|
|||
A warrior's main goal is to prove his courage; he seeks glory. A soldier is a professional whose job is to advance the political aims of his nation; his goal is to win with the least cost to his own side. Within those parameters, all other things being equal he'll also choose a course which minimizes unnecessary losses to the other side -- but minimizing his own losses is more important. A good soldier isn't trying to prove his bravery or get medals or get his name in the newspapers. A good soldier doesn't seek a glorious death. A good soldier has a job to do; he does it quickly and professionally, and then returns to the barracks and trains for the next mission. To a warrior, a soldier looks, at the least, uncouth; at the most, cowardly. That isn't true, and soldiers can be extremely brave. To a warrior, the way you fight is with set piece battles. The two sides line up, they all stand and yell at the enemies and wave their weapons in the air, and then charge each other. That's fine if both sides play that way. Problem is that to a soldier that's foolishness; what he wants to do is to slaughter the enemy with a minimum of fuss; if his enemy is lined up that way he'll call in an airstrike. This isn't cowardice, it's simply efficiency. But to a warrior this is very frustrating; there's no opportunity to show courage; all the warriors can do is to die for their country. ("Nobody ever won a war by dying for his country.") So while we acknowledge the Taliban's invitation, we must gratefully decline. All other things being equal, we'd rather win the war. There isn't any place for a warrior on a 21st century battlefield. (discussion in progress) |