In the past week or so I've heard several times from different people how great it is that our servicemen and -women in combat zones can be so in touch with their families by means of modern communications technologies such as satellite, video, e-mail, social networking pages, and the like. There's no doubt that these systems have drastically altered how our troops overseas communicate with their loved ones.
But is the new age of instant communication universally "great?" Maybe not in every case. For many younger servicepeople, the military experience is the first complete break with family, their first chance to get out and make their own decisions. It's an escape, but also a formative process. I would guess that's why so many men, decades after their service, often seem to recall their military experience more vividly and positively than many other things they did later. "Mother" (rhymes with "smother"!) has no place in it; this is where babes in arms become brothers in arms.
Thinking back to my own service days, we had a technology called letters.* These primitive communication devices might take a week or ten days to reach their addressees, depending on how remote you were and how often a supply chopper came through. I sent off a letter home every week or so, and probably received one about as often. That seemed plenty, if not excessive. It wasn't that I was so focused on perfecting my military skills (hah!); it was just that the family seemed not to fit into the picture.
Forty years later, I also have to wonder how concerns from the home front distracted us from our duties and detracted from mission effectiveness. In an environment where alertness and focus are key to staying alive, who needs to be preoccupied with what's going on back home? I was not personally in an especially "hot" combat situation but it seems to me the more active the fighting, the less welcome distractions would become. They call soldiers "warriors" these days. It's a good term that reflects our shift to an all-volunteer force. It also suggests a focus that's far removed from mom's cancer operation next week, or a sweetheart who's marrying somebody else.
Don't get me wrong. Mostly, I think the new-and-better communication is a good development. From the point of view of parents, there's no question. Also, with widespread call-up of Reserves and National Guard units, there are more family men and women at war now than there used to be; and for this group, unpredictably ripped from their civilian lives, better communication is indubitably a big plus. Others, though, especially younger single males, may see it differently. Are there any who make the choice of not using all this new technology, and are they understood at home if they don't?
* "Letter," a written or printed message intended for the perusal only of the person or organization to whom it is addressed (Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002. http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com (7 Jun. 2009).
Comments