The truthfulness and authenticity behind the dreadfully disturbing war stories of soldiers and veterans is often questioned by skeptical listeners, wary readers, and even military personnel defending the army. The inhumanity, the despair, and the utter wretchedness depicted in tales of soldiers frequently frighten the untainted ears and minds of civilians, provoking a longing for disbelief, and a desire for blindness in the light of astonishing misery and unimaginable actions. Such skepticism surfaced with an article entitled “Shock Troops” published in the July 23, 2007 issue of The New Republic. Several disgusting events were illuminated in this article (preceded by an earlier piece by the same author entitled “War Bonds”), provoking intense incredulity from readers concerning the veracity of the story. Although the facts of the story perhaps do not parallel the truth, we must recognize the sentiment behind such tales. For the sake of legality, factual reality is necessary, but for the purpose of objective learning it is not the truthfulness of the facts that must be considered, but it is the sentiment behind such depictions that we must recognize. Perhaps a story fails to adequately follow the lines of authenticity, but this does not make the soldier a liar. It is crucial to recognize that the fog of terror and the chaos of war may prevent a soldier’s memory from being loyal to the truth, and the tales that are told must be recognized not for the authenticity of the events, but for the realness of the emotions that trigger the words of the storyteller, and what these words reveal about the nature of war.
The indignant readers of The New Republic could not fathom that the events depicted in “Shock Troops” could possibly be real. A myriad of arguments and articles were presented refuting “Scott Thomas’” (pseudonym) descriptions of such incidents as the intentional slaughtering of dogs, gross mockery of an IED woman, and making light of a mass grave filled with the skeletons of children. Could this have really occurred? Many readers believe not, and attack Thomas’ claims by stating that the stories are “highly implausible” (The Weekly Standard). Although such actions are terribly inexcusable, it is important that these accounts are not simply dismissed for lack of authenticity, because despite the questionable facts, the sentiment behind the stories holds immense importance in understanding the harshness of war. The terror one experiences in the face of war is evident through the stories soldiers return with, and it is not merely the events that we must consider, but the words that are spoken that we must delve into and learn from, without tripping on the question of veracity.
The events described in “Shock Troops” are definitely “shocking”, but can we not pry out the emotion upon which this account rests? These stories clearly illustrate the crude destructiveness of war while illuminating the personal affects that individuals experience. By reading war books such as The Things They Carried and All Quiet on the Western Front it is clear that war is devastating, and simply because these events are not “true” does not negate the sentiments described. Many war stories conduct a sense of dismalness and the horror of war, while accompanying these images with satirical humor. It is imperative that we read such stories not as an attempt to gain knowledge of events, but to gain insight into the minds of the soldiers and the nature of war itself.
Thomas, (his actual name is Beauchamp), “recounted some grotesque incidents in his columns, including his own mocking of a woman disfigured by the war” (The New York Times). His tales are not depictions of valiant acts of courage, or boastful accounts in which he dueled with death, but events that possibly bear shame. What can we draw from the words of Beauchamp? Questioning the validity of his words is one option, but it is digging into the meaning of the events is of much greater academic value. Beauchamp’s articles show us that war has the potential to twist minds and force people to do things that seem undoable, or unthinkable.
Much of the outrage that followed Beauchamp’s article stemmed not only from the effect that such an account may have on the credibility of the United States’ military, but the effect it would have on the image of America as a whole. The incidents described in “Shock Troops” are dreadfully immoral and greatly offensive, but did such events really occur? Where the truth lies is unknown, as there is evidence supporting both arguments. Yet the answer only truly matters if the law is involved. Prosecuting those who committed such acts must be separated from prosecuting the words of the author. Beauchamp’s article must not be recognized for the incidents it describes, but for what it reveals about the nature of war.
After the publication of “Shock Troops” and the indignation that followed, Beauchamp responded to the critics and stanch disbelievers that he had provided merely “one soldier’s view of events in Iraq” that were “never intended as a reflection of the entire U.S. military” (Washington Post, p. 153). If such incidents are false, clearly the author should be held accountable. However, despite where the truth stands, the writings of Beauchamp cannot be disregarded due to a question of veracity. The emotions and the sentiment that may have triggered Beauchamp to write “Shock Troops” must be considered for their valuable ability to paint the part of the personality of war. Regardless of whether or not his stories occurred, clearly the scar of war stained his thoughts with crude and harsh memories, and illuminated the horrific nature of war, and the tremendous effects it has on the minds of soldiers.
In Tim O’Brian’s book The Things They Carried, he describes the nature of war stories, stating, “it’s difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen” (p. 71). Due to the chaos of war, and the fright that it instills soldiers may be prevented from remembering the true events. However, it is this chaos that is the most important factor of a soldier’s tale, as it shows the readers and listeners the true characteristics of war, in all its violence, and in all its sorrow, while being in the midst of a pandemonium of bullets, gunshots and emotions.
All the chaos and all the sadness and all the pain and all the courage and all the love and all the beauty that embraces our world is fully released in the time of war. The words of soldiers and veterans, despite the truthfulness of the events they describe, must be regarded as testimonies of the nature of war. As a Vietnam veteran and storywriter, Tim O’Brian shows that “almost everything is true” while “almost nothing is true.” From this, we can learn that by stripping away the hard facts of the stories, there is a tender commonality between them all: war is unique. War has many characteristics from horrendous fear to amusing boredom. It is imperative that such stories are taken not for the knowledge of events, but for the sake of understanding all the personalities of war. As an objective learner, never having fought in a battle, and never having the frightening face of war stare me in the eyes, I will never fully understand the nature of such an unimaginable phenomenon. Thus, I must listen to the words of soldiers to truly learn about the nature of war. As Mr. O’Brian puts it,
War is hell, but that’s not the half of it, because war is also mystery and terror and adventure and courage and discovery and holiness and pity and despair and longing and love. War is nasty; war is fun. War is thrilling’ war is drudgery. War makes you a man; war makes you dead (The Things They Carried, p. 80)

My Visit to the Mosque

Walking down the driveway to the green and white painted mosque, I cautiously observed the devout worshippers of Allah; the men with their long coarse beards, and the women with their hijabs and children. I entered on the left side, the women’s side, as the men went around to the right. Slipping off my beaten up sneakers, I laid them next to all the other shoes, some tall and elegant, others flat and comfortable. I tiptoed into the worship area, taking a seat on the blue carpet.
There was a lovely decorated wall that secluded the women behind the men. Unlike in a church or synagogue, we all sat on the floor rather than on a chair or bench. We sat facing Mecca, the holiest city in the realm of Islam. This Saudi Arabian city holds such reverence because it was there that the prophet Muhammad received the revelations from God. Muhammad habitually retired to a cave to participate in private meditation, when one time he fell asleep, only to be awoken by the angel Gabriel. Gabriel commanded him to recite:
Recite! In the name of you Lord Who created.
Created man from a clot!
Recite! And your Lord is Most Bountiful-
He taught by the pen-
Taught man that which he knew not!
(Qur’an, 96:1-5)
For the remainder of his life, Muhammad continued to receive revelations, thus creating the powerful religion of Islam. Because the words of God were directly recorded and interpreted, Muslims believe that the Qur’an is perfectly and precisely the word of Allah. Unlike the bible and the Torah, which are supposedly corrupt due to men’s constant interference, the Qur’an, (written in Arabic) has not been tampered with, and thus is the exact and last deliverance of God’s will. Consequently, significant reticence has been held in translating the text into other languages, and traditionally one is to refer to printed volumes of the Qur’an as masahif (literally, “binding” or “volume”), “implying that the divine word is singular and cannot be perfectly contained in ink and paper.” Furthermore, a version that is not in Arabic is even less accurate, less perfect, and should be regarded as merely an interpretation of the literal word.
I sat there, gazing at the women with their many colored scarves, so lovingly hushing their restless children. One woman bore a full burqa that enveloped her entire body with a mere slit for sight. A younger girl wore a bright pink beaded hijab, as she played with glitter bracelets throughout the service. We, as women, could not see the imam because of the wall between us, but we could hear his deep penetrating voice on the speaker that was placed on our side. The service was delivered partly in English, and partly in Arabic. The verse that has stained my memory, with all its beauty and eloquence is Sura 81, discussing the Day of Judgment. Spectacular images are created as this momentous day is described, “the stars turn dim and scatter”, “the mountains made to move” are just a few of my favorite depictions. It was somewhat difficult to comprehend the speaker with his broken English and mixed in Arabic, but nonetheless the entirety of the service intrigued me. When the imam had finished addressing the pious worshippers, the mosque was engulfed in a hum of deep and devout prayer. Everyone lowered his or her heads to the ground, demonstrating complete submission to Allah.
In Islam, there are certain “Pillars of Faith” that one must follow, known as the shahada: prayer, fasting, alms giving, and the Hajj pilgrimage. In this essay I will elaborate only on the importance of prayer.
Muslims are required to pray five times each day. This ritual of prayer is called salat and although most followers do not strictly observe it, salat remains a central aspect of the religion. Muslims are not obligated to go to a mosque to perform their ritual prayers, but are encouraged to particularly during the midday prayer on Fridays, which is the session that I attended.
Salat prayers are performed in accordance to the travels of the sun, but “none of them are done precisely at the moment of a sun-related time (for example sunrise or sunset). This is consciously to disassociate Islam from any form of sun worship.”
As I attentively watched the women lost in midst of prayer, I began thinking back on the previous week, when a group of fellow students, including myself went to the mosque so as to be introduced to the customs with which we were to adhere. I remembered the immense warmth and welcome that I felt when I entered. There was one older man who was pleasantly plump, with a white beard that ironically reminded me of Santa Claus. He brought us cookies and tea, and constantly told us “you are very welcome here, very welcome,” in a muffled voice, coated with a strong accent. At the worship service as well everyone was remarkably friendly, and accepting. I spoke with one woman from Pakistan, who was not allowed to pray because she was menstruating, and thus considered unclean. There were people from a myriad of countries, including Egypt, Algeria, and the Philippines. It was wonderful to see such a vast range of differences enjoying and participating in this caring community. However, it was not simply the commonality of a religion that brought these people together, but the intense love that each person held for Islam. The first thing that Jameela, (the women who gave us our orientation) said to us was, “I love my religion. I love it so much I could cry.” I could feel this passion like it was a tangible fog resting in the midst of the mosque. I could feel this passion when the elderly man offered us goodies. I could feel this passion in each word that Jameela spoke, and I could feel this passion when the entire congregation lowered their faces to the ground submitting fully and completely to the greatness of Allah, the merciful and compassionate.