Reflections on the many Americas

By REV JIM PURCELL

I have not lived everywhere in America. However, I have briefly lived on the West Coast, and in the Midwest and the Southwest, as well as the Deep South, when not residing in my native New Jersey.

The city of Brotherly Love: Philly any old day

Yet, what I have noticed along the way is that there are subtle, and sometimes more than subtle, differences in what people in one part of our country call "American," as opposed to what others in different parts of the nation characterize as "American." The whole view of what is wholesome, sought after and believed in, governmentally speaking, changes with the scenery. There is also the matter of race that has to be dealt with, also regionally, but that would just make this post too darn long.


Suburban New Jersey when everyone is going home

I was raised in the shadow of New York City, across the Raritan Bay in Keansburg, New Jersey. I lived in a diverse environment, wherein Blacks, Hispanics, Asian and people from all over the world settled into to live. Because I lived near New York City, I understood and was frequently exposed to varying opinions and points of view. New York City is nothing if not a global city. New York does not have to go to the world, because the world comes to New York. Rather than list those things that New York is a leader in, it is easier to list those things that are not well known to people in the Greater New York Metropolitan Area; most notably, farming, agricultural life, animal husbandry, growing things or raising things that walk and moo. Sure, like the commercials say, you can find a little bit of everything in Jersey and New York, but those things are not a central preoccupation of the people here.


Rush Hour in the city of Lincoln, Nebraska

When I lived in Killeen, Texas, I was a soldier who lived on a base. So, it is not like I had a chance to really get the flavor of what it was like to live in the Southwest, per se. I know that, where the base I was at (Fort Hood) was diverse, the community was not. While there were many occasions for soldiers and locals to join in common activities, they did not frequently, in my experience. In fact, what I noticed was that Central Texans more or less kept to themselves and tolerated the soldiers. Maybe they ran local stores and sold us things, or rolled their eyes when we came into a bar or restaurant they owned. Still, if there was something I can say I actually felt in the locals was a sense of invasion. The Central Texan lived their lives around us, where we weren't: not at the same place and time. Their lives were agrarian or commercial.

Lovely old New Hope, Pennsylvania

On the West Coast, again I lived on a base: Californians welcomed soldiers. Where I was stationed, though, at Fort Ord, in wine country, soldiers were as welcomed as sunlight. Of course, things were also very expensive there. While perusing the local town  of Carmel, in 1986, I could buy a T-shirt stating I had been to Carmel for $20. I don't know what that is in today's money -- but $20 then was a lot more than $20 today. Things were so expensive, in fact, that it was just easier and less expensive to hang around Ord, which was affectionately termed "the Planet Ord" by its residents. My impression, though, was that people who lived there were very educated and successful, and the local economy probably went the way of the grape industry.

The Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina

There was my sojourn to the Mid-West, in the 2010s, which was unsuccessful for my part. It was a sparse place without many people. The economy in Lincoln, Nebraska, while bolstered by the University of Nebraska and several major corporate giants, still seemed to orbit around the business of growing corn, wheat and whatever the heck else they grew out there. I will always remember Nebraska, as I had a reversal of luck there and ended up, for the first time ever in my life, homeless there. It was not a particularly urbane place. The state's capitol city strove to be more than the under-sized college town it was then (and probably still is). Roads were made and entrances were cut into undeveloped lots of real-estate, in the hope that one day something might be developed there. It was a 'primer' of a city, and not actually a city yet. It had hospitals and a small Downtown area, and with every printing of the local newspaper, it gave the new number of residents who moved into the state. The weather is brutal in the winter, and it has led me to wonder why anyone ever settled there in the first place.

A NYC street -- and I wouldn't call it crowded

Then there was the Deep South. Anyone from the crowded East Coast can find it very easy to fall in love with the gentle lifestyle and beautiful weather and scenery of the South. I have been a Floridian, a Georgian and a North Carolinian. And, whenever my professional career is done, I will do what I can to find my way back to the sleepy little towns of the Great Smoky Mountains. In contrast with relatively close Charlotte, the mountain life is still a place where seclusion is possible. Yet, major urban areas like Charlotte; Richmond, in Virginia; Atlanta, in Georgia and so many other places have dramatically changed the nature of the Deep South. The stereotypes I grew up with in the 1960s and '70s just do not hold water anymore. Southerners, in my opinion, are not unlike their Northeastern cousins in many ways. An agrarian economy still exists there, though, and is probably one (of many) factors that make the Southern reality contrasted to those of Northeasterners.

In my life, I have not seen one America, which values and holds dear the same things in the same ways. I have seen many Americas, which elevates some traditions higher than others, and discards others entirely. Yes, geography plays a role: Now, what size the role is can be debated from here to kingdom come. The local economies and who is making things, or growing things, bartering things, banking things all plays a part of the reality each area lives, and the lens through which so many different people see what is commonly called "The United States of America."


The suburban borough of Red Bank, New Jersey

It is too easy to just look at a map and guess the differences in perceptions over people. However, at the same time, I would use a map as one of many ways to inform one about the priorities of others in this country. I am colored by my perceptions of what I have seen in my American sojourn, and my experiences -- like everyone else. I am interested to see the commonalities in our nation, and those things that are uncommon and particular to certain areas of people.

If I were being politically correct, I would say that all of the many differences are part of that '...great mosaic that is America.' I will leave it at that, and maybe be a little politically correct today.

The Infantry, Women and the Army

Photos by Jim Purcell

Women in the Infantry: It is a reality of everyday life in uniform.

By REV JIM PURCELL

There is a new initiative from the Department of Defense that women should be included in the ranks of all combat arms components in the United States military. There are supporters of this measure and, of course, detractors as well.

I served a substantial amount of time in the Infantry during my military service and can see where critics of this move can find fault with it. Being a "grunt," a term of affection by infantryman for infantrymen, comes with a rigorous lifestyle, which can include combat with enemy forces when the United States is at war. The Infantry is, by definition, a very hazardous way to make a living in the world.

The Army I served in during the 1980s was a reflection of the society it safeguarded. The Army is always reflective of the country it protects, the people that afford it and the nation that fields it. Would women infantrymen be welcome in the 1980s? No. They would not have been welcome or wanted in Infantry units, I believe. However, that was then.

Soldiers qualify on the M2, .50-caliber machinegun.

The Army today represents a people very different than America under President Reagan, before the Internet or self-driving cars. Things change and, like everything else, the Army changes with it. There was a time when Blacks were disallowed from serving with white soldiers. There was a time when women could not serve in the Army directly (or any other service) but served the cause as part of the Women's Army Corps, which supported Army operations. The first female paratroopers were not allowed to serve until the 1970s.

So this new personnel move by the Armed Forces represents yet another evolution of women in the service, and the military service itself. This change and the realities it will create should not be argued about because it has happened. It will not be undone or the hands of the clock turned back on this one.

Will there be challenges? You bet. There will regrettable incidents and I do not expect the transition will go flawlessly. At times, people may gnash their teeth and say, 'How did this ever happen!?' And then, they will get over it and do whatever needs doing and women will continue to serve in the Infantry.

I have already heard old soldiers grumbling about the prospect of female grunts. The last thing our female warriors should have to contend with is static from those who served in the Infantry back in the day, or civilians whom they protect, or legislators at any level of government anywhere in our great land.

A new day has dawned and, as in the case of every new morning, each of us has the choice to live that new day as a part of the solution or a part of the problem.

Militia Takevover Brings New Set of Issues

By REV JIM PURCELL

In the past few days, a group of armed, white militiamen have occupied a wildlife sanctuary in Oregon with the goal of sparking a Neo-Conservative revolution in the United States, which culminates in the overthrow of the Federal Government, according to published reports.

To some, their actions are being regarded as "patriotic," while others view the group as simply a collective of home-grown terrorists. I side with the latter group, and am concerned about the nature of the nationwide militia phenomenon, their intentions and links to white supremacist ideology, not to mention their access to firearms. It is my opinion, these groups (and I include the Klu Klux Klan in this) have been indulged and allowed to grow by Federal law enforcement, without proper scrutiny or tracking by authorities.

I believe in freedom of speech, as all Americans should. However, the moment "freedom of speech" includes buying firearms being coupled with open talk of sedition and violence it becomes something else. Where there are fierce anti-government sentiments, which apparently is a common denominator in such groups, and firearms there is a precursor for action. And, any group that advocates the forcible overthrow of the American Government must, in all common sense, be laid to rest quickly and decisively in order that their actions may serve as an example to other such groups.

Of course, why these groups were and are allowed to exist, grow and prosper, is beyond me. I would have thought Federal authorities would have been tracking domestic terror groups more efficiently than to allow one to overrun Federal land. There is an excuse the group gives for this, the so-called Bundy Militia, but to my mind I cannot imagine a fit excuse, for any reason, to resort to bearing arms against one's own country.

Currently, there are negotiators trying to avert an armed conflict between the government and the militiamen, yet I am not even sure if that is in the best interest of this situation as, if this is not treason they are doing, I have no idea what else to call it. There should be no leniency with treason or sedition, in my opinion. Historically speaking, treason is the crime that perhaps carries the worst of punishments, deservedly so.

It is my firm belief that we, as the American People, have entered a time wherein we must each choose what side of potential armed Neo-Conservativism revolution we stand on because, as is made clear, there are reactionary elements within that political movement that are not content to abide by the ruling of the ballot box. The span between being an ideological Conservative and a radical Conservative is only a brief commute and, I believe, these people and their aims, goals or ambitions, represent a clear and present danger to the welfare of the American state and government. I admit, I have always believed this, since the early days of the Tea Party Movement rhetoric but now I believe there is sufficient evidence for anyone to see plainly.

There are reflections used by so called "patriot" groups of the American Revolution. These people liken themselves to the Founding Fathers revisited. In fact, these are dangerous, immature and potentially hostile collectives of people that each deserve attention by Federal law enforcement authorities. It is not true anymore, with this recent event, that the fiery words of revolution spoken by these people and their ideological leaders (the Bobby Jindalls, Ted Cruzs and Donald Trumps of the world) are merely high political theater. Things have taken a dark turn and the very fabric of our American society, and all we hold dear, is being threatened not by the Russians or the Chinese but by our neighbors, our friends, our colleagues and even our family, in some cases. Yet, in each would-be revolution, sides must be taken and, not because of my words but by the actions of the Neo-Conservative Movement in the recent past and now, there must be a stand. What will America be? Another Third World backwater where the mob may usurp legitimately elected leadership or will it remain a beacon of freedom, where revolutions are waged not with assault weapons and homemade pyrotechnics but through the vote -- one person, one vote? This question is being debated now, like it or not.

I do not care to cast off the traditions of being a democratic republic, which is what America was crafted to be. I do not want to give in to terror and armed rebellion. I will not countenance being menaced any longer by seditious actors and I certainly will not lend my voice to them by voting for anyone in the Republican Party these anarchists have aligned themselves with.

In each person's life, there comes a time when they must either be bullied into something they would not choose or to stand for what is right. I choose to stand for what is right, to me, and that is the less-than-perfect, but better-than-all-other system of governance in this country. So, I will not be moved by the spectacle of treason or words of crocodile patriotism. On my part, I am of the belief they can go to hell.

The New Year: 2016

By REV JIM PURCELL

As this upcoming year represents my half-century mark, it is a time to take stock.

Am I where I thought I would be, doing what I thought I would be doing? Are there people in my life whom I thought would still be here? Am I living in that awesome place where I thought I would be at this age so long ago?

Well, as that list goes, I am not looking too badly. Not shabby at all. But, life didn't go the way I expected to get here, and most of my big plans for myself fell apart at one time or another. So, while I may be in that space, that place, where I thought I would be -- I took the strangest route I could have imagined.

Isn't that what life is anyway? Like the old saying goes: Men make plans and God laughs. Well, with me, he must have been rolling on the floor. So, why couldn't I have just taken the wide, easy path to where I am now? Why did it have to be so damn hard?

Well, adversity builds character, real character. When things get hard and times are trying, those are the moments when people learn empathy, forgiveness and real determination. No, it is not the kind of determination that Rocky showed against Draco in the montage scenes of Rocky IV. It is not the kind of determination to climb K2 or Mount Everest. Sometimes, the hardest thing to do for someone is to lose something they loved and treasured and then just wake up the next morning and get out of bed.

You know, as time clicks by, I have had a few friends and loved ones leave this world. Of course, being at about the same age, there are some of these friends and loved ones who died young. I noticed, though, that something my friends who passed early have in common is that they smoked and drank to excess. They lived life badly, being angry or scornful. They refused to change inwardly from their youth, and growing old and living crazy is not a match made in heaven. Not finding peace with yourself and living healthy will send you to heaven, for sure, but dying because of something like smoking too much is just prolonged suicide.  Someone is just biding their time, in that case, to leave this world as soon as they case.

For the past three years I have been working hard on my recovery from alcohol and anger, both of which consumed me for many years. I believed I was unfairly cheated, robbed of things that were precious to me. Well, there is something else about life we each learn at some point or other: It isn't fair, not in this world. Not yet. But, the knack to living is being able to go on and still search for whatever makes us happy.

More than money or position, land or jobs I always wanted peace and peace of mind. It has been a successful life in that I have found my piece of peace. I do not wish to to great things anymore, and while I like to work no one could characterize me as ambitious anymore. I learned that it is better to be at peace with one's self and their surroundings than to be fighting for the top spot.

In the end, somehow I have always knew, that we will not judge ourselves on how much money is in the bank, how big the car was, or how grand one's house was. In the end, what we each will judge ourselves is how we lived our lives, what we learned from those lives and how much peace we were each able to find in our hearts. Don't get me wrong -- big houses and cars are great. Yet, they are only things, which rust and breakdown and they do not shine forever. Only the human spirit shines for ever, and making that spirit brighter will shine forever.

Happy 2016 for everyone who visits the Chronicles, enjoy the year and blessings to you and yours.

Patriotism

By REV. JIM PURCELL

These days, I regard the expressions and concepts surrounding patriotism by some people as more of a symptom of a serious underlining mental health problem or a cry for help rather than anything remotely involved with serving or protecting one's country.

You see, in the America I grew up in, which included many years in military academies early on, I was taught and came to believe patriotism was unconditional. It was the kind of love that one may have for a parent or child. It is unshakable. Whether the parent or child was right or wrong, had lost their way for a time, or was having a wonderful success -- everything came back to that unconditional love. Later on, and for many years, I served the United States in the Army, and what patriotism is became an everyday concept for me. Patriotism isn't a few minutes of putting your hand over your heart at ball games, it is a way to live and a system for loving your country come what may.

As an American, I have prayed very often for God to show His grace over our nation. Never once did I expect it, or demand that God do this, much less order him to bless America, regardless of how we conducted ourselves as Americans. I do not think God would like that too much, you see. As He is the boss and not me, it strikes me that he might get upset by me believing I was the boss and telling him what to do.

Well, now the scene has been set.

If patriotism was unconditional love, the kind of which one felt for their mother and father or child before, patriotism today is demonstrated by many as the love one might feel for their new boyfriend or girlfriend. It is the kind of "love" that is new and unpracticed; the kind of love that has not yet weathered hard times and may well not stand up to any significant test. It is the kind of love where a man tells his girlfriend, 'If you don't wear that blue shirt instead of the red shirt then I will not love you anymore.' If the boyfriend wants to go to a Knicks game, it is the love where the woman will tell her man that she does not wish to go to the Knicks game and, if he does, he can sleep on the street.

You see, when someone believes that they must be furious with their country because a black person, or a Conservative person or a Liberal person is elected as president, then there was actually never any love for this country from that person in the first place. Either someone will support and defend their nation all the time, no matter if something is happening they do not like or something they like is happening -- then they are not a patriot.

A wonderful example of patriotism that has stood the test of time for me dates back to ancient Macedonia and the rule of Alexander of Macedonia (b. 365 BCE) (commonly called "Alexander the Great"). Well, Alexander was making his case to the people of Athens about why they must, collectively, fight the Persians for there to be any real safety in the world for the Hellenes. He said he intended to launch a great invasion of Persia, and he wanted Athenian support. Well, there was a politician and orator in Athens, by the name of Demosthenes, who disagreed vehemently with Alexander, so much so Alexander and Demosthenes were considered political opponents of the highest order.

While Demosthenes' isolationist argument did find friends in government and in the people, ultimately Athens sided with Alexander and the invasion was planned. Now comes the part of the story that is hard to find today. Rather than march off and grumble under his breath about the injustice of his failure, Demosthenes did not denounce his country, its leaders or the state. He did not wish to usurp the state because the greatest number of people did not find virtue with his point of view. Instead, Demosthenes the Athenian did what Athenians did during times of war: He joined the Army as a private soldier. He fought in the first rank of Greeks against the Persians, and he died in the war he fought so hard to attempt to avert. You see, Athens was the home of Demosthenes, whether the state was right or wrong. Demosthenes was a citizen of the Athenian state, without any doubt, and his love for his homeland was not counted in how many times he got his way, but instead by how many times he served his community, in war or peace. This is not the love of country that occurs in the United States today by reactionary people.

God will not love America first, before all countries, if America makes torture its policy, intolerance its calling card, ignorance its first response to the unknown. If America is still an empire, as some still argue, then any empire whereby torture, intolerance and ignorance, matched to wars of convenience and commerce, cannot stand nor will it be considered an empire for the better. Rather, such an empire is an 'Evil Empire,' right out of Star Wars. I believe I know a thing about being an America. She is the great love of my life and I have served her in uniform and out and appreciate my homeland very much. God blessed me by allowing me to be born here, and I am thankful.

I appreciate my homeland so much, I would never torture for her, not hate for her or fail to serve in her Army should she call. I love her so much, I would lose a political argument and then, in the wake of my loss, come back together with my rival for the sake of a stronger country, a united country.

I will not bark at my Creator, the God of my understanding, as a yappy dog or a petulant child trying to hold my breath and have my way about who is president, or who is elected to the Congress. I would say my piece, do what I could and love my country throughout.

Where it involves the policies of war crimes and torture, race hatred and ignorance of some, I could not, as a Christian, sanction these; nor would I countenance protecting anyone at any level of office in my land, or in anyone's land, being protected from prosecution nor exempted from punishment where found guilty. And, if candidates in political forums run on these things to get to office, are elected and do these things as part of their positions, I say the same only louder.

Patriotism is unconditional love of the land someone comes from, and such love is focused through the right decisions of actual Christianity -- not hysterical Christianity, pro-Christian cults or fringe Christian groups who deny the written word of their faith, nor the fanatical preachings of their own conscience. Patriotism must be viewed through the lamp of conscience and God, and when it is not it becomes dangerous fanaticism and a harmful thing -- a wildfire through a forest.

In the good old days, people feared the Lord and lived their personal lives as an example, or they tried. They did not try and force the word or wisdom of the Lord on others, as the greatest sin is to pretend to know the mind of the Lord God. They did not bark at God. They did not seek war for its own sake and they did not seek to commit crimes in war, outlawed by world agreement. No, this nation does not look or sound or act like the nation I knew growing up: it is radicalized, indignant, diminished, mad at times and drunk with greed. Still, it is my nation. Like a wind, people and causes come and go. However, I will celebrate when these terrible times have gone, and look to that day.

America's Revolutionary Past Not a Comic Book

By REV. JIM PURCELL

I am distressed about the past. Not my past. The past of our United States, and how some people attempt to turn events that took place into a comic book, worse yet they sometimes try and turn it into a coloring book. American history can be 'dumbed down' to the point where it can be depicted in a few blocks of cartoons with some quotes placed in white bubbles over the heads of drawn characters.

When I was at Georgian Court University, as a young man, I studied history. In time, I would go to seminary in New York and, certainly, there are great examinations of the past there as well. But, always, there was this fire to know what happened yesterday, and many yesterdays ago.

History is political, though. It serves as the motivation of actions for people today. Nations and people fight wars over the past. If everyone were to get collective amnesia tomorrow, Jews and Arabs would have nothing left to fight over. Blacks and whites would get along throughout this and every other country. The Chinese might actually work in friendship with India, and maybe India and Pakistan would operate together for a change. But, it is the past that binds people to it, like prisoners on a chain-gang. So, the mightiest person in that situation is the one who owns the chains, meaning the one who owns the history of what happened, when, with whom, for what reason, what purpose.

There are groups of people, with various political, industrial, business and religious viewpoints, that stand to profit if history suits their needs. It is for this reason that so many people attempt to, and sometimes successfully, re-write history. It is a fool who says, 'I don't care about history. It has nothing to do with me.' Well, I disagree. From the style and fabric of the clothes you wear on your back, to every morsel of food you put in your mouth, from where you work, to where and how you live and down to whomever you might go to bed with at night, history invades every fabric of our being. There is a lot of power at stake for the man, woman or group of people who control the edit function of history, people.

For example, there are neo-Conservative political faction in the United States who would attempt to re-write the American revolution so as to have precedent for turning our once-loved republic into a theocracy, which is unlike any theological likeness the Founders would have known or understood. But, when a political party is able to point to the Founders and say, 'Look -- we're just like them! So, don't enact laws because of what we say. No, change your laws because we -- we Conservatives -- are only following what the Founders would have wanted.'

First, who are the Founders? Well, they are the Class of 1775. They are the leaders, followers and people who founded this better-than-all-other United States of America behind their blood, sweat and tears -- and intractable optimism. "The Founders" are not just Gen. George Washington or his aides, not John Hancock nor just the 2nd Continental Congress, not just Patrick Henry or John Jay, or Thomas Paine or Benjamin Franklin. If you were to walk up to one of the leaders in that fine company and ask them who founded the country, they would not have forgotten to point to those muddied, bloodied, oil- and sweat-stained men pushing artillery through the middle of the night, fighting battles as half-trained volunteers, nor forgotten so many women who overnight became single-parents and sole-breadwinners for families while their men were busy moving artillery, fighting battles -- being all 'Revolutionary.'

You see, the Revolutionary Era, according to Elise Wilson, was a movement during a century or so, which involved generations of people, who primed the Revolutionary Generation, then there were the contributions of the Revolutionary Generation, and then finally there was interpreting the lofty ideals of the Revolutionary Generation within a governmental entity, which was the not insubstantial mission of the Post-Revolutionary Generation (which, it could be argued, in my opinion, actually ended with the Civil War and not in 1800, as is commonly discussed).

The real "American Revolution" was the central theme of generations. Understanding what that meant, in all of its complexity and simplicity, cannot be easily done -- let alone in comic book form for Fox News viewers.It is neo-Conservatives today in Texas who do not wish the specific contributions of Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States, former consul to France and author of the Declaration of Independence to be taught to school children. How does one do that? The Declaration wrote itself, the French just gave us stuff because they were intuitive, the Louisiana Purchase was a fluke? However, in my opinion, by not involving the contradiction of who the public and private Jefferson was, slave-owner and revolutionary for the freedom of "all men" what is achieved? Well, for one, as a society, it makes it easier by having less pointed conversations about slavery. Yes, the hard questions about how Founders allowed slavery become easier to talk about if we do not examine, in any detail, the life of Thomas Jefferson.

Like African-Americans, by not being reminded in school about slavery, will forget about it? Like anyone cold or should forget about slavery, its causations and impact upon American history and in our news today.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, that intellectual heavyweight from South Carolina, will tell you, as his has publicly that "Moses wrote the Constitution." Well, Mr. Graham knows a lot better than that. It took the Founders between 1776 and 1786 to come up with a workable, compromised document that enough people could live with unhappily to vote for. Neither the Whigs nor the Democratic Republicans were all that happy with the result. However, it would do. It would be close enough for two very different political mindsets to be able to do business with. Moses was long to the earth when that document was forged. However, the 'short-hand' that Mr. Graham is attempted to overlay upon that entire convention that produced the Constitution was that it was somehow: A. Jewish, B. divinely inspired and C. part of Divine Providence, as it is accepted in many circles religiously. He is attempting to turn a secular political convention of ideas and thought by humans and place a religiosity upon it, and translate the decade-long effort of people who did not agree with each other's politics very much as the authors of a religious document.

Well, I am a Baptist. I have a hard enough time with the real Bible, without Sen. Graham and his cohorts over in Fox News trying to create an annex to the Bible. Perhaps the only thing the Constitution and the Holy Bible have in common is that neither Sen. Graham, nor any of the cast of young, blond female commentators over at Fox, have ever read either of those documents. And, if they did, they couldn't understand a word of either. Mr. Graham was, as a matter of fact, a lawyer for the National Guard in South Carolina, who no doubt dealt with Constitutional issues somewhere along his tenure. However, as a professional, for Mr. Graham to try and pass along compromise political agreements as bona fide God-given law informs not only about his quality as a lawyer, but also his worth as a scholar, an American and an alleged leader of the people.

History should be a tool to learn from, not re-packaged to become a bumper sticker for the Grand Old Party. 

Hard Times in the 'Heartland'

I am writing a new short story, as well as a flash fiction piece, about my experience as a homeless veteran. I love my time in the military itself, but I think the most powerful story I can recount is finding myself with no place to live, no car, injured and unable to work and no support systems -- in the middle of a Nebraska winter in 2012. As much as it is a story about hard times, it is also a piece that focuses on the failings of Lincoln, Nebraska, and the VA there, to have someplace for veterans to turn so they don't have to experience the harsh "Heartland" temperatures and perils first-hand by living outside. It was certainly an experience that changed me, and a lot of veterans I have known since.

FUTURE TECHNOLOGY for the US Army Documentry

Military Technology: Not Everything Should Be Automated

By REV. JIM PURCELL

I was never a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army, but I was a buck sergeant, and a corporal before that (after going from PV1 to Specialist 4th Class prior). I served as a grunt, 11C Mortarman, then as a 96B Intelligence Analyst (HUMINT) and then an 11B Infantyman. I was in for almost 11 years in all, and, during my time in, I was assigned to the XVIII Airborne Corps, 82nd Airborne Division, 7th Infantry Division and the 2nd Armored Division. So, I know a little bit about being a grunt.

With that said, technology is the wellspring of the military services, and this is intractable. However, there are things that should not be replaced. Not being on active duty for more than 20 years, I have stayed up on those things that were in the news about the military, which is hardly a lot but it is something. I have even gone out of my way to stay atop some of the advances coming out from arms manufacturers and places like Boston Dynamics, among others, where they announce Beta-Testing for promising weapons systems. Overall, I think soldiers will be safer and more effective with the enhancement coming down the pipeline.

However, the soldiering trade should not, at its core, be altered -- only enhanced, in my opinion. I was in a low-tech Army of the 1980s and early 90s. In my day, soldiering was much the same as it had been when my father, uncles and cousins served from the 1940s through 1970s. Yes, there were weapon systems upgrades. By the same token, soldiers of my day still used the M16A1 (into the late 1980s), still used bayonets, wore the same clunky LBE that the Army had been wearing since Korea, wore tropical 0G-107 uniforms of the Vietnam Era (along with BDU's -- it was optional on posts like Ft. Bragg) and wore Corcoran jump boots and jungle boots (again, not all posts authorized the jungle boots). I received a steel pot helmet when I initially entered and after a year or so I received the first generation kevlar helmet, while our flak vests were tragically inefficient and were Vietnam vintage. At first, I ate C-Rations in the field, then MRE's (and can still taste both to this day). There were no very significant technological breakthroughs for individual soldiers, just major weapons systems. In my day, the big changes were Bradley M2 vehicles instead of M113s, TOW AT systems and the very first fielding of the M1 Abrams tanks, which replaced the M60A3 Main Battle Tank, as well as MLRS.

Today, the very foundation of what the force will look like in 20 years is being decided. I do not disagree that robotic infantry support and direct support elements are good ideas -- they're awesome. Anything that improves the range, accuracy of fire, ability to maneuver and secure a strip of real-estate is fine by me. Still, I think that the old way of learning map reading: one soldier, one map, one compass is something that should never be changed, nor the regular training of hand-to-hand (inclusive of knife) and bayonet should change either. Meanwhile, I have heard there is a helmet being developed that would allow soldiers to play music on headphones on patrol and would channelize their vision with its wearing -- now, that is nuts. Patrol techniques, individually and as part of teams and squads, is the most fundamental skill a grunt possesses and the old way of doing it (low and slow, quiet and with a head on a swivel) is just the plain old way to do it.

I understand there exists so much technology out there in the Army today that soldiers have almost a brand-new experience over their forerunners. Yet, improving and enhancing should never edit or delete the essential skills of soldiering, which included long field stays over months some time in training. Meanwhile, live-fire trainings, like in Doughboy City, in Berlin, back in the day kept soldiers the kind of sharp they needed. It was told me once that the only way to make a grunt is outside in the rain and cold for a bunch of months, with as much 'pain-in-the-ass' the brass could add. I agree with this, as much as I hated it when I was a young soldier.

I believe in technology, and want the very best for our kids when they have to go to the dance, but not at the sake of training the individual soldier in some of the more traditional pillars of the old school, be they infantry or something else. Soldiering is perhaps the second-oldest profession in the world, and it is experiencing a renaissance, but the core needs to stay strong. The best parts of soldiering are timeless. Add the old with the new and it's a powerful combination. But, keeping some of those core aspects of training should be an enduring priority, which resides right next to adding the best and newest technologies.

In conclusion, I want to applaud all the wonderful guys and gals who are serving our nation in uniform and for their dedication and invaluable service to our country.

Boston Dynamics All Prototypes

For a look at what is next in military security and combat systems, check out Boston Dynamics. It is a glimpse into the future.

DARPA Tests Exoskeletons on Soldiers

In a federally funded initiative, DARPA is testing a flexible exoskeleton that has been developed for use by American servicemen and women. Rather than the "Iron Man" version of an exoskeleton, the direction instead has been toward flexibility. For more information, see the link at: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/darpa-tests-exoskeletons-on-soldiers/ar-AAeDs4x.

All I know is that, as a former Infantry grunt, I wouldn't have minded a little electronic help with the rucksack.

-- Rev. Jim Purcell

Apple Electric Car Available in 2019!

The Apple electric car is said to begin being available for sale in 2019. Follow the link for the latest and greatest; http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/09/21/report-apples-electric-car-arriving-2019/72571316/

Inside the Army's 82nd Airborne Division: Hand-to-Hand Combat Training

Though many parts of the "Old Army" are gone, it is fortunate that at least some traditions live on in the 82nd Airborne Division, America's "Guard of Honor."

P

American Paratroopers have been known  for hand-to-hand skills since the inception of the force, in the 1940s. An integral part of being a paratrooper is being physically confident enough to sustain themselves in unarmed combat.

Things and times may change, but the need for hand-to-hand is something that should not, in my opinion. It is the basic skills of the Infantry soldier, not technology and 'soft skills' upon which the Army builds its foundation.

Military Technology: Never Standing Still and Always Advancing

By REV JIM PURCELL

Years ago, when I was a history major at then-Georgian Court College (now Georgian Court University), in Lakewood, New Jersey, the Great Depression and World War II eras fascinated me. One of the things that fascinated me most was the great leaps of technology that happened between Peal Harbor to the signing of the Japanese surrender on the deck of the USS Missouri, on September 2, 1945.

Iowa class battleship

I think the best way to discuss technological improvements, well perhaps the most obvious, is to talk battleships. The improvements of the Iowa class dreadnoughts from the earlier Pennsylvania class ships (among them the USS Arizona) are staggering.

Similarly, in the Charge of Krojanty, on Sept. 1, 1939, the clash of the past over the future was visible when Polish cavalry, some of the best in the world, were broken in the face of German panzer tanks.

Military technology cannot stand still because not only the safety of soldiers and civilians at stake, but also the course of nations and republics.

Today, it is robot, laser and nano-technologies that have inspired the creators of the next great wave of military weapons systems. I think technology's advancement is far. At the same time, though, it is more imperative on people to work on communication skills and non-violent means of resolving conflicts because the ante has been raised so high.

'Terminator' arm is world's most advanced prosthetic limb

The future is here -- U.S. Navy fields laser weapons on carrier

By REV JIM PURCELL

There is no doubt we are at the portal of a new age in warfare. Lasers are in full operation on U.S. warships at sea. It is a new day, indeed, because once made practical lasers will never again fail to be valuable weapon systems in the Armed Forces.

I do not lament this. As a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, I understand a few things: the force embraces technology, the future and enhancement of its weapons systems and believing it should be some other way is not sensible. Consequently, I am interested about how this technological edge will be translated into the nation's ground forces. But, that is a post for another time.

The main way the United States projects its powers throughout the world, on a day-to-day basis, is through the Navy. If there is a way to protect our sailors and ships, not to mention win battles at sea or on land, then it should be done.

The U.S. Navy has long been a technological trend-setter, creating ships and weapons that have played important roles during times of peace and war. That lasers are now an everyday thing means the advent of warfare on a new level on the seas.

Russian Military unveils SUPER DEADLY military assault rifles

Know the Enemy...and that means his rifles and order of battle as well. Frequently, Russian weapons are found in 'secondary markets' throughout the world so any step-up in technology is worth the look. --Rev. Jim Purcell

Boston Dynamics Military Robots and the Future

By REV JIM PURCELL

The advent of advanced robotic technology in the Armed Forces offers new possibilities, some welcome and some not, in my opinion. Where it involves protecting the force from hostile entities, it is a win -- no question. However, the question begs answering: Can a robot effectively replace a sentry from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines or Coast Guard?

This video will show you the robotic technology being decided upon, and it is a considerable asset -- let's face it. Being a forward-looking country, and because it is incumbent on the military to move ahead and not stay behind, I think these robots will be fielded at some time in the future.

Do I have qualms? A few. But, I hope they are nothing. If an asset like this is given to tactical formations, especially the infantry in the Army and Marines, the upgrade in force efficiency would be amazing.This has the possibility of transforming important parts of the Airborne, Air Assault and Light infantry. I will reserve my opinion somewhat where it involves airborne use until I see how this thing handles a drop, though.