The first chapter downplays the role idealism and heroism can play in a war and instead goes about showing how humans have to be motivated to achieve a set target. Marshall’s description of how men in combat can easily vacillate between behaving like lions or like scared hares serves to justify the fallibility of human nature. Something that bolsters this argument is the pivotal role that has been attached to army officers, men who provide disorganized soldiers with leadership and guidance. By taking a rather pessimistic view of human nature, one that relegates man to the status of an egotistical creature, Gwynne Dyer lays bare his belief that humans need strong leadership at all times. Dyer also endorses the manipulation and psychological brainwashing that the military often resorts to. In his depiction of humans as captive to the fear of death, the author fails to appreciate the unique quality of the human spirit. The acceptance of unlimited liability by all soldiers highlights the selflessness displayed when they sign up in the army. To sign a contract for your own death does tell us something about the person who does so. The unromantic view of solders under stress can be castigated on the grounds that fear is a reality and is very much palpable. When you put at risk the most precious thing you have, your life, then it is only understandable that a person will show some signs of tension.
Dyer underscores the fact that total war is only sleeping and it is only a matter of time before the world community finds itself enveloped in another major conflict. Such a conclusion ignores the placating effect of nuclear weapons .Given that humans are rational, the presence of nuclear weapons can, paradoxically, deter major conflict. Consider the economic interdependence that marks the modern epoch, a fact that serves to exemplify why nations will avoid war when they can. This is not to say that war will become a thing of the past for it will remain as long as humanity survives. But the likelihood of a major armed conflict between the nuclear powers diminishes owing to the realization of the tremendous destruction it can engender.
The observation that is war is completely capricious and that no amount of planning can negate the multitude of variables present in it cannot be generalized as a rule of thumb. As the years roll forward, planning is increasingly defining itself as paramount to success in any war. In essence, the burgeoning need for planning is a reflection of the complexity of our era. In his endorsement of war as the ‘province of uncertainty’, Dyer has to some extent relegated an important factor to something that lacks efficacy. There is no denying the fact that unpredictably is entrenched in the very nature of conflict, but this does not give us the warrant to label preparation as insignificant. What I find surprising is the extent to which Dyer is willing to do so.
The second chapter underlines the role of basic training as something that caters to the metamorphosis that marks the entry of new recruits into the army. Basic training is a method of transmuting the young civilians into bellicose soldiers, ready to kill at the slightest whim. It is worth outlining the considerable level of resistance and non conformity that accompanies this period of basic training. Not everyone internalizes the military values to the same degree and even if they do, they cannot be any degree of assurance that once on the battlefield; their ingrained belief in the sanctity of human life will not deter them from engaging in combat. If nothing else, this serves to show that about 20 years of socialization has left behind its imprint on the young recruit’s soul. It is rather hard to see how three weeks of intensive training can, in the slightest, reverse all the moral norms and values embedded inside the individual. Taken together, the notion that otherwise empathetic humans can be turned into heartless beasts in a period of three weeks renders itself worthy of a certain degree of suspicion. In stark contrast, evidence corroborates the difficulty of killing even in face to face combat, where the price of doing so is potentially one’s life. As pointed out by US army Colonel S.L.A. Marshall, only 15 percent of trained combat riflemen fired their weapons at all in battle. Also, consider the Battle of Gettysburg where huge numbers of soldiers refused to fire their weapons at short range. It needs to be pointed out that the new training methods stand out as an anomaly in their ability to mitigate the moral compunction that results from killing. The tactics used in such modern training methods are more successful as they take into account human psychology. That said, the inability of basic training to instill military values into the new recruits stands as a testament to the compassion embedded in all of humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment