Why does the warrior fight

My husband was in the military for twenty-nine years and now teaches American history to college freshmen. He is a gentle patriot who expects his wife to be the same. No, I did not tell my son to carry his shield or come home on it. I did try to instill love of country, belief in God, a sure goal of duty, and the knowledge of his own worth. Regarding Spartan stories, it might be a good idea to explore why those stories were created and who carried the oral tradition from one generation to the next.

The IDF warriors of all branches, while undeniably skilful soldiers, have repeatedly and wilfully targeted civilians; unless you choose to disregard investigations by the UN, Human Rights Watch and all the other usual suspects from humanitarian organizations — and those ex-IDF who are leaving the IDF in protest. These facts are well-documented and well-forgotten in US mainstream consciousness.

Terrorists blow up babies with car bombs or homemade missiles, and it is called murder; the West blows up babies with pound bombs or cruise missiles, and it is called collateral damage.

Why do they hate us? We are as arrogant as the Taliban are medieval. The state of Israel is currently doing to illegally occupied territories what the US bombed the Serbs for doing to Kosovo. Some of the most splendid warriors in recent times were the Waffen-SS, whose fighting spirit was acknowledged by friend and foe alike, and their cause was nevertheless despicable.

Jochen Peiper, of Malmedy massacre in-fame, reportedly asked the war crimes court to put full blame for the massacre on him and execute him — and then spare his men. A true hero and warrior; for a system that perpetrated the Holocaust. I could go on, but I know from experience it is pointless.

That I even try to speak up must be chalked up to what little sliver of warrior ethos must have been misplaced somewhere in me while my back was turned. This current series will no doubt prove interesting, but I question the use of a several thousand years old — and possibly unique — culture like Sparta as an exemplar of what it means to be a warrior. The example of the women not crying for their dead sons and husbands is, to my mind, a part of the culture of Sparta itself, not that of a warrior.

Yet I agree that there is a spark — an ethos — that all warriors have in common, but I would also say that there are so many layers of complexity beyond that. As I said earlier, I am looking forward to this series. The discussion weaving Spartan society, attitudes of the mothers, and the warrior ethos into one tapestry heads down a dangerous road of emulating imagined substance without understanding the context.

This military capability was not so much intended to project power offensively outside Sparta as to be able to suppress the inevitable helot uprisings. Thucydides highlights the inherent conservatism of the Spartan leadership- understandable when they knew that as soon as the army left Sparta, there was a better than even chance the slaves would revolt and no one would be able to do a lot to stop them.

A short anecdote about true toughness-. Seven years ago, after returning from a tour as a tank company commander in Iraq, I was assigned as a training officer for a reserve tank company in Kentucky. Shortly before Memorial Day, we received notification from the Casualty Branch, Headquarters Marine Corps, notifying us that a Marine from the local area had been killed the previous day.

My 1stSgt and I changed into our Alphas and headed north. His father took the news as well as could be expected. She immediately put the pieces together before we had the chance to say anything. That kind of compassion- that inherent goodness and grace- more than any warrior ethos, is the true strength of our country.

There is a fundamental problem with the depiction of Spartan women here: all the sayings quoted are anonymous and there are very good reasons to doubt their authenticity — even if they appear in Plutarch and have become dogma.

Spartans did not bring home their dead; they buried them on the field of honor. All the cited stories probably originate elsewhere and were intended to discredit Sparta, not praise her. At the same time, unlike the Trojan women, who are frequently portrayed as loving mothers deserving of sympathy see Euripides plays , these sayings make Spartan women seem so repulsively unnatural that Athenians could feel justified in any kind of atrocities against them.

The love of a mother for her child is one of the most primeval feelings in the world, a love that mankind has long acknowledged and cherished. Ancient Greek literature sets the standard. Medea remains a repulsive barbarian because she is willing to kill her children out of jealousy.

The quoted sayings are clearly intended to make Spartan women sound like barbarians, like unnatural, unfeminine creatures, who deserve no sympathy even in their adversity. Furthermore, all the sayings are predicated on cowardice on the part of young Spartan men.

Based on these sayings, Sparta was populated by cowardly men, a situation that seems hard to square with the historical record — even if we admit that Spartans were probably no braver than most other Greeks. Spartan women were unique in the Ancient world because of their education, economic power, and self-confidence, but there is no evidence that they were less loving mothers.

I provide more comprehensive information about Spartan women and society on my website: Sparta Reconsidered. My response to the story of the Spartan Mother and shield has always been the same.

Make it mandatory that when you kill your enemy, you have to eat the body. This mother was willing to send her son off to be killed, but was she willing to send him off to be eaten? This saying attributed to Spartan mothers is almost certainly enemy propaganda intentionally designed to make Spartan women seem unnatural — and Spartan men cowardly. It was celebrated in ancient Greek theater and even the Trojan women were made sympathetic by portraying their love for their sons and husbands.

To portray Spartan women as devoid of this fundamental human feeling was a device to make them seem alient, unnatural and barbaric. That made it easier for the enemy to justify any attrocities they committed against them. Note too most of these stories about brave Spartan mothers include a cowardly son whom they are scorning. After all, many of them were just cowards who wanted to run home to mother! There is no evidence whatever that any of these alleged sayings by Spartan mothers has any authenticity.

Eat the enemy dead? That could really slow down an offensive… and make things kind of difficult for the Navy.

I think SP gave you a pass on some of your comments. The history of the world is written in the hearts and desires of men. I love peace as much as you, however, there are wolves, and there are sheep dogs, and there are sheep.

Noone wants the sheep dogs around, until the wolves show up. I respect your opinion, but you need to revisit history realistically and objectively. Paradise is reserved for Heaven only, until then there will be wars, and you will need us.

Sparta was a warrior nation, committed to aggression and disinclined to detente with its neighboring states. It remains so today for the Jhadists. I truly believe that Mr. Thank you for this post, Steven!

It has inspired an article for my fitness newsletter. I sent the link to Callie. As a personal trainer and instructor, I work with so many women who fight for their families everyday. This series is helping me shape and articulate a direction for my business. For me, the warrior ethos is more the effect of self mastery.

I believe that those who see only the physical aspects to being a warrior have a complete lack of understanding. True warriors only fight when absolutely necessary. They are not some crazy, uncontrollable group of murderers driven mad with blood lust. They do not kill out of waste. Everything is based on efficiency of action.

Most killings are wasteful and an inefficient means of settling disputes. Honor is an aspect of self mastery. The ability to accept our fears, our concerns, our own short comings, and defy the weakness and temptations they bring despite the odds. To defy the tendency to cave to those things and allow such things to have power over us.

I think many people overlay their distaste for the loss of life and their emotional reactions to strife upon the warriors and soldiers who fight the battles. They understand that there is something greater at stake than just their lives. And that is what frightens people when they face warriors.

The absence of the fear of death or harm. It is the very thing present with in the spirit of the wild animal. They have no fear of death or harm when something needs to be done. Wars do change…real warriors are the same be they from antiquity or in modern age.

Life is full of strife and challenges and rightly so because with out anything that challenges us we would be big sacs of tissue floating around.

We know what the lack of physical challenge brings….. We know what the lack of mental training brings…. We know what lack of spiritual training brings… those who see nothing as sacred and everything as permissible….

The warrior is something to strive to become…. Warriors must face their own darkness and overcome. They must be intelligent. They must be at peace with their own nature and understand the necessity of that nature. If we look to tribal cultures there are rights of passage that teach children to face fears, to overcome and to persevere despite the PERCEIVED situation and odds or very real threat of pain. Now we have birthday parties and presents…. Nothing is taught… challenges are not met or even faced….

The most important battles never shed a single drop of blood and yet cause more devastation than can be calculated. In each choice we fight battles, invisible ones that no one admits. It is a internal state present inside of a person.

One must wonder…. Or at least how different the causes would have been…. I hope you all will continue that as you read my reply. I write from the perspective of an infantry officer currently in the SOF pipeline. That said, here is my take:.

Fundamentally, a warrior ethos helps a warrior decide when and how to act. In armed combat, it preserves lives. Civilian and enemy lives? You bet. Warriors armed combatants, in this case are defenders of cultural identity, first and foremost. Most warrior classes pay very close attention to their societal values because they need to understand what their culture believes is just and what is not.

In armed combat, the stakes are extremely high not only because we can die, but because we are asked to kill. We only kill certain people under very specific circumstances and in specific ways. Stray outside the bounds of our warrior ethos, we cease to act as an agent of our culture.

Are we perfect? Absolutely not. Often tragically so. However, a warrior who willfully acts outside his ethos becomes nothing more than a killer; a murderer. He ceases to act on behalf of his culture and is no longer a true warrior. While a warrior ethos does safeguard noncombatants and enemy combatants, it performs a vital function for the warrior as well. It is a lifeline he uses to pull himself out of the hell of war so that he may return home. If a man acts within the sphere of his ethos, he can return to the culture he has defended with his soul intact.

I think I understand your perspective, and I respect your position. The warrior archetype takes countless forms, most of which are non-violent. They are doctors, priests, businessmen, mothers, teachers and scientists. Along with those in our military, these warriors work to preserve our common ideals through commerce, education, technology, and spirituality.

Earlier in this thread I saw a post by a SSG who said he did not feel quite right as a warrior and that an ethos was dictated to him by higher. Brother, I felt the same way. What changed for me was that I sat down with my platoon and we decided to take ownership of our ethos. Like a PT or training plan, dudes will put more faith in something if they have active input into it. Why do we need this?

What is acceptable behavior and what is not? How will this translate to the young PFC or SGT who sees a man running towards him with a child under one arm and bundle of blankets under the other? A warrior ethos should be a living, breathing entity that everyone who abides by it constantly tweaks.

It means nothing if guys just parrot it like basic trainees. I would be surprised if that creed you just took ownership of did not translate into something that looked like common sense ROEs. You also mentioned guilt at wanting to test yourself against your enemy and were worried that you were being selfish.

If it must be done, do it well. Do I wish for war? If not me, then who? I admit, I do worry about the strain my work puts on my family. If you want to talk privately, my email is [email protected]. Having been on both sides of the battle as a soldier and commander, and parents who both were in combat: father in Vietnam, and mother during the bombing of Germany where her father my grandfather was a PW FOR 7 years.

Twenty years in the military service. This is a conversation worth having with the soldiers and familes who have Endured, Iraqi Freedom, and now as a neighbor and retiree. These insights by these soldiers are a great starting place for discussion on this subject.

Best K. Too many are lost to war, period. A short intro, I was born in NY in a Jewish family, was not allowed to have toy guns or watch cartoons because they are violent. Moved to Israel in and have been serving in the Israeli army since either as a conscript or a reservist.

I am a commissioned officer. I dislike the army in a very fundamental way, it provides security but destroys people and things and demands a wide array of problematic behavioral patterns, but I understand it to be a necessity. I do believe that there is a warriors ethos, that is the distilled essence of the use of violence to do what is morally right — for example to protect your family.

The Art and Ethos of the warrior is to use the minimum amount of violence to achieve that goal. To Soldier in Afghanistan: I would not fret about that feeling you are searching for. First and foremost make sure you do your job professionally and as safely as possible. You are a squad commander who is responsible to get your job done AND bring your men back home. I fought two wars and endless other stuff. I do not believe battle or war is not to be glorified, but to be won and sustained and for that to happen with the minimum psychological damage you must do what you understand to be moral and ethical within a context.

I first felt like a warrior when I was about 45 and realized I have been doing this for over 25 years. I was born just after the close of the Korean conflict; all of my uncles had served there. I missed the Viet Nam conflict, though I volunteered for the Navy in and intended to further volunteer for swift boats.

It is interesting to me that you frame the warrior ethos in the matriarchal context as I have always thought the strength of volunteerism, the willingness of American youth to fight in foreign wars stemmed from their sense of family and community, their particular societal and familial cohesion, which in much or most of America is anchored in a chivalric, matriarchal foundation and tradition.

My postgraduate study is in strategic intelligence and I now work for the Corps as a sworn civilian. I think your observations and conclusions on the origins and value of the warrior ethos in western civilization are spot on and your futurism prescient. My family has been in Virginia since the early s recorded and I was raised with values much like those of Robert E.

After living in California for thirty odd years; Virginia is my Country. To me, good warrior strives to be an eloquent, educated and thoughtful gentleman who shows deference toward women. A man who does not romanticizes violence, but paradoxically takes up arms. The professional is enjoined out of a sense of honor and duty.

About that, warriors are romantic… To my way of thinking, there could be no better friend or worse enemy. Having been among elite warriors most of my career I believe my values common among professionals, not just warriors, but driven professionals in every vocation.

And for all those who do not understand, we do. That propensity comes at great price when met. Yet, volunteers still come, are always out there, down through the generations: the willing who take pride, not so much in ribbons but for having stood into it. I have seen all the wrongs and horrors wars portend, and I have no regrets. I feel left out of this discussion, only now having access to the internet and this great forum.

Pressfield is, as he alluded to, far beyond a literal warrior. The virtues espoused here, courage, honor, integrity, loyalty are applicable to many professions. Take the paramedic: It takes courage to reach a victim in a hazardous location think glacier or high seas. It takes loyalty to your profession to do what it takes to reach that victim. It takes personal integrity exhaust all available methods to reach, and save that victim.

Or how about a Firefighter? Did it take courage and honor to run up into the WTC while everybody else were running out?

Or any dangerous building for that matter? Loyalty to the other men on your line? Or the loyalty to know that regardless, your team-mates will do what it takes to get you home? Outside of these virtues conspicuously similar to the Army Values LDRSHIP , there is the process of becoming a member of the warrior caste: self depredation, asceticism, sacrifice. In this regard, even an alpinist is a warrior: they do what it takes to gain a summit. Voluntary exposure to the elements while friends or family are indoors.

Fasting for days on end to temper your hunger for when it counts. Staying awake training through the nights while your wife is in bed so you can push on for days on end? Its sad how comfortable the West is with 4G internet and a Starbucks on every corner, a softening of America that estranges a warrior culture that has been a permanent part of society world wide; until we are tempted by the easy, fat lazy ways of those too meek for the warrior elite.

Maniot woman who was carrying amo to her warrior son and found him dead in his place during the Greek War of Independance……. Still, the posts are too short for beginners. Could you please extend them a bit from next time? Thanks for the post. I think anyone in the military would appreciate it. Please copy it and spread it around to anyone you think could benefit from it.

I can also see how it fits with what our military is doing these days. How many of them know that their friend was killed and yet they find the courage and will to go on? It amazes me to hear stories of men and women that can push through the toughest of times and face their fears head on. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Where did it come from? What form does it take today? We have no reports of a mother weeping or protesting. Posted in The Warrior Ethos. I already have a copy.

A Man At Arms is on sale now! Don't miss out on exclusive bonuses available to early buyers! And in many cases they seem to hold the warrior to a higher ethical standard than that required for an ordinary citizen within the general population of the society that the warrior serves. The warriors themselves frequently police strict adherence to these standards; with violators being shamed, ostracized, or even killed by their peers.

But why to warriors need such a code? Why should a warrior culture want to restrict the actions of its members and require them to commit to lofty ideals?

Might not such restraints cripple their effectiveness as warriors? Why could any warrior be burdened with concerns about honor and shame?

Warriors need a way to distinguish what they must do out of a sense of duty from what a serial killer does for the sheer sadistic pleasure of it. Their actions, like those of the serial killer, set them apart from the rest of society. Warriors, however, are not sociopaths.

They respect the values of the society in which they were raised and which they are prepared to die to protect. Therefore it is important for them to conduct themselves in such a way that they will be honored and esteemed by their communities, not reviled and rejected by them.

By setting high standards for themselves, warriors can create a lifeline that will allow them to pull themselves out of the hell of war and reintegrate themselves into their society.

This allows warriors to retain both their self-respect and the respect of those they guard. Certainly, there are honor codes and honor concepts, character development seminars, ethics classes and core values. I have asked many midshipmen and cadets this question in a variety of contexts. The answer they typically give is a mixed review.

I believe one of the reasons for this was captured by Mark Osiel in his book Obeying Orders , in which he argues that the modern military too often relies on a rule-following approach to character training, rather than employing a more Aristotelian method of promoting key virtues and providing strong role models so that young warriors can form deeply ingrained habits of excellence.

Midshipmen and cadets are exhorted not to regard themselves as an elite group, distinct from other cadres of the population.

While I certainly agree that those who serve in the military should show and, more importantly, feel respect for those who achieve great things in the civilian world and make their own contributions to society out of uniform, I see no reason why such respect should be thought incompatible with feeling elite themselves. There is nothing odd about feeling immense pride in being, say, an excellent fire-fighter, and yet still having great respect for those who are, for example, excellent coaches, artists, or scholars.

A warrior may take tremendous pride in the fact that he is among those few best qualified to defend his nation and still think very highly of those civilians who are best qualified to teach in urban high schools or run successful businesses or write an immortal sonnet.

On the moral side, I see nothing wrong with withholding respect from persons, in or out of uniform, who make no real attempt to adhere to ethical standards. If warriors do in fact live up to the high standards they set for themselves, it is not unfair or hypocritical of them to expect the same from others.

There are plenty of civilians who firmly believe that adultery is wrong and will remain faithful to their marriage vows, even if no laws required them to do so. With regard to their martial abilities, warriors-in-training should be encouraged to feel that they are capable of things that most civilians by choice or nature are not. What is the point of training if, at the end of it, you do not feel that you can do or withstand what those not similarly trained cannot?

Unfortunately, many rites of passage events intended to prove to the participants that they can do or withstand what others cannot have been softened to the point that they now carry little emotional significance. Forgot password? Don't have an account? All Rights Reserved. OSO version 0.

University Press Scholarship Online. Sign in. Not registered? Sign up. Publications Pages Publications Pages. Recently viewed 0 Save Search.