Cheers to General Conway
Marine Corps Times reported yesterday that General James Conway, commandant of the Marine Corps, has lowered the drinking age
from 21 to 18 for Marines on liberty overseas and for leathernecks taking part in official on-base command functions — including the birthday ball.
It seems underage Marines had grown tired of watching their Navy peers drink freely at port--the Navy only requires sailors to follow local laws--while they were forced to adhere to American drinking laws--ridiculous American drinking laws if I might say so.
Now Marines, too, will only be required to follow local drinking laws, which means that pretty much anywhere in the world where drinking is legal, they'll be free to blow off a little steam with a cold one. Until they come home at least. But, on Marine Corps bases here and abroad, the drinking age will be disregard during special events such as the Corps' birthday.
Really, is there anyone in this country who believes that a 19 year-old United States Marine returning from seven months in Iraq--where drinking is a no-no regardless of age--shouldn't be allowed to order a round of beers for his buddies when he gets back home? A more debatable issue is whether U.S. troops should be allowed to drink while serving in Iraq, at least while getting some well-deserved R and R at bases where insurgent activity is an uncommon occurrence. Military.com's Christian Lowe tackled this question in a piece for Doublethink magazine a few years ago:
Of course, nobody said joining the military would be a frolicking good time, despite the abundance of guns and off-road vehicles. No, the U.S. military--especially in the Middle East--is an almost monolithically un-fun organization. And from the stress and uncertainty of brutally hard, sweaty, scary, and boring work, the soldier gets little relief. No drinking and no sex. No fun.
According to General Order Number One, troops can't have a drink, gamble, or look at a nudie magazine when they're in the war zone. For crying out loud, you can't even have a pet!
To be sure, the military has good reasons to keep the booze away from the troops and the fraternization to a minimum. Loaded soldiers and loaded guns don't mix. While reporting from Iraq, I heard several stories of troops getting hold of some local whiskey in Baghdad, taking one sip too many, and deciding to pop off a few rounds in the barracks.
Now imagine some drunken 19-year-old with access to assault weapons, who, in addition, is suffering through the inevitable jealousies that erupt from short-lived teenage romances. Not a good idea.
But, like some individuals, some forces can do it in moderation. The Italians, the Spaniards, the Dutch, and other soldiers helping the United States in its war on terrorism are allowed to take an occasional nip. If moderation works for them, why not for us?
I'm inclined to believe that whatever the chances are of alcohol-related misconduct, U.S. troops ought to be given the benefit of the doubt--innocent until proven guilty of poor judgment. But, I can see why the military would be reluctant to allow its men to drink in a combat zone, when even a base far out in the desert might be targeted by insurgents on any given day, or night.
Still, when these men--and that is precisely what they are--return home from a tour in Iraq, they ought to be able to enjoy the little things that make this country great, i.e. beer. And wasn't the Vietnam War the impetus for lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18 in the first place, only to be raised again by the Reagan administration in what, as far as I can tell, was the only mistake the great man ever made?
The Marine Corps should be commended for making what may turn out to be a controversial decision. Mothers Against Drunk Driving will surely condemn the move, but, given that the Long War is unlikely to end anytime soon, there ought to be a pretty broad consensus for lowering the drinking age back to 18--or at least exempting combat veterans from a law that no college kid ever follows anyway.