Getting Experience The Easier, Less Deadly Way
I had a horrible, friendless childhood, and two things kept me from being a kiddie suicide:
1. Being too chicken to off myself.
2. Reading books.
Books showed me that there was more of a world out there -- one I wanted to be a part of -- in addition to showing me how other human beings thought and felt and handled sticky life situations.
Accordingly, here's how Marine General James Mattis, on the verge of his 2004 Iraq deployment, responded an email from a colleague asking him about "importance of reading and military history for officers," many of whom found themselves "too busy to read."
That email, reprinted by Business Insider:
[Dear, "Bill"]The problem with being too busy to read is that you learn by experience (or by your men's experience), i.e. the hard way. By reading, you learn through others' experiences, generally a better way to do business, especially in our line of work where the consequences of incompetence are so final for young men.
Thanks to my reading, I have never been caught flat-footed by any situation, never at a loss for how any problem has been addressed (successfully or unsuccessfully) before. It doesn't give me all the answers, but it lights what is often a dark path ahead.
With [Task Force] 58, I had w/ me Slim's book, books about the Russian and British experiences in [Afghanistan], and a couple others. Going into Iraq, "The Siege" (about the Brits' defeat at Al Kut in WW I) was req'd reading for field grade officers. I also had Slim's book; reviewed T.E. Lawrence's "Seven Pillars of Wisdom"; a good book about the life of Gertrude Bell (the Brit archaeologist who virtually founded the modern Iraq state in the aftermath of WW I and the fall of the Ottoman empire); and "From Beirut to Jerusalem". I also went deeply into Liddell Hart's book on Sherman, and Fuller's book on Alexander the Great got a lot of my attention (although I never imagined that my HQ would end up only 500 meters from where he lay in state in Babylon).
Ultimately, a real understanding of history means that we face NOTHING new under the sun.
For all the "4th Generation of War" intellectuals running around today saying that the nature of war has fundamentally changed, the tactics are wholly new, etc, I must respectfully say ... "Not really": Alex the Great would not be in the least bit perplexed by the enemy that we face right now in Iraq, and our leaders going into this fight do their troops a disservice by not studying (studying, vice just reading) the men who have gone before us.
We have been fighting on this planet for 5000 years and we should take advantage of their experience. "Winging it" and filling body bags as we sort out what works reminds us of the moral dictates and the cost of incompetence in our profession. As commanders and staff officers, we are coaches and sentries for our units: how can we coach anything if we don't know a hell of a lot more than just the [Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures]? What happens when you're on a dynamic battlefield and things are changing faster than higher [Headquarters] can stay abreast? Do you not adapt because you cannot conceptualize faster than the enemy's adaptation? (Darwin has a pretty good theory about the outcome for those who cannot adapt to changing circumstance -- in the information age things can change rather abruptly and at warp speed, especially the moral high ground which our regimented thinkers cede far too quickly in our recent fights.) And how can you be a sentinel and not have your unit caught flat-footed if you don't know what the warning signs are -- that your unit's preps are not sufficient for the specifics of a tasking that you have not anticipated?
Perhaps if you are in support functions waiting on the warfighters to spell out the specifics of what you are to do, you can avoid the consequences of not reading. Those who must adapt to overcoming an independent enemy's will are not allowed that luxury.
This is not new to the USMC approach to warfighting -- Going into Kuwait 12 years ago, I read (and reread) Rommel's Papers (remember "Kampstaffel"?), Montgomery's book ("Eyes Officers"...), "Grant Takes Command" (need for commanders to get along, "commanders' relationships" being more important than "command relationships"), and some others.
As a result, the enemy has paid when I had the opportunity to go against them, and I believe that many of my young guys lived because I didn't waste their lives because I didn't have the vision in my mind of how to destroy the enemy at least cost to our guys and to the innocents on the battlefields.
Hope this answers your question.... I will cc my ADC in the event he can add to this. He is the only officer I know who has read more than I.
Semper Fi, Mattis
A fine summary indeed by General James Mattis.
The question "What is war like?" has many possible answers.
Military books span a spectrum from broad concepts of strategy to the experiences of the individual front-line officer and trooper. Some are intended as general overviews, some as personal accounts, others as histories, and still others aim at preparing warfighters to think clearly and act decisively and effectively.
Anyone interested in the latter would do well to start with Irwin Rommel's "Infantry Attacks" and "The Rommel Papers".
Next might be "Lost Victories" by Erich von Manstein.
"If You Survive" (George Wilson) and "Company Commander" (Charles B. MacDonald) are good introductions to the life of an infantry officer in a hot war.
One other thing: For someone born in, say, the last couple of decades, it's important to read a book like Richard Wheeler's "Iwo", about the taking of Iwo Jima by the Marines. Why? Because it shows what a real war can be like.
The battle for Iwo lasted a bit over three weeks. In that short time, almost 7,000 US troops were killed, and another 19,000 wounded.
These days, it's too easy to develop an antiseptic view of war. For instance, in Iraq, during the six years from 2003 to 2009, the US lost only one A-10 to hostile fire, and lost no fighter planes at all to hostile fire.
Lastango at January 18, 2016 1:17 AM
I am surprised Sun Tzu's The Art of War hasn't been mentioned...
Don't forget to use Amy's Amazon link to go find these!
Radwaste at January 18, 2016 6:37 AM
Everyone scoffed back in my day, at the worthlessness of a liberal arts degree, but the truth was, in general, History majors made better leaders and officers than business majors.
If you don't learn vicariously from books about how things can go horribly horribly wrong, both logistically, and on the battle field, the only other way to learn it, is by killing your people.
Isab at January 18, 2016 6:40 AM
We still scoff at the liberal arts. When it is more indoctrination than education derision is the correct response. A good liberal arts education is a great thing. But most are not good and what they are educated in would just fill those body bags faster.
Ben at January 18, 2016 8:47 AM
We still scoff at the liberal arts. When it is more indoctrination than education derision is the correct response. A good liberal arts education is a great thing. But most are not good and what they are educated in would just fill those body bags faster.
Posted by: Ben at January 18, 2016 8:47 AM
Agreed. A History degree was still somewhat rigorous when I acquired one back in the 70's. Now, they have largely been replaced by grievance studies.
I suspect it is still better than Women's studies or the pablum they call "Social Studies". Or Poli Sci.
Never recall having a test in an upper division history class that didn't require a pretty well written essay to pass.
I wonder what they do now? I am sure it has been dumbed down to dreck, like every other liberal arts subject.
Most of my historical education occurred after I left college.
Isab at January 18, 2016 8:54 AM
I majored in business, but read history (especially military history) as a hobby. It's a good way to study it. No grievance professors telling me how to think or limiting my reading material. Not writing essays, however, is a weakness of reading history as a hobby versus studying it under tutelage; no parsing of one's readings into a coherent viewpoint to be disseminated to others.
I also read business and leadership books because, as the general said, "[b]y reading, you learn through others' experiences...." Although, too many business books these days are dumbed down "parables." I don't give a rat's ass who moved your cheese. Please write for an audience that's not five years old.
Conan the Grammarian at January 18, 2016 10:06 AM
I had a horrible, friendless childhood,
Amy, I'm curious: why the absence of any friends?
JD at January 18, 2016 12:15 PM
But what about Hegel's famous statement? grin
BTW, Bill Maher had a good section on the importance of reading in "When You Ride Alone You Ride with Bin Laden." What's odd is that that's the ONLY time I remember that he actually scolded young people for not reading challenging books in general; as a rule, I can't help but see him as someone who encourages juvenile, empty-headed fun above all other fun, no matter how old one gets. Example, from the 2005 book "New Rules," page 168:
"Stop giving awards to movies just because they're long. It only encourages them. While I was watching The Hours, my popcorn actually grew into a stalk. Remember, if I wanted to be bored shitless, I'd read."
lenona at January 18, 2016 1:21 PM
To Amy:
You may have been somewhat lucky that in addition to your friendless state, there were no amoral bullies willing to "help" you to off yourself.
Here's a 2007 thread on the debate over whether early-onset bipolar disorder exists; there are 28 posts:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/hartford-ct/TKUPC6N5TR5JI2UFQ
I was thinking of post from "amy" at #4, who says she has EOBP.
Excerpts:
"...At age 3, I decided it was a perfectly dandy idea to drown the little girl across the street because she wouldn't let me ride on her motorcycle toy. I knew I could get away with it because I was only 3.
"Luckily, my mood swing passed, and I did not do that.
"I also went into rages that lasted for hours; these were not the tantrums my own daughter now has. Her tantrums end when I can distract her, threaten to take away her Wiggles or tell her how disappointed in her I am...
"...Medication saved my life at age 12 and keeps me alive today and if not for people willing to acknowledge that very small children can have very serious brain disorders, god only knows how many more families would have to go through the hell my family did."
Also, check out comment #11 by Chels, especially - it has a grimly amusing surprise in it.
lenona at January 18, 2016 1:49 PM
Might I recommend When Books Went to War: The Stories that Helped Us Win World War II
by Molly Guptill Manning? This outstanding book describes how publishers and librarians worked with the government to provide Armed Service Editions of the most popular books of the day to offset the boredom, loneliness, and stress of World War II. Several of the soldiers stated that they looked forward to the next batch of books almost as much as letters from home.
Kima at January 18, 2016 2:51 PM
Isab: "Never recall having a test in an upper division history class that didn't require a pretty well written essay to pass."
"I wonder what they do now?"
Well, they might still require a well written essay; but, I can tell you from experience that that essay had better be looking at a Marxist, Feminist, or Deconstructionist interpretation.
And, don't you dare deviate from those interpretations; or else, you will not get a good grade.
charles at January 19, 2016 9:04 PM
Leave a comment