Max Boot (via Real Clear Politics) is an author I like, but I just don't understand why he complains that our troops in Iraq have too many material comforts:
No one would begrudge a few conveniences to those who have volunteered to defend us. But the military's logistics feats come with a high price tag that goes far beyond the $7.7 billion we spend every month on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. U.S. troops in those countries consume 882,000 liters of water and 2.4 million gallons of fuel every day, plus tons of other supplies that have to be transported across dangerous war zones. Centcom has more than 3,000 trucks delivering supplies and another 2,400 moving fuel — each one a target that has to be protected.
Among the more surrealistic moments of my travels was pausing at a base near Baqubah — a far-from-pacified Iraqi city that was Abu Musab Zarqawi's last base of operations — to enjoy a fresh-brewed iced latte at a Green Beans coffee shop. It hit the spot, but when I later told a Marine captain about the experience, he took away some of my enjoyment by asking, "I wonder how many men had to die to get those coffee beans to Baqubah?"
Yes, in theory, someone has died to get coffee beans to an American base. Just as some die to get ammo, water, and food to the troops. But dying for basic nutrition and ammo is far different than dying for coffee or other comforts, you may say.
Well consider the benefits of having troops who have creature comforts:
--Just looking at the coffee, staying awake on long duty would seem to save lives. Perhaps just visiting writers shouldn't be able to get coffee on base.
--How many troops come back from missions alive because when not on patrol they can rest in comfort? Would they really be better off living in spartan conditions, sleeping on hot, hard dirt with cold MREs and sand fleas for their entertainment?
--How many troops stay healthy and avoid becoming noncombat casualties because "luxurious" camps insulate them a bit for a short time from the harsh environment beyond the wire?
--How many lives are saved because veteran soldiers and Marines reenlist rather than quit in disgust at poor conditions and thus let a green troop take their place on patrol?
--How many other troops do those reenlisting veterans save because of their presence on the battlefield? Or can train new troops in life-saving practices back here? If they lived in two-man tents, sweltering in Iraq's heat and swilling instant coffee, would they re-up in such numbers?
There really appears to be a strange viewpoint that says that lack of material comforts makes you "lean and mean" and thus formidable warriors immune to all hardship. In reality, poverty of conditions just makes you skinny and depressed. In reality, such soldiers just get killed or go home when they can.
By all means, troops, grab a latte, play your video games or watch a DVD in air-conditioned comfort, get a good night's rest, and then go out and kill some more of the bad guys. Their lack of comforts are tiring the bad guys out--not making them invincible.
