The Reactionary Utopian
August 30, 2007
LOOSE CANNONS WITH NUKES
by Joe Sobran
This Kelly Flinn business is making my head spin. It
also sends chills down my spine. Possibly it's the cause
of these fainting spells I've been having. I can't take
much more.
First of all, I've always had reservations about the
sexual integration of the armed forces. People can get
over racial and religious differences, but sexual
differences are different from other differences.
For one thing, they are more durable than other
differences. And more desirable. Some would even say they
are more necessary.
They are also harder to screen out of close personal
contacts like the rough intimacy of military life. We no
longer have restroom doors saying "White" and "Colored."
It wouldn't make much sense for them to say "Catholic,"
"Methodist," and "Presbyterian," either. But "Men" and
"Women" are here to stay. I hope.
If having women in the military were a great idea
from a military point of view, it would probably have
occurred to Julius Caesar or Napoleon, or Rommel or
Patton, before it occurred to Patsy Schroeder.
Just one man's opinion, you understand. But if we
need women in our defense forces, we must not need much
defense.
First feminists argued that women have the "right"
to serve in the armed forces on the same terms as men.
Now they complain that women's rights are being violated
by the normal (that is, rough) treatment of recruits in
boot camp. And they demand that these women who are
supposed to be protecting the rest of us be protected
from their male comrades and officers in the service.
If you can't take the heat ... The proverb is, as
Hamlet says, "something musty." The idea of basic
training is not to nurture your most exquisite individual
qualities. It's to get rid of them. It's to coarsen you
to the point where you will be capable of killing on
command. We seem to be losing the elusive distinction
between boot camp and sensitivity training. A society may
need a certain number of men who can do bloody things
without qualms, but not because it's their "right" to do
them.
But this being 1997, it looks as if we're headed for
an all-victim defense force. Miss Flinn herself feels
victimized by her treatment: "I've lost my innocence, and
I've lost my ability to trust people in general and
anyone and anything," says the woman who took another
woman's husband and lied about it under oath -- acts she
calls "mistakes."
As for losing her innocence, it recalls the retort
of the cynical Thomas Cromwell in A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS:
"You lost that some time ago. Have you only just
noticed?"
Miss Flinn's lost innocence has already brought her
a flood of book and movie offers, and no doubt a chance
to pose in PLAYBOY. Who knows? She could be the first to
do both an interview and a centerfold in the same issue.
Whatever course she chooses, at least she won't be
carrying a nuclear payload anymore. I hope we can all
agree that nuclear weapons and loose cannons don't mix.
If you think disgruntled postal workers are trouble, wait
'til you see a disgruntled B-52 pilot.
Our huge armed forces far exceed any rational
defense needs; at this point, we should speak not of
"defense" but of our "foreign legions." All governments
call their military forces "defenses"; no country has a
"Department of Aggression"; yet for some reason, wars
just keep on happening. Maybe it's because big
nation-states feel as victimized as Miss Flinn does. No
doubt their feelings are easily hurt.
If you're an outright pacifist, I suppose you should
rejoice at what has happened to the U.S. armed services
lately. Old soldiers are quitting in disgust, and younger
men of soldierly temperament -- who put honor, courage,
and duty above their "rights" -- find the private
militias more congenial.
But if you're going to have armed forces at all, it
makes no sense to staff them on the basis of the criteria
appropriate to liberal civilian institutions. To amend
Nelson Algren's famous advice: Never eat at a place
called Mom's, never play poker with a guy named Doc, and
never take survival tips from liberals.
[This column was originally published by Universal Press
Syndicate May 27, 1997.]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Read this column on-line at
"http://www.sobran.com/columns/2007/070830.shtml".
Copyright (c) 2007 by the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation.
This column may not be published in print or Internet
publications without express permission of Fitzgerald
Griffin Foundation. You may forward it to interested
individuals if you use this entire page, including the
following disclaimer:
"SOBRAN'S and Joe Sobran's columns are available
by subscription. For details and samples, see
http://www.sobran.com/e-mail.shtml, write
FGF@vacoxmail.com, or call 800-513-5053."