Michael Steele made some political comments this past week and was crucified, rightfully so for the partisan portion of his comments. Mr. Steele was not totally wrong. He was only wrong in his statement which suggests the war in Afghanistan is President Obama’s self-initiated war. That is completely incorrect and Mr. Steele knows better than that. However, Mr. Steele is absolutely correct that history has not proven any nation has a good chance of taking a war into that region and come out with a victory. Both the British and the old Soviet Union squandered wealth and human resources in that region for decades before both of these nations packed up and left in shame and defeat. There are some psychological lessons to be learned from Mr. Steele’s correct political statement.

The landscape, geographical structure, culture and religious beliefs of the region make it absolutely impossible for any nation to conduct a successful war in the region. I am disappointed President Obama made a decision to continue that war after many years of absolute minimal progress. My personal opinion is that President Obama should have been wise enough to recognize the human, economic, and even the political implications for this nation to continue to prosecute the war in Afghanistan especially, at the time this country desperately needs to focus every attention at home and maximize every resource available to the people of this nation.

But that is the problem with male ego and psyche. When men are in power and are in charge of making war decisions, majority of the time men yield to those male characteristics that tend to inflate the testosterone driven male psyche and ego. A classic example is the war in Afghanistan where all the evidence is there for President Obama to make the right choice—bring the troops home and seek intelligent ways to engage the evils of terrorism.
From the beginning of time, men saw and still see war as a means of pounding their chest, flexing their muscle and feeding the unhealthy segment of male ego. Men proudly send their sons to sacrifice their young lives in wars because it is a patriotic thing to do. Just in case you wonder I am a man, all man. Being a man does not prevent me from pointing out fundamental male flaws that endanger the rest of mankind. On a subconsciously level, men see war as a means of showing they are powerful, in charge and keeping a nation safe. History has shown this is far from being the case.

One can make a strongly case that no one wins in a war. The pain, anger, resentments, trauma, human and economic tragedies endured in time of war linger for many generations on both sides. In many cases, the wound and pains of wars never heal and they carry over to the next generations. The other side of this male fracture ego that is so dangerously comical is that majority of these men, who pound their chest, talk tough and beat the drum steps of war hate to physically sweat the blood of war themselves, or send their loved ones. How ironic is that? Military records of nations show that most war thirsty leader who took their nations to meaningless wars manipulated their own ways out of the system from serving in the military or in wars when their nations called on them to do so.

Women on their hand seem to have deeper understanding of the implications of wars. Women understand it’s their husbands, sons, and daughter that get to be sent away to fight wars. Women do not just think about their loved ones, they also think about the sons, the husbands and daughters of the perceived “enemy.” Women are so blessed with such healthy ego than men are. In time of wars, women demonstrate deep emotional thoughts and compassion about children coming into the world and the implications of war on their developmental upbringing. Men on the other hands are emotionally detached and see human casualties as normal collaterals of war.

This old mythical notion that men are mentally and emotionally better equipped to lead a nation’s national security and defense is baseless and nonsense. The truth of the matter is men’s temperament and ego is not suitable for these types of jobs. Women have healthier views and deeper emotional connections to human components affected by the consequences of wars. One can make a serious case that women would bring a healthier, stronger and wiser judgment when it comes to decision to prosecute a war than men would. Time has come for nations to begin to understand that women would serve mankind better in positions of national security and defense. It’s time for nations to turn the table on men and trust women with those positions.

Technorati Tags: clinical psychology. religion. beliefs. ego psycholog. consciousness. holistic healing. pain. anger.resentments. emotions, wellness

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.