Response to The Military’s Overlooked Brain Trust by Courtney E. Martin, American Prospect
Courtney E. Martin wrote an interesting article for The American Prospect; below is a copy of the link. Please read this intelligent young woman’s article before reading mine.
The Military’s Overlooked Brain Trust
This is how she summarizes her article regarding communication inside of the US Army being a “top-down” affair.
“They[soldiers] deserve to be encouraged, not just in lip service but also in real life, to contribute to a dialogue about our military policy. Putting one’s life on the line, after all, should include some very deep forethought and spiritual reckoning, not just fear or adrenaline. These soldiers deserve an opportunity to analyze the big picture. Instead, they are broken down by hoarse drill sergeants, trained to scream, “Hoo haa, I want to kill somebody!” as they stab their bayonets into old tires, and conditioned to follow orders instead of their own moral compass. Where is the “creative and critical thinking” in that?”
Ms. Martin,
I am currently in Baghdad, a city of 4,000,000 plus residents. I work with an 11 man team and patrol the streets and surrounding neighborhoods of this busy city on a regular basis. So I ask you to put yourself in my situation:
Imagine yourself in Baghdad, unable to move through a traffic circle because it’s rush-hour. Every person walking down the street is a potential threat. You don’t know who wants to kill you, but you know some of them do. Will they be brave enough to throw a grenade at your vehicle, or will they keep on walking? Imagine that someone has planted an IED on the side of the street and somewhere someone with a cell phone detonator and a video camera is watching you, deciding if they are going to kill you, or wait for a better, more news-worthy target.
While you’re looking through heaps of trash and crowded streets doing your best to determine what looks “normal” and what looks like a threat, imagine that a car filled with 500 pounds of explosives, neatly packed inside 120 mm shells, inside the trunk of a car stuffed full with nails, glass, ball-bearings and several 5 gallon jugs of fuel racing at you at 40 MPH. The weight of the explosives causes the car to ride on its tires, the driver, staring directly at you, refuses to acknowledge all the signals you are giving him to stop driving at you.
You have to make a choice:
- Yell on the radio alerting your team that a VBIED is inbound, hunker down, brace for impact, take your machine gun off of safe, squeeze the trigger, and fire controlled bursts into the hood and front windshield of the car hoping to disable the car, kill the driver, or get the car to explode before it makes contact with you and your team inside your Humvee all while trying not to kill anyone else on the busy street watching the scene unfold.
Or
2. Think about your moral compass.
You have two seconds: GO!
Training for soldiers today in the US Military, as it has been for the last couple of hundred years, is designed to make soldiers react, without thinking, in the most stressful and dangerous situations, because it saves lives. It saves lives of civilians, it saves lives of fellow soldiers, and it may even save their own life. However, much more is demanded out of today’s soldier because of the asymmetrical war we are fighting and the instant, world-wide, media coverage that an incident can have on the success or failure of the war.
Soldiers are required to make more decisions in shorter periods of time in more stressful situations. That training is successfully provided by the drill sergeants. Those drill sergeants, most of them combat veterans, create a stressful, realistic, combat environment because soldiers need to learn how to make a correct life or death decision in a stressful environment without thinking. Not everyone wants to kill for the sake of killing, but in war, death is part of the business in which we work.
There’s an old saying that goes, “If you’re gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough.” Like in any society or work force, we are not all created equal. Not everyone can be a CEO, manager, or supervisor, and in the military, not everyone can be a General or a Command Sergeant Major, but everyone has the opportunity to work as hard as they can, get a good civilian and military education and be as successful as they are motivated to be.
Soldiers are often encouraged to ask questions. As someone who has been both Enlisted and an Officer, I have seen both sides. I have been a follower and a leader. I have voiced my opinion, I have raised questions, and I have followed my share of orders that I didn’t agree with because maybe I don’t understand every single widget that may be moving that requires me to take care of my piece of the action. Sometimes, just knowing that my small part may make or break the success of a mission is enough to do my job and when it’s all over, I can ask “why” and have it explained to me gaining valuable knowledge to make me a better future leader.
Regardless, this is the military, it’s voluntary, and we all signed a contract and made a promise to our country and our respective branches of service essentially saying that they would do what we were told.
To balance it all out, soldiers are taught “moral compass” basics that many kids don’t get at home or in school: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. Each branch of service has their own lessons in morality that are catered to their individual mission.
Where does it all come together? Do we want soldiers that think freely and question every order given to them or do we want soldiers to obey orders and perform without thought? I think we can have both, as long as we have hoarse drill sergeants breaking soldiers down and building them up to meet the Army’s needs.
Army MOS 46Q: Public Affairs Specialist (Journalist). If you’re interested, contact your local recruiter and tell them Major Jim Gafney sent you.
She needs to come live in your house.We, as a nation, need these brave young men and women that are trained to adapt and overcome for our protection.You hit the nail on the head with your response to her article. Immediate action to orders saves lives. There is no time for second guessing. She has tried to give drill instructors a bad reputation. They keep the our children as safe as they can be with the tools of experience and sometimes mistakes… God bless you and all of our people in harms way.
Thanks for this thoughtful response to my piece. I suppose I must not have made clear that I understand there is a time and a place, a season even, for everything. I didn’t mean to suggest that soldiers in the middle of a theater experience should sit cross-legged and philosophize on a whim. But I do think that after you’ve faced the kinds of situations you describe, when you’re back home, processing and continuing your search for purpose, that it would be a good time to pick your brain about how things are going and what needs to be done next–big picture.
In any case, thanks for your insights in this space. Take care and thanks for your service.
Ms. Martin is arguing with the cartoon of the military she just KNOWS is like that. Darn you and your evidence to the contrary!
First of all, it is unfortunate that this “intelligent, young woman” could not take the MSM’s (Main Stream Media) road less traveled and written the story of the soldier that had joined the US Army to escape the cycle of abuse. Wow, what a great human interest piece. I see them constantly. A garden built in Harlem, organized by a former drug pusher/user/pimp that cleaned up and got a life; a former prostitute who is now an organizational leader in a young girl’s sports program, these are accompliments. So, why can’t the soldier get the same recognition? He’s a soldier. War is a bad taboo in our country right now. After all our media gave rise to Michael Jackson’s death over the death of honorable soldiers, VOLUNTARILY protecting our freedom. That is disgusting.
Our military’s morale and the morale of its spouses and children are quickly undermined by the choice of reported stories. Our own government appears to be ignoring General McChrystal, the man they appointed to be the Top Afghan Commander. Obama can go on news talk shows, but can’t manage to talk to his appointed advisor more than twice in six months?!?
General McChrystal is a highly decorated, intelligent, and seasoned Special Operations Officer and I think he makes Obama nervous. Obama has no prior military service, and although he is educated, in my opinion, it is clear that General McChrystal’s concept and assessment of the situation goes far above Obama’s and this Administration’s head. I am glad that General McChrystal is speaking publically about the issues that we are facing, and not allowing our Government to throw our military serving in harm’s way under the bus! (NSDQ!!!! Even in politics!)
So maybe Ms. Martin, the focus of your story should have been that the Obama administration doesn’t give a hoot about what our top military advisors think the best direction is to take in order to continue to protect our country, not knocking the men and women who lead the fight as non-thought provoking.
Having a 19 year old serving in the USMC, I believe that young people are encouraged in the military to think intelligently and for themselves… I believe that they are encouraged to learn tried and true ways of assessing, planning, and executing missions. They are also encouraged to speak up, and share information with their superiors, about what is working and what isn’t. Too assume those individuals aren’t being listened too is just wrong. Where does your expertise come from Ms. Martin? A five day workshop?!?
One last note: The comment of “(Unfortunately, the Army is still light years behind in understanding gender dynamics.)” The military isn’t meant to be the new example of gender dynamics. It is also an ALL VOLUNTEER military. Women who join the military usually know they aren’t going to have a bathtub in Bagram to shave their legs, they can’t stop in the middle of a convoy through hostile territory to fix their make-up, decide that they should get pregnant prior to a deployment to a combat zone (although the military makes accommodations for this). The military also offers parental leave, different physical training requirements for women, as well as certain consideration for women health wise.
HOWEVER; most of the women that I know in service would be upset at that comment. They are fighter pilots, helicopter pilots, Generals, and Leaders of MEN and women. This is NOT the 1960’s and a “Mad Men” Episode! Don’t take us back there! We women have been pushing for equality across the board, including in the military.
You certainly understand what it took for Barbara Walters, Diane Sawyer, Connie Chong, and Katie Couric to make it in your field correct? I am sure they wanted to be recognized on their merits, not because the field of Journalism was more “Gender Dynamic”.
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the blog post From the Front: 10/01/2009 News and Personal dispatches from the front and the home front.
I have a great deal of respect for those who serve in our nations’ military. The prevailing issue with opposing views is the rarity in which we actually listen to others. It is not my position to change anyone or their beliefs. In the present climate of our nation, the passion associated with politics and war is enormous. My understanding of Ms. Martin’s piece is to entertain the idea that blindly following an order, while in some professions may be necessary, does not mean that reflection should not occur following the event. We grow as individuals not merely by our experiences, but by how we interpret, ponder and resolve them. To not question oneself and others can often lead to abuse of power. While contemplating orders from superiors may be a luxury for some, it should be one that we attempt to afford ourselves nonetheless.
I am stunned by how many of the respondents completely misinterpreted Ms. Martin’s article and attempted to paint her as naive and unrealistic. You people should be embarrassed that you’re so intent on espousing your own opinions that you can’t even read and understand her very logical, clearly-stated point. Obviously, she was not advocating that soldiers question orders during the heat of battle. She was explaining that soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan have experiences and insights that could help us end these wars in a way that makes sense and saves lives.
Ms. Fahey-
I think it is presumptuous of you to assume that her point was misinterpreted by any or all of the commenters here. It was her opinion, after a 5 day workshop, that “…These soldiers deserve an opportunity to analyze the big picture. Instead, they are broken down by hoarse drill sergeants, trained to scream, “Hoo haa, I want to kill somebody!” as they stab their bayonets into old tires, and conditioned to follow orders instead of their own moral compass.
Where is the “creative and critical thinking” in that? ”
It is the opinion of others (you called us “You people”) that she is incorrect. To me the statement severely demeans the soldiers, as if they aren’t intelligent enough to use their knowledge to actually make a difference.
This is a blog. It is here to insight debate, “creative and critical thinking”, and share opposing views in a respectful forum. So I will not apologize, nor will I be embarrassed for “espousing” my opinions. I don’t believe that anyone else should either. That is the right that this country gives us as citizens, and our military protects.
Furthermore, in my opinion, Ms. Martin only wrote her story to “one” audience. Not addressing an another audience, or the one that lives those lives. Maybe she forgot that there are Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Veterans, and family members, who KNOW a different side to her story. I don’t know if she did or didn’t, however I think that she thoughtfully and respectfully tried to clarify her point here.
It should be noted that comments may be written and submitted well before they are posted. So rebuttals to a story or another comment may come well after another is even viewable. Just like many other blogs out there. It helps alleviate spam postings.
Maybe, you are good friends with Ms. Martin, (She is your “friend” on your Face book account) and maybe you took the response to her too personally. I don’t know. Maybe, she posted something about it to her Face book account that elicited your response as well as Ms. McElroy’s, since you both are not regular readers of the blog. Again, I don’t know.
I can say this, however, this is not the only response that interpreted Ms. Martin’s article differently than both you and she stated.
Ms. Martin,
If I am correct, the point of your article is to express a lack of communication up and down the chain of command within the US Army and how it would be useful if we encouraged soldiers to voice their ideas to assist in the success of the bigger picture.
That being said, I would like to give you a brief synopsis of the method we use to communicate ideas to improve things for the next time training, a mission, or event is performed.
After each of these events, we perform what is called an After Action Review. These reviews can be simple or complicated. They are all recorded in some manner, and then passed up through the chain of command. Depending on the level of the event, it can go all the way to senior leaders in the military.
We discuss the event from beginning to end, discuss what was good, what was bad and in the end we come up with the three main positive and three main negatives to take away from the event, write a report, and send it on its way. The more complicated the event, the more complicated the report, the higher it gets sent up the chain of command.
Some of the rules I use are:
No personal attacks. (PVT Schmedlap is an idiot.)
Have a thick skin. (Don’t get offended when someone says, “CPT America, your mission failed, let’s examine why.”)
If you have a problem/issue, offer a solution. (“This sucks!” is not a solvable problem.)
Stick to the subject. (“The lobster at the mess hall was chewy” has no bearing on the mission.”
Essentially, this is how the US Army’s soldiers are used as a brain trust to pass useful knowledge and information with the intention refining how we do business.
If you are interested in expanding your knowledge base about the military and how it works, you are always welcome to shoot me an email and ask me questions. There is also an imbedded reporter program that I would recommend to journalists and writers that are interested in following the military.
Better yet put her in a pair of boots and let her hump a 150lbs of equipment day after day while being shot at.
Wouldn’t it be nice if those who wrote about the military had to do the job for a year or two?
chas