The Burning Tigris

The Burning Tigris (The Armenian Genocide and America's Response) by Peter Balakian is a book well worth reading, about the first modern genocide of the Armenians by the Turks (Ottoman Empire). At the time (beginning in 1890, much more concentrated from 1914-1916), the Armenians were a stateless people, a religious and cultural minority within Ottoman Empire. It's estimated that one-half to two-thirds of the Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire were killed during this period. Yet to this day, Turkey denies the genocide even happened - or at most, blames it on the Armenians.

This book is one of the very few books I have read to make me almost physically ill. You cannot make this stuff up. As with many important world events, it showcases both the best and the worst of humanity. The best, in the American missionaries and diplomats who tried everything they could to save people, in some cases at the expense of their own lives. The best, in people that stood up and defended themselves against bad odds until they could stand no more. The worst, in the systematic attempt to annihilate an entire people.

For all that they had a systematic approach, there is such an underlying hatred and violence and satisfaction in the accounts of eyewitnesses, both Armenians and neutrals. The tactic of killing off the men first, so that there is no one left but the women, the children, the elderly, the infirm. Systematic rape and torture of women. Killing of children. Not just taking people's lives, but taking people's lives in sadistic ways that go far beyond a soldier's duty to defend their home.

All I can really say is, if you care about history, especially as it relates to human rights, you should read this book.

It also answered the question of why April 24 (my birthday) is Armenian Genocide Day. April 24, 1915, the Turks dealt a killing blow to the brightest and best of Armenians, taking out the most eloquent voices of protest. They almost silenced an entire generation of writers.

DV

Promised Post about Military Marriage

I mentioned this the other night, and I'm leaving it public so folks not on my friends list who might be interested can read it.

There have been articles in the press lately about how the divorce rate for the Army is going up (in the case of the officers, it is skyrocketing) and trying to link it to the Iraq situation. Big surprise, I know - separation from your spouse and family causes strain on your marriage? What's next, sex causes pregnancy?

Granted, the separations have their good points as well. They give you a chance to stand on your own, not just as part of the couple. They give you a chance to appreciate what the two of you have together. But for the most part, they can really suck. Communication can be problematical, at times. Email and phone calls and letters can go a long way, but it's still not the same as having your spouse there.

The largest problem with military marriages that I see is people getting married before they really know each other. Sometimes because one of the pair (or, these days, both of the pair) is deploying, and they feel they have to for whatever reason. I'm not here to judge whether it's a good reason or not. But it can be a problem. First you don't know your partner inside out, then you rush to get married, then you're separated. Things happen in this situation, and they aren't always good.

Then, you have the attitude towards marriage and infidelity. Everyone's heard the joke about how "what happens on TDY stays on TDY" or how TDY to Korea stands for "Temporarily Divorced for a Year". Commitment is hard, and a lot of people aren't living up to it anymore. We were chatting with our instructor, and he was saying how he could totally see how military WIVES (his emphasis) cheat. Because, you know, women need physical intimacy. He seemed kind of surprised that Seatmate and I called him on that - as if we were expressing some sort of Victorian ideal. I won't lie - I missed Brian like crazy while he was gone, and there were nights that I would have done anything to just touch him, just for a moment. We're fairly physical people (as those who have seen us together will attest) - we like to hug, and kiss, and hold hands, and even just sit together. I missed that while he was gone, and I miss it now. But I'm not going to jeopardize my relationship with my husband for a moment of physical pleasure. If I get desperate, I'll just go buy some more batteries.

The guys can be just as guilty, I warrant. There's plenty of guys who think nothing of cheating on their spouse while they're away.

And don't even get me started on soldiers who sleep with other soldiers' spouses. Because that is just wrong.

So, how can we fix this marriage problem? I seriously think the military needs to start some sort of mandatory marriage counseling, either pre-wedding or during your marriage. I think it would be an excellent investment, because people who stay in the Army tend to be people whose families are happy with how they're treated.

On a side note, if I have to read one more letter to the editor of the times that talks about poor little civilian spouses and ASSUMES that the "military spouse" must be a civilian female, I shall scream.
I am a soldier.
I am a spouse.
Don't ask me to decide which one is harder - sometimes it's impossible to tell.

How about the fact that dual-military marriages face their own issues and stresses? Or, what about the civilian male spouses? It has to be even harder for them, given that the stereotype is the soldier boy going off to war while wife/girlfriend stays behind, bravely waving goodbye.

Maybe I need to go write my own letter to the editor.

DV (who would really love to see a book about dual-military marriages)