When you can see the people you're about to kill -- truly see them -- and when you can discern they are not the enemy, sometimes men of conscience refuse orders to kill, as I wrote about here:
The problem is that drone operators think they can see, but, as the saying goes, you're peering through a straw from 20 or 30 thousand feet. You don't have full "situational awareness." A wedding party may look like a small company of "terrorists."
The missiles may be precise, but our so-called intelligence is often tragically imprecise.
My mouth fell open at the children waving their arms, and stayed open to the end. Beautiful story- I will pass it on. I think more people would act with courage if they read stories of others acting with courage.
"Wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows." "It is not enough to say we must not wage war. It is necessary to love peace and sacrifice for it." "We have guided Missiles and Misguided men" "We must pursue peaceful end through peaceful means."
“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.” ― Martin Luther King Jr.
A couple of the earlier comments touch on the topic of how such remote-control warfare does, or doesn’t, affect the people conducting it.
One of the more grimly hopeful things I remember reading during the Global War on Terror years, was an article about how drone operators (“pilots”) in Nevada, I believe it was, who were flying missions over Afghanistan, were falling apart mentally. One could take away the message that something in human nature was just rebelling against this total mechanization of killing – that these airmen had been so far removed from the reality of battle that they suffered from a whole new sort of trauma as they vaporized their targets half a world away.
Still, I don’t really believe it is so. The Air Force was probably just abusing them with overlong shifts, or ignoring their circadian rhythms, or something, nothing that couldn’t be got around if any commanders cared enough to figure it out.
I remember reading the obituaries in the NY Times over the years as the crew members of the two A-bomb missions over Japan died of old age. I was struck that not a single man of them, as far as I could tell, ever evinced the least pang of conscience or doubt over what they participated in. I feel simultaneous respect for and despair at the military’s success in selecting men who would carry out such a mission without ever – ever – letting a spark of humanity get in the way.
Can somebody ~ anybody ~ here at BV [awash as it is in self-righteous indignation over this whole drone thing] tell me the difference between a drone operator sitting in his or her air conditioned office pushing buttons delivering death and destruction thousands of miles away, and a B-52 crew dropping bombs from 32,000 feet or higher, as was done routinely during America’s war in Vietnam?
“B-52 Stratofortresses flew a total of nearly 114 thousand sorties over Southeast Asia between 1965 and 1973. The U.S. Air Force flew more than 5 million sorties in Vietnam over the course of the entire conflict, more than twice the number of sorties flown by the Army Air Force in World War II.
“A total of 18 B-52s were lost in combat during the Vietnam War, most as a result of surface-to-air missile (SAM) strikes over North Vietnam. Further, 12 aircraft were lost in other operational circumstances, including the two lost on July 7, 1967.” [mid-air collision] Source: https://www.vietnamwar50th.com/education/week_of_july_3_2022/ .
So after almost 114,000 sorties, a grand total of 30 B-52s were lost, or 0.000263 percent.
And beyond the B-52s, there’s this little inconvenient fact of history:
“Between 1965 and 1975, the United States and its allies dropped more than 7.5 million tons of bombs on Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia—DOUBLE THE AMOUNT DROPPED ON EUROPE AND ASIA DURING WORLD WAR II. Pound for pound, it remains the largest aerial bombardment in human history.”
And then there is this: “All told, the U.S. Air Force flew 5.25 million sorties over South Vietnam, North Vietnam, northern and southern Laos, and Cambodia, losing 2,251 aircraft: 1,737 to hostile action,” [or 0.000331 percent]. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War .
And after all that, America still lost that war. Just like it has every war it has gotten into since the end of World War II.
Well, dead is dead, Jeff, whether by bullet or bomb or Hellfire missile.
What's different about drone warfare is how it's sold to us. It's sold as surgical and precise, high-tech and clean, as opposed to all those messy "boots on the ground." A 2nd key difference is that we risk no troops at all. We kill at no risk to us whatsoever. Not even killed or captured aircrew due to enemy fire or malfunction. Because we kill with impunity, there's a tendency to continue to kill, irrespective of the results. And that's what we did, especially in the War on Terror, always citing progress made when there was no progress. Lots of profits made, though!
Dead is most definitely Dead, Bill. But the question wasn't about the difference between drones and "boots on the ground." It was about the difference between drone strikes and B-52 strikes.
The only difference i see between the two is that drone operators are not subject to being shot down like B-52s, and either killed or taken as POWs, as were relatively very few B-52 crew members.
Yes, that's the key difference, Jeff. A president has to risk the loss or capture of aircrews, which may give him pause. But drones are basically risk-free, as are Tomahawk cruise missiles. Remember when Trump was praised by the establishment for shooting missiles at Syria? What a brave act, right?
I think there's one more difference. B-52s, of course, are not "surgical." They don't have the image of being "clean." Whereas our drones are sold as "precision" weapons; we are told how super-accurate they are, how carefully we select targets, etc.
In sum: Drones incur no risk/no casualties and also promote the idea of "clean" warfare.
In any event [and please correct me if i am wrong], but i don't think B-52s were ever intended to be "surgical" or "precision" bomb delivery systems.
Not when they could "carry 84 500-pound bombs internally as well as another 24 750-pound bombs mounted on wing pylons. This gave the bomber a total of 108 bombs or 60,000 pounds of bombs to drop on the enemy.
There were some early Doonesbury strips that looked at Nixon’s “secret” bombing of Cambodia – not a secret to the Cambodians, as one villager observes.
As I recall, the villager is shown next to (or maybe in?) a new bomb crater, shaking his fist at the B-52s as they fly home, saying he hoped those men understood the devastation they had brought. The next frame is inside the cockpit, where the crew is just making small talk about football, dinner, whatever.
I think Tom Wolfe did a pretty good job in "Jousting with Sam and Charlie" (carrier-based fighter & fighter/bomber pilots in Vietnam). "Professional detachment" ... just another day's work, fostered and insulated by speed and altitude. And attitude. "What the eyes don't see the heart doesn't grieve over." There's no difference I can see between a bombadier's targeting coordinates and someone looking at a monitor. I'm thinking the outrage really stems from the facts that (1) all the high-dollar technology in the world has yet to sanitize war enough for our sensibilities (killing only the enemy) and (2) the revulsion that a fellow American, normal as you and me, could calmly "pilot" a drone to do what drones are meant to do and go home at the end of their shift, job well done. With a murderer or serial killer it's "How could they do that?" But an everyday guy or gal knocking back Red Bulls? How far removed is anyone from doing that? It's just a job.
First of all, wdt, Thank You for citing Tom Wolfe’s “Jousting with Sam and Charlie.” Given that the last time i read anything by Wolfe was back in the early 70s and his THE ELECTRIC KOOL-AID ACID TEST, i’d forgotten how truly great and brilliant a writer he was.
And second of all: Given that the B-52s of Vietnam were based in either Guam or Thailand, my guess is that after a mission, the crews may not have been drinking Red Bull, but they definitely had some of the finest on-base living, drinking, eating, and recreation facilities/establishments in the entire US military system. So there’s another equivalency between our Drone Warriors of today and those folks back then.
Like You said about our Droners, for those folks back then, it was “just a job,” as well. Tough duty, but somebody had to do it, eh?
Jeff, as a young man, enamored with jet fighters, my favorite Yanky plane was the F-105 Republic Thunderchief. The "Thud" or "Lead Sled". I always admired its size, aggressive stance and legendary top speed at low altitudes. The F-105 could carry up to 14,000-lbs of bombs and missiles. The aircraft's offensive capabilities were sarcastically referred to as a "Triple Threat"—it could bomb you, strafe you, or fall on you.
Wiki'ing it a few weeks ago I was shocked to read that over 20,000 Thunderchief sorties were flown in Vietnam. 382 (!) aircraft were lost out of the 833-produced. 0.46%! (Or 1.9100% in comparison to your B52 statistics.) It was a 2-man crew, right? Pilot and Weapons Officer. So that's 764-airman who were killed!
And, as you say, after all that, America still lost that war.
If I recall correctly, the Thud was initially designed as a high-speed tactical nuclear strike aircraft. It was "adapted" for Vietnam. Not the easiest plane to fly. I think most were lost to ground fire in Vietnam.
Dennis: Back in 1966-67 when i was Private First Class infantryman in the 101st Airborne Division operating up in the Central Highlands close to the Cambodian border, i had two very up close and personal experiences with close tactical air support from F-105s; one of which very likely saved our Company of 120+ troops from being completely overrun and wiped out.
i also walked thru what was left of several villages that had been bombed and napalmed by F-105s or their kin because of “suspected” Viet Cong presence/activity. And i also walked thru areas of that Rain Forest Jungle that had been turned into a desert, courtesy of a B-52 strike.
And do You know Why America lost that war despite all that superior tactical and strategic air fire power and support? It is because what we were doing in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia was not merely Wrong; it was, is, and ever will be because what we were doing was totally and completely fucking EVIL. Just like every war that the US has been involved in since the end of WW II, and particularly, since the Fall of Saigon in 1975.
And New Zealand played a part in that whole Cluster Fuck.
Anyway, i’m curious: What were You doing during that period? Did You know that Kiwis were helping the Yanks keep that Domino from falling? And was there any kind of anti-war activity going on there? Have a Great day.
ps: And the percentage of F-105s lost of all produced was 46%, not 0.46%. i think You misplaced Your decimal point.
Jeff, I was a 20-some year-old student at her Majesty Queen Victoria's University in the capital city of Wellington. Blocks away from Government House. With my hair down to my arse and a pierced ear earring.
We students protested in the streets of Wellington and earned a reputation of being traitors and the scum of the earth. Only 8% of Kiwi's went to university at that time. A tough exam being the only way to get in - and 100% government paid. To be a university student was to be branded as an entitled prick at that time! Not a badge of honour.* At parties (booze-ups) I remember telling other party goers I was a bricklayer. Not wanting to face the insults of being a uni-arsehole!
Kiwi's were gung-ho Yank boot lickers in that period because they believed the Yanks had saved them from being overrun by the yellow hoards in WW2. And of course, we were fighting the commie's taking over the World. Keeping the Domino's from falling.
Thanks for those two links - sad reading
"The New Zealanders had the highest ratio of fatal casualties to participants at 2.18 percent, with the Americans a very close second at 2.15 percent."
And sadly in this current Ukraine conflict the majority of Kiwis have drunk the Yank KOOLAID and think Putin is Hitler, and the Yanks proxy war for regime change in Russia is actually all about preserving democracy in the Ukraine. My letters to the editor are never published. And my comments on social media disappear within minutes. I don't talk to Kiwis about this subject. Avoid it like the plague.
*Do you know what the “Tall Poppy Syndrome” is? It's a term used to describe the culture of criticizing, resenting, and undermining the success and ambition of other people. The term is prevalently used in Australia and New Zealand and refers to the idea of cutting a tall poppy to size, so that it doesn’t stand out amongst the rest. Your personal success is criticized and ridiculed by your peers.
*Fear of making peers uncomfortable with your success.
*Not pursuing goals in order to not stand out from the pack.
*Talking down your achievements to others and to yourself (negative self-talk).
This is such an important article even as we participate in the proxy war in Ukraine, using the Ukrainians as we would drones to go fight those Russians. However, being that drone operator does come with the hazard of moral injury, survivor guilt. All we need to do is ask Daniel Hale and his cohorts. But the issue is that we can fight and still have time for our Bud Light and the NFL on Sunday. Then after drones comes an AI soldier, until they turn the guns on us.
Recent incidents in which Russian jets 'interfered with' U.S. drones raises for me another issue w/r/t drone usage. In the first incident, the American drone was flying over the Black Sea.. The more recent incident occurred over Syrian airspace. Given that these drones are often armed, they are instruments of American military force, operated by Americans.
What are American military forces doing in Ukraine, and over the Black Sea? This was supposed to be a proxy war (though they don't use that term directly)- fought by Ukrainians against 'our enemy', Russia. And what of Syria?
The point is that this is not only a way to sanitize or make disappear the wars we initiate and prosecute around the globe; but also a form of mission creep whereby the chances of direct war with Russia, etc. increase. It would not be much of an additional step in such circumstances for American pilots to deliver and fly the F-16s authorized for Ukraine. Do the decision makers really not understand that Russia is not going to pretend the U.S. isn't at war with it?
We are the 800 pound gorilla in the joke: where does an 800 pound gorilla sleep...anywhere it wants to. To our leadership we are righteous in all that we do and wherever we do it. Good must pursue and eliminate evil wherever it may be found. This sounds childish but I'm convinced those in power belief it.
Very possibly, yes, they (the neocons in foreign policy, for example) may have actually convinced themselves to 'believe' those myths of American Exceptionalism, noble purposes, etc. They may need to, in order to do what their ideologies and agenda require; but especially, because they have to repeat such nonsense over and over to the public and their 'representatives'.
That the latter have so easily been convinced to roll over for them and become 'believers' is not much a mystery, either. Not only have they, too been spoon-fed lies and propaganda for a long time, but they too are using war both to pad their purses and to further their own dismal careers.
Those drone kid operators in Arizona sitting in a comfy chair in their air-conditioned office with their joysticks and screen killing, oops, wedding parties. And then going home at 5-oclock to take their kids to soccer practice, and get in bed with their wife every night.
I have a very close relative who fits your characterization perfectly, though the person is getting to middle age. I wonder as you do how the job can be lived with but the subject is not one that can be brought up, so everyone acts as if it were just another job.
Let's see, approaching middle age.... maybe grew up on the violent video games and became desensitized to death as it was always just on a screen? This is another sad facet... the killers are able to do what they do so far removed from the actual tragedy of the murders. "Nothin' personal.... just business.' .... but they don't even have to face the victims. I suspect they treat it as just another bit of un-reality- another game.
I know from what I've read that the job can wreak havoc on the operators. I also wonder if it could be a time bomb in that the visions of death and destruction could haunt the operator long after leaving the job and particularly when his/her own life is nearing an end. The work doesn't seem compatible with pleasant dreams.
I have no love for airmen mutilating earthly from high in the sky not seeing the smoking flesh of those below. Same with the droners. Our proxy war in Ukraine is a similar analogy: no smoldering American flesh to see just others that are not us. And like Trumpism the "others" don't matter cause they aren't us
In the movie "Patton" in one of the closing scenes reporters ask Patton about coming mechanized warfare where soldiers never see your enemy. Patton objects that such a situation never affirms anything heroic and says he is glad he will never see it.
Patton & his Dog "Willie" a Bull Terrier (named after William the Conqueror) always loved the Line in the Movie I entered their Tent @ Nite., and upon entering saw the meanest two sets of Eyes glowing/ glowering @ Me!!! lol
The primary reason that Americans are “insulated and isolated from the horrors of war,” Bill, is that it has been 160 years since the American People have had to actually, really confront and deal with those horrors right here in the United States with what may very well end up having been merely the FIRST American Civil War.
Compare that to what the Peoples, Lands, Countries, and Nations of Europe, Asia, Africa, and to a lesser degree, Latin America have had to deal with over that same stretch of time.
And compare the number of both military and non-military Americans who ~ over these sixteen decades ~ have been killed or physically and/or psychologically maimed, or become refugees, widowed or widowered, parentless or childless, jobless, homeless, and hopeless because of war to the numbers of military and non-military casualties suffered by the rest of the Planet.
And that doesn’t take into consideration the number of military and non-military Americans who have directly or indirectly benefitted quite handsomely from all the wars America has gotten into all over the Planet, particularly since the end of World War II and the birth of the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex. And who are directly or indirectly benefitting more than ever today as a result of America’s trillion dollar national “defense and security” budgets.
Compared to the rest of the Planet, how many Americans have actually suffered in any way whatsoever from all of America’s wars, as compared to the number of Americans who have not only not suffered, but have benefitted quite handsomely?
That is exactly how and why Americans are “insulated and isolated” from all those horrors.
Yes, I agree, Jeff. I mentioned this in "Podcast by George." The last time Americans truly looked closely into to the face of war was the U.S. Civil War. Otherwise, we've been isolated from its worst effects.
Reviving the draft isn't the answer. Unless the sons and daughters of all CEOs/Members of Congress/White House staff are selected first and sent to the front as infantry.
First of all, Dennis: As long as Congress keeps appropriating funds to pay for all these wars that the Executive Branch wants to get into, there is no need for any kind of formal Declaration of War.
Stop the funding, and not only will “the problem of forever war” be “mitigated”; it will be eliminated.
And how would reinstating the Draft lead to mitigation? Let alone preventing or, failing that, stopping another war from happening? It neither mitigated, prevented, nor stopped the Vietnam War.
And even if it did, a Draft is nothing but a wrapped-in-the-Flag/wiping-the-butt-with-the-Constitution form of Involuntary Servitude, aka Slavery.
When you can see the people you're about to kill -- truly see them -- and when you can discern they are not the enemy, sometimes men of conscience refuse orders to kill, as I wrote about here:
https://bracingviews.com/2021/08/02/destroying-the-village-in-vietnam/
The problem is that drone operators think they can see, but, as the saying goes, you're peering through a straw from 20 or 30 thousand feet. You don't have full "situational awareness." A wedding party may look like a small company of "terrorists."
The missiles may be precise, but our so-called intelligence is often tragically imprecise.
My mouth fell open at the children waving their arms, and stayed open to the end. Beautiful story- I will pass it on. I think more people would act with courage if they read stories of others acting with courage.
Thank you.
That is a beautiful Tale of War, Bill. One of Your very Best ever.
Martin Luther King saw clearly when he said this, "Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."
I am moved to read again MartinLuther King’s Apr 1967 (I was a junior in high school) Speech:
Beyond Vietnam - A Time to Break Silence.
Approp today and since 1981.
"Wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows." "It is not enough to say we must not wage war. It is necessary to love peace and sacrifice for it." "We have guided Missiles and Misguided men" "We must pursue peaceful end through peaceful means."
“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.” ― Martin Luther King Jr.
And it was exactly one year later after that speech ~ to the day ~ that Dr King was murdered. Think there was any connection?
A couple of the earlier comments touch on the topic of how such remote-control warfare does, or doesn’t, affect the people conducting it.
One of the more grimly hopeful things I remember reading during the Global War on Terror years, was an article about how drone operators (“pilots”) in Nevada, I believe it was, who were flying missions over Afghanistan, were falling apart mentally. One could take away the message that something in human nature was just rebelling against this total mechanization of killing – that these airmen had been so far removed from the reality of battle that they suffered from a whole new sort of trauma as they vaporized their targets half a world away.
Still, I don’t really believe it is so. The Air Force was probably just abusing them with overlong shifts, or ignoring their circadian rhythms, or something, nothing that couldn’t be got around if any commanders cared enough to figure it out.
I remember reading the obituaries in the NY Times over the years as the crew members of the two A-bomb missions over Japan died of old age. I was struck that not a single man of them, as far as I could tell, ever evinced the least pang of conscience or doubt over what they participated in. I feel simultaneous respect for and despair at the military’s success in selecting men who would carry out such a mission without ever – ever – letting a spark of humanity get in the way.
Can somebody ~ anybody ~ here at BV [awash as it is in self-righteous indignation over this whole drone thing] tell me the difference between a drone operator sitting in his or her air conditioned office pushing buttons delivering death and destruction thousands of miles away, and a B-52 crew dropping bombs from 32,000 feet or higher, as was done routinely during America’s war in Vietnam?
“B-52 Stratofortresses flew a total of nearly 114 thousand sorties over Southeast Asia between 1965 and 1973. The U.S. Air Force flew more than 5 million sorties in Vietnam over the course of the entire conflict, more than twice the number of sorties flown by the Army Air Force in World War II.
“A total of 18 B-52s were lost in combat during the Vietnam War, most as a result of surface-to-air missile (SAM) strikes over North Vietnam. Further, 12 aircraft were lost in other operational circumstances, including the two lost on July 7, 1967.” [mid-air collision] Source: https://www.vietnamwar50th.com/education/week_of_july_3_2022/ .
So after almost 114,000 sorties, a grand total of 30 B-52s were lost, or 0.000263 percent.
And beyond the B-52s, there’s this little inconvenient fact of history:
“Between 1965 and 1975, the United States and its allies dropped more than 7.5 million tons of bombs on Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia—DOUBLE THE AMOUNT DROPPED ON EUROPE AND ASIA DURING WORLD WAR II. Pound for pound, it remains the largest aerial bombardment in human history.”
Source: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/2eae918ca40a4bd7a55390bba4735cdb; EMPHASIS added. Note: This article has detailed maps showing where all these bombs were dropped.
And then there is this: “All told, the U.S. Air Force flew 5.25 million sorties over South Vietnam, North Vietnam, northern and southern Laos, and Cambodia, losing 2,251 aircraft: 1,737 to hostile action,” [or 0.000331 percent]. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War .
And after all that, America still lost that war. Just like it has every war it has gotten into since the end of World War II.
Well, dead is dead, Jeff, whether by bullet or bomb or Hellfire missile.
What's different about drone warfare is how it's sold to us. It's sold as surgical and precise, high-tech and clean, as opposed to all those messy "boots on the ground." A 2nd key difference is that we risk no troops at all. We kill at no risk to us whatsoever. Not even killed or captured aircrew due to enemy fire or malfunction. Because we kill with impunity, there's a tendency to continue to kill, irrespective of the results. And that's what we did, especially in the War on Terror, always citing progress made when there was no progress. Lots of profits made, though!
Dead is most definitely Dead, Bill. But the question wasn't about the difference between drones and "boots on the ground." It was about the difference between drone strikes and B-52 strikes.
The only difference i see between the two is that drone operators are not subject to being shot down like B-52s, and either killed or taken as POWs, as were relatively very few B-52 crew members.
Yes, that's the key difference, Jeff. A president has to risk the loss or capture of aircrews, which may give him pause. But drones are basically risk-free, as are Tomahawk cruise missiles. Remember when Trump was praised by the establishment for shooting missiles at Syria? What a brave act, right?
I think there's one more difference. B-52s, of course, are not "surgical." They don't have the image of being "clean." Whereas our drones are sold as "precision" weapons; we are told how super-accurate they are, how carefully we select targets, etc.
In sum: Drones incur no risk/no casualties and also promote the idea of "clean" warfare.
i was going to ask if the US has lost any military aircraft to enemy defensive measures since Vietnam, Bill, and was frankly very surprised to see how many it has at Wiki's "List of combat losses of United States military aircraft since the Vietnam War" at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_combat_losses_of_United_States_military_aircraft_since_the_Vietnam_War .
In any event [and please correct me if i am wrong], but i don't think B-52s were ever intended to be "surgical" or "precision" bomb delivery systems.
Not when they could "carry 84 500-pound bombs internally as well as another 24 750-pound bombs mounted on wing pylons. This gave the bomber a total of 108 bombs or 60,000 pounds of bombs to drop on the enemy.
"When flown in a pair of cells — or a group of three B-52s in formation — the bombers could leave behind a swath of destruction a mile long and a half mile wide." [ https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/this-is-how-the-b-52-rained-fire-in-vietnam/ ]
When You can leave that extent and level of destruction behind, who needs to be surgical, precise, or even nominally accurate, eh?
There were some early Doonesbury strips that looked at Nixon’s “secret” bombing of Cambodia – not a secret to the Cambodians, as one villager observes.
As I recall, the villager is shown next to (or maybe in?) a new bomb crater, shaking his fist at the B-52s as they fly home, saying he hoped those men understood the devastation they had brought. The next frame is inside the cockpit, where the crew is just making small talk about football, dinner, whatever.
I think Tom Wolfe did a pretty good job in "Jousting with Sam and Charlie" (carrier-based fighter & fighter/bomber pilots in Vietnam). "Professional detachment" ... just another day's work, fostered and insulated by speed and altitude. And attitude. "What the eyes don't see the heart doesn't grieve over." There's no difference I can see between a bombadier's targeting coordinates and someone looking at a monitor. I'm thinking the outrage really stems from the facts that (1) all the high-dollar technology in the world has yet to sanitize war enough for our sensibilities (killing only the enemy) and (2) the revulsion that a fellow American, normal as you and me, could calmly "pilot" a drone to do what drones are meant to do and go home at the end of their shift, job well done. With a murderer or serial killer it's "How could they do that?" But an everyday guy or gal knocking back Red Bulls? How far removed is anyone from doing that? It's just a job.
First of all, wdt, Thank You for citing Tom Wolfe’s “Jousting with Sam and Charlie.” Given that the last time i read anything by Wolfe was back in the early 70s and his THE ELECTRIC KOOL-AID ACID TEST, i’d forgotten how truly great and brilliant a writer he was.
And second of all: Given that the B-52s of Vietnam were based in either Guam or Thailand, my guess is that after a mission, the crews may not have been drinking Red Bull, but they definitely had some of the finest on-base living, drinking, eating, and recreation facilities/establishments in the entire US military system. So there’s another equivalency between our Drone Warriors of today and those folks back then.
Like You said about our Droners, for those folks back then, it was “just a job,” as well. Tough duty, but somebody had to do it, eh?
Jeff, as a young man, enamored with jet fighters, my favorite Yanky plane was the F-105 Republic Thunderchief. The "Thud" or "Lead Sled". I always admired its size, aggressive stance and legendary top speed at low altitudes. The F-105 could carry up to 14,000-lbs of bombs and missiles. The aircraft's offensive capabilities were sarcastically referred to as a "Triple Threat"—it could bomb you, strafe you, or fall on you.
Wiki'ing it a few weeks ago I was shocked to read that over 20,000 Thunderchief sorties were flown in Vietnam. 382 (!) aircraft were lost out of the 833-produced. 0.46%! (Or 1.9100% in comparison to your B52 statistics.) It was a 2-man crew, right? Pilot and Weapons Officer. So that's 764-airman who were killed!
And, as you say, after all that, America still lost that war.
If I recall correctly, the Thud was initially designed as a high-speed tactical nuclear strike aircraft. It was "adapted" for Vietnam. Not the easiest plane to fly. I think most were lost to ground fire in Vietnam.
Dennis: Back in 1966-67 when i was Private First Class infantryman in the 101st Airborne Division operating up in the Central Highlands close to the Cambodian border, i had two very up close and personal experiences with close tactical air support from F-105s; one of which very likely saved our Company of 120+ troops from being completely overrun and wiped out.
i also walked thru what was left of several villages that had been bombed and napalmed by F-105s or their kin because of “suspected” Viet Cong presence/activity. And i also walked thru areas of that Rain Forest Jungle that had been turned into a desert, courtesy of a B-52 strike.
And do You know Why America lost that war despite all that superior tactical and strategic air fire power and support? It is because what we were doing in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia was not merely Wrong; it was, is, and ever will be because what we were doing was totally and completely fucking EVIL. Just like every war that the US has been involved in since the end of WW II, and particularly, since the Fall of Saigon in 1975.
And New Zealand played a part in that whole Cluster Fuck.
See Part 4 of https://www.vietnamwar50th.com/assets/1/7/VW50th_Allies_Posters_11-6-19REV.pdf and https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/118263775/the-last-most-shameful-chapter-of-nzs-involvement-in-the-vietnam-war for starters.
Anyway, i’m curious: What were You doing during that period? Did You know that Kiwis were helping the Yanks keep that Domino from falling? And was there any kind of anti-war activity going on there? Have a Great day.
ps: And the percentage of F-105s lost of all produced was 46%, not 0.46%. i think You misplaced Your decimal point.
Jeff, I was a 20-some year-old student at her Majesty Queen Victoria's University in the capital city of Wellington. Blocks away from Government House. With my hair down to my arse and a pierced ear earring.
We students protested in the streets of Wellington and earned a reputation of being traitors and the scum of the earth. Only 8% of Kiwi's went to university at that time. A tough exam being the only way to get in - and 100% government paid. To be a university student was to be branded as an entitled prick at that time! Not a badge of honour.* At parties (booze-ups) I remember telling other party goers I was a bricklayer. Not wanting to face the insults of being a uni-arsehole!
Kiwi's were gung-ho Yank boot lickers in that period because they believed the Yanks had saved them from being overrun by the yellow hoards in WW2. And of course, we were fighting the commie's taking over the World. Keeping the Domino's from falling.
Thanks for those two links - sad reading
"The New Zealanders had the highest ratio of fatal casualties to participants at 2.18 percent, with the Americans a very close second at 2.15 percent."
And sadly in this current Ukraine conflict the majority of Kiwis have drunk the Yank KOOLAID and think Putin is Hitler, and the Yanks proxy war for regime change in Russia is actually all about preserving democracy in the Ukraine. My letters to the editor are never published. And my comments on social media disappear within minutes. I don't talk to Kiwis about this subject. Avoid it like the plague.
*Do you know what the “Tall Poppy Syndrome” is? It's a term used to describe the culture of criticizing, resenting, and undermining the success and ambition of other people. The term is prevalently used in Australia and New Zealand and refers to the idea of cutting a tall poppy to size, so that it doesn’t stand out amongst the rest. Your personal success is criticized and ridiculed by your peers.
*Fear of making peers uncomfortable with your success.
*Not pursuing goals in order to not stand out from the pack.
*Talking down your achievements to others and to yourself (negative self-talk).
*Withholding from celebrating success.
*Hesitating to share new ideas.
Interesting times, eh? Did New Zealand have a Draft, or was Y'All's military an All- Volunteer Force?
This is such an important article even as we participate in the proxy war in Ukraine, using the Ukrainians as we would drones to go fight those Russians. However, being that drone operator does come with the hazard of moral injury, survivor guilt. All we need to do is ask Daniel Hale and his cohorts. But the issue is that we can fight and still have time for our Bud Light and the NFL on Sunday. Then after drones comes an AI soldier, until they turn the guns on us.
Well, maybe not Bud Light. :-) Coors Light.
oops I guess you are right :)
Recent incidents in which Russian jets 'interfered with' U.S. drones raises for me another issue w/r/t drone usage. In the first incident, the American drone was flying over the Black Sea.. The more recent incident occurred over Syrian airspace. Given that these drones are often armed, they are instruments of American military force, operated by Americans.
What are American military forces doing in Ukraine, and over the Black Sea? This was supposed to be a proxy war (though they don't use that term directly)- fought by Ukrainians against 'our enemy', Russia. And what of Syria?
The point is that this is not only a way to sanitize or make disappear the wars we initiate and prosecute around the globe; but also a form of mission creep whereby the chances of direct war with Russia, etc. increase. It would not be much of an additional step in such circumstances for American pilots to deliver and fly the F-16s authorized for Ukraine. Do the decision makers really not understand that Russia is not going to pretend the U.S. isn't at war with it?
Strangely, we are pretending we're not at war with Russia. I don't think the Russians are also pretending. It's not make-believe for them.
We are the 800 pound gorilla in the joke: where does an 800 pound gorilla sleep...anywhere it wants to. To our leadership we are righteous in all that we do and wherever we do it. Good must pursue and eliminate evil wherever it may be found. This sounds childish but I'm convinced those in power belief it.
Very possibly, yes, they (the neocons in foreign policy, for example) may have actually convinced themselves to 'believe' those myths of American Exceptionalism, noble purposes, etc. They may need to, in order to do what their ideologies and agenda require; but especially, because they have to repeat such nonsense over and over to the public and their 'representatives'.
That the latter have so easily been convinced to roll over for them and become 'believers' is not much a mystery, either. Not only have they, too been spoon-fed lies and propaganda for a long time, but they too are using war both to pad their purses and to further their own dismal careers.
The sickest thought for me:
Those drone kid operators in Arizona sitting in a comfy chair in their air-conditioned office with their joysticks and screen killing, oops, wedding parties. And then going home at 5-oclock to take their kids to soccer practice, and get in bed with their wife every night.
I have a very close relative who fits your characterization perfectly, though the person is getting to middle age. I wonder as you do how the job can be lived with but the subject is not one that can be brought up, so everyone acts as if it were just another job.
Let's see, approaching middle age.... maybe grew up on the violent video games and became desensitized to death as it was always just on a screen? This is another sad facet... the killers are able to do what they do so far removed from the actual tragedy of the murders. "Nothin' personal.... just business.' .... but they don't even have to face the victims. I suspect they treat it as just another bit of un-reality- another game.
I know from what I've read that the job can wreak havoc on the operators. I also wonder if it could be a time bomb in that the visions of death and destruction could haunt the operator long after leaving the job and particularly when his/her own life is nearing an end. The work doesn't seem compatible with pleasant dreams.
I have no love for airmen mutilating earthly from high in the sky not seeing the smoking flesh of those below. Same with the droners. Our proxy war in Ukraine is a similar analogy: no smoldering American flesh to see just others that are not us. And like Trumpism the "others" don't matter cause they aren't us
In the movie "Patton" in one of the closing scenes reporters ask Patton about coming mechanized warfare where soldiers never see your enemy. Patton objects that such a situation never affirms anything heroic and says he is glad he will never see it.
Patton & his Dog "Willie" a Bull Terrier (named after William the Conqueror) always loved the Line in the Movie I entered their Tent @ Nite., and upon entering saw the meanest two sets of Eyes glowing/ glowering @ Me!!! lol
The primary reason that Americans are “insulated and isolated from the horrors of war,” Bill, is that it has been 160 years since the American People have had to actually, really confront and deal with those horrors right here in the United States with what may very well end up having been merely the FIRST American Civil War.
Compare that to what the Peoples, Lands, Countries, and Nations of Europe, Asia, Africa, and to a lesser degree, Latin America have had to deal with over that same stretch of time.
And compare the number of both military and non-military Americans who ~ over these sixteen decades ~ have been killed or physically and/or psychologically maimed, or become refugees, widowed or widowered, parentless or childless, jobless, homeless, and hopeless because of war to the numbers of military and non-military casualties suffered by the rest of the Planet.
And that doesn’t take into consideration the number of military and non-military Americans who have directly or indirectly benefitted quite handsomely from all the wars America has gotten into all over the Planet, particularly since the end of World War II and the birth of the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex. And who are directly or indirectly benefitting more than ever today as a result of America’s trillion dollar national “defense and security” budgets.
Compared to the rest of the Planet, how many Americans have actually suffered in any way whatsoever from all of America’s wars, as compared to the number of Americans who have not only not suffered, but have benefitted quite handsomely?
That is exactly how and why Americans are “insulated and isolated” from all those horrors.
Yes, I agree, Jeff. I mentioned this in "Podcast by George." The last time Americans truly looked closely into to the face of war was the U.S. Civil War. Otherwise, we've been isolated from its worst effects.
Bill and Jeff...would this help mitigate the problem of forever war you think?
*Congress has to not shirk its duty to declare war.
*Reinstitute the draft.
Reviving the draft isn't the answer. Unless the sons and daughters of all CEOs/Members of Congress/White House staff are selected first and sent to the front as infantry.
And that's not going to happen.
First of all, Dennis: As long as Congress keeps appropriating funds to pay for all these wars that the Executive Branch wants to get into, there is no need for any kind of formal Declaration of War.
Stop the funding, and not only will “the problem of forever war” be “mitigated”; it will be eliminated.
And how would reinstating the Draft lead to mitigation? Let alone preventing or, failing that, stopping another war from happening? It neither mitigated, prevented, nor stopped the Vietnam War.
And even if it did, a Draft is nothing but a wrapped-in-the-Flag/wiping-the-butt-with-the-Constitution form of Involuntary Servitude, aka Slavery.