The Events of September 11th Are Dwarfed by What Followed

Last week, amidst think pieces on 9/11, I came upon a Brookings Institute article titled “17 years after 9/11, what it means to have Generation Z military.” The central issue addressed in the article is that new recruits today no longer remember September 11th, because they weren’t alive then, or because they were too young to remember. The result, writes Navy commander Brendan D. Stickles, is a sort of generational gap within the military.

Stickles begins his article with an anecdote:

On September 11, 2018, someone who was born on 9/11 will join the U.S. military.

That isn’t as shocking to me as it may be to you. Over my military career—I’m a commander in the U.S. Navy—I’ve told all my new sailors the story of my hometown. Per capita, Glen Rock, New Jersey lost more people than almost anywhere in the 9/11 attacks. Everyone who died had young families. They were hard-working people pursuing their American dreams: people like Grace Allegra-Cua who was 40; Anthony DiOnisio who was 38; Brendan Dolan who was 37; and Tim Finerty, 33. Glen Rock lost 11 citizens that morning—about one person for every three city blocks. It was a tough day.

I’ve told their story hundreds of times. I also ask new members of my team where he or she was on that fateful day in 2001. Years ago, new accessions said they were in boot camp, and then they were in high school, then middle school, and then third grade. Finally, last spring one my newest sailors answered: “Skipper, I have no idea. I was only two years old…but my high school had three soldiers killed since then.”

He and I see 9/11 from two very different perspectives. My town of Glen Rock took our hit from a blunt instrument on one catastrophic autumn day, while his small rural hometown felt a sharp, repetitive pain every year since. Three dead sons over a decade and even more wounded. Probably at least one suicide and several veterans struggling with drug addiction.

I come from a military family. I have siblings who are currently deployed. But I think Stickles’ story illustrates why I find our nation’s ongoing jingoistic fascination with 9/11 disturbing. The events of September 11th may have devastated Stickles’ hometown, but the events that followed have devastated many other hometowns.

More than twice as many Americans have died fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last 17 years than died on September 11th. More than a thousand more Americans have been wounded in these wars than were wounded in the events of September 11th. And these counts don’t include tens of thousands of veterans who have committed suicide or, as Stickles references, those who have otherwise seen their lives destroyed.

Stickles’ article feels disjointed to me. His intent is not to suggest that the price we have paid waging the wars we began after September 11th may be higher than the price we paid on that day. In fact, he does not even ask that question. The closest Stickles comes to addressing the disconnect between the impact September 11th had on him—and the impact the events that followed had on his new recruits—comes at the end of his piece:

[P]erhaps more than their predecessors, “Gen-Z” will expect and demand that civilian and military leaders explain America’s role around the world—both the persistent fights in the Middle East and our commitment to the liberal world order we’ve maintained over the last 70 years. I think that is a fair trade.

On the 17th anniversary of that horrible day, I am thankful that somewhere in America, another patriot is joining the military team I am proud to be a part of. I look forward to learning how they see the world. Frankly, we could use some fresh ideas.

That is as close as Stickles comes to being introspective, to really reflecting on what it means that his new recruits’ personal experiences with devastation and loss are related not to September 11th but to the wars we started after that date. What does this difference mean? How does it shape these recruits’ perspective?

Perhaps the reason Stickles has told and retold the story of September 11th for just this reason—to keep the anger over that event alive and ensure that this anger—against all seeming odds—will burn brighter than anger over the loss of young soldiers, the loss experienced by their families, the ongoing loss felt by their communities.

None of this even addresses the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of U.S. military action there. None of this addresses the reality that our actions impacted communities in those countries on a scale that dwarfs the impact of 9/11 at home—a scale almost unimaginable to us today.

The day a newly minted sailer told Stickles that he could not remember September 11th, but could remember the students his high school had lost in the wars that followed, Stickles had an opportunity—an chance to ask probing questions about his ongoing use of that event to drum up patriotism among his recruits. Instead, he concluded only that he’ll need to do more to explain—and justify—America’s wars to younger recruits.

Perhaps Stickles’ realization is a small step in the right direction nonetheless. Lack of introspection aside, Stickles’ comments come with an implicit acknowledgement that a jingoistic referencing of September 11th is no longer enough to justify our wars or motivate new recruits. If true, that is a good thing.

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!