Military...do you agree with this quote?

Question

"I was always embarrassed by the words sacred, glorious, and sacrifice and the expression in vain. We had heard them, sometimes standing in the rain almost out of earshot, so that only the shouted words came through, and had read them, on proclamations that were slapped up by billposters over other proclamations, now for a long time, and I had seen nothing sacred, and the things that were glorious had no glory and the sacrifices were like the stockyards at Chicago if nothing was done with the meat except to bury it. [...] Abstract words such as glory, honor, courage, or hallow were obscene beside the concrete names of villages, the number of roads, the names of rivers, the number of regiments and the dates." Ernest Hemmingway "A Farewell to Arms"

Answer 1

Think you all missed the point - I too was and still am embarrased by those who came and patronised us when we were serving; they waxed lyrical like they knew the meaning of being in situations that only occured in their very worst of nightmares. We [soldiers] do it for our brothers in arms, we don't do it for medals, we do it to keep those at home safe, we don't do it for the politicians, we do it hoping that none of our children will ever have to be exposed to the horrors of the meat grinder that is war.

Answer 2

It's a different kind of war he's talking about anyway. We've also come a long way from those days where we didn't make sure to take care of our troops.

Today, integrity first, service before self, and excellence in all we do are characteristics trained and engrained into all of our airmen (who, unlike hemmingway's time, are not dollar a dozen draftees, but rather dedicated and professional volunteers). The same thing applies with the core values of the other services as well.

Furthermore, the technology of warfare has changed. In Hemmingway's day war meant marching through firebombed villages, reminiscent of lunar landscapes punctuated by the blood and bodies of civilians caught in collateral damage. Today we have precision guided munitions and civilian deaths are low. The grizzly scenes of dead innocents are mostly restricted to attacks by bombers... and that steels the reserve as one realizes that it IS honorable and a worthy sacrifice to stand in the way of such carnage so that innocent people don't need to fear stepping outside their front door.

Answer 3

In the book, to Lt. Frederic Henry, such abstractions as honor, glory, and sacrifice do little to explain or assuage the unbelievable destruction that he sees around him. What matters, he decides, are the names of villages and soldiers, the concrete facts of decimated walls and dead bodies. He believes that in order to discuss the war honestly, one must dismiss artificial concepts and deal with terms grounded in the reality of the war. He tarnishes the romanticized ideal of the military hero by equating the “sacrifices” of human lives in war with the slaughter of livestock. He further compares romantic riffs about honor and glory to burying meat in the ground. Nothing can be sustained or nurtured by such pointlessness.

I however don't agree with the comparison of human lives being lost to the slaughter of animals. I can, however, understand how someone can have these feelings especially since they were a soldier involved in a war at the time. You have to consider the mind set of the person making the quote, at that time.
Very thought provoking question.

Answer 4

No.

This is nothing more than a political opinion - written by somebody who would rather be 'sophisticated' than learn what courage' and 'honor' means.

I was never impressed with Hemingway.

Answer 5

The Civil War general, General Sherman I believe, said it much better -- "War is hell!"

Answer 6

N O!!!!!!!!!!!!Written by a Non-Military Person With
Absolutely No Military Knowledge!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 7

Their is no honor in killing, just resolution and hopefully peace.

Answer 8

no i don't agree.. old men and the sea was better any