I’m Upset About Mattis
I disagree with Captain Ed about recent remarks made by General James Mattis. According to CNN, Mattis talked about how much fun it was to kill the enemy:
“Actually it’s quite fun to fight them, you know. It’s a hell of a hoot,” Mattis said, prompting laughter from some military members in the audience. “It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right up there with you. I like brawling.
“You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil,” Mattis said. “You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them.”
Captain Ed says:
I don’t think that Mattis materially damaged our war efforts by playing into a stereotype of American bloodlust that foreigners have of our soldiers, because those who believe that will do so whether a Marine general makes undisciplined remarks or not.
There may be something to that, but like it or not, we are waging a public relations war as well as a military war. Comments like this hurt the public relations war badly. I agree with Captain Ed that I don’t want our soldiers to get “weepy” about killing the enemy — but I don’t want them to be stupid in how they talk about it, either. If Mattis made a blunder this big in the military war, he would be disciplined harshly. I don’t think he should escape harsh discipline just because his blunder was in the P.R. realm.
[…] 9:58 am
Andrea’s sweetness and light for “Patticakes” may have won her a pet weasel, but Saint Patty has just scor […]
damnum absque injuria » The Last Laugh (38c04c) — 2/13/2005 @ 6:38 pm[…] 9:58 am
Andrea’s sweetness and light for “Patticakes” may have won her a pet weasel, but Saint Patty has just scor […]
damnum absque injuria » The Last Laugh (38c04c) — 2/17/2005 @ 5:52 am[…] There has been a fair amount of shrill rhetoric directed against me due to my denunciation of Gen. Mattis’s counterproductive remarks about the joy of shooti […]
Patterico's Pontifications » Hopefully Final Thoughts on Mattis (0c6a63) — 2/17/2005 @ 3:13 pmI respectfully and strongly disagree. Enough wimpy PR attempting to soothe Barbara Boxer and her ilk. We sleep soundly in our beds because of folks like General Mattis. For an opinion much more articulate than mine, please read this:
The Old Coot (48c30c) — 2/6/2005 @ 4:02 pmCourtesy of Villianous Company (http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/), here are some more General Matthias quotes:
Number 1:
Our fight is not with the Iraqi people, nor is it with members of the Iraqi army who choose to surrender. While we will move swiftly and aggressively against those who resist, we will treat all others with decency, demonstrating chivalry and soldierly compassion for people who have endured a lifetime under Saddam’s oppression.
You are part of the world’s most feared and trusted force. Engage your brain before you engage your weapon. Share your courage with each other as we enter the uncertain terrain north of the Line of Departure. Keep faith in your comrades on your left and right and Marine Air overhead. Fight with a happy heart and strong spirit.
For the mission’s sake, our country’s sake, and the sake of the men who carried the Division’s colors in past battles—who fought for life and never lost their nerve—carry out your mission and keep your honor clean. Demonstrate to the world there is “No Better Friend, No Worse Enemy” than a U.S. Marine
Number 2
“We carry an embedded offensive capability in every convoy,” said Major General James Mattis, commander of 1st Marine Division. “To us you don’t drive on through, you stop, you hunt them down and you nail them.”
Maj Gen Mattis added: “If they choose to fight they are going to regret it, but we also believe that part of the physicians’ oath that says first do no harm. If to kill a terrorist we have got to kill eight innocent people you don’t kill them.”
Number 3:
The spirits of the Sailors, Soldiers, and Marines remain very high, unperturbed by the heat, enemy action, news, media pessimism, or disturbing misconduct of a few leaderless jail guards at Al Ghraib prison. We are defined by our men, one act at a time – with compassion for the innocent and discrimination when using their weapons, a discrimination unkown to the morally bankrupt enemy we fight. You ladies know these selfless, high spirited troops better than anyone, so you know it’s not false modesty when I admit I have the easiest job in the Division, thanks to the attention to duty, good humor, military efficiency and chivalry that these gallant young fellows display every day.
End
To paraphrase Abe Lincoln, “we cannot spare this man — he fights.” Before you let the metrosexuals of the MSM dictate what is and is not appropriate for a fighting man to say, consider what type of leaders we would have if we did. Do you want metrosexual-approved generals guarding your safety? I don’t.
Mark L (acae97) — 2/6/2005 @ 5:49 pmI do not think I could match either of the two prior posts but I think Chesty Puller, a man who joined the Marines as a private and reached the rank of Lt. Gen. would approve of the General’s comments and have little time for the limp wrists and pantywaists who are shocked by a patriot’s remarks.
TJ Jackson (5ea554) — 2/6/2005 @ 6:05 pmHarshly Discipline General Mattis?
Mark A. Kilmer's Political Annotation (23f806) — 2/6/2005 @ 6:39 pmI mentioned in passing that General James Mattis’s statements regarding the treatment of the enemy were great from the standpoint of what we want from our military but were dangerously impolitic at this point in history. Patterico questions Captain E…
Don’t you folks think there is any validity to the idea that we should not be making more enemies in the Arab world with rhetoric that makes us sound like crazy warmongers?
Don’t get me wrong. I respect this man’s willingness to fight. We need military men who will not shy away from a fight.
But comments like this hurt us. Forget the Barbara Boxers of the world. Think about the more reasonable Arabs, who may have tried to give us the benefit of the doubt, but who may be motivated to fight against us due to rhetoric like this.
Patterico (756436) — 2/6/2005 @ 6:43 pmPaterrico,
I’ve posted a couple of items on the Mattis kerfuffle over at my blog. Short version: I think you’re wrong. Mattis’s comment was no more horrendous than Lee’s famous quip that, “It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it,” or Patton’s remark that “Americans love to fight, traditionally. All real Americans love the sting and clash of battle.” Or, for that matter, Patton’s observation that he would “prefer to skin [Germans] alive” but feared that “some of our people at home would accuse [him] of being too rough.
Yes, I admit that Mattis’s comments are likely to shock Mr. and Mrs. America, or at least the namby-pamby half that has trouble with reality. But that’s largely a symptom of the ever-growing schism between civilian and military culture in this country. And I don’t think it’s Mattis’s duty to pander to the pansies who haven’t the slightest clue of what the military is all about, what military life entails, or what it takes to accomplish the mission while people are actively trying to kill you to prevent you from accomplishing it. Now, since I have no personal combat experience (although I was a Marine for seven years before law school), I asked two guys I work with — both Marine veterans of Vietnam (one an F-4 backseater, one a sniper, and both of whom are responsible for more than their fair share of dead VC and NVA) — what they thought of Mattis’s comment. They both confirmed what he said: It feels pretty damned good to kill the enemy, especially when the S.O.B. was just trying to kill you and yours, and especially when he is motivated by a contemptible ideology. That may be an ugly thing, and unpleasant to hear, but it’s reality. And for that reason, Mr. and Mrs. America need to hear it. If they can’t stomach it then we ought not send our young men and women to war, because sending them to war and then burying our heads in the sand about the full ramifications of that decision is a profoundly immoral thing. Otherwise, Mr. and Mrs. America ought to come to terms with what’s involved in war, with what exactly it takes to do the dirty job of defending this country and advancing its interests through force, and the types of leaders who get that job done. “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” Rough men like LtGen Mattis deserve our heartfelt thanks and support. They do not deserve to be greeted with upturned noses because they’re dirty, sweaty, bloody and proud of it.
Matt (318a08) — 2/6/2005 @ 6:53 pmDamn. Sorry ’bout misspelling your name, man. D’oh!
Matt (318a08) — 2/6/2005 @ 7:15 pmPatterico,
I just realized that you posted a comment while I was drafting mine.
Mattis is a professional soldier who said he likes his job. If that motivates people to fight against us, I’d be a little surprised. But if it does, so be it.
The other part of his comment was an expression of disgust for the sort of men who made up the Taliban regime. Frankly, those sorts of people are our enemies. They are not “reasonable Arabs” and they were never willing to give us the benefit of the doubt. Anyone motivated to try and bring death to Americans by that comment would’ve done so anyway, sooner or later. So let ’em come. Again, let me analogize to Patton, who said, “It is the duty of all commanders to see that their men are fully aware of the many vile deeds perpetrated upon civilization by Germans, and that they attack with the utmost determination, ferocity, and hate.” Might that comment have pissed off some Germans? Sure.
But so what? It’s not like we weren’t already at war with them.
Matt (318a08) — 2/6/2005 @ 8:07 pmThe problem with PR is that it is essentially spin. If I want to hear spin, I’ll (ahem, sorry) listen to any show on TV that features a panel of lawyers or politicians. I’ve no beef with them, but that is what they do for a living. I also know what military folks do (having been one for many years) and would prefer to hear them as they are, not as someone else would like them to be. As far as inflaming the “Arab Street,” I think the opposite may actually occur. The Arabs have always thought of themselves as a warrior people. Saddam, though feared, was also greatly admired because of his spit-in-your-eye and cut-your-heart-out rhetoric. Similarly, the “Z-man” gains a lot of support precisely because he IS so blood thirsty. OTOH, Bin Laden attacked us because he thought we were weak. Would 9/11 have happened if we had encouraged our military to be a little more candid in their public utterances? The Reputation of the Marines is a major force multiplier. From their point of view, you couldn’t buy better PR than all the wailing and whining from the MSM over the General’s remarks. Accusing the Marines of being barbarians is like calling the Pope Catholic — and it makes them smile.
Bill (d53947) — 2/6/2005 @ 9:06 pmthis is why there are Pentagon Spokesmen. Generals exist to figure out how to KILL PEOPLE. They are not there to be nice or to be politic. If anyone in position of power in the chain of command below civilian leadership is unable to think and feel just as General Mathis thinks and feels, they should be fired immediately.
john (6fdeb3) — 2/6/2005 @ 10:16 pmI’m not sure I disagree, but he should learn to keep his damn mouth shut. If he hasn’t been ordered not to make a fool of himself, maybe he should be.
Patterico (756436) — 2/6/2005 @ 10:23 pmThat’s basically the point I made on Spoons’s thread. I’m glad the guy likes to shoot the individuals I think need to be shot. I’m just not glad he lacked the common sense to know better than to say that out loud. Contrary to popular opinion, honesty is not always the best policy.
Xrlq (c51d0d) — 2/6/2005 @ 10:39 pmfirst of all why are you still up. Go to bed. I’m old enough to be your father and I’m telling you you need your rest for your work tomorrow. As to General Mattis—If you get a guard dog, you don’t complain about the barking and the pooping. That’s what they do.If you don’t like the barking and pooping get a gold fish. In this case, the job of General includes inspiring his troops to kill people. There is no nice way to do this. War is not about making nice. It is about detroying the advasaries will to fight. This can be done by taking away his means of waging war or by creating fear or dispair. Death is one part of war and a necessary part. There must be some level of basic hostility within the soldier or no man can bring himself to kill another man. There is no way that I know of to escape the reality of communication in a free and open society;therefor it is almost inevitable that some communication of the truth will find its way to public discourse. What to do? Consider World War 11 and the almost complete control of the press by the government. Nothing could be written without censorship. I do not believe that we need to go to the level that FDR and the Democrats did in controlling the press and suppressing dissent.
john (6fdeb3) — 2/6/2005 @ 11:05 pmReasonable Arabs will agree with Gen. Matthis’s statement. Certainly the Iraqis that voted on Sunday — and then on Tuesday shot up the terrorists that attempted to punish them for voting — agree with his sentiments.
As for the unreasonable Arabs — like the CAIR goons that started this flap in the first place? Well, Stonewall Jackson had a great piece of advice on what to do with ’em. It is a good deal more radical than anything Matthis said.
Like I said before if you want metrosexual officers — more concerned with fe-e-elings than missions — guarding you, then we should follow your advice, and discipline Matthis severely. As for me I would counsel him in the following manner: (Over a beer at the O-Club) “Jim, watch what you say when you are among the bone-heads of the meadia and CAIR. They will take any excuse they can to weaken our military by getting rid of leaders like you.”
Mark L (a5c192) — 2/7/2005 @ 5:10 amFirst, those folks in the Middle East respect strength. Don’t you forget that.
Second, why deprive a man of the enjoyment of a job well done?
OS
Old Soldier, not fading away (86bf57) — 2/7/2005 @ 11:18 amIn my opinion the General’s comments will not hurt the US at all. Fear of US combat troops by our enemies is a plus.
Harold (0d0969) — 2/7/2005 @ 11:56 amRobert Scales defends Mattis in the WA Times [link below]. a classic article: ‘[call on libs to]…demonstrate how to kill an enemy in a more humane and politically correct manner’. aren’t we tired of being criticized without beinf offered a viable solution, an alternative. personally, i find Mattis’ candor refreshing. who among us doubts his words as a fair characterization of how military men relate to each other? war is a violent business, why send someone who is going to speak in a flowery manner?
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050206-094203-4208r.htm
jonkendall (8a3aae) — 2/7/2005 @ 5:07 pmMattis comment is not going to offend any Arab who thinks, and won’t make any difference to those who hate us anyway. We have EAson Jordan accusing the US of intentionally targeting journalists, in spite of a lack of evidence on his part. Jordan’s comment is far more damaging ot the US, and yet it’s being ignored. I say give Mattis a pat on the back. I’m proud of him, and I have no sympathy for anyone offended by his remarks.
Ralph Tacoma (af0bc0) — 2/7/2005 @ 7:47 pmI have a hard time differentiating between Gen. Mattis and Generals Sherman, Grant, Patton, and other whom I greatly admire. The wimpy liberals have for years canonized mass butchers like Stalin, Mao, Ho, Castro, and the Khmer Rhouge. Why should I be upset?
No way Jose! My message to the Stalino-Fascist faction of the Democrats — stick in your ear! You deserve far worse–just keep talking and it will happen.
Mescalero (af92e5) — 2/7/2005 @ 8:35 pmJust. Shut. Up.
Victory Soap (f522ce) — 2/7/2005 @ 9:26 pmAnd while I’m at it…. a marine commander’s remarks about certain realities of combat are causing some people in the blogoverse to retract their testicles into their abdomens. Observe, one Patterico. He is “upset” that General James Mattis had the…
I can imagine how more reasonable Arabs might respond to Mattis’ statement – were there any more reasonable Arabs. Until such time as they manifest themselves and take serious exception to the sort of acts committed by their “less reasonable” brethren, I figure the lot of them deserve whatever opprobrium they get.
CGHill (6bfc75) — 2/8/2005 @ 6:45 amvictory soap: I think you’ve misconstrued Paterricos’ argument. In short his position is that General Mattis should be Gary Cooper–strong and silent.”Just kill ’em and shut up about it”. He has no problem with the killing of these murdering thugs, it’s the excess verbage he objects to.
john (6fdeb3) — 2/8/2005 @ 6:07 pmBlogtard of the Day: Andrea Harris
damnum absque injuria (38c04c) — 2/10/2005 @ 7:21 amThis bitch needs to be institutionalized. She’s not funny, she’s not snarky, she’s not clever, she’s just an entity in which arrogance, stupidity and conceit are all struggling to gain the upper hand. Someone, please take her out of our misery.
…
Speaking as the son of a career enlisted man – sgt. major, vet of WWII, Korea, & Vietnam – who joined up, my uncles tell me, as a result of a little misunderstanding involving a knife in a bar fight – I have no question but that he’d back Mattis. And speaking for myself, 4F but with 5 sons – if any of them were serving, I’d hope it would be under a commander like Mattis. The only mistake that Mattis made was talking when journalists were present. Ernie Pyle is dead.
harmon (dcac79) — 2/10/2005 @ 8:34 pmharmon, your views are very close to mine. I want men with his kind of fight. I just think it was stupid for him to say this publicly. Generals are supposed to know better.
Patterico (756436) — 2/10/2005 @ 9:09 pmPatterico – focussing strictly on the question of saying it publicly – I think we do need soldiers – generals – who will say this kind of thing out loud. Wars are not won merely by the army – at least, wars fought by democracies. The home front has to be behind the army, and has to have a sense of belligerency against the enemy. This is not being done in this war, as it was not done in Vietnam, and it’s one of the things that cost us in Vietnam. Bush has, once in a while, said things that are a little belligerent, only to be castigated by the press. But where some more Zell Millers? Where are the leaders who will say “we will seek them out & destroy them…not altogether without a certain degree of relish” (Churchill – I’m quoting from memory so it might be a little off…) For political reasons, Bush has to step carefully, but here & there, now & then, we need someone to say out loud that we are going kill them dead and stomp on their graves. And that we will enjoy doing it! More people will respond positively to this than you believe.
harmon (dcac79) — 2/11/2005 @ 5:51 amOur military exists for one reason, to exert our political will by force, or threat of force. That involves killing our enemies, destroying their stuff and taking their territory. He was being true to what he gets paid to do and to close our eyes to the true nature of war is foolish. It isn’t pretty, but it’s a necessary part of how the world has been running since our first ancestor smacked an attacker in the head with a rock.
Cerberus (0c7c86) — 2/11/2005 @ 9:47 amDresden
Winds of Change.NET (128088) — 2/12/2005 @ 6:21 pmToday marks the anniversary of the firebombing of Dresden by the British Air Force. Like a lot of people in the Anglosphere – more than will likely admit it – I first learned of it…
I’m of the opinion that this whole brouhaha is another manifistation of MSM bias. I can’t prove it, but I’d bet dollars to donuts that no one called the follwing general on the carpet for making a similar quote.
He could also get a bit less general (no pun intended) in his quotes…
RedJacket (c466f4) — 2/13/2005 @ 9:45 amSubstitute “Osama bin Laden” for “Hitler” and I’d have no problem with Mattis making the exact same comment. I see a difference between that and what he *did* say.
Patterico (756436) — 2/13/2005 @ 10:06 amThe Last Laugh
damnum absque injuria (38c04c) — 2/13/2005 @ 10:38 amAndrea’s sweetness and light for “Patticakes” may have won her a pet weasel, but Saint Patty has just scored himself a Sunday op-ed (more on that here) in the largest newspaper west of the Mississippi. I’ll leave it to the reader to decide which o…