The most enlightening – and amusing – part of my day occurred by complete happenstance.
I was in Ft. Bliss, Texas as part a trip with the Secretary of Defense and we had arrived a bit early. The plan was for the secretary to preside over a retirement/enlistment/re-enlistment ceremony, and we had walked in the middle of rehearsal. The stage was set up with an array of flags behind a podium from which the secretary would speak. On stage, a group of 45 wide-eyed soon-to-soldiers donning jeans and black Army t-shirts were lined up, rehearsing how they would walk up, raise their right hand and take the oath to serve.
A burly man was standing in front of the podium, guiding them along. The ceremony will begin with the retirees stepping up to the stage to officially leave the military, he explained over the loudspeaker.
And then the secretary will rise, and give a brief statement, the man explained. He told them his comments would go something like this: “You are all heroes, blah, blah, blah…” I couldn’t help but chuckle.
As it turned out, the secretary thanked the soldiers for serving with “honor and distinction”
I realize he didn’t mean anything by it, but the stand-in secretary’s comments got me thinking: Did those new soldiers feel like heroes for signing up today, knowing they would likely go to Iraq or Afghanistan?
Or do they feel serving is an obligation and to call it heroism is blah, blah, blah…
Mos' likely they're wondering what the hell they got themselves into, but extremely glad to be done with "bear watch".
Posted by: rba | May 01, 2008 at 10:12 AM
It's almost heretical not to say that every single American soldier and sailor is a hero, but this demeans the word and undermines the respect we give to those who are actually heroic.
The dogmas of our national religion assert that our men and women in uniform are defending their country, or advancing freedom and democracy. Aside from the aid given to citizens by the National Guard, there has not been a single instance over the last 60 years where our armed forces were used to either defend the United States, or advance democracy.
That is an inconvenient truth we are unwilling to face. When someone in public life suggests this, as did Rev. Wright, they are vilified and repudiated.
Posted by: Charles | May 01, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Nancy -
I am confident that the burly stand in for the SecDef was a senior NCO or middling Field Grade Officer who has been around the world a few times and was making a joke that all there understood. Gallows humor is appreciated in the armed forces even if they do not laugh out loud about it.
But I am confused Nancy - were they new enlistees, re-enlistees, retirees, or all of the above.
Posted by: mike | May 01, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Hi Mike: You are right. The military always appreciates humor. In fact, the reporters out on embeds with troops welcome it as well. :) And to answer your question, the ceremony included all of the above.
Thanks for writing.
Posted by: Nancy Youssef | May 01, 2008 at 11:54 AM
I cannot pretend that I know, but I suspect that, while undoubtedly some were there from a desire to protect and defend their country, a large portion of the enlistees were there because they were unable to find jobs in the civilian sector.
Posted by: Bill H | May 02, 2008 at 10:39 AM
Charles has it spot on. We need more voices like his to be heard more often, to remind us what a stupor we have slid into over the last 60 years.
Posted by: Peter | May 03, 2008 at 07:59 AM
To inflate our praise of soldiers by calling them heroes for doing routine work also inflates their sense of entitlement in return. Their expectations of hero worship upon coming home are unlikely to be met and the disappointment will contribute to their difficulties with readjusting to civilian life. Let's reserve the word hero for soldiers who actually perform heroically in combat.
Posted by: Peter | May 12, 2008 at 12:41 PM