Average Reviews:
(More customer reviews)As a former Naval Officer and now someone who works closely with the Navy and the other services, I was very excited to read this book and gain insight into 'why the navy thinks differently.' The author lays out a few interesting points about how the physical geography of the sea creates a sense of self-reliance amongst sailors and how that self-reliance in turn colors their decision making. So far so good although the book seems to rely more on his opinions then actual evidence to support his claims. Sadly, this part of the book is also rather light and the rest of the text is filled with long winded expositions on naval tactics, the point of which seems more about beefing up the length of the book than actually supporting the thesis. Despite this the book still carries through until the end when the author devotes nearly an entire chapter to how women and homosexuals are poised to destroy the Navy. "If the presence of women on combatant ships - including, of course, in naval aviation - is allowed to continue, and perhaps expand into submarines, and if homosexuals are permitted to serve openly in the armed forces, then the potential for catastrophic failure in future combat will have been increased." (121) This sort of reactionary writing would have been expected during the early '90s but this book was published in 2009, meaning the author has systematically ignored decades worth of evidence that, despite the problems that have occurred with the integration of women on ships, the Navy as a whole has not suffered in terms of combat power.
The author goes on to cite various psychology papers that claim that women are naturally unfit for military service and, therefore, are a detriment to the Navy. Having served with women in a variety of combat roles, this is simply not true. Biology does not predetermine attitudes and every women I ever served with was just as professional and competent, if not more so, then their male counterparts. Risk tolerance, fighting spirit, intelligence, and professionalism are instilled in all sailors and the degree to which those traits take hold varies just as much between men as it does with women. This sort of misogynistic attitude (at one point the author argues that a picture of women on a non-U.S. ship showing their breasts is comparable to the prisoner abuse pictures from Abu Ghraib) carries over into homosexuality, where the author (who states in the beginning of the book how thankful he is for having spent most of his childhood in an all-male boarding school) claims that gays serving openly will prevent the same sort of male boding that is so essential in combat. This fear reflects what one can only assume to be a deep-seated homophobia, after all, it's not like there is any reason why a gay man can't bond with a straight one in a non-sexual way provided both are accepting of the others sexual decisions. It's a shame the author (and editor) decided to include the last chapter in this book because it greatly detracts from what was an otherwise, at times, interesting read.
Click Here to see more reviews about: Navy Strategic Culture: Why the Navy Thinks Differently
To provide readers with insights into how naval officers think about the conduct of naval warfare, retired naval officer and Naval War College professor emeritus Roger Barnett opens the service for inspection. He attributes the unstructured, at-sea environment with powerfully conditioning an officer's way of thinking, explaining that the watery setting forces them to be constantly alert, self-reliant, and willing to take risks. In characterizing the culture, he describes an expeditionary mindset, underwritten by history and nourished by experience that sets naval officers apart from the other branches of the military. Barnett shows how officers think about the theory and practice of warfare in oceanic and littoral contexts.
Get 27% OFF
Click here for more information about Navy Strategic Culture: Why the Navy Thinks Differently
0 comments:
Post a Comment