August 8, 2025 • 24 mins
Exploring how the United States Marine Corps' approach to combat is shaped by institutional, technological, and cultural factors, particularly in the context of the Iraq War. It investigates the visual culture of warfare, analyzing how military training, technology like advanced optics and drones, and even popular media such as films and video games, influence a Marine's perception and readiness to kill. The source also discusses the psychological impact of combat, the challenges of counterinsurgency operations, and the evolving role of the Marine Corps in an era of increasingly remote and automated warfare, including the controversial integration of women into combat roles and the development of robotic soldiers. Ultimately, the text reflects on the human cost of war, highlighting the profound psychological toll on veterans and the ethical dilemmas posed by modern military advancements.
You can listen and download our episodes for free on more than 10 different platforms:
https://linktr.ee/book_shelter
Get the Book now from Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Light-Up-Marine-Battle-Iraq/dp/1421417855?&linkCode=ll1&tag=cvthunderx-20&linkId=607fd1779f6798d1177cfdb2ba2098bf&language=en_US&ref_=as_li_ss_tl
You can listen and download our episodes for free on more than 10 different platforms:
https://linktr.ee/book_shelter
Get the Book now from Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Light-Up-Marine-Battle-Iraq/dp/1421417855?&linkCode=ll1&tag=cvthunderx-20&linkId=607fd1779f6798d1177cfdb2ba2098bf&language=en_US&ref_=as_li_ss_tl
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome, Welcome to the deep dive. Today, we're plunging into
a truly fascinating and often pretty intense exploration of how
we perceive combat literally and figuratively. We're going to unpack
the book lighted up the Marine Eye for Battle in
the War for Iraq, which offers well a really comprehensive
look at the institutional, technological, and cultural forces that have
(00:24):
shaped Marine corps unique approach to combat.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
Yeah, it's quite a deep look.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
Our mission today is basically to follow the book's narrative
and arguments, helping you understand its profound impact through a
detailed sort of story like journey, and the.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Author, you know, even while strongly opposing the Iraq War himself,
sets the stage with a deeply personal frame right there
in the preface. It's quite striking. Oh so, it starts
with his encounter with General Zenny in March two thousand
and three, just days before the invasion, and Zinny, with
a surprising foresight, predicted the US was about to make
supendous strategic mistake.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Wow days before.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Yeah, days he said it would destabilize the entire Gulf
region and harm national security. Immediately signals this isn't just
about the battlefield.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
Itself, right, It's about the bigger picture, the long term consequences.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
Exactly, the profound, long term consequences of these big strategic choices.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
That's a powerful and honestly almost haunting prediction to open with.
And the human element gets even more immediate, more tragic
through his encounters with two marines.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
Right, that's right. First, Sergeant Colin Keith, he found himself
grappling with well, the almost impossible task of reconciling his
wartime experiences with just the strangeness of civilian life.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Afterwards, the incongruity.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Yeah, and then tragically, Corporal Tom Lowry, his post war
struggles led to a fetal car crash in twenty thirteen.
So the book really focuses on the optics of combat,
how the very act of seeing shapes war.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Not just seeing physically.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Right, not just physically, but as a deeply psychological and
cultural thing. It's about how the Marine Corps patterns, the
way its members perceive, how they engage, how they ultimately
survive battle, and how that vision impacts everything, even you know,
life back home.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
So it's crucial then to understand how this Marine eye
was deliberately forged. The book dives right into that, doesn't
it the historical context it does.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
It reveals how the US military, including the Marines, quite
literally institutionalized the willingness to kill. It goes way back
to Sla Marshal's controversial nineteen forty seven book Men Against Fire.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
Oh yeah, I've heard of that one. Didn't it make
some huge claim about firing rates in World War Two?
Speaker 2 (02:33):
It made the staggering claim that only fifteen to twenty
percent of WWII troops actually fire their weapons at the enemy.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
That's just astonishing. Whether it's perfectly accurate or not, that
number is wild. What did the military do with that perception,
that belief that so many soldiers weren't firing well?
Speaker 2 (02:49):
That perceived deficiency led directly to David Grossman's influential work
on Killing, which basically outlined the military's application of behavior
as psychology.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Okay, behaviorism, so changing behaviors through conditioning exactly.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
They radically changed marksmanship training. Instead of static bullseye targets,
they introduced pop up manchaged figures, you know, targets.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
That look like people, right, more realistic.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
More realistic, and troops were forced into more battle like conditions,
They got immediate feedback when targets dropped, and the result
it was profound. By the century's end, the non firing
rate for US troops in combat was near zero near zero.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
Wow. So they effectively trained up a hesitancy pretty much. So,
how exactly did the Marines, known for their distinct warrior
culture craft this specific Marine I during training? What's involved
in that rigorous process?
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Marine boot camp at twelve weeks is two weeks longer
than the Army's basic training, and every minute is designed
for a specific purpose. There's constant desensitization.
Speaker 1 (03:50):
These sessitization.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Recruits are drilled with these chants that are designed to
strip away normal human inhibitions. Phrases like kill the women,
kill the children, kill them all.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
That incredibly stark, brutal.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
Really, it's visceral and completely intentional.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
It makes you wonder how anyone comes out of that
process unchanged. And then beyond that desensitization, there's the precision
of marksmanship, right, that's key for Marines.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Exactly two whole weeks are dedicated specifically to M sixteen qualification.
Recruits are expected to hit human silhouette targets at a
staggering five.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Hundred yards five hundred yards, that's afar it is.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Then infantry training battalions push this further, incorporating moving targets
and truly reinforcing the core's foundational motto. Every marine a rifleman.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
So the takeaway isn't just about teaching someone to shoot.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
No, it's about perfecting the willingness and the ability to
shoot and kill another human being under extreme conditions. That's
the core of it.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
And this trained biological eye isn't operating in isolation. It's
profoundly augmented by technology. When marines say light it up,
what does that command truly signify in terms of this
unique perception, Ah.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Light it up. It's a command that perfect encapsulates the
coterminous nature of perception and destruction in modern warfare.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
Meaning they happen at the same time, seeing and destroying
one exactly.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Light it up means not just illuminate, but eliminate tools
like night vision goggles, the thermal sight of an Abram's tank,
the Falcon View tactical imaging system, where the cameras on
a Predator drone. They aren't just gadgets, They're more than tools.
They are literal extensions of the human eye. They transform
how marines see the enemy, the battlefield, and ultimately how
(05:29):
they unleash their killing power. This constant technological augmentation creates
a radically different visual experience of combat.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
So this Marine I is forged through intense training, then
technologically amplified. But how does this abstract concept manifest you know,
when the bullets start flying. The book brings this to
vivid life through Sergeant Colin Keith's experience during the two
thousand and three invasion. Tell us about his story.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Yeah, Key's story is powerful. His unit thirty five was
ambushed by Fidani irregulars near Dewania. Keith was operating an
MK nineteen rapid fire grenade launcher from his humvey.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
An MK nineteen Wow heavy stuff, very and.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
He recalls this overwhelming sandstorm hitting just reducing visibility to
almost nothing for miles. Initially, he felt immense pride in
his service. He even compared combat to sports to sports. Yeah,
believing marine superior shooting skill was a key advantage. He
actually said, we shoot so much better.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
That initial pride comparing it to a sport. It seems
almost like a coping mechanism. Maybe a way to process
the incomprehensible, But the book suggests that perception shifted dramatically
for Keif later on.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
What happened The profound shift came later Keith experienced intense
guilt and nightmares from, in his words, killing so many people.
He began to empathize with those on the other end
of my rounds.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
That's a huge shift.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Huge, And he asked himself this truly agonizing question. It
would make my service more difficult to live with if
I had killed those people for no reason. It just
reveals the deep moral st that even the most effectively
trained marine eye can't always escape.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
That individual experience connects to a much grander strategic vision
for the Iraq War, doesn't it. We're talking about network
centric warfare, this revolution in military affairs that promised unprecedented clarity.
What was this giant eyeball and space ideal all about?
Speaker 2 (07:22):
This revolution was driven by digital communications, satellite GPS, laser
guided munitions, all aiming for what you might call total situational.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Awareness, seeing everything everywhere.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Essentially, Yeah, The goal was for military forces to be
connected and coordinated like a single massive organism. Think Global Hawk, UAVs,
providing twenty four hour coverage, joint stars offering real time images,
even small Dragon e UAVs deployed right down to the platoon.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Level, so eliminate all blind spots.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
That was the idea, give a perfect, almost godlike view
of the battlefield.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
And this perfect view fed into the infamous Shock and
Odd doctrine, aiming for rapiday dominance by destroying the enemy's will, perception,
and understanding. The Pentagon even used bugsplat software to predict
civilian casualties.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
That's right, which led to debates about limiting destruction. Lieutenant
General James T. Conway, commanding General of IMF, that's the
first Marine expeditionary force that you put it very bluntly,
This isn't a fair fight. We didn't intend it.
Speaker 1 (08:21):
To be stark. But what's crucial here is the paradox. Right,
Despite all of this emphasis on precision tech and avoiding
collateral damage.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
The human cost was undeniable. The book sites an incident
where a five hundred pound laser guided missile could have
cleared a sniper from a mosque, but it was withheld.
Why because it would cause quote tremendous amount of collateral
damage to an important religious site in Iraq and possibly
also killing many civilians. It just highlights its constant tension
(08:49):
between technological capability and the ethical considerations on the ground.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Shifting gears a bit. It's fascinating how the Marine eye
isn't just shaped by training in tech, but also by
popular cold. How did marines actually perceive combat through the
lens of film and media.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
It's quite striking. Marines themselves described actual combat as like
a movie scene or having perfect cinematography for a movie.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
Wow. Really life imitating art.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Kind of, And it makes sense when you consider the
Marine corps own extensive film division and its well century
long symbiotic relationship with Hollywood. Camp Pendleton, for instance, has
been used as a set for films like Sands of
Yeojima for decades.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
So it's a loop. Hollywood depicts war, then war starts
to feel like Hollywood for those living it Exactly that loops,
and this loop extends directly to recruitment, doesn't it. You
mentioned commercials like Pride of the Nation using archived combat footage,
which brings us to this controversial, unsettling concept war porn.
How does the book define that?
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Yeah, the book doesn't pull any punches here it draws
a direct and frankly unsettling analogy to sexual pornography. It's
essentially illicit content designed to elicit desire or promote specific
aggressive combat behaviors. Okay, example, you see it clearly in
YouTube videos, sometimes apparently even shown in boot camp. There
are examples with sounds like oohs and oz watching Apache
(10:11):
attacks or one video called Marines Get Some Die MFI
with this intense heavy metal soundtrack depicting enemies as dune
Kun Muslim terrorists. It's designed to thrill and motivate.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
And the effect of these motivation videos they weren't just
for entertainment.
Speaker 2 (10:29):
No, they genuinely made viewers want to enlist or reenlist.
This whole concept of war package for pleasurable consumption is
what media critic Roger Stall calls mill attainment.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Mill attainment, like the History channels Shootout d d Feluja
with those blow by blow reenactments.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Exactly that kind of thing. Militaniment also extends to how
individual soldiers are portrayed, like MSNBC's for God in Country
profile on Chris Orth, a sniper. It showcases his one shot,
one kill ethos, which is compelling to many.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
But doesn't show the cost well.
Speaker 2 (10:59):
It briefly, almost fleetingly touches on his trauma, the burden
he carries, but the focus is clearly on the sniper's
hardness the finality of his actions, not really the deeper
psychological cost.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
This all suggests a deeper connection between maybe play and warfare.
The book argues that the ludic tenant that innate human
desire to prove oneself through competition and play is central
to marine warfighting, especially with military simulation.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Absolutely, and this is where the science fiction novel Enders
Game becomes a really crucial and kind of disturbing lens.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
Ah Enders Game the kids playing war games exactly.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
Its premise is chilling children unknowingly commit xenocide believing they
are merely playing a game. The book argues that simulation
minimizes moral responsibility and hesitation for killing, creating this dangerous.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
Distance, and the critique is that the military might have
missed the point.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Yeah. The author critiques that the Marine Corps may have
adopted the simulation aspect without fully appreciating the book's own
emphasis on empathy and guilt, which is a pretty central
theme in the novel itself.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
The military entertainment complex has a longer history than many
might realize, doesn't it.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
Well yeah. Early examples include the Army working with Atari
back in the nineteen seventies, despite some initial reluctance from
designers like Ed Rodberg who famously said he didn't want
to train people to kill right.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
And even Reagan mentioned it.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Ronald Reagan's nineteen eighty three Epcot Center speech even predicted
a future where children could wage war from afar. This
collaboration became much more systemic in the mid nineteen nineteen
oh so what changed well led to major developments like
the National Academy of Science Workshop in nineteen ninety six
and then the founding of the Institute for Creative Technologies
or ict at USC in nineteen ninety nine.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
And their goal.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
Their mission was pretty clear to create synthetic experiences so
compelling that participants react as if they were real. Imagine
projects like flat World designed to really put you there virtually.
Speaker 1 (12:57):
And this directly influenced how video games were into graded
into training. The Marine Corps was an early adopter in
the mid nineties right evaluating commercial games.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
They were they evaluated about thirty commercial games. General Charles C.
Krulex nineteen ninety seven order even allowed on duty play
of games like Doom for military thinking and decision making exercises.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
Playing Doom on duty that's a huge shift, making games
a legitimate training tool.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
It really was. And close Combat First to Fight, released
in two thousand and five, is a prime example of
this integration. Developed with Marine input, focused on four man
fire teams in urban combat, drawing on krulex idea of the.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
Strategic corporal was it realistic?
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Gamers, including former Marines, lauded its realism, even though the
actual violence was apparently watered down for teen rating, But
the structural violence of easy shooting, the way the game
rewards aggressive engagement that remained.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
So what does all this simulation mean for the war fighter?
For the human at the center of this Marine eye,
the ultimate psychological aim seems to be creating virtual veterans.
What does that truly entail?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
The goal is essentially to preload warfighters databases with accurate
representations of combat scenarios. The idea is to make them
less hesitant and more deadly fighters.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
Like practicing before the real thing.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Exactly. It's about achieving virtual presence, or being there through simulations.
In these things called infantry immersion trainers building what's called
muscle memory for combat before ever stepping onto a real battlefield.
It's a profound shift in how readiness is achieved, merging
the virtual with the physical.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
Yet despite all this training and technology, the Marine I
faced profound challenges in the shifting landscape of counterinsurgency or COIN.
How did the core try to reconcile its traditional killer
ethos with the demands of winning hearts and minds.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Yeah, there's a deep paradox there. The doctrine shifted significantly.
You go from Krelak's earlier essays to the two thousand
and seven Counterinsurgency Field Manual, which emphasized caring for civilians
just as much as killing the enemy.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
But that's hard to do in practice.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
Incredibly difficult. Turning off the killing switch became almost impossible
amidst suicide bombings and IEDs in places like Alanbar Province,
where the enemy was often totally indistinguishable from the population.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
And there was pushback, skepticism.
Speaker 2 (15:13):
Deep skepticism from some senior Marines and academics who basically
viewed do no harm coming from shock troops as nonsensical
or even hegemonic.
Speaker 1 (15:23):
This tension seems perfectly captured in general Madis's famous quotes.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
Absolutely like be polite, be professional, but have a plan
to kill everybody you meet, where is addressed to chiaite
chikhs I come in peace. If you fuck with me,
I'll kill you all.
Speaker 1 (15:37):
He became almost as supreme ludologist as the book calls him,
maintaining killing capacity alongside this humanitarian.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
Talk, exactly juggling those two sides.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
The Haditha killings in November two thousand and five serve
as a stark, really tragic example of these challenges, don't
they they do?
Speaker 2 (15:53):
It was a sunny stronghold, intense insurgency, and ied blast
killed a marine. What followed was awful. A marine squad
killed five on our men than nineteen Iraqi women, children
and old men in nearby houses.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
And the official report.
Speaker 2 (16:06):
The official report found a routine devaluation of Iraqi lives.
Viewing civilian casualties is essentially just the cost of doing business.
It revealed this staggering dissonance between that indifference and the
population centric mindset that was supposed to guide Kowine.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
That's horrifying. It raises critical questions about the psychological state
of these marines. A two thousand and six Mental Health
Advisory Team study gave some grim insights it did.
Speaker 2 (16:30):
The steady revealed that a disturbing seventeen percent of marines
and soldiers agreed that all non combatants should be treated
as insurgents. Fewer than half agreed non combatants should be
treated with dignity. Many admitted insulting Iraqis.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
But there's another side to that coin, right. The stress
they were.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Under absolutely critical context. The report also detailed the intent
acute stress reported by marines themselves, seeing things like my
sergeant's leg getting blown off, or friends burned to death,
picking up my friends off the ground because they had
been blown up. The Hidetha squad specifically was immersed in
this kind of unbearable stress.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
So how did the core try to self correct to
uphold its values amidst these complex realities the interestings of
the ethical warrior ideal.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Yes, there was an increased focus on honor, courage, and commitment,
often through literary culture. The warrior archetype was promoted as
this blend of killing, prowess and moral fortitude, someone able
to override his or her emotions and act mindfully.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
Like Stephen Pressfield's warrior.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Ethos exactly, emphatizing camaraderie, brotherhood, and a psychological salary of
pride and honor rather than just raw aggression. It was
an attempt to instill more reflective, principled approach.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
And they took this directly to the public with the
which Way would You Run? Campaign in twenty.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
Twelve right That advertising campaign highlighted humanitarian assistance, asking viewers
if they'd run toward chaos for help, not just for combat.
It targeted millennials interest in service to others, while still
you know, show casing marine mobility and firepower. An interesting
rebranding effort for a new generation.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Looking ahead, this marine I faces a looming identity crisis.
You mentioned Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates raising concerns.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
Yeah. Gates questioned whether the US even needs a second
land army anymore. He suggested that new anti ship missiles
could make traditional amphibious assaults basically obsolete.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
So the belief is shifting towards tech.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
The growing belief, Yeah, is that computers, missiles, planes, and
drones will win wars, which fundamentally challenges the traditional marine role.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
That sounds straight out of science fiction, which, incidentally, the
book argues, has always profoundly influenced military planning.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Absolutely, concepts like space marines and colonial marines are all
over popular culture Aliens, Battlestar, Galactica, Avatar.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
And Starship Troopers.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Starship Troopers even laid out the blueprint for powered armor
exoskeletons to augment human capabilities strength, speed, senses. There's even
a vision of a space born infantry called SUSTAIN for
rapid global force projection without needing permission to cross airspace.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Wild stuff. And this is where it gets really interesting
for the future of the Core. As technology takes over
the brute force aspects, the very definition of a marine
starts to shift. The book explores this idea of a
post masculinist marine, right.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Where traditional physical attributes like strength and speed become less critical,
which opens up these profound questions about gender roles in
combat and beyond.
Speaker 1 (19:28):
This shift where physical strength becomes less paramount directly led
to the Pentagon's twenty thirteen decision to end the ban
on women in combat, But that sparked heated debate, didn't it. Oh.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Absolutely, submarines expressed fears of destroying the Marine corps due
to worries about reduced standards or compromise unicohesion because of
potential sexual behavior.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
But the counter argument.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
The counter argument, of course, is that rigorous training can
shape behavior and fundamental American values of individual autonomy and
merit based opportunity demand and equal combat roles. Plus women,
like men from lower socioeconomic classes, may also find less
to lose in choosing military service.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
It also suggests a potential shift in the marine image,
maybe towards a protector role.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Potentially yeah, a softening up, maybe towards a protector role
that fits more traditional ideals of womanhood.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
And this evolution leads us further into the realm of
the cyborg warrior, with implanted sensors and cognitive algorithms, further
eroding traditional gendered sensibility in combat.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
Which leads to things like the Gladiator Robot, a Carnegie
Mellon prototype for the USMC back in two thousand and seven,
a multipurpose combat robot with optics far superior to any human.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Eye, which brings us to a core ethical concern, the
fear of relinquishing human control over the act of killing.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Precisely can ethical robots, as Ronald Darkin's research explores, actually
be programmed to follow ethical values on the battlefield. It's
a huge question, and.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
This links to Paul W. Kahn's paradox of riskless warfare.
Speaker 2 (20:59):
Yeah, the idea of killing without mutual risk, without the
threat of being killed yourself, reduces the moral justification for violence.
It could potentially lower the threshold for engaging in war
in the first place.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
This profound technological shift brings us back full circle to
the ultimate human cost. The book touches on biopolitics and
this phrase, the mournful differential of destruction. What does that
truly capture?
Speaker 2 (21:22):
It's a stark concept. It highlights the really disproportionate impact
of war. Arundati Roy searingly asked how many dead Iraqi
women and children for every dead American investment banker?
Speaker 1 (21:33):
Oof powerful.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
It points to a kind of sacrificial ethos in modern
US society, where young men and women, often from lower
socioeconomic classes, choose military service almost as a cost benefit
analysis given the broader societal inequalities. Evan Wright even called
recon Marines America's first generation of discosable children.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
And the toll of this increasingly synthetic eye is immense.
This cyborgine convergence between human and machine means the Marine
I became increasingly automated.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
Yet yet the argument that warrior's subjectivity lives insists that
the human experience remains absolutely paramount, which helps explain the
profound mental health crisis among veterans.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
We're talking about Colin keith snightmares, Tom Lowry's tragic death,
James Blake Miller, the Marlborough Marine who felt confused as
to why I'm still here and why other people aren't
exactly and.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
The profound impact is maybe best summarized by the mother
of a veteran who committed suicide. She said, the United
States Army turned my son into a killer. They trained
him to kill to protect others. They forgot to untrain him.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
That concept is now widely understood as moral injury.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
The violation of an ethical belief or moral code in combat,
which can leave these deep, deep blasting scars.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
Literature often serves as a mirror to this immense complexity.
Paul Fussel's ironic mode in war literature captures that collision
between innocence and awareness, the disillusionmentt and.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Anthony Swafford's jar head, frankly explos is a pathological desire
to kill with that visceral pink mist imagery, it's unslenching.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
Then there's Phil Clay's redeployment.
Speaker 2 (23:08):
Yeah, Clay brings this experience right home. With Sergeant Price's
fragmented memories, his orange state of heightened overwhelming perception, or
even a trip to Wilmington, North Carolina, feels just like
patrolling Felujah.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
That struggle to recalibrate, The struggle.
Speaker 2 (23:21):
To recalibrate from wartime perception back to civilian life is
powerfully portrayed. Even if Price finds some fractured purpose and
violent acts like shooting dogs, it's shown as this desperate
way to cope with his shattered reality.
Speaker 1 (23:34):
So we've journeyed through the really intricate evolution of the
MARINEI for Battle, from rigorous training and cutting edge technology
to its portrayal in pop culture and the pervasive influence
of simulation.
Speaker 2 (23:48):
We've explored the profound ethical challenges of counterinsurgency and contemplated
the future of warfare in a world increasingly shaped by
algorithms and robotics.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
We've seen the heavy human costs from psychological truy to
moral injury, and how literature grapples with this complex reality.
This deep dive should truly make you consider how deeply
interconnected perception, technology, and human experience.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
Are, especially when it comes to the act of war.
It forces you.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
To think precisely, which leaves us with a final thought
to ponder, if war is increasingly fought through synthetic vision
and by virtual veterans, how do we as citizens ensure
we fully grasp the true human and societal cost, Especially
when the lines between killing and playing becomes so blurred
and moral injury remains this silent, devastating epidemic.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
It's a question worth continually exploring. Absolutely
Welcome, Welcome to the deep dive. Today, we're plunging into
a truly fascinating and often pretty intense exploration of how
we perceive combat literally and figuratively. We're going to unpack
the book lighted up the Marine Eye for Battle in
the War for Iraq, which offers well a really comprehensive
look at the institutional, technological, and cultural forces that have
(00:24):
shaped Marine corps unique approach to combat.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
Yeah, it's quite a deep look.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
Our mission today is basically to follow the book's narrative
and arguments, helping you understand its profound impact through a
detailed sort of story like journey, and the.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Author, you know, even while strongly opposing the Iraq War himself,
sets the stage with a deeply personal frame right there
in the preface. It's quite striking. Oh so, it starts
with his encounter with General Zenny in March two thousand
and three, just days before the invasion, and Zinny, with
a surprising foresight, predicted the US was about to make
supendous strategic mistake.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Wow days before.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Yeah, days he said it would destabilize the entire Gulf
region and harm national security. Immediately signals this isn't just
about the battlefield.
Speaker 1 (01:07):
Itself, right, It's about the bigger picture, the long term consequences.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
Exactly, the profound, long term consequences of these big strategic choices.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
That's a powerful and honestly almost haunting prediction to open with.
And the human element gets even more immediate, more tragic
through his encounters with two marines.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
Right, that's right. First, Sergeant Colin Keith, he found himself
grappling with well, the almost impossible task of reconciling his
wartime experiences with just the strangeness of civilian life.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Afterwards, the incongruity.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Yeah, and then tragically, Corporal Tom Lowry, his post war
struggles led to a fetal car crash in twenty thirteen.
So the book really focuses on the optics of combat,
how the very act of seeing shapes war.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Not just seeing physically.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Right, not just physically, but as a deeply psychological and
cultural thing. It's about how the Marine Corps patterns, the
way its members perceive, how they engage, how they ultimately
survive battle, and how that vision impacts everything, even you know,
life back home.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
So it's crucial then to understand how this Marine eye
was deliberately forged. The book dives right into that, doesn't
it the historical context it does.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
It reveals how the US military, including the Marines, quite
literally institutionalized the willingness to kill. It goes way back
to Sla Marshal's controversial nineteen forty seven book Men Against Fire.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
Oh yeah, I've heard of that one. Didn't it make
some huge claim about firing rates in World War Two?
Speaker 2 (02:33):
It made the staggering claim that only fifteen to twenty
percent of WWII troops actually fire their weapons at the enemy.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
That's just astonishing. Whether it's perfectly accurate or not, that
number is wild. What did the military do with that perception,
that belief that so many soldiers weren't firing well?
Speaker 2 (02:49):
That perceived deficiency led directly to David Grossman's influential work
on Killing, which basically outlined the military's application of behavior
as psychology.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Okay, behaviorism, so changing behaviors through conditioning exactly.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
They radically changed marksmanship training. Instead of static bullseye targets,
they introduced pop up manchaged figures, you know, targets.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
That look like people, right, more realistic.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
More realistic, and troops were forced into more battle like conditions,
They got immediate feedback when targets dropped, and the result
it was profound. By the century's end, the non firing
rate for US troops in combat was near zero near zero.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
Wow. So they effectively trained up a hesitancy pretty much. So,
how exactly did the Marines, known for their distinct warrior
culture craft this specific Marine I during training? What's involved
in that rigorous process?
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Marine boot camp at twelve weeks is two weeks longer
than the Army's basic training, and every minute is designed
for a specific purpose. There's constant desensitization.
Speaker 1 (03:50):
These sessitization.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Recruits are drilled with these chants that are designed to
strip away normal human inhibitions. Phrases like kill the women,
kill the children, kill them all.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
That incredibly stark, brutal.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
Really, it's visceral and completely intentional.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
It makes you wonder how anyone comes out of that
process unchanged. And then beyond that desensitization, there's the precision
of marksmanship, right, that's key for Marines.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Exactly two whole weeks are dedicated specifically to M sixteen qualification.
Recruits are expected to hit human silhouette targets at a
staggering five.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Hundred yards five hundred yards, that's afar it is.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Then infantry training battalions push this further, incorporating moving targets
and truly reinforcing the core's foundational motto. Every marine a rifleman.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
So the takeaway isn't just about teaching someone to shoot.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
No, it's about perfecting the willingness and the ability to
shoot and kill another human being under extreme conditions. That's
the core of it.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
And this trained biological eye isn't operating in isolation. It's
profoundly augmented by technology. When marines say light it up,
what does that command truly signify in terms of this
unique perception, Ah.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
Light it up. It's a command that perfect encapsulates the
coterminous nature of perception and destruction in modern warfare.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
Meaning they happen at the same time, seeing and destroying
one exactly.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Light it up means not just illuminate, but eliminate tools
like night vision goggles, the thermal sight of an Abram's tank,
the Falcon View tactical imaging system, where the cameras on
a Predator drone. They aren't just gadgets, They're more than tools.
They are literal extensions of the human eye. They transform
how marines see the enemy, the battlefield, and ultimately how
(05:29):
they unleash their killing power. This constant technological augmentation creates
a radically different visual experience of combat.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
So this Marine I is forged through intense training, then
technologically amplified. But how does this abstract concept manifest you know,
when the bullets start flying. The book brings this to
vivid life through Sergeant Colin Keith's experience during the two
thousand and three invasion. Tell us about his story.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Yeah, Key's story is powerful. His unit thirty five was
ambushed by Fidani irregulars near Dewania. Keith was operating an
MK nineteen rapid fire grenade launcher from his humvey.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
An MK nineteen Wow heavy stuff, very and.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
He recalls this overwhelming sandstorm hitting just reducing visibility to
almost nothing for miles. Initially, he felt immense pride in
his service. He even compared combat to sports to sports. Yeah,
believing marine superior shooting skill was a key advantage. He
actually said, we shoot so much better.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
That initial pride comparing it to a sport. It seems
almost like a coping mechanism. Maybe a way to process
the incomprehensible, But the book suggests that perception shifted dramatically
for Keif later on.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
What happened The profound shift came later Keith experienced intense
guilt and nightmares from, in his words, killing so many people.
He began to empathize with those on the other end
of my rounds.
Speaker 1 (06:49):
That's a huge shift.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
Huge, And he asked himself this truly agonizing question. It
would make my service more difficult to live with if
I had killed those people for no reason. It just
reveals the deep moral st that even the most effectively
trained marine eye can't always escape.
Speaker 1 (07:04):
That individual experience connects to a much grander strategic vision
for the Iraq War, doesn't it. We're talking about network
centric warfare, this revolution in military affairs that promised unprecedented clarity.
What was this giant eyeball and space ideal all about?
Speaker 2 (07:22):
This revolution was driven by digital communications, satellite GPS, laser
guided munitions, all aiming for what you might call total situational.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Awareness, seeing everything everywhere.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Essentially, Yeah, The goal was for military forces to be
connected and coordinated like a single massive organism. Think Global Hawk, UAVs,
providing twenty four hour coverage, joint stars offering real time images,
even small Dragon e UAVs deployed right down to the platoon.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Level, so eliminate all blind spots.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
That was the idea, give a perfect, almost godlike view
of the battlefield.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
And this perfect view fed into the infamous Shock and
Odd doctrine, aiming for rapiday dominance by destroying the enemy's will, perception,
and understanding. The Pentagon even used bugsplat software to predict
civilian casualties.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
That's right, which led to debates about limiting destruction. Lieutenant
General James T. Conway, commanding General of IMF, that's the
first Marine expeditionary force that you put it very bluntly,
This isn't a fair fight. We didn't intend it.
Speaker 1 (08:21):
To be stark. But what's crucial here is the paradox. Right,
Despite all of this emphasis on precision tech and avoiding
collateral damage.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
The human cost was undeniable. The book sites an incident
where a five hundred pound laser guided missile could have
cleared a sniper from a mosque, but it was withheld.
Why because it would cause quote tremendous amount of collateral
damage to an important religious site in Iraq and possibly
also killing many civilians. It just highlights its constant tension
(08:49):
between technological capability and the ethical considerations on the ground.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Shifting gears a bit. It's fascinating how the Marine eye
isn't just shaped by training in tech, but also by
popular cold. How did marines actually perceive combat through the
lens of film and media.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
It's quite striking. Marines themselves described actual combat as like
a movie scene or having perfect cinematography for a movie.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
Wow. Really life imitating art.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Kind of, And it makes sense when you consider the
Marine corps own extensive film division and its well century
long symbiotic relationship with Hollywood. Camp Pendleton, for instance, has
been used as a set for films like Sands of
Yeojima for decades.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
So it's a loop. Hollywood depicts war, then war starts
to feel like Hollywood for those living it Exactly that loops,
and this loop extends directly to recruitment, doesn't it. You
mentioned commercials like Pride of the Nation using archived combat footage,
which brings us to this controversial, unsettling concept war porn.
How does the book define that?
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Yeah, the book doesn't pull any punches here it draws
a direct and frankly unsettling analogy to sexual pornography. It's
essentially illicit content designed to elicit desire or promote specific
aggressive combat behaviors. Okay, example, you see it clearly in
YouTube videos, sometimes apparently even shown in boot camp. There
are examples with sounds like oohs and oz watching Apache
(10:11):
attacks or one video called Marines Get Some Die MFI
with this intense heavy metal soundtrack depicting enemies as dune
Kun Muslim terrorists. It's designed to thrill and motivate.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
And the effect of these motivation videos they weren't just
for entertainment.
Speaker 2 (10:29):
No, they genuinely made viewers want to enlist or reenlist.
This whole concept of war package for pleasurable consumption is
what media critic Roger Stall calls mill attainment.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Mill attainment, like the History channels Shootout d d Feluja
with those blow by blow reenactments.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Exactly that kind of thing. Militaniment also extends to how
individual soldiers are portrayed, like MSNBC's for God in Country
profile on Chris Orth, a sniper. It showcases his one shot,
one kill ethos, which is compelling to many.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
But doesn't show the cost well.
Speaker 2 (10:59):
It briefly, almost fleetingly touches on his trauma, the burden
he carries, but the focus is clearly on the sniper's
hardness the finality of his actions, not really the deeper
psychological cost.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
This all suggests a deeper connection between maybe play and warfare.
The book argues that the ludic tenant that innate human
desire to prove oneself through competition and play is central
to marine warfighting, especially with military simulation.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Absolutely, and this is where the science fiction novel Enders
Game becomes a really crucial and kind of disturbing lens.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
Ah Enders Game the kids playing war games exactly.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
Its premise is chilling children unknowingly commit xenocide believing they
are merely playing a game. The book argues that simulation
minimizes moral responsibility and hesitation for killing, creating this dangerous.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
Distance, and the critique is that the military might have
missed the point.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Yeah. The author critiques that the Marine Corps may have
adopted the simulation aspect without fully appreciating the book's own
emphasis on empathy and guilt, which is a pretty central
theme in the novel itself.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
The military entertainment complex has a longer history than many
might realize, doesn't it.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
Well yeah. Early examples include the Army working with Atari
back in the nineteen seventies, despite some initial reluctance from
designers like Ed Rodberg who famously said he didn't want
to train people to kill right.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
And even Reagan mentioned it.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Ronald Reagan's nineteen eighty three Epcot Center speech even predicted
a future where children could wage war from afar. This
collaboration became much more systemic in the mid nineteen nineteen
oh so what changed well led to major developments like
the National Academy of Science Workshop in nineteen ninety six
and then the founding of the Institute for Creative Technologies
or ict at USC in nineteen ninety nine.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
And their goal.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
Their mission was pretty clear to create synthetic experiences so
compelling that participants react as if they were real. Imagine
projects like flat World designed to really put you there virtually.
Speaker 1 (12:57):
And this directly influenced how video games were into graded
into training. The Marine Corps was an early adopter in
the mid nineties right evaluating commercial games.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
They were they evaluated about thirty commercial games. General Charles C.
Krulex nineteen ninety seven order even allowed on duty play
of games like Doom for military thinking and decision making exercises.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
Playing Doom on duty that's a huge shift, making games
a legitimate training tool.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
It really was. And close Combat First to Fight, released
in two thousand and five, is a prime example of
this integration. Developed with Marine input, focused on four man
fire teams in urban combat, drawing on krulex idea of the.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
Strategic corporal was it realistic?
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Gamers, including former Marines, lauded its realism, even though the
actual violence was apparently watered down for teen rating, But
the structural violence of easy shooting, the way the game
rewards aggressive engagement that remained.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
So what does all this simulation mean for the war fighter?
For the human at the center of this Marine eye,
the ultimate psychological aim seems to be creating virtual veterans.
What does that truly entail?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
The goal is essentially to preload warfighters databases with accurate
representations of combat scenarios. The idea is to make them
less hesitant and more deadly fighters.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
Like practicing before the real thing.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Exactly. It's about achieving virtual presence, or being there through simulations.
In these things called infantry immersion trainers building what's called
muscle memory for combat before ever stepping onto a real battlefield.
It's a profound shift in how readiness is achieved, merging
the virtual with the physical.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
Yet despite all this training and technology, the Marine I
faced profound challenges in the shifting landscape of counterinsurgency or COIN.
How did the core try to reconcile its traditional killer
ethos with the demands of winning hearts and minds.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Yeah, there's a deep paradox there. The doctrine shifted significantly.
You go from Krelak's earlier essays to the two thousand
and seven Counterinsurgency Field Manual, which emphasized caring for civilians
just as much as killing the enemy.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
But that's hard to do in practice.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
Incredibly difficult. Turning off the killing switch became almost impossible
amidst suicide bombings and IEDs in places like Alanbar Province,
where the enemy was often totally indistinguishable from the population.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
And there was pushback, skepticism.
Speaker 2 (15:13):
Deep skepticism from some senior Marines and academics who basically
viewed do no harm coming from shock troops as nonsensical
or even hegemonic.
Speaker 1 (15:23):
This tension seems perfectly captured in general Madis's famous quotes.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
Absolutely like be polite, be professional, but have a plan
to kill everybody you meet, where is addressed to chiaite
chikhs I come in peace. If you fuck with me,
I'll kill you all.
Speaker 1 (15:37):
He became almost as supreme ludologist as the book calls him,
maintaining killing capacity alongside this humanitarian.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
Talk, exactly juggling those two sides.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
The Haditha killings in November two thousand and five serve
as a stark, really tragic example of these challenges, don't
they they do?
Speaker 2 (15:53):
It was a sunny stronghold, intense insurgency, and ied blast
killed a marine. What followed was awful. A marine squad
killed five on our men than nineteen Iraqi women, children
and old men in nearby houses.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
And the official report.
Speaker 2 (16:06):
The official report found a routine devaluation of Iraqi lives.
Viewing civilian casualties is essentially just the cost of doing business.
It revealed this staggering dissonance between that indifference and the
population centric mindset that was supposed to guide Kowine.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
That's horrifying. It raises critical questions about the psychological state
of these marines. A two thousand and six Mental Health
Advisory Team study gave some grim insights it did.
Speaker 2 (16:30):
The steady revealed that a disturbing seventeen percent of marines
and soldiers agreed that all non combatants should be treated
as insurgents. Fewer than half agreed non combatants should be
treated with dignity. Many admitted insulting Iraqis.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
But there's another side to that coin, right. The stress
they were.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Under absolutely critical context. The report also detailed the intent
acute stress reported by marines themselves, seeing things like my
sergeant's leg getting blown off, or friends burned to death,
picking up my friends off the ground because they had
been blown up. The Hidetha squad specifically was immersed in
this kind of unbearable stress.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
So how did the core try to self correct to
uphold its values amidst these complex realities the interestings of
the ethical warrior ideal.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Yes, there was an increased focus on honor, courage, and commitment,
often through literary culture. The warrior archetype was promoted as
this blend of killing, prowess and moral fortitude, someone able
to override his or her emotions and act mindfully.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
Like Stephen Pressfield's warrior.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Ethos exactly, emphatizing camaraderie, brotherhood, and a psychological salary of
pride and honor rather than just raw aggression. It was
an attempt to instill more reflective, principled approach.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
And they took this directly to the public with the
which Way would You Run? Campaign in twenty.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
Twelve right That advertising campaign highlighted humanitarian assistance, asking viewers
if they'd run toward chaos for help, not just for combat.
It targeted millennials interest in service to others, while still
you know, show casing marine mobility and firepower. An interesting
rebranding effort for a new generation.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Looking ahead, this marine I faces a looming identity crisis.
You mentioned Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates raising concerns.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
Yeah. Gates questioned whether the US even needs a second
land army anymore. He suggested that new anti ship missiles
could make traditional amphibious assaults basically obsolete.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
So the belief is shifting towards tech.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
The growing belief, Yeah, is that computers, missiles, planes, and
drones will win wars, which fundamentally challenges the traditional marine role.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
That sounds straight out of science fiction, which, incidentally, the
book argues, has always profoundly influenced military planning.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Absolutely, concepts like space marines and colonial marines are all
over popular culture Aliens, Battlestar, Galactica, Avatar.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
And Starship Troopers.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Starship Troopers even laid out the blueprint for powered armor
exoskeletons to augment human capabilities strength, speed, senses. There's even
a vision of a space born infantry called SUSTAIN for
rapid global force projection without needing permission to cross airspace.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Wild stuff. And this is where it gets really interesting
for the future of the Core. As technology takes over
the brute force aspects, the very definition of a marine
starts to shift. The book explores this idea of a
post masculinist marine, right.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Where traditional physical attributes like strength and speed become less critical,
which opens up these profound questions about gender roles in
combat and beyond.
Speaker 1 (19:28):
This shift where physical strength becomes less paramount directly led
to the Pentagon's twenty thirteen decision to end the ban
on women in combat, But that sparked heated debate, didn't it. Oh.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Absolutely, submarines expressed fears of destroying the Marine corps due
to worries about reduced standards or compromise unicohesion because of
potential sexual behavior.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
But the counter argument.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
The counter argument, of course, is that rigorous training can
shape behavior and fundamental American values of individual autonomy and
merit based opportunity demand and equal combat roles. Plus women,
like men from lower socioeconomic classes, may also find less
to lose in choosing military service.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
It also suggests a potential shift in the marine image,
maybe towards a protector role.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Potentially yeah, a softening up, maybe towards a protector role
that fits more traditional ideals of womanhood.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
And this evolution leads us further into the realm of
the cyborg warrior, with implanted sensors and cognitive algorithms, further
eroding traditional gendered sensibility in combat.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
Which leads to things like the Gladiator Robot, a Carnegie
Mellon prototype for the USMC back in two thousand and seven,
a multipurpose combat robot with optics far superior to any human.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Eye, which brings us to a core ethical concern, the
fear of relinquishing human control over the act of killing.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Precisely can ethical robots, as Ronald Darkin's research explores, actually
be programmed to follow ethical values on the battlefield. It's
a huge question, and.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
This links to Paul W. Kahn's paradox of riskless warfare.
Speaker 2 (20:59):
Yeah, the idea of killing without mutual risk, without the
threat of being killed yourself, reduces the moral justification for violence.
It could potentially lower the threshold for engaging in war
in the first place.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
This profound technological shift brings us back full circle to
the ultimate human cost. The book touches on biopolitics and
this phrase, the mournful differential of destruction. What does that
truly capture?
Speaker 2 (21:22):
It's a stark concept. It highlights the really disproportionate impact
of war. Arundati Roy searingly asked how many dead Iraqi
women and children for every dead American investment banker?
Speaker 1 (21:33):
Oof powerful.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
It points to a kind of sacrificial ethos in modern
US society, where young men and women, often from lower
socioeconomic classes, choose military service almost as a cost benefit
analysis given the broader societal inequalities. Evan Wright even called
recon Marines America's first generation of discosable children.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
And the toll of this increasingly synthetic eye is immense.
This cyborgine convergence between human and machine means the Marine
I became increasingly automated.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
Yet yet the argument that warrior's subjectivity lives insists that
the human experience remains absolutely paramount, which helps explain the
profound mental health crisis among veterans.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
We're talking about Colin keith snightmares, Tom Lowry's tragic death,
James Blake Miller, the Marlborough Marine who felt confused as
to why I'm still here and why other people aren't
exactly and.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
The profound impact is maybe best summarized by the mother
of a veteran who committed suicide. She said, the United
States Army turned my son into a killer. They trained
him to kill to protect others. They forgot to untrain him.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
That concept is now widely understood as moral injury.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
The violation of an ethical belief or moral code in combat,
which can leave these deep, deep blasting scars.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
Literature often serves as a mirror to this immense complexity.
Paul Fussel's ironic mode in war literature captures that collision
between innocence and awareness, the disillusionmentt and.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Anthony Swafford's jar head, frankly explos is a pathological desire
to kill with that visceral pink mist imagery, it's unslenching.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
Then there's Phil Clay's redeployment.
Speaker 2 (23:08):
Yeah, Clay brings this experience right home. With Sergeant Price's
fragmented memories, his orange state of heightened overwhelming perception, or
even a trip to Wilmington, North Carolina, feels just like
patrolling Felujah.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
That struggle to recalibrate, The struggle.
Speaker 2 (23:21):
To recalibrate from wartime perception back to civilian life is
powerfully portrayed. Even if Price finds some fractured purpose and
violent acts like shooting dogs, it's shown as this desperate
way to cope with his shattered reality.
Speaker 1 (23:34):
So we've journeyed through the really intricate evolution of the
MARINEI for Battle, from rigorous training and cutting edge technology
to its portrayal in pop culture and the pervasive influence
of simulation.
Speaker 2 (23:48):
We've explored the profound ethical challenges of counterinsurgency and contemplated
the future of warfare in a world increasingly shaped by
algorithms and robotics.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
We've seen the heavy human costs from psychological truy to
moral injury, and how literature grapples with this complex reality.
This deep dive should truly make you consider how deeply
interconnected perception, technology, and human experience.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
Are, especially when it comes to the act of war.
It forces you.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
To think precisely, which leaves us with a final thought
to ponder, if war is increasingly fought through synthetic vision
and by virtual veterans, how do we as citizens ensure
we fully grasp the true human and societal cost, Especially
when the lines between killing and playing becomes so blurred
and moral injury remains this silent, devastating epidemic.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
It's a question worth continually exploring. Absolutely
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!