Live data from Hacker News

Why Men Love War (1984)

esquire.com

41–50 of 188 posts

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#41

> But I believe that most men who have been to war would have to admit, if they are honest, that somewhere inside themselves they loved it too, loved it as much as anything that has happened to them before or since. This sounds conspicuously like the conservative version of the people who say "All men secretly desire to rape women."

I feel like this is an incredibly childish and almost insulting reduction of a complicated and important feeling that the author is trying to come to terms with, and one that is likely very common, even if not universal. He spent pages explaining and examining this attitude, and doesn't appear to be using it as a justification at any level, I don't think it is appropriate or helpful to frame it this way at all.

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#42
post #9
post #2

This is a compelling long read. If the subject is of interest, the movie Restrepo and this talk from Sebastian Junger [1] may be of interest, too. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wn0zEBhvwXY

> 42 American soldiers and many more Afghans were killed in the "Valley of Death" before it was finally abandoned, written off as more trouble than it was worth. Only 42 to get that nickname? After the World Wars happened? Wow. We've gotten soft in modern times.

The entire butcher's bill from the War on Terror and the Iraq war for the US military, over a decade and a half, would be less than a quiet day during one of the offensives on the Western Front in WW1 or the Eastern in WW2.

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I welcome the day when ideas stand or fall on their own and are no longer pre-judged and rejected because they are “conservative”, “liberal”, “religious”, “scientific”, or whatever.

My more educated friends go a step further and start calling things 'Hegelian' and such when I'm just trying to get directly at matters.

A fun drinking game is to ask them to rigorously define what “Hegelian” is, and every time the explanation becomes pointlessly vague or self-referential, drink. I take no responsibility for the inevitable stomach pumping though.

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#44
post #39

This is the single thing that freaked me out the most about our military and made me realize it wasn't the place for me when I joined at 17. Being a high school kid and meeting people who will look you straight in the eye and laugh as they talk about murdering someone, or watching their comrade's head explode. And not hypothetically, but in real, gruesome detail. I guess there's a need for that kind of person to exis…

> "people who will look you straight in the eye and laugh as they talk about murdering someone" Murdering, or killing? I ask because murder refers to a specific sort of unlawful killing, but it's not clear if you're using the term precisely. Most would probably say there's substantial difference between laughing about killing somebody who was trying to kill you (not murder) and laughing about killing a civilian in co…

One person's killing is another's murder. The act is the same regardless. There is no innocent self defense in war.

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#45
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, shit. I started doing that ‘cause I heard everyone else was, too...

I started because it saves time, urine is sterile when expelled and I am using soap to wash the rest of me which should clean everything after up. Makes sense to do it then, rather than use an extra couple gallons to flush 500ml of liquid to what is ultimately the same place. I also regularly clean the shower.

Oh jeez, the whole "is urine sterile" debate.

Enter on one side, the purists: "sterile means absolutely, positively no germs"

Enter on the other side, the realists: "if I pull open my festering sore, and you piss on it, will I get your illness?"

The purists say, "well maybe, the probability is not zero, you can't say that is sterile"

The realists say, "Run the experiment it 1000 times, and if no one gets infected, what do you call that? What do you call it if 1 out of 1000 gets infected?"

What do you say?

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#46
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really a conservative view? I’ve seen that sentiment on decidedly non conservative sites.

I welcome the day when ideas stand or fall on their own and are no longer pre-judged and rejected because they are “conservative”, “liberal”, “religious”, “scientific”, or whatever.

[deleted]

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started because it saves time, urine is sterile when expelled and I am using soap to wash the rest of me which should clean everything after up. Makes sense to do it then, rather than use an extra couple gallons to flush 500ml of liquid to what is ultimately the same place. I also regularly clean the shower.

Oh jeez, the whole "is urine sterile" debate. Enter on one side, the purists: "sterile means absolutely, positively no germs" Enter on the other side, the realists: "if I pull open my festering sore, and you piss on it, will I get your illness?" The purists say, "well maybe, the probability is not zero, you can't say that is sterile" The realists say, "Run the experiment it 1000 times, and if no one gets infected, wh…

And the romantics, "Does this have more germs than the saliva I gladly drink out of my lover's mouth?"

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#48

Not that this isn't an interesting read (albeit mostly a lengthy rationalization of shared trauma) but they really need some better editors over at Esquire — spelling, spacing and grammatical errors everywhere. Edit: there appears also in the text, frequently, the world "tile" as an adjective. "tile night" "tile blackness" "tile war". Methinks someone needs a better find + replace regex.

"til" in many cases should be "th"

"m" in many cases should be "rn"

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#49

> But I believe that most men who have been to war would have to admit, if they are honest, that somewhere inside themselves they loved it too, loved it as much as anything that has happened to them before or since. This sounds conspicuously like the conservative version of the people who say "All men secretly desire to rape women."

"All men" or "all people" is a trope that should be erased from our vocabulary. Most statements making claims (esp. about the motivation) of "all people" are incorrect. Every person has their own opinion, and you simply can't generalize . Unless it's naïve tautological claims like "all people need food to survive".

>Every person has their own opinion

Perhaps this is also a too-general claim :)

Re: Why Men Love War (1984)

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My more educated friends go a step further and start calling things 'Hegelian' and such when I'm just trying to get directly at matters.

A fun drinking game is to ask them to rigorously define what “Hegelian” is, and every time the explanation becomes pointlessly vague or self-referential, drink. I take no responsibility for the inevitable stomach pumping though.

I like to ask them to explain how I can build a rocket ship with it.
Post reply on HN