View From Another Angle

Our Task Force Guam guys were highlighted in Stars and Stripes: http://www.stripes.com/news/afghan-deployment-is-a-family-affair-for-guam-national-guardsmen-1.253334.

The picture in the article was taken in the motor pool at my current post. Those guys will be going home soon to a well-deserved fiesta. They'll be replaced by my brother's former division.

I am not a picture guy, but with the persistent prodding of the wifey, I have managed to take a few here and there.

This picture was from my barracks in my first post.

This was the site of our joint Memorial Day ceremony that I was a part of in the north.

This is the memorial on that post to those who have lost their lives while stationed there.

The largest city in the north in on the left; the rest of Afghanistan is on the right.

This was my chaplain assistant at our airport-post a week or so before heading home.

This is the guy I mentor. He is from Maryland like me (but one of the few good parts) and hopes to minister to ROTC students. I encouraged to attend seminary. He applied and was accepted into RTS Charlotte. He and his wife will both leave the Air Force in a year or so to begin that next adventure!

These are some of the snow-capped mountains ringing the capital city. In a few weeks, the snowfall will descend from the mountains and turn our sandy wasteland into a snowy wasteland. :)

These folks from my unit ran in the four mile Turkey Trot I oversaw on Friday morning. Guess which ones are Australian.

This is my body armor hanging on the wall in my office. I don it every time I go outside the wire.

This is my son's hand print, which I keep under my little Christmas tree. There is nothing I really want for Christmas this year. I have it all.

(By the way, I'm sure my little boy is a smarty, but I'm very suspicious about whether he really wrote the note. If so, he needs to work on his uppercase letters.)

A Defense of Three Controversial Wars

...in one page!

It is not as if any war is without controversy. Perhaps a third of our countrymen were English loyalists at the time of the Revolution. We seemed to stumble into the War of 1812 after a number of very partisan decisions (and scandals). Border skirmishes were used as an excuse to launch the Mexican War. A ship explosion of dubious origin presaged the Spanish-American War (presaging the Gulf of Tonkin incident in Vietnam less than a century later).

The Civil War was largely ignited by a firebrand minority of abolitionists in the North and a rebellious band of secessionists in the deep South. The bankers that were supposed to keep us out of the "Great War" were later accused of playing a role in our involvement. FDR was (rightly) accused on wanting to enter the even greater war against Hitler. In both Korea and Vietnam, many questioned why "American boys" were fighting wars that "Asian boys" should be fighting. And a Republican president couldn't go near an oil-producing state in either the early 90's or the early 2000's without the claim "blood for oil." (FYI, there was no economic/energy benefit to either war, with the exception that we preserved the oil fields of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in the first one.)

Here, I propose, in brief, to defend three of our most controversial wars: Vietnam, OEF, and OIF.

Like the whitewashing of the Civil War in modern education, the Vietnam War has largely been twisted beyond recognition before the eyes of America's youth. They do not know that there was validity behind our action there, the majority of the American public supported the war for much of its duration, and we had a very realistic shot at winning the war.

There are legitimate doubts accompanying the inception of the Vietnam War. Our initial involvement seemed to have more to do with French colonialism than Soviet communism. In addition, the incident that escalated our involvement in the Gulf of Tonkin was likely manufactured. That said, the "domino theory" behind our involvement was largely sound. The theory--that the fall of one state to Soviet communism would lead to another--is largely ridiculed today as anti-communist paranoia. But we were right to be paranoid. Regions did fall like dominoes to Soviet communism, including regions close to home. By the time Reagan came to office, the shadow of the sphere of Soviet influence had descended over much of the world.

That said, whether Vietnam was the right place to stop the dominoes from falling is questionable. What is beyond question is that the war was largely winnable, except for the incompetent strategy of some of our elected leaders and misguided tactics of some of our military leaders. In fact, the Tet Offensive, cited by Grandpa Cronkite as his rationale for labeling Vietnam a "failed war," was in fact a devastating blow to the Vietcong that could have presaged American victory. As this was a proto-terrorist war as well, a counter-insurgency strategy that employed a "winning the hearts and minds approach" would've gone a long way at uniting the South Vietnamese against the North.

Even after LBJ tried his best to let the war wind down into a depressing defeat, Nixon came in, revived American support and almost won the war. He withdrew American troops, but battered the North into oblivion from the air, which greatly reduced their ability against the South. It was only when Watergate squandered all of Nixon's political capital that the war was largely lost.

There was more unanimity on the war in Afghanistan. It was controversial to the extent that the U.S. attacked a country that had not first attacked the U.S. But it was not controversial in accordance with post-9/11 war doctrine, which declared that any states that harbor terrorists who pose a clear and present danger to the U.S are subject to the full extent of U.S. war power. Much of the world agreed with this principle of warfare, and for the first time in its history, NATO invoked the clause of its treaty that an attack of one member was an attack on all and joined the U.S. for the fight in Afghanistan.

That same principle of war doctrine became part of the justification for war in Iraq. After 9/11, the calculus of U.S. foreign policy changed dramatic. We learned that non-state-based actors could project devastating destructive power upon the U.S.  From that points on, any country the might equip terrorists groups with the resources and destructive power that could result in a catastrophe in the U.S. was subject to attack. There was no more clear and present danger in this regard than Iraq. In many ways, they were the most substantial supporter of terrorism. For example, Iraq did more to fund the terrorist actions of Hamas than any other nation.

At the same time, Iraq was clearly more 1) aggressive and 2) lethal than any other country. Of the main threats of the time--Iraq, Iran, and North Korea (Syria and Libya were cowed into submission by our new war doctrine)--only one country had attacked other countries in recent history (against Iran and later, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia) and only one had used WMD (against Iran and against the Kurds): Iraq.

In fact, even prior to our new war posture after 9/11, Iraq was deemed such a threat to international security that it was bound to certain conditions by the U.N., including the unfettered inspections of its WMD facilities. The U.N. specifically mandated military action against Iraq if those inspections were in any way prevented or manipulated. This danger was clearly recognized by the international community before 9/11. President Clinton only bombed Iraq when it was in violation of these conditions, but he clearly had warrant invade Iraq and decapitate the Hussein regime.

When put in the context of a post-9/11 world, where terrorists could wreak havoc upon our country, a nation with Iraq's track record and support of terrorism made them a threat the world could not abide. It is a shame that the indictment was not more unanimous against Iraq, but many countries had economic ties to Iraq that they didn't want to sever. Remember, however, that the U.S. led a "coalition of the willing," comprising several dozen nations, that saw the justice in that cause.

It is a shame that after not discovering WMD, President Bush defended the war on humanitarian grounds. The American people saw through this thin rationale. If we were in Iraq for humanitarian reasons, what about the Sudanese genocide, which was much more blatant?

In reality, the case for war in Iraq was not built upon their actual supply of WMDs, but of the potential possession of WMDs. After the first Gulf War, the U.N. forbid them from leaving this as an unknown quantity due to the threat they posed to the world. After 9/11, and with Iraq's connections with terrorism, the threat they posed was unacceptable.

These opinions, of course, are just that. But as our wars in the Middle East draw to a close (for at least a few years), may the discussions that surrounded them continue!

Happy Turkey Day!

To the tremendous surprise of many a family today, their soldier will be sitting at the dinner table with them. I just found out that our first wave of returning soldiers, expecting to not be home until the early days of December, were rushed through their outprocessing in Texas and flown out late last night.

The wifey got an email from her best girlfriend in the unit that she would be picking up her husband (my friend and roommate at Camp Eggers) late last night. They have a little girl who has missed her daddy. No more! May they and the family families who enjoy this unexpected joy today have a blessed and memorable time together.

I enjoyed my own little many Thanksgiving after a six mile hill run last night, compliments of my wife. I replenished with my typical carton of milk, as well as some newly arrived, protein-laden "Turkey Jerky" and an all-natural "Cashew Cookie" Larabar. The good life.

For the first time in a long time, I got to sleep in today. Like a dummy, I set my alarm for 0800 in order to make breakfast chow before it closed. I realized my mistake when I work up and adjusted my alarm for 0900, but it was too late. My body is conditioned to start pumping adrenaline as soon as I wake up in order to get jump into the day. I still missed breakfast due to my futile attempt to go back to sleep, but I compensated for that by drinking a few packets of Maple and Brown Sugar Cream of Wheat from a giant coffee cup.

I looked at the menu for our special meal today. I don't care about turkey, potatoes, stuffing, or pie. All I noticed, with East Coast-induced tunnel vision, was "shrimp cocktail." I'm skeptical. When they serve shrimp of "surf and turf" night each week, it's fried. Rumor is that frying the seafood covers up the frozen/re-heated taste. If the shrimp looks legit, you can expect several rounds of "More, please." It'll be the deployment equivalent of Oliver Twist.

Tomorrow, I will bask in the grizzly aftermath of my overindulgent culinary binge by enjoying the even more popular American holiday, Black Friday. I noticed that Barnes and Noble will have a 50% off deal on some of their book sets. I plan to claim a couple of said book sets and retire thereafter into the parlour (by which I probably mean the wooden bench by the Gatorade-bottle fountain).

Later today, I will be conducting an informal Thanksgiving chapel service. I call it "informal" because I believe true worship services belong to the Lord's Day and not to any civil holiday. That said, it provides a useful, informal opportunity to encourage the saints and perhaps prick the hearts and minds of the unbelieving. I will teach (not preach) on Rev. 22:1-5 and the importance of giving thanks for future realities, which are just as real as anything we hold in our hands today.

As I sign off, I look around at my broom closet of an office, now cleared of an assistant and more organized and breathable. I look above my dual computers and see a German calendar, one month removed from its conclusion (and largely mine, here on this deployment. On the right side of the calendar, there are pictures of the last time I played with my boy down in Texas (he already had his daddy's goofy grin by then). On the left, there are two hand prints from the daughter of our good friends in Colorado (the loud daughter, not the quiet one, who was probably meditating on something substantive during that time). Just underneath the hand prints is a small, stuffed moo cow holding a sign that says "Eat Mor Chikin."

I turn to the right, past my three shelves of books, to my one open widow. More pictures of wife and baby surround the window, as well as a number of counseling pamphlets. A Washington Redskins basketball hoop is stuck to the center of the window (I know, they play football). Now I turn to the back of the room, where my extra-small body armor hangs upon the wall. I love that it's so small, so that I can still move around like a ninja. Next to the armor is a facsimile Michelangelo painting of Adam's creation leftover from my wife's college dorm room. It covers my other window, which illuminates it with light during the day. Below it hangs an empty, solitary stocking where my assistant's body armor used to hang.

Turning to the final wall, I look upon two more shelves of books. My assistant's old "desk" is now adorned with a two foot tall Christmas tree, sent from a veteran and VFW member who has deluged us with decorations with the support of his fellow vets. On the wall above the tree is a Washington Redskins folder, which almost mocks me with taunts of a wasted season and not even a top draft pick to show for it. Next to the tree (which has cool, color-changing LED tips on the bristles) is a bag of candy for soldiers, packed by elementary school students in New Jersey.

Between the bag of candy and the tree is a scrolling picture frame, where I can enjoy pictures of Malawi, my proposal to the Mrs., crazy college days, and the arrival of the little one. There are also a bunch of pictures of me from when I was little, taken from a slideshow given at our wedding rehearsal. I'm not sure my mom realizes that several of the pictures were not actually me, but my younger brother. I've had several "Wait a second!" moments when looking at the picture that are supposedly me.

Finally, resting against the base of my tree, is a large index card with a little green baby hand print on it. That gross, spittle-covered hand will be touching my face in a couple of short months. I will love it (and then will wash my face). Until then, little Jack Jack's hand greets me and bids me come home.

Gettysburg: The House Divided Almost Falls

I never realized how close our country was to losing the battle at Gettysburg, and consequently, the Civil War.

Perhaps that is because I never finished reading Shelby Foote's acclaimed and monstrous series on the Civil War. I couldn't keep reading. I find the whole conflict unbelievably depressing.

I learned soon after high school that the conflict was not nearly as clear-cut from a moral vantage point as I was led to believe. Slavery played role in the lead-up to the conflict, but not the decisive role. Some of the evidence for this contention:

-The majority of the country, including the North, was willing to tolerate slavery. This included Abraham Lincoln. He was perfectly content to seek a gradual extinction of slavery through compromise and economic incentives (paying for freedom, etc). What he, and the North, would not abide was the dissolution of the United States.

-The Emancipation Proclamation, while rooted in the morality of Lincoln and our founding ideals, was also the result of a pragmatic pursuit of undermining the free labor which helped support the Confederate cause and excite the abolitionist base of the North. It also only applied to the Southern states, not the Northern border states that still allowed slavery.

-There were many in the South who did not support slavery, including a number of Southern leaders. If one asked the average Confederate why they were fighting, they would respond "Because they are down here." They were against the federal government being mobilized against their states and homes and against a Northern minority's moral imposition.

-If the Union had lost the battle at Gettysburg. Not only would it have been a disastrous military defeat, leading to the possible occupation of DC, it would have been a disastrous political defeat. New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania were all turning against the war and another loss would most definitely prompt many of them to demand a suing for peace terms and a compromise on slavery. Even if Lincoln tried to stand against this rising political tide, he would have likely lost to the Democratic candidate for president in 1864, Gen. George McClellan, who would have likewise sued for peace and compromised on slavery (most Northern Democrats were against the Emancipation Proclamation).

As it was, the fiery speech planned by the Democratic Governor of New York for July 4th, denouncing the continuation of the war, would need to be cancelled due to the events of July 1st-3rd in Gettysburg. Here's how the Confederacy almost won the battle and the war:

-Gen. Robert E. Lee invaded the North, not do achieve a decisive military victory, but to so thoroughly demoralize a war-weary Union that they were forced to sue for peace and end the war. He initially wanted to avoid a general engagement. If he had managed to avoid such an engagement, he would have likely won the war. (He knew what was happening in NY, NJ, and PA.)

-If an engagement did come with Union troops, he would capitalize on their frantic efforts to catch up with him and turn his whole army against each over-extended Union corps as it engaged him. But his trap was sprung early by over-zealous Union corps commanders, who didn't give him time to consolidate his forces. Meanwhile, his cavalry under Jeb Stuart was nowhere to be found and his on-ground intelligence was poor enough that he didn't realize how quickly the whole Union army was to catching him. Instead, the Union and Confederacy were probably throwing in new corps and brigades at about the same pace. If the Confederate army was given time to consolidate and/or the Union army had been slower to consolidate, Lee's strategy would've likely won the war.

-The battle itself was not a contest between Lee and his Union counterpart, Gen. George Mead. This was due to Lee's leadership philosophy (present the overall strategy and let the corps commanders guide the tactics) and Meade's inexperience (three days in overall command prior to the battle) and lack of imagination (always reactive, never proactive). Instead, the battle came down to the leadership of corps and brigade commanders. And perhaps for the first time in the war, the Confederacy was outmatched. They sorely missed the innovative and aggressive tactics of Gen. "Stonewall" Jackson and were baffled by the hilly, gated terrain of Pennsylvania. If the mid-level tier of Confederate leaders was still infused with Jackson's audacity or was more comfortable with the terrain, they would have likely brought about a Confederate victory.

-There were a number of moments when the Confederate army's distance from victory could be measured in yards and minutes, and most of these yards and minutes centered around Cemetery Hill--the Union stronghold. Yet, at each of these moments, an unforeseen and incredible obstacle was thrown in the way. Many an unknown Union one-star or Colonel would jump from his horse and join his men in fights to the death. Reinforcements would arrive for the Union at just the moment when the lines were being overrun and were sometimes able to throw back vastly superior forces in the confusion. At other points, Confederate leaders stopped their offensive just short of total victory, thinking that they could mop up later in the battle. Finally, at several key points, the Confederate force would have prevailed, but for the delay or cowardice of another leader/unit that was supposed to guard their flank and press the attack. If, at any of these points, certain mid-level Union leaders showed less courage, reinforcements arrived five minutes later, or the full array of Confederate forces assigned to an attack were at the ready, the Confederacy would have prevailed.

But after three days of battle, Gen. Pickett's doomed charge was dashed against the rocks of a matured and desperate Union army and the Union scored its first substantial military victory of the war (quickly followed by Vicksburg in the west). The Confederate army was forced back across the Potomac River, anti-war politicians in the North cancelled their speeches, and the Union army was ready to press home their victory (but for the dawdling of Meade and his array of mostly moderate Democratic generals). The whole complexion of the war--militarily and politically--was decisively changed in time for the celebration of America's independence.

Yet, at such a great cost. Approximately one-third of both the Northern and Southern armies were lost to death, injury, or capture. Some companies were reduced to a mere handful of soldiers, all of their comrades-in-arms now lost to them. The death toll that day exceeded 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and D-Day. The second day of battle alone was nearly equivalent to the horrendous battle of Antietam a year before. Perhaps the most horrific dimension of the retreat for Confederate soldiers, aside from the devastating affect on morale, was the sounds coming from the medical wagons that passed them by. One voice was heard crying out "I am dying! What will become of my poor wife and children?" Thousands of widows would be asking that same question in the weeks to come.

The Civil War was not fundamentally fought over the issue of slavery, but over whether a state had the right to secede from the Union. Were the rights of the state ultimate over the rights of the individual it sought to oppress or the rights of the nation that was Constitutionally-bound? The state, the great bulwark of federalism against the oppressive tendencies of a national government, was used to bludgeon the individual and hold the nation over the precipice of anarchy. After that time (America's "second founding," according to historian Mark Noll) the greatest line of defense in service of Constitutional freedoms was largely lost due to its abuse.

Lincoln came to speak of the Civil War in spiritual and apocalyptic terms. While the war was fundamentally about preserving the Union, for Lincoln, it was also God's judgment upon such an unjustifiably moral evil as slavery. While reading into God's providence is a futile endeavor, the great moral scourge of slavery was removed from history's great island of freedom through the great moral scourge of self-inflicted war. To belittle the horror of either scourge is to belittle the great blood-letting through brought our country back together again.

Random Tidbits

After being gone for the better part of two weeks, I was able to start anew on my cycle of going to a site with a team each week. Today, I had the pleasure of joining the first team I traveled out with when I moved to this post. I spent the brunt of the day counting sensitive inventory that we are transitioning to our Afghan counterparts and talked with my soldiers at the margins.

Last night, I counseled a Romanian friend who is distraught that he might be kept here an extra seven weeks. He promised his little girl that he would be home for Christmas. I gently reminded him that we must entrust our families to the Lord, who wields love in power in a manner that we could never replicate. This man frequently asks me about my "little angel," so he knows that this burden is on that we both carry.

He also took the opportunity to confess his sins to me and ask for forgiveness. (In his Roman Catholic worldview, he equates me with a priest and calls me "Father.") I gently reminded him that if He is in Christ, then his sins--past, present, future--have been nailed to the cross with Christ and there remain (I pounded on the picnic table for emphasis). He has resolved to not fall into the same sins that he has in the past and is keeping his resolve in this regard, but I reminded that he doesn't live in order to earn God's favor, but lives in gratitude for Jesus who earned God's favor for us.

Amidst the current turmoil, his heart was prone to wander, believing that God has forgotten him. I told him, and must remind myself constantly, that if we believe that God has forgotten us, it is because we have forgotten God. That is why God frequently calls us in the Scripture to "remember." Only in remembering His character, the life and death of Christ, and His promises that are bound to that saving work, can we remember in all seasons that we are not forgotten.

At the end of our time together, I was able to give this man a small box with two fleeces and school supplies, lovingly donated by my mother-in-law. He was most certainly grateful, especially at such a difficult moment. Speaking of which, our Canadian friends no longer get mail. There mail system was already in incredibly slow up to a month or two ago. But when the Philippines got hit by their natural disaster, the few Canadian choppers joined our military and that of other friendly nations to come to their aid. That now means no mail for our Canadian soldiers. They happily make the sacrifice for the Philippines, but for the small contingent of Canadians left here after December, I would love to do something to make sure they're remembered.

After a couple of days of small smatterings of conversations with the wifey, we were deluged with almost three hours of rich conversation last night. I am so blessed that such communication is not the exception but the rule in our marriage. We may have lived parallel professional lives at points in our marriage, but by God's grace, our deep friendship has never been compromised. I look forward to our road trips soon after I get back, when we can spend hours reflecting on these trying months and envisioning the years ahead.

I finally found a book that drew me in. I am now over 500 pages into a 600 page book on the Battle of Gettysburg, written this past year by eminent Gettysburg scholar, Allen Guelzo. The lead-up to the battle was a bit slow (like the first book of Lord of the Rings), but once the battle got underway, I was hooked. More on the book later.

I had the privilege this past weekend of preaching at both the morning traditional service (my normal service) and the evening contemporary service (which I normally attend). On Thanksgiving, I am cancelling my normal No BS BS and replacing it with an informal Thanksgiving service, hopefully drawing folks from both Sunday services. May God stir me with gratitude in this as well!

Uncanny

Tying Up the Ragnar

I sent the following email (below) to our new overall commander, an Australian Brigadier General, a little while ago. Note the final article, which was published a week after our race and includes comments by the captain of my team (from Canada) and a few pictures from the event. In the picture of a group of us cheering on runners, I am the dude on the far right with the muddy legs, stocking cap, and cowbell. (You can never have enough cowbell.) A number of runners have told me that this is something they will never forget and will be one of their enduring memories from this deployment. In a theater of war, such as this is, let us pray that this proves true!

Greetings, sir.

Just over two weeks ago, as you were transitioning in, about a dozen soldiers from our unit joined about fifty other soldiers, including a couple of dozen Canadians, in a massive two hundred mile relay race at Camp Phoenix.

This race started as a random brainchild of mine, and with the full support of the Ragnar Relay race organization in the States, and the help of a number of experienced Canadian runners, we were able to coordinate this race in only a few short weeks and had five teams complete the race in under 30 hours.

As an additional benefit (aside from the pride of finishing), this race was publicized in the States and our soldiers were kept in the thoughts and prayers of a number of Americans on that day. Please see the attached press releases and articles on the race:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/community/press-releases/3923/

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865590328/Soldiers-run-their-own-race-to-remember-the-fallen-while-reminding-us-all-of-the-costs-of-war.html?pg=all

http://www.lasvegasweekly.com/news/2013/nov/18/running-ragnar-relay----las-vegas-and-afghanistan/

With Gratitude,

CH Roberts

Taking the "M-E" and the "I" Out of Marriage

A soldier was telling me that his younger brother recently walked in on his mom and her boyfriend while they were engaging in sordid acts. It was traumatizing for the young man.

But he can't tell his mother this, because he would be trying to keep her from being happy. That is why she divorced their dad--he wasn't making her happy. Now she is with someone who makes her happy and doing things that make her happy. Who cares about the kids?

Marriage is not meant to make me happy. It is meant to show the world how a man and woman can love each other even when unhappy, reflecting the love of God for His unlovable people.

My wife is the joy and delight of my heart. What do I do if I am unhappy with her or our marriage? I get over it. And I redouble my efforts to serve her and bring her joy.

Marriage is sanctifying. It is meant to kick the snot out of our selfishness. It is a strict school master, teaching me to love my wife more and love myself less.

As I learn this lesson, I graduate to parenthood, which is, guess what, sanctifying. It kicks the snot out of my selfishness all over again and teaches me to love those who can't love me back.

Yet most of my soldiers look back on the tattered remains of love in their own upbringing and find little hope for marital love. If marriage is about making me happy, then my marriage is over.

May God in His infinite wisdom draw selfish sinners closer together and teach us of the sanctifying power of marriage and its powerful witness to the cross of Christ, where the God-man gave His life for the life of His Bride, the Church.