First point:
the legendary “bullet-proof” hero: a constructed reality (like the salesman, like the returned hero)
Soldiers are encouraged to see themselves as “bullet proof” heroes in order to perform heroic feats and endanger their lives in dangerous situations. As one Sapper says he does not know if it is an “army thing” or a “bloke thing” or wonders about the talk of “love and brotherhood” but you just want to finish the job off.”
The illusion of invincibility is a protective device: As Trooper Anthony McKenzie says, they have been conditioned to believe that they are “bulletproof”. He says, “if you didn’t think you were bulletproof you wouldn’t run towards danger’.
Such soldiers are trained and reprogrammed to run towards, rather than from, danger. (Trooper Mark Donaldson, who was awarded the VC medal, is the typical hero-soldier who braves danger, runs towards “incoming bullets”, and towards the insurgents to provide a protective shield for his mates.)
Frequently, the myth of the “bullet proof hero” sets the soldier up for failure, especially in times when they feel that they have been “shit scared” instead of heroic. In other words, the more higher the expectation, the more illusory the goals, the greater the fall, and the greater the chance of disappointment and failure. (Biff and Willy, Uncle Peter)
Second point:
altered realities owing to first-hand experience and prolonged stress (stress reconditions / rewires the brain)
Owing to a heightened sense of anxiety and prolonged exposure to stress, war veterans have become conditioned to a life-and-death reality. This alters their sensitivities, reactions and responses.
Sapper Tom Williams who served in the Afghanistan war, says that three days of intense bombing “knocked his psyche off balance”. He notes that he became “scared shitless” and “it changed things”. Certainly what changed was the image of the bullet-proof hero. Soldiers are not meant to be scared. (“The fight for survival takes over everything.”)
Many return home with post-traumatic stress disorder, conditioned to see danger in everyday situations.
Trooper Paul Clemence who returned from the Afghanistan war in 2010, found it difficult to readjust to a “normal” world and “normal” every day activities.
For Trooper Paul Clemence, a handbag on a table can “totally freak him out”; so, too, does a van parked in an alleyway. A plastic bag rustling in the wind gives him a panic attack. Antiseptic odours also remind him of the morgue.
As former Major John Cantwell says, the past “invades my consciousness”. “the real me watches aghast at the blubbering fool I’ve become”.
Third point:
constructed “realities” : governments shape our view of political and social realities through the information they provide and conceal; the language and slogans they use and the images they provide (propaganda/message: Battle of Cowshed)
Wag the Dog parallel: In 2004, Pat Tillman was shot dead in Afghanistan. Tillman was a star American footballer who gave up his career to enlist. His death was treated as terrible tragedy. His heroic death was an “inspiration” to the public and to his fellow soldiers. The official narrative was that Tillman had faced death as the enemy’s bullets flew towards him. The only problem was that he was killed accidentally by his fellow soldiers on a petrol that turned sour. A year after his death, Pat’s brother Kevin told the House Committee in America that the truth needed to be told. Anything less was a betrayal of the values for which soldiers fought.
Constructed realities: brave soldiers are sent to foreign wars, indoctrinated with the government’s “views and values” about the war on terror and the need to spread democracy. In 2009, the then Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon said “We’re trying to bed down democracy in Afghanistan,” He soon scaled down dreams realising that creating a western style liberal democracy in Afghanistan was a pipedream. “The idea of having a western style democracy in Afghanistan is pretty ambitious”.
Governments and the Defence Department indoctrinate soldiers to believe that they are fighting terrorists — evil people. They manufacture an innocent, simple, naïve view of conflict and of the need for war. PM Tony Abbott said that the war in Syria is not about “goodies versus baddies” but “baddies versus baddies”. One soldier’s tattoo reads: “freedom is not free”. Private Paul Warren states that he is fighting terrorism; they are in Afghanistan to “try and stop that sort of thing happening; that’s why we put ourselves in harm’s way.”
Australia’s youngest war widow also reflects the views and values of the Government’s official message. For Vicki Hopkins, the message is a protective device. Australia’s youngest war widow, Ms Hopkins lost her husband during the “evil war”; she believes the soldiers are in Afghanistan fighting “evil people” in “bad places” and helping to rebuilding lives.
The language used by the media and the government minimise the emphasis on killing; they “disturb” enemies.
Powerful gatekeepers whip up fear to manipulate and influence the public’s (collective) emotional response.
Like Napoleon (Animal Farm) who fixes on a convenient scapegoat to spread fear and justify the takeover of the farm, we are constantly reminded of “evil” people wishing us harm; we see images of grey ominous fighter aircraft being prepared for overseas deployments. We see federal police appearing at carefully orchestrated press conferences explaining how they have successfully prevented us from being murdered in our beds.
Fear is recycled on subway walls. The posters remind us, “see something, say something”.
The ability of governments and the media to manipulate our emotions at a subconscious level is a useful tactic – especially if they want our support for an issue or scheme.
As The Age writer/cartoonist, Michael Leunig says, when we went to war in 2003, (which is equally applicable today) “to prosecute an avoidable war, a government requires in its citizens a critical mass of fear and hatred against the proposed enemy, and in the media there were many who were suddenly willing to work quite ravenously at fostering this emotional climate”.
Fourth point:
Sheer terror: first-hand experience changes one view of the “constructed” or assumed reality
“Until you have been there in that country, you can’t grasp what we are doing there” says one Sapper. (See Uncle Peter)
After losing 10 mates in three months from IED explosions, Sapper Tom Williams states that he quickly lost his “innocence” and developed the typical “long stare” of someone who had seen a great deal of brutality and trauma.
When the soldiers have to fight on the ground in foreign countries, many soldiers change their views about the war. They realise that they are killing innocent women and children, (just like their own family members). Many become aware of hypocritical views held by Western governments and become disheartened. They are often forced to kill children who are also sent by the Taliban as human shields. They go to war to kill “bad people” but they soon realise the Government selectively chooses which “bad people” it will kill and which it will help.
Sergeant Trooper Smith said that he could understand US “traitor” Bradley Chelsea Manning’s frustration at the indiscriminate killing conducted by western governments, which could not be justified.
Private Paul Warren was involved in the 2009 raid by Australian special forces. They mistakenly killed five children among several civilians in a fire-fight with insurgents in Oruzgan province that went terribly wrong. He will always suffer from devastating nightmares of that horror. Private Warren realised he was guilty of inflicting immense suffering and pain and knew that women and children (like his own) were killed.
(Does this mean that we, too, should be included in the ‘baddies”?)
Sapper Private Warren also struggled with the fact that foreign intervention often exacerbates the situation. For example, ISIS did not exist prior to the Iraq war in 2003. The ISIL jihadist terrorists have sprung from the US prisons in Iraq established to deal with Saddam Hussein’s murderous henchmen. (2003).
Using Shakespearean terms, The Age reporter, Mark Kenny writes, “if history is written by the winners, then the story of recent US-led adventures in the Middle East certainly qualifies as a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing”. “They left Iraq in 2003 to a corrupt sectarian government – a failing disintegrated state with moral authority in short supply.”
From different perspectives: (anecdote?)
US Army Private Manning leaked 700, 000 secret documents to Wiki leak: it was the biggest security leak in US history
- More than 100,000 people have signed a petition calling for his nomination for a Nobel peace prize
- Others say he is the most reckless traitor in US history.
See comments on how dictators use heavy-handed tactics to control our reality.
Back to Whose Reality Summary Page