thousand other small gestures.<\/p>\n

So, take my word for it, it\u2019s really, really hard to write about the military objectively, even if you try. That\u2019s not to say that all journalists are shills; it\u2019s just a warning for you to take care when you\u2019re hanging out with, or reading, our warrior-pundits.<\/p>\n

And yet having some perspective on the military and what it does matters as we threaten to slip into yet more multigenerational wars without purpose, watch the further militarization<\/a> of foreign affairs, and devote ever more of our national budget to the military.\u00a0 War lovers and war pornographers can\u2019t offer us an objective look at a world in which more and more foreigners only run into Americans when they are wearing green and carrying weapons.<\/p>\n

I respect my military colleagues, at least the ones who took it all seriously enough to deserve that respect, and would not speak ill of them. Some do indeed make enormous sacrifices, including of their own lives, even if for reasons that are ambiguous at best to a majority of Americans. But in order to understand these men and women and the tasks they are set to, we need journalists who are willing to type with both hands, not just pass on their own wet dreams to a gullible public.<\/p>\n

Civilian control of our military is a cornerstone of our republic, and we the people need to base our decisions on something better than Sergeant Rock comic rewrites.<\/p>\n

_______________________<\/p>\n

Peter Van Buren spent a year in Iraq as a State Department Foreign Service Officer serving as Team Leader for two Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs). Now in Washington, he writes about Iraq and the Middle East at his blog, <\/em>We Meant Well<\/em><\/a>. His book, <\/em>We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People<\/a> (The American Empire Project, Metropolitan Books), will be published this September and can be preordered by clicking here<\/a>. To listen to Timothy MacBain\u2019s latest TomCast audio interview in which Van Buren discusses the farce of nation-building in Iraq, click\u00a0here<\/a>, or download it to your iPod\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

[Note:<\/strong> The views expressed here are solely those of the author in his private capacity and do not in any way represent the views of the Department of State, the Department of Defense, or any other entity of the U.S. Government. The Department of State has not approved, endorsed, or authorized this post.]<\/em> <\/em><\/p>\n

Copyright 2011 Peter Van Buren<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 tomdispatch.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Objective reporting on the SEAL team that killed bin Laden was as easy to find as a Prius at a Michele Bachmann rally. The media simply couldn\u2019t help themselves. They couldn\u2019t stop spooning out man-sized helpings of testosterone — the SEALs\u2019 phallic weapons, their frat-house, haze-worthy training, their romance-novel bravado, their sweaty, heaving chests pressing against tight uniforms, muscles daring to break free… You get the point. Towel off and read on.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[62],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12322","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-media"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12322","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12322"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12322\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12322"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12322"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12322"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}