Every time my local rag, "The Hamilton Spectator" prints a story about a local soldier serving in Afghanistan they seem to always ask if they support "the mission" over there, and invariably, the soldiers say that yes indeed they do.
My response to that is that I'm not going to change my mind about Canada in Afghanistan just because some interviewed soldier says that they are in complete accord with what we're doing there. Especially if they don't explain why they support it AT ALL. Sometimes they'll add some little touch about building schools, sending girls to school, and etc., but that's not enough for me either.
You could look into the eyes of a hundred children going to school and think "it's worth it." You could then look into the eyes of a hundred children, some dead, others wounded, others shattered by the deaths of their loved ones in a NATO air-strike and think "it's not worth it."
But I wonder whether an CF personnel feel obliged to say they support the mission when they talk to the media, because to criticize it would lead to trouble? Then, these meaningless assertions of agreement get to become fodder for the propaganda wars back home.
Obviously, there are also soldiers who are going to want to "see the job done" because their comrades died in the effort. But that's no reason for other people to vote for us staying.
I suppose, finally, that I could go to some pro-war military blogs and get some greater detailed accounts of their support for the mission, but in all honesty, I hate pro-war blogs, and I'm pretty sure it's all a fucking waste of time. If the pro-war mainstream media can't find someone to say something coherently and concisely after eight years of trying (and I've done some looking) then why should I descend into one of those internet snake-pits to read tiresome dirges about the global-Islamo-fascist conspiracy?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You're right, the "I support the mission" quotes are meaningless.
Any soldier currently serving in Afghanistan would be foolish to tell journalists he/she does not support the mission. I'm sure the consequences of saying so would be unpleasant, starting with a dramatic chill in relations with all co-workers - some because they support the mission, others because they don't want superiors to think they share that "unpatriotic" viewpoint.
I've never been in the military, but I've been in plenty of workplace situations where people get the cold shoulder or worse for expressing a viewpoint different from the boss's. I can only imagine how much worse the reaction would be in a setting where obeying orders and toeing the line is pretty much the most important thing all the time.
Yeah. We're to believe that their proximity and actual involvement ought to give their views some merit, but that has to be weighed against numerous things, including whether or not they're free to speak their minds.
If there's a chill just among co-workers for dissing the job amongst themselves, imagine the military and its relationship with the press.
Post a Comment