Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic
To me, this ably illustrates the need for a well-trained militia to react to potential threats given that the regular army could be a half-week march away. Which is probably why the Minutemen are given such prominence. But, it does imply that such a militia must have access to good training and be well disciplined if it is to act in a timely and effective manner, after all, it may be required to hold the line for several days to allow the main force to arrive. However, it does appear that over the course of time, because this implication has not been overtly stated, most people have forgotten (or haven't bothered to read between the lines) this and now seem to think that a bunch of householders grabbed their guns and fought off an empire.
|
Despite our fascination with violence military power, Americans are highly averse to actually serving. We have a Hamiltonian sensibility in that regard. We’ve been at war for 13 years in Afghanistan and were at war in Iraq for 8 years. On the order of 1% of us have been involved in uniform. The same people keep going again and again and again. Between the two wars, some guys have fought WW2 twice.
Anyway, the myth that fighting wars is relatively easy for the right kind of people justifies the American aversion to the discomfort of service. It’s human nature, really. However, some societies have done a better job of inculcating the belief that a modest amount of universal discomfort is necessary for success on the battlefield. The myth that farmers and shop keepers with no training or formal organization beat the British Army rationalizes the American aversion to service.