My fantasy of war includes rage, but never having experienced the reality directly, I can only guess at it's existence and nature in this extreme context. In order to explore this area with any degree of authenticity, from an experiential perspective, I met and interviewed, Raphael Rodgers. Raphael is an American ex-military service man, who served three tours in Vietnam (a tour being twelve months) between 1964 and 1967. He trained as a Green Beret and for the latter half of his time in combat he served as a LURP, a Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol Personnel. LURPs were specially trained soldiers who carried out high risk operations, often behind enemy lines. Several years after he returned to the States he worked as a police officer. He now lives and works in England.
Kieron Jecchinis: Why did you become a soldier?
Raphael Rodgers: This all probably started back in the latter part of the fifties, early sixties. My parents sent me off to go to high school and the day that my father took me to school I got into three fights trying to get in the front door. And he thought that it probably wouldn't be a good idea for me to pursue my studies there as it looked as if I was going to continually have problems. My parents then found St Emma which was the only all black military academy the United States ever had. And after four years I graduated, which in many instances programmed me to becoming a soldier. Especially, in that, as I used to watch the stories and television programs of the conflict during the Second World War and Korea. I always felt in my heart that no man had to fight for me. that I would be willing to earn my own place in the country. to have my own rights, to pay my dues. At one point my father asked me why I had decided to enlist in the United States Army. He had planned to finance my education so that I could become a doctor. as he was. I explained to him that I wanted to prove to myself what I really was as opposed to what I thought I was. and I felt that joining the military would provide me with the experiences that would do that.
| That moment, that second when you pull the trigger, you're in rage. Unfortunately there's not a lot you can do about it after that |
Is there a memorable moment in combat when you felt rage and were acting in that state?
I don't know whether I'd actually say that I acted in rage. I don't know whether if I actually acted in rage I'd care to talk about it. Especially in combat. I remember once, my father let me go boxing. I went in and I had a couple of lessons. And they put me in a ring with a kid a good bit bigger then me. And he begins to thump me. Which I thought was totally unfair, being, that he seemed, to me, much better than me, and was using me as a punching bag. And I told him that he ought to quit. And, he didn't. So I got out of the ring and I took the gloves off, and I told him I'd see him outside. He laughed. I went outside and got a two by four and waited behind the door. And when he came out I beat him, until I got tired. And I told him next time he saw me not to hit me, he ought to pay attention to what I said. I was in a rage then but I was about thirteen years old. I would think that taking that same tack as a combat soldier... is not something I would care to talk about... I have come across friends who have been badly treated... I was surely not pleased... the outcome of this is not a... the discussion of that is not probably a good point of consideration.
Did you witness rage in combat?
You know, rage forms itself in many ways. and I think that, when you shoot a bullet at somebody, that bullet is your rage. It's centralised. That moment, that second when you pull the trigger, you're in rage. Unfortunately there's not a lot you can do about it after that. You either miss. or you accomplish your end product. and you have to live with the results. I think in combat, under controlled aggression, and in close combat, all blows struck, be it with knife, or hand, or bullet use certain amount of rage. If it is a close quarter situation over any length of time. then there's a lot of rage that goes on. Because everybody's excited, everybody is doing whatever they can to stay alive. This is not an argument, where you and I are thumping each other with our fists. This is a terminal situation. and it's a free for all. Generally in those confrontations, everybody's in rage. I think all blows that are struck are probably struck with every amount and ounce of energy the guy can muster. Because he's not trying to knock him down, he's trying to kill him. And if he hits him. he's trying to take whatever he hits off. Yes. I saw that.
One form of rage that is so often associated with war is the graphic firework-like display of explosions, gun fire etc. Have you any memorable moments of either seeing this or being in the midst of it?
Oh yeah. It's a beautiful sight. In fact there was an article last week in The Times. It spoke of a combat photographer. He died in l978. They were speaking about his pictures that he took in World War Two. And that he became so hypnotised by the violence and the destruction. and the glory of war. Because it's a very sensual. exciting experience. There's colours, there's noise, and there's change. And this change is brought about in a most sudden manner. Sudden being violent. It's done in great colour. You rarely have bland explosions, you know, when bodies come unglued they don't do it in a graceful manner, it's not like in slow motion. I remember waking up one morning in the middle of a fire fight and there were tracers going over head. and bombs were exploding. I thought it was great. It was like the fourth of July. Fire fights, even at night, apart from being a bit frightening. are beautiful things to see.
I asked a Vietnam Vet once what it was like when he made his first confirmed kill. He said it was 'pure joy'. It was only after he took out the dead man's wallet and looked at the photos of his family did the remorse set in. Did you find any joy in that sort of situation?
There arc a set of books that you can buy called 'How To Kill'. In the first page it says 'Kill without joy'. I feel bad and have felt that way. I don't have a problem if I feel that another individual deserves termination. I will send him, her, it, out of here. But I do not do it with joy. It is something that is a necessary thing that I feel to do.
On the phone you said to me that someone once told you, after you came back from Vietnam, that you would 'start the day off bad, and you would get worse.'
This had cone on for some time, but it was only made apparent to me maybe five or so years after I had returned. And I had begun to change There was a point right after Vietnam where I think I functioned very much as a combat soldier, in that I had friends and I had enemies. And I didn't have anybody in between. So I treated everybody as if they were my friends. or I took some kind of drastic action relative to the individual. But action against a person almost implies that it was physical. It doesn't have to be. But whatever action I took was either for or against. If they were in the middle I just had no contact with them. I don't think I smiled a lot. I didn't see a lot of humour.
And after five years?
I began to live again. I began to interact with society. The nice parts of society. The little things. The birds, children. The silliness that people do.
There was a period from 1967 to 1973 where I carried a gun all the time. Because of the training that I had had and the length of time that I spent in-country. A gun was part of my tools. It meant that should anything happen to me, I could defend myself. And that was the way that I had learned to live. Full stop. I didn't carry it because I looked for trouble. I carried it because that made me feel comfortable.
What sort of situations during this period might have impelled you to take your gun out?
I remember once I had met my girlfriend. She said that this guy had been following her. So I let her go through the door. I went through the door. And the guy came in behind us. I turned around and said 'Can I help you?' And he said. 'I think I want to talk to the girl.' I said. 'It's my girlfriend. and she doesn't want to talk to you.' And he said. 'Well I want to talk to her.' And I took a nine millimetre high power out and dropped it to my side, and I said. 'She does not want to talk to you. and I think it would be in your advantage to leave.' Which he did. He seemed a very nice fellow after that. Situations such as that. I had one, two incidents in two years when somebody, for some strange reason. wanted to take me to task. and then though, it wasn't really a good idea.
Did you consider yourself dangerous around that time?
I didn't consider myself dangerous at the time. I was dangerous. Well. because I would have killed you. I would not have hesitated. The guy that walked into that building was very close to being killed. I didn't pull this gun on him because I planned to talk to him about it. And if he hadn't decided that it wasn't a good place for him I would have sent him packing.
Do you find rage a turn on?
No. I personally abhor the loss of control in myself and in others. The loss of control in myself frightens me. Because I feel if I lose it there's a possibility of something happening that I may have to pay a price for that I don't want to pay. And that doesn't turn me on. Anger. Controlled anger in aggression there is a use for. Not rage. Rage in my understanding implies loss of control. I think that control either in a combat soldier, especially in a police officer, is paramount. A gun knows no friend. It will kill anybody you point it at. And if he loses control he'll shoot anything that moves. That is not good. As a boxer, you lose control of yourself you lose control of the situation. You must consider that your weapon must be re-loaded. There is no infinite supply of bullets. Knives must be utilised in the proper manner. You can't just stick it in folks. People don't die that easy. You have to stick it in the right place. The whole idea is to send them away so that you can continue to do this nasty work. You cannot do this if you've lost it.
| When you shoot a bullet at somebody, that bullet is your rage |
Again on the phone, you described an incident as a police officer where there seemed to be a point when rage could have taken over but you stopped it in time.
It wasn't rage. Because rage you don't stop. Rage is there. What had happened, in front of this school, I erected certain NO PARKING ANYTIME signs to control traffic. And this young man and his girlfriend parked up under one of these signs. And I asked him to park in the back. And he said. 'F.U.' I said 'Listen. You cannot park there. You park there. I will tow your car away and I will put you in jail. So you take your car around back, and we'll forget that.' He said 'I'm not gonna do a thing. You can go and get F'd.' I said. 'You are under arrest, you can get out of your car.' He got out of his car and said, 'You're not going to put me in jail. And I was standing, oh, maybe ten feet in front of his car, and he started at me. Walking. I unsnapped my weapon. And now I think I had become a bit upset. I think he had challenged my authority and I had switched into a non-reasoning mode. And I unleashed this weapon and I dropped it to my side. As he started towards me I started to bring the weapon up. I was a police officer at the time, and I cannot say that I functioned that way as a police officer, this instance though. I was going to send him out of here. His girlfriend ran around and threw her arms around this guy and explained to him that I was not the person that he should take to task. Good for him. Because I had about levelled the weapon and it was about half way cocked. He believed her and put his hands on the car. After this I realised I had been very close to making a mistake. I then went to my district commander, explained to him what had happened and asked to be relieved of this duty. Because kids will do this sort of thing. He immediately understood and I never had to go back to this place again.
After I had switched off the tape recorder Raphael told me a story which explained why he doesn't like going in to bars or pubs that often. While talking to a woman friend in a bar in the States he was punched on the back of the head by some miffed individual. Raphael got up and went for the guy. They both proceeded to fight their way out of the bar. Once outside Raphael switched into 'combat mode' and went directly for his opponent's eyes. Luckily, the opponent was taller and could hold Raphael at a safe distance. Nonetheless. having seen the look in Raphael's eyes, he decide to call off the fight and promptly got into his car and drove away. It was only then that Raphael felt himself getting mad. He said he got 'madder, and madder, and madder'. He then went home, got his shotgun, returned to the bar and sat outside for three days waiting for his opponent to return. Fortunately, he didn't.
Raphael said that he knew he had a demon inside of him and this incident, as well as the one outside the high school 'bothered him significantly'.
How would you deal with a threatening situation now?
I go out of my way not to find myself in contact confrontational situations. I don't need it. You can confront things in a lot of ways. After a couple of years as a police officer I developed the philosophy of the confrontation. But the confrontation was of the mind. And the game I played was, if I had to put my hands on him. I had lost. The game was to get him to do what I wanted him to do because he thought it was right. And if I had to make him do it. then he won. OK'? I got into four fights as a cop. I lost four times. All the rest of the time I could win, I do the same thing now.
What I gather from what you've been saying is, in your view, rage is the enemy of the soldier and confrontational situations.
Rage is the enemy of the warrior. Because the warrior has to use power directly, not indiscriminately. The warrior's aim is to win. You don't win by hurting those that aren't involved in the war.
Do you see a difference between a soldier and a warrior?
No. The soldier and the warrior are the same The warrior in one sense might be a more disciplined soldier if you take some of the elite units. But anybody that stands in the trenches, has got the balls to stand in the trenches, he's a warrior. I cannot take that away from them. How much of the philosophy of the 'Purity Of Arms' is embraced. is each individual's difference.
Could you explain that philosophy in a nutshell?
Arms are used in conflict, to destroy the enemy, or to bring him to his knees. Once he has given up, it is no longer necessary to use the weapons. And a disciplined warrior stops. He takes the surrender with respect, and incapacitates him by whatever means necessary. without undue harm, to bring him to the point where he is no longer a danger.
In my opinion, the soldier's aim is to win the war, to bring about peace. Peace is organised change. This is not accomplished by abusing the populace or the combatant who has stopped fighting. Because what you then create is another enemy. who will come back and get you again. He'll sneak around. he'll form guerrilla units. he'll disrupt. Because you have in some degree enraged him. You have now taken him to the point where he has lost control. And he will do anything. anything, to get back at you. That's not what the whole thing is about. The whole thing is about stopping that kind of action, so that you can have peace.
After all this time would you say you are now a man at peace with himself?
(After some thought) Yea. I don't think I'm fighting the war anymore. I will always live with the memory of the war. And the friends I lost. But I don't hold any hatred for the Vietnamese. Because what they were doing was what they thought was correct. The war for me is over.
When did it end?
The watch I wear is thirty years old this year. It was bought for me by my best friend. His name was Seymor. He was a Recon team leader with me. And we were both out on a mission. I was his radio relay when his team was ambushed. And he never got back. About two years ago he was finally let into the Special Forces Association, even though he's still considered MIA. But they accepted that he was permanently MIA. probably KIA. And I think, for me, the last remnants of those that were close to me were put to bed. The war was over then.
Looking back on it now, What are your views on Vietnam?
If the outcome of Vietnam had been different, and let us say that we had won, the United States would be a completely different country today. The United States today is like a big bear with an over sensitive paw. If it sticks it out and a little country hits it with a couple of pins, it pulls it back and says 'Ooh!'. Think what that bear would be like if it had won in Vietnam. It would be walking across the world with nobody to stop it. It's got an army. navy and airforce that no country in the world today can confront. But because of this sensitivity to what happened in Vietnam, the United States is controlled, not by the forces outside of itself. but by it's own sensitivity to prosecuting some kind of conflict. Vietnam saved the world, in many ways, from an expression of force that might not have been controlled today.
Copyright © Achilles Heel Collective
If you've enjoyed reading this article on-line please consider subscribing to the magazine.
