OTT: If ye break faith with us who die
James Nicoll
[Note to Canadians: Yes, this was inspired by exactly what
you think [1]]
So you have a military and civilian government. Ideally the
civilians are in charge. Odds are that at some point, the interests
of the civilian government and those of the military will diverge.
Conflict is a useful thing in stories and the conflict between the
civilians and the soldiers is good source for fiction.
There are at least three basic ways this can break down:
Military right, civilians wrong:
The guys on the sharp end are in possession of more facts
than the guys at home or less biased by prejudice. Given stupid
orders, the soldier boys have to either find a way to interpret
them in a more useful way, to follow them to their personal doom
and thus show the nation what being a patriot is or perhaps go
home and institute a new form of government.
Anderson had at least two stories that touched on this:
In one, the effete decadent civilized people (but I repeat myself)
of Earth use semi-barbaric people at the periphery to hold off
alien enemies. Eventually the virile semi-barbs tire of this and
seek a new arrangement. Who! Will! Win!?
Like that was in doubt.
In STARFARERS, the military steps in to give the US
government some much needed guidence, which is presented as a
bad thing and the End of True American Democracy (because, of
course no real democracy ever recovered from an event like
that). This is a bad thing.
Civilians right, military wrong
This too is fairly common: those gung ho guys with the guns
just want to shoot stuff but sometimes that isn't the right solution.
Examples might be DOCTOR STRANGELOVE, where a solution to the
Cold War turns out to be suboptimal or Kube-McDowell's EMPRY, where
some military decisions are made without the benefit of the full
facts.
It's more complicated than that
Perhaps both sides are right but in different ways or perhaps
both sides are wrong. Maybe it's something else even more complicated.
THE LAST AMERICAN CAESAR (I forget who wrote that but don't
take this as a recommendation to hunt it down) details coup and
counter-coup driven by the reluctance of the American social elite
to serve in the military (leading to alienation between military
and the civilian government), plus some fairly bad decisions all round
on top of that.
1: Note to you unfortunate souls outside Canada: An unbiased commentary
on the events can be found here.
http://rickmercer.blogspot.com/2006/04/priority-six-we-are-bunch-of-pricks.html
What Mercer doesn't mention (perhaps because it had not yet
been announced, is that not only will we no longer fly the flags at
half mast for dead soldiers but they'd also like to stop the press
from photographing the coffins of the dead as they arrive in Canada.
--
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
James Nicoll
James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> THE LAST AMERICAN CAESAR (I forget who wrote that but don't
>take this as a recommendation to hunt it down) details coup and
>counter-coup driven by the reluctance of the American social elite
>to serve in the military (leading to alienation between military
>and the civilian government), plus some fairly bad decisions all round
>on top of that.
Actually, it's THE LAST CAESAR. I seem to have conflated
AMERICAN CAESAR and THE LAST CAESAR. LAST AMERICAN CAESAR would be
about how Douglas McArthur's
The sequence of events, as I recall them was:
There's no period of reform in the US armed forces post-
Vietnam. The elite decide service is beneath them and as a logical
consequence, so are all the people who are in the military.
Various events in Europe and Asia lead to the end of the
Cold War and the replacement of the Cold War's bipolar world
with a multipolar one.
No longer worried about the Soviets and with (I think)
economic issues at home, the civilian government, in particular
the administration of the day, springs massive cut-backs on
the US armed forces. Officers who object are cashiered.
All hell breaks loose when factions within the military
suddenly realises they seem to have a lot of guns and can use them to
influence policy.
James Nicoll
James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <e2qlv4$stp$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>> THE LAST AMERICAN CAESAR (I forget who wrote that but don't
>>take this as a recommendation to hunt it down) details coup and
>>counter-coup driven by the reluctance of the American social elite
>>to serve in the military (leading to alienation between military
>>and the civilian government), plus some fairly bad decisions all round
>>on top of that.
>
> Actually, it's THE LAST CAESAR. I seem to have conflated
>AMERICAN CAESAR and THE LAST CAESAR. LAST AMERICAN CAESAR would be
>about how Douglas McArthur's
>
thought about it.
"great-grand nephew so angered the powers that be in the
American Empire that they deposed him in 2062 and replaced him with a
surprising number of Presidents in the next year."
Pete Granzeau
It sounds just like what happens south of the 49th Parallel, Great
Lakes, etc. Thumbs stopping ears, fingers covering eyes: "LA LA LA We
can't hear you!"
James Nicoll
Pete Granzeau <pgra...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:54:28 +0000 (UTC), jdni...@panix.com (James
>Nicoll) wrote:
>
>>
>> [Note to Canadians: Yes, this was inspired by exactly what
>>you think [1]]
>>
>>
>>on the events can be found here.
>>
>>http://rickmercer.blogspot.com/2006/04/priority-six-we-are-bunch-of-pricks.html
>>
>> What Mercer doesn't mention (perhaps because it had not yet
>>been announced, is that not only will we no longer fly the flags at
>>half mast for dead soldiers but they'd also like to stop the press
>>from photographing the coffins of the dead as they arrive in Canada.
>
>It sounds just like what happens south of the 49th Parallel, Great
>Lakes, etc. Thumbs stopping ears, fingers covering eyes: "LA LA LA We
>can't hear you!"
It's very nearly as though the two countries share some
common history and culture, isn't it? The problem is, there's
isn't any particular ill-will in Canada about our troops in
Afghanistan and although obviously we would prefer if they did
not die, at least this time it wasn't our American allies who
killed them. So why the flag thing and the media ban?
Could be reflexive aping of the current American
administration coupled with a failure to understand the
reason why they act that way. It could be a reflexive
"It has be bad because the Liberals thought of it" [1].
The commemoration thing could be because conservatives
like their commemorations like they like their graves
(mass) and the media ban may be because the ReformaTory
core is kind of backward and may think cameras can steal
souls.
Or perhaps they know something we don't about how
many dead soldiers we are going to get.
James Nicoll
1: Actually, it was a ReformaTory backbencher who thought of
it. The Liberals merely implimented it.
Mike Schilling
"James Nicoll" <jdni...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:e2qlv4$stp$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> 1: Note to you unfortunate souls outside Canada: An unbiased commentary
> on the events can be found here.
>
> http://rickmercer.blogspot.com/2006/04/priority-six-we-are-bunch-of-pricks.html
The little knew of brotherhood
The faith of fighting men
Who stopped that flag that used to flew
and blamed old Jean Chrétien
A.Mo...@nhm.ac.uk
James Nicoll schrieb:
The sequence of events, as I recall them was:
>
> There's no period of reform in the US armed forces post-
> Vietnam. The elite decide service is beneath them and as a logical
> consequence, so are all the people who are in the military.
>
> Various events in Europe and Asia lead to the end of the
> Cold War and the replacement of the Cold War's bipolar world
> with a multipolar one.
I remember that one (or at least the first part). IIRC Germany (nuclear
armed under a SPD chancellor) and the Soviets cut a deal, where Poland
and CSSR are are divided (again).
The Soviets need all their forces in a war against China and Japan
(which also has nukes and went communist). There are probably also
several other things going on. On the whole a very weak story.
Talking about military takeovers, isn't there a coup in Wilsons Year of
the Quiet Sun ?
Andreas
--
Andreas Morlok
Department of Earth and Planetary Science
Kobe University
Kobe
James Nicoll
<A.Mo...@nhm.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>James Nicoll schrieb:
>
> The sequence of events, as I recall them was:
>>
>> There's no period of reform in the US armed forces post-
>> Vietnam. The elite decide service is beneath them and as a logical
>> consequence, so are all the people who are in the military.
>>
>> Various events in Europe and Asia lead to the end of the
>> Cold War and the replacement of the Cold War's bipolar world
>> with a multipolar one.
>
>I remember that one (or at least the first part). IIRC Germany (nuclear
>armed under a SPD chancellor) and the Soviets cut a deal, where Poland
>and CSSR are are divided (again).
>The Soviets need all their forces in a war against China and Japan
>(which also has nukes and went communist). There are probably also
>several other things going on. On the whole a very weak story.
That the first novel in that setting. The US coup was a
consequence.
>Talking about military takeovers, isn't there a coup in Wilsons Year of
>the Quiet Sun ?
Well, an attempted one by the JCS. It demonstrated that old
adage: never bring a gun to a fight where the other guy has a time-
machine and tomorrow's newspapers.
A.Mo...@nhm.ac.uk
James Nicoll schrieb:
> >Talking about military takeovers, isn't there a coup in Wilsons Year of
> >the Quiet Sun ?
>
> Well, an attempted one by the JCS. It demonstrated that old
> adage: never bring a gun to a fight where the other guy has a time-
> machine and tomorrow's newspapers.
Right, now I remember. Thinking about it, there is also a Drake/Morris
novel
(Arc Riders ?) presenting a similar time line. As result of some time
travellers
changing the past, the Vietnam war escalates into a war with china.
Sometimes in
the 80s, a military coup is attempted, which leads to a nuclear civil
war in the US (IIRC).
Andreas