Article

2005-04-22 Iraq-Jordan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2005-04-22 9:48:41 AM|| || Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 One unspoken truth about this is that some of these personnel are obliged, as a courtesy, to take "wives" from local women. This serves both sides very, very well. First of all, "extra" daughters are expensive to maintain, and it is a major coup to have them married to a "wealthy" husband, who provides a great dowry. Second of all, it creates a family tie with the soldier which means he is (loosely) "kin", obligating both him and his new family to protect each other. Third, he becomes heir to all the extended family gossip and intel, which is truly amazing in its depth and complexity. However, this all breaks down if the girls back home find out. They are usually bitterly resentful of the competition, and don't want their potential husbands marrying some "foreign whore". The worst that can happen, as the British found out, is for the domestic wives to join their husbands in the foreign country. This stamps out a gigantic reservoir of information and good feeling, as the domestic girls frown on *any* "mixed" marriage.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-04-22 10:24:21 AM|| 2005-04-22 10:24:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 These are tools that are often more effective than bombs and bullets.

All well and good, but when the usage of bombs and bullets are warranted, there should be no qualms about using them.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-04-22 10:35:20 AM|| 2005-04-22 10:35:20 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Successful SF wives know very well the wall between out there and home. That's just part of the sacrifice all parties have to make, is all, and they expect their men to bring home nothing that isn't curable. For that matter, that's the deal in all successful marriages where one of the spouses travels extensively, and the stay-at-home just has to have implicit trust in the judgement of the travellor. Mr. Wife told me of spending enough on taxi fares in Egypt to buy the services of "100 women!" as his driver told him, and how the guest houses in South America came with bed warmers unless specifically repudiated. Different cultures... what is one to do?

Posted by trailing wife 2005-04-22 12:32:21 PM|| 2005-04-22 12:32:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 "....what is one to do?"

..ask a Roman.

Posted by Lurp 2005-04-22 2:18:43 PM|| 2005-04-22 2:18:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 What did the Romans do, Lurp?

Posted by trailing wife 2005-04-22 7:42:44 PM|| 2005-04-22 7:42:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Yuck, TW. I've spent the majority of my 17 year marriage apart from my wife. In the last 45 days, I have slept in my own bed 4 nights. I have never slept with another woman, boy, girl, goat, knothole and never will. I trust my wife does likewise. If your idea of trust is 'I trust he won't bring home the clap' then 'tis a pity. The only trust worth having, the whole point of marriage, is the knowledge that no one is allowed inside you and your spouse's intimate space, regardless of distance. Far-off betrayal is betrayal nonetheless.

Posted by Zpaz 2005-04-22 9:19:16 PM|| 2005-04-22 9:19:16 PM|| Front Page Top

00:02 .com
23:51 trailing wife
23:47 Asedwich
23:46 Bomb-a-rama
23:36 Brett
23:32 phil_b
23:30 phil_b
23:27 its me
22:47 .com
22:43 Barbara Skolaut
22:40 Barbara Skolaut
22:36 Grunter
22:28 Atomic Conspiracy
22:08 Unagum Elmelet3616
22:08 .com
22:07 Sobiesky
21:47 JosephMendiola
21:39 Zhang Fei
21:38 3dc
21:34 whitecollar redneck
21:22 tu3031
21:19 Zpaz
21:17 mom
21:15 mom