As Independence Day is fast approaching, his words about freedom are playing over and over in my head.
Jennifer Milele is a dear friend who I met at networking event. Jennifer's personality, her work ethics, and love of political satire are attributes that I admired instantly. Our friendship grew deeper when I hired her for several graphic jobs. Now we interact several times a week while “working on the paper.” Jennifer is also a night owl like me and has answered her phone at 3:00am to hear me read a blog post. She has weighed in on many blog posts that never made it to print or the Internet over the years.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - roger nowosielski
I was hoping you were going to be less naive than a twenty-year old. Don't worry though, I'm not going to make that mistake again.
27 - Dr Dreadful
No one has ever "picked apart" my arguments here.
By my last count there are at least four Dans commenting semi-regularly here, but if you're the Dan I think you are, then, yes, we have - in some depth, and you have reciprocated.
I wouldn't go so far as to say Tyler's views are wrong-headed, although they are simplistic. Doubtless they will become somewhat more nuanced as he progresses in his military career - especially if he sees some front-line action.
Besides, I think Marines are trained to be reticent when asked about their jobs, and there is also a strong ésprit de corps which makes them disinclined to speak of the service in a way that might smack of disloyalty to their comrades.
So the opinions expressed by Tyler here may not exactly be complete. They do have a certain parroted quality.
28 - Dan
"...if you're the Dan I think you are, then yes, we have-in some depth..."
If you define "picked apart" as identifying a logical fallacy, or some argumentative inconsistency, then no, you haven't. I would have remembered--and been grateful for the gained perspective.
Descriptors of ridicule such as "simplistic", "parroted", "naive", or lacking "nuance" do nothing to diminish the veracity of Tylers views. Nor are they particularly persuasive when countered with a view of such obvious nuance and carefully considered opinion as:
"And the reason Americans were "attacked" on their soil is because Americans are constantly attacking others in their own countries. What the United States experienced on 9/11 is a fraction of what many parts of the world have experienced on a near-daily basis at the hands of America and America's client states."---Jordan Richardson
29 - Zedd
Genma,
I am also a mom. My husband was a Marine. I am not sure what that has to do with having a dialogue on the lucidity of this young man's conclusions. I don't understand what freedoms he is fighting for, to the extent of possibly loosing his life. No bashing, on spitting. What freedom is at stake here? The Iranians are trying to take our freedom? The Afghans? Who???
What you and I know is that the young are taken into the military and brainwashed with propaganda so that they eagerly offer their lives for what may or may not be a legitimate cause. If war had to be fought be men over forty, there would be far less wars because few would buy into the rhetoric.
Dan,
What logic have you offered us?
30 - Zedd
roger,
I was thinking over The Social Contract and I think I finally understand how Rousseau believed the "shaping" of the general will would come about. He was saying that myths (myth makers) would serve as a steering mechanism for the people.
The more I look at American "values", the more I believe he was on to something. America is steered not just by propaganda but the imagery that has been conjured up, which rivals religious imagery (in it's sanctity and mysterious power and value). The mythology steers the will of the public.
On this thread the confusing element is not the young man's naivety. It is the immense gulf between two lucidly related ideas that are however presented as one clear notion. I am proposing that what Doc, and yourself see as the missing piece is easily filled in if you know the myth.
I am not sure if I am being clear or not.
The myths says we are freedom "personified". I am guessing the evil doers (who want to crush our freedom)are so because they don't fit the images of good in the myth. The are the wrong religion, wrong language, wrong complexion, wrong clothes, they ride the wrong animals on the wrong terrain, etc). One doesn't have to think too hard to conclude that fighting them is fighting on behalf of freedom.
31 - Dan
zedd, elements of islamic extremism in Iraq and Afghanistan don't "take our freedom" only because they're not capable of doing so. Young men like Tyler and many older men over 40 prevent them from becoming capable.
The difference between sharia law and what we experience in this country is the extent freedom would be lost. Arguably some freedom has already been lost. The inconvienience of heightened security in airports for example.
Men like Tyler aren't "taken into the military" as a result of propaganda "brainwashing", they volunteer to join, usually with proper counsel from people who are concerned with their well being.
None eagerly "offer their lives". Instead they assume a level of risk acceptable to them that enables them to serve a national military cause that they believe to be legitimate and noble.
32 - roger nowosielski
Very cool insight, Zedd. It is part of the ethos, so of course brainwashing and naivete fall short of the mark.
Got to think about it.
33 - roger nowosielski
Dan is complaining about his loss of freedom because there are others who want to do him in. Interesting how freedom gets defined here by other people's presumed intent. Hence the obvious solution - eliminate all those who would interfere with Dan's lifestyle, keep 'em all at bay. Or jail 'em if you must and throw away the key.
There is of course an obvious solution for people like Dan - to find their own cocoon and stay there. Or getting a gun and start shooting.
34 - Dan
If I sound like I complain about a loss of freedom (as minor as it is so far) it is because I experience a loss of freedom. Nothing to do with "other peoples presumed intent". Of course one needn't presume the intent of other people when they so explicitly declare it.
Those "others" who want to "do me in" also want to do you in. finding a cocoon or getting a gun would be a logical option if not for the valiant efforts of guys like Tyler.
I suppose your solution would be submission.
35 - Zedd
Interesting how freedom gets defined here by other people's presumed intent
A puzzle.
Dan,
Hating what we do is not the same as hating freedom. Everything that we do does not represent freedom. Its just what we do (could be nice or mean, good or bad). Opposing America or America's behvior is not synonymous with opposing freedom.
36 - Zedd
Dan, @35
So you are not really talking about freedom, you are simply talking about survival. You are saying that these people want to kill you and this young man is going out to keep them from doing so.
Is this a correction or a retraction from the discussion on freedom?
37 - roger nowosielski
"I suppose your solution would be submission."
Don't be ridiculous. Of course I believe in self-defense. I just don't live in fear.
As for terrorist attacks, they're trying to do to us what we're doing to them. The last I've heard, we're on their soil.
38 - Clavos
I wonder how many who enlist in the military in time of war are thrill seeking?
I knew a few in Nam.
39 - caitlin hoffman
I understand freedom of speech and i know you have the right but i also have a right to defend my husband who cant defend himself right now because he is off helping ppl in Afghanistan and i get that you want to disscus things but ppl should do it more constructive i do take it as a personal attack when ppl say "thanks for nothing pal" and "it makes me wanna throw up" this is a personal attack that had nothing to do with politics especially the throw up part i may not be your Harvard Graduate or have a way with words but i have a heart and so does tyler and his family tyler never signed up to die for anyone and never signed up to kill anyone he signed up to help not to harm tyler called the other day and asked us to send hard candy to give to the afghan children he isnt evil and he wouldnt hurt a fly unless he had to and another thing you may have disagreed with tyler on the "dont ask dont tell" but he most def was NOT bashing on gays its for their safety bcuz everyone in this world isnt good ppl some ppl are evil but he was by no means being disrestpectful but thanks for your apologies and realizing that we do read this to bcuz were proud you may not support this war and i dont have the time to explain everything about this war but even if you dont support the war you should still support the troops God Bless yall and please keep my husband in your prayers sincerly, Mrs.Hoffman!
40 - caitlin hoffman
And also thanks for the ones supporting him and all of the rest of them!
41 - pablo
40 Caitlin
The war is illegal under both us law and international law, its that simple. Your husband is not defening my freedom, and he is engaged in either assisting others murder other human beings or doing so himself, he has only my contempt.
He is not defending my freedom in ANY sense of the word, and I suggest again that since he SWORE to uphold and defend the constitution of the united states, that he read it, and abide by it. Only congress can wage war, not the exectutive, this is very clear, if you like I would be glad to cite you the article and clause.
42 - STM
Anyone who thinks this is an illegal war should watch re-runs of innocent people being killed horribly by jets being flown into skyscrapers, and New York firemen running into buildings they knew they might never get out of.
How quickly we forget. If the Taliban and their mates in al-Qaeda had their way, there wouldn't be any free speech; not a simplistic notion, but fact.
If America and its allies pull out now, the way the thought process goes in the arab world and Afghanistan, they'll be regarded as weak, paper tigers and that will open the door for more atrocities. I know how that thought process around supposed loss of face works ... I lived in Iraq as a kid.
And on Iraq, most Iraqis who survived Saddam and the invasion thought of the US and its allies as liberators; it was the handling of the "peace" by the US that have caused the subsequent problems, not the invasion itself.
If you think Iraqis weren't glad to get rid of Saddam Hussein, an Arab version of Stalin with a bit of Adolf Hitler thrown in, think again ... they were.
It all went pear-shaped about the time small-town-America reservist correctional officers were left in charge of Abu Ghraib (one of the most sensitive military jobs of all time) and started posting up their Baghdad holiday snaps for everyone to see. Whoever put them into that job and thought it would be a idea deserves to be strung up by the short and curlies.
I'm with Caitlin: if we just stand around waving flowers at these lunatics, they'll just keep doing what they do, only twice as hard.
No one in their right mind wants that war to continue (or to have to engage in it in the first place), but if engage in a counter-insurgency like this (very different to Vietnam), the only way out is to stay the course.
It's a long-term strategy, not a shoot-em-up and let's get out of here thing.
As for thrill-seekers, I'm certain they'll be dispelled of the idea that it's all a bit of fun the moment someone starts taking potshots at them.
I'm not sure we should giving the soldiers a hard time here, either, no matter what your view.
Failures in US foreign policy are one thing; heaping shit on people doing what they're told is another.
43 - Alan Kurtz
Initially I agreed (comment #5) with El Bicho that Lance Corporal Hoffman "sounds extremely young and naive." Then Zedd (#7) offered an alternative explanation, faulting author Genma Holmes for ignoring "the effective manner in which the military brainwashes the young to die for platitudes." Later Zedd (#30) reiterated, "What you and I know is that the young are taken into the military and brainwashed with propaganda so that they eagerly offer their lives for what may or may not be a legitimate cause."
This sheds an entirely different light on Lance Corporal Hoffman. Among our armed forces, it's widely accepted that the USMC is the most gung ho. If any branch engages in brainwashing, it's most likely the Marines. That doesn't mean Tyler wasn't naive when he enlisted, but his present mindset probably goes way beyond naiveté. Add to that his avowed Christian missionary zeal, and we've got a regular Manchurian Candidate on our hands.
Equally interesting is the contagious nature of Tyler's brainwashing, which has plainly infected his bride. In comment #10, Caitlin Hoffman advises: "you should read more about whats going on there germ warfare nuclear warfare get a clue you rude ppl." In #14, she offers: "the reason we had the fort hood incedent is bcuz the president this [thinks] its politically incorrect to assume things. but that was wrong bcuz that wasnt assuming. he [the shooter] warned ppl but yet the military couldnt do anything bcuz the president is the boss." She added: "yall also have no clue what the military knows about that afghanistan and iraq have tried to do to us on our soil and our military stopped it. you wouldnt know about what that is and im not allowed to tell you those things."
Holy cover-up, Batman. Germ warfare! Nuclear warfare! President Obama responsible for the Fort Hood massacre! Afghans and Iraqis trying to attack us on our own soil and our military stopped it! And why has the media (including Fox) reported none of this bunker-busting news? "im not allowed to tell you those things."
What she is allowed to tell us is that (comment #40) "tyler never signed up to die for anyone and never signed up to kill anyone. he signed up to help not to harm." This is clearly a cover story. After all, the Marine Corps is not the Peace Corps. But, as Caitlin says, "i dont have the time to explain everything about this war. but even if you dont support the war you should still support the troops."
I've never understood that distinction. We heard it during Vietnam, and its' been revived for every harebrained conflict since. It's become such a cliché that nobody questions it. But, damn it, the troops are the war. In the '60s, there was a famous antiwar poster that said, "What If They Gave a War and Nobody Came?" The answer is obvious. There would be no war.
44 - roger nowosielski
They're doing a real job on the American people, especially the young. Most of them are barely out of high school and we're making toy soldiers out of them.
Zedd is right. We don't only have the Christian Right to contend with; misguided patriotism is the religion of the rest.
Heck of a way to celebrate the Independence Day by a nation of dumb fucks.
45 - Clavos
As for thrill-seekers, I'm certain they'll be dispelled of the idea that it's all a bit of fun the moment someone starts taking potshots at them.
You missed my point, Stan. I was talking about those who are in it for the opportunities to kill without legal consequence.
They exist. In greater numbers than the DoD cares to admit.
46 - STM
Serious, Clav? I know there are psychos but I'd have thought in small numbers.
Did you encounter that kind of "thrill-seeker"???
47 - STM
You're up early BTW. Midsummer over there and nice and warm down on the water?
48 - Clavos
Yep. In the final stages of prep for a two week cruise in the Berry Islands of the Bahamas, departing Tuesday morning at about 4 AM.
49 - STM
Sounds pretty good to me.
I can't get over the idea that someone is just hopping on a boat and going to ... the Bahamas.
I know it's just a hop, skip and a jump from Miami, but it does sound pretty exotic when you're stuck down here in the South Pacific :)
50 - STM
I just had a look on the map too. Looks like it could be a lot of fun.
51 - caitlin hoffman
ok you know i shouldnt have said it was the presidents fault its others fault to but i was very aggravated at the time and spoke irrational i apologize for makin judgement but i can assure you im not brainwashed, there is alot of things that go on here and over there that i cant speak of and tyler was 18 when he joined so of course he was young but he believe he was helping he isnt a thrill seeker and you may not know him but he wouldnt kill a person if he didnt have to and not everybody over there kills ppl there are bad ppl over there but there are also good ppl tyler is there protecting the good ppl from the bad, there is a man who serves them tea in afghanistan bcuz he supports the troops and wants to thank them for protecting him and his family the good ppl over there love them, and he isnt killing innocent ppl and he hasnt killed anyone so far he is protecting ppl over there and im not saying i agree or disagree with the war but i know tyler is helping ppl and i support him and im proud of him our govt llikes to worry about protecting others and i believer thats what were doing over there now and he does fight the bad guys so you dont have to but could you for a min think about if this was your son or your husband or your grandchild or nephew or brother bcuz you would wanna defend your family member im not here to argue or call names and i shouldnt have called you rude and ingrateful but i was very upset at the time you have to understand how upsetting it was to see all bad comments and no good ones but now that i see some ppl put great comments it makes me feel alot better and for the ppl who are critizing the way ppl talk saying its not your its your're what is the point in that i thought this was political that doesnt sound very political to me mabey you dont support tyler or the troops and thats sad but tyler isnt here to please everyone and he could never do that if he tried the point im getting at is think about others before you speak and also tyler
52 - caitlin hoffman
doesnt control what ppl do over here he didnt let the radicals and jihad over here to shoot ppl so who did? it wasnt him and the point he is over there for it to try and keep the bad guys over there and not letting them come to america and kill and they cant control everyone its impossible
53 - Zedd
caitlin,
Most of what everyone is saying to you is, the situation is a lot more complicated. We are not the good guys and everyone we are fighting are not bad guys.
Also, it would be difficult to get people to want to give their lives if you tell them that they are fighting for murky reasons with an enemy that may have every reason to hate us, in a complex, ancient and desolate country that has caused one great nation after another to crumble; where the enemy is virtually impossible to reach by modern means. No one would be so eager to fight. What happens is that they are told that they are fighting for our freedom. That is nice and tidy (good guys vs bad guys), something that all Americans understand.
54 - Zedd
Clavos @39
I am sure some are. They are barely out of boyhood. They just left their cul de sacs and reveling with their buds, their greatest adventures being out running the cops in their mustangs and beating the monster in a video game. They know very little about anything and are looking for something bigger than themselves.
Some are angry, some have nowhere to go and off course the most frightening are those that are simply emotionally unstable and are looking for a violent outlet.
Isolate these young men and talk to them about honor and glory, freedom and right and you end up with killing machines. Socrates says they are a necessity.
55 - Alan Kurtz
Somehow it always gets back to Socrates. The original brainwasher.
56 - Zedd
Funny!!
57 - Dr Dreadful
Descriptors of ridicule such as "simplistic", "parroted", "naive", or lacking "nuance" do nothing to diminish the veracity of Tylers views.
Dan, I'm sure Tyler's views are absolutely genuine, and I did not intend any ridicule by my use of the phrases "parroted" and "lacking nuance" - I was simply calling it as I saw it.
As far as Jordan's opinion goes, it at least offers a concrete theory as to why America is a terrorist target. You're surely not suggesting that 9/11 happened for no reason whatsoever? Why do you think it happened - they were bored and it was something to do?
58 - Alan Kurtz
Bringing 9/11 into this discussion, as Dr Dreadful (#57) just did, is redolent of Godwin's Law, which I will now restate as Alan's Law: "As an online discussion of the War in Afghanistan grows longer, the probability of justification involving 9/11 approaches 1." Correct me if I'm wrong, but of the 19 al-Qaeda terrorists who hijacked four commercial airliners that fateful day, 15 were Saudis, 2 hailed from the UAR, one was Lebanese, and ringleader Mohamed Atta was Egyptian. Overall responsibility for the attack was immediately affixed to al-Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden (another Saudi) and Ayman al-Zawahiri (another Egyptian). None of these 21 villains was Afghani.
However, since al-Qaeda enjoyed the Taliban's protection in making Afghanistan its base of operations, a U.S.-led coalition launched Operation Enduring Freedom 26 days after 9/11. Airstrikes instantly destroyed al-Qaeda training camps and otherwise disrupted their safe haven. Invading coalition armies soon forced al-Qaeda to seek refuge in mountain caves, and quickly ousted the Taliban as well. Three months after 9/11, the last cave complex was overrun, and al-Qaeda leadership slipped away into tribal areas of Pakistan.
In the ensuing years, the Taliban has reemerged, although not as the national government and minus ties to al-Qaeda. U.S. military intelligence estimates that fewer than 100 al-Qaeda fighters remain in Afghanistan.
Nevertheless, Operation Enduring Freedom is now 8½ years old and ought to be renamed Operation Enduring Warfare. When President George W. Bush warned five days after 9/11, "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a while," he wasn't kidding.
The bottom line is that our War in Afghanistan ceased long ago to have anything to do with 9/11.
59 - El Bicho
"Correct me if I'm wrong"
You're wrong about Dreadful bringing 9/11 into the discussion. I know your busy naming things after yourself but if you look he was responding to Dan who was responding to Jordan.
Maybe Alan's Law should be "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of someone not properly identifying what has taken place approaches."
60 - El Bicho
caitlin, it would be helpful if you used periods and paragraph breaks. Your word blobs are difficult to read.
I am guessing you are even younger than he from what I can make out. No doubt he is proud to have a wife who supports and defends his so completely. I hope he and all our forces there return safely from that mess.
61 - Alan Kurtz
El Bicho (#59), you are such a sourpuss. But tell me, how did you get from comment #2 ("reading his words makes me want to throw up") to #60 ("I hope he and all our forces there return safely from that mess") in the space of two days? Evidently the emetic of Tyler's words had such a tonic effect that you can now stomach the thought of his safe return, which you failed to mention in comment #2.
62 - El Bicho
Alan, you appear once again to be suffering from Alan's Law, though your reinforce of it proves it is now properly defined.
Why would being put off by his statements, which I still am, somehow negate my hope that he returns home safely? I failed to mention the sun in Comment #2. Does that mean it doesn't exist as well?
63 - Dr Dreadful
Bringing 9/11 into this discussion, as Dr Dreadful (#57) just did, is redolent of Godwin's Law
...What?!???
64 - Alan Kurtz
Honestly, El Bicho, a simple apology to Mrs. Hoffman for your cruelty in comment #2 would suffice. Squirming around and playing word games about how you "failed to mention the sun" is beneath even the marginal dignity of Blogcritics.
65 - El Bicho
Odd that you would find the comment cruel now, which it wasn't, after previously agreeing with part of it. I am sure it has nothing to do with my pointing out the flaws in your comments.
Also, I wasn't aware you couldn't take the playful teasing of #59. Does sitting on your high horse make you more sensitive?
66 - Genma Holmes
Happy Fourth of July. We have many men and women from all backgrounds who are serving in the military. Thank you!
67 - Alan Kurtz
Assuming that he's still unscathed, this must be a happy 4th of July for Lance Corporal Hoffman. In the interview, he complained that serving "makes it harder to be an effective witness for Jesus Christ because the military has become a very secular environment with so many restrictions." His loyal wife Caitlin expanded this point in comment #12, saying "the military is strict he cant even shoot if he thinks he is in danger he pretty much has to get permission." In comment #14, she added, "the military gets stricter everyday they are limited to doing certain things bcuz of the rules and they dont make the rules so get that correct."
Now comes news that General David Petraeus, taking command of coalition forces in Afghanistan, pledged today at NATO headquarters in Kabul to review the rules under which our soldiers fight, "to determine where refinements might be needed." In a memo to his troops, Petraeus wrote, "Protecting those we are here to help nonetheless does require killing, capturing or turning the insurgents. We will not shrink from that."
This suggests that Lance Corporal Hoffman will soon be able to shoot people if he thinks he is in danger without getting permission, making it easier to be an effective witness for Jesus Christ. No doubt Tyler and Caitlin, and their champion Genma Holmes, will be pleased by this development, but to me it seems like a step in the wrong direction. Relaxing the chain of command can only result in more death all around, not less.
This July 4th makes me sad and angry at the way in which the military has hijacked our celebration of national independence, which was won through a war of incredible hardship fought by civilians on their homeland, not professional soldiers overseas, in order to free us from a foreign-controlled and unrepresentative government. And here we are, 234 years later, waging permanent wars far from home in order to prop up (you guessed it) foreign-controlled and unrepresentative governments. The American revolutionists wouldn't recognize the country we have become, and probably wouldn't even want to live here.
68 - roger nowosielski
You said it, Alan. And don't forget, Petraeus has blessings from the White House.
69 - Genma Holmes
Alan,
Thanks for reading this over and over and over and over. Your responses look longer than my original post. I have another one I am posting about those who suffer sadness on the 4th for various reasons. I am going to champion you to make sure it gets maximum exposure. You are spending so much time on here analyzing a solider who serves, I hope you got a chance to enjoy the fireworks...oh, wait, you probably thought the fireworks going off was someone trying to hijack you and carry up off to a foreign country.
70 - Dan
"This suggests that Lance Corporal Hoffman will soon be able to shoot people if he thinks he is in danger without getting permission, making it easier to be an effective witness for Jesus Christ"---Alan Kurtz
In this comment Alan conflates restrictions placed on US marines on the free exercise of their Christian faith with rules of combative engagement with the enemy that are thought to be too restrictive.
Alan is either unable to recognize fundamental distinctions or he is being intentionally dishonest. Either way, the prudent thing would be to consider his view accordingly.
Dr. D #57, Others using those terms were calling it as they see it as well. My only observation was that that type of critisism has no substance.
That 9-11 didn't happen without provocation is obvious. To examine the totality of historical provocation and response and then conclude that they're bad and we're good is the point of contention.
In that respect, Jordans "concrete theory" is no more complex or nuanced than Tylers.
71 - roger nowosielski
"Welcome to the Crusades experience, another holy war.
Onward, Christian soldiers!"
That's the essence of Dan's "argument."
72 - Dr Dreadful
To examine the totality of historical provocation and response and then conclude that they're bad and we're good is the point of contention.
In that respect, Jordans "concrete theory" is no more complex or nuanced than Tylers.
I beg to differ. Tyler's "theory" is not a theory at all. Jordan's has nuance because he empathises with the other side and goes beyond the meme of "us good, them bad".
I would hope that Cpl. Hoffman does as well: you can't be an effective warrior without knowing something of how your enemy thinks.
But he is only doing his duty by supplying such cliché non-answers as "freedom isn't free" and "if we don't fight them over there, we'll have to fight them here". A Marine isn't supposed to offer his own opinion to an outsider. I'm not offended by this interview, as some commenters were. I would have expected nothing else.
73 - roger nowosielski
I don't think Dan is capable of nuance. But then again, nuance is a dirty word as far as conservatives are concerned.
74 - roger nowosielski
"Alan is either unable to recognize fundamental distinctions or he is being intentionally dishonest."
Alan's writings may be satirical at times, but intellectual dishonesty has never been his fault.
You're confusing intellectual honesty with bluntness.
No question that rednecks are "intellectually honest." But there is nothing intellectual about their views.
75 - Dan
The essence of your argument, roger, seems to be placing inappropriate quotation marks around incoherent references to historical conquests and lyrical refrain.
Is it your goal to be the most frequent contributor to the comments section regardless of whether your overall contribution is cheapened by a void of substantive interaction.