| updated weekly |
home - contribute - donate - message board - events - links - contact us - archive |
|
|
| February 2, 2007 Alaskan in Exile by Neil Zawicki, insurgent49 
I went to the coast with Amanda so we could stare at the
ocean and witness the relentless crash of the sea – kinetic
energy from the other side of the planet landing in a roar on the rocks
again and again and again – to try and remember how simple it all
really is, and how so little really matters.Of course, that’s not all we did. There was a continental breakfast at the Waves Motel in Newport, and a wooden statue of a sailor identified as Captain Ahab, and there was a little rack of DVD movies for rent at the counter, next to the tourist brochures. We selected two movies. One of them was a Vietnam War movie I had never heard of called Tigerland. The movie did not actually take place in Vietnam, but at Fort Polk, Louisiana in 1971, where a company of infantry were completing Advanced Individual Training and then shipping off to Vietnam – but not until after spending a week in a simulated Vietnam combat environment called Tigerland, an actual training facility built by the army during that war. What really struck me about this film is that it dealt with the psychology of the soldiers and of society at the time. It was a depiction of an army on the verge of unraveling. Troops got high in their bunks at night and fights broke out so frequently that the command structure had all they could do to keep the troops in line. The main character, Private Roland Bozz, was a rebellious “barracks lawyer” who had been in and out of the stockade and used his knowledge of military regulations to help soldiers get out of the army and go home. That was another thing that struck me: the portrayal of the number of troops who secretly or openly wanted out. There were a lot of them when I was in the army, and I am sure there were plenty back then also. “What the hell, when did, ‘my country right or wrong’ turn into ‘fuck this shit?’” shouted a frustrated company commander while dealing with the soldiers trying to get out of service. Later, the same commander confided with a top sergeant, “We are losing a war and the army is nearing the breaking point. Are we supposed to just let people go home?” Sounds familiar. I was impressed at how the film addressed the situation in Iraq while telling a story of Vietnam, the same way the novel and film M*A*S*H addressed Vietnam while telling a story of Korea. And when I learned the film came out in 2000, it became more a piece of prophecy than commentary. In another scene, a training officer instructed the men how to use a field radio and some alligator clips to electrocute a prisoner in the field by wiring his nuts to the battery during interrogation. At this, Bozz turned and walked off the training field, saying, “Why would I want to do that to another human being?” One by one, Bozz succeeds in helping soldiers get discharged for everything from hardship to psychiatric profiles. The military during a senseless war is one of the only institutions people are willing to be labeled mentally unstable to escape from. It happens a lot. There are powerful scenes in the movie of soldiers who are motivated and high-speed during the day, but at night break down and beg to be sent home. The film also depicts the absurdity of training troops to go and fight in a war that even the commanders have given up on, because it is pointless to continue. Like Tigerland, there are training facilities today that attempt to simulate conditions in Iraq. Interesting. Like Vietnam in 1971, we have been in Iraq long enough to know how to fight there, but also to understand that we are losing. Soldier on, I suppose. Neil Zawicki, exiled Alaskan, is Editor at Large for Insurgent49, a former reporter for the Alaska Star, and winner of the Alaska Press Club's 'Best Columnist' award. He is now living out the rest of his days in an undisclosed location in Oregon. He can be contacted at hondo23@gmail.com 'Alaskan In Exile' appears on insurgent49.com every Friday. |
-
Columnists -
- column archive -
January 26, 2007 January 19, 2007 January 12, 2007 January 5, 2007 December 29, 2006 December 22, 2006 December 15, 2006 December 8, 2006 December 1, 2006 November 24, 2006 November 17, 2006 November 10, 2006 November 3, 2006 October 27, 2006 October 20, 2006 October 13, 2006 October 6, 2006 September 29, 2006 September 22, 2006 September 15, 2006 September 8, 2006 September 1, 2006 August 25, 2006 August 18, 2006 August 11, 2006 August 4, 2006 July 28, 2006 July 21, 2006 July 14, 2006 June 30, 2006 June 23, 2006 June 16, 2006 June 9, 2006 June 2, 2006 May 26, 2006 May 12, 2006 May 5, 2006 April 28, 2006 April 21, 2006 April 14, 2006 April 7, 2006 March 31, 2006 March 24, 2006 March 17, 2005 March 3, 2006 February 24, 2006 February 17, 2006 February 10, 2006 February 3, 2006 January 27, 2006 January 20, 2006 January 13, 2006 January 6, 2006 December 30, 2005 December 23, 2005 December 16, 2005 December 10, 2005 December 2, 2005 November 25, 2005 November 18, 2005 November 11, 2005 November 4, 2005 October 28, 2005 October 21, 2005 October 14, 2005 October 7, 2005 September 30, 2005 September 23, 2005 September 16, 2005 September 9, 2005 September 2, 2005 August 26, 2005 August 19, 2005 August 12, 2005 August 5, 2005 July 29, 2005 July 22, 2005 July 15, 2005 July 8, 2005 July 1, 2005 June 24, 2005 June 17, 2005 June 10, 2005 June 3, 2005 May 27, 2005 May 20, 2005 May 13, 2005 May 6, 2005 April 29, 2005 April 21, 2005 April 14, 2005 April 7, 2005 April 1, 2005 - also by this
writer -
|
||||||||
| Copyright 2005
Insurgent Media. All Rights
Reserved. in-sur-gent (in sur'jent), n. 1. a member of a group which revolts against the policies of its leadership. |
|||||||||
