It is not often I respond to this kind of remark.
I know it is a rhetorical question, designed to malign the one being questioned.
This most recent incarnation of throwing dogshit at returning vets came up on a blog site I am quite fond of. A controversial site hosted by an esteemed Doctor of Neurology that deals with moral issues and Atheism.
There is much stimulating debate and conversation, and the occasional glimmer of humour.
Insults and acrimony are nothing new, but this level of venom was a new level of pitch for a commenter who goes by the moniker 'KW'
(actually he is an anonymous poster who signs 'KW').
It happened so:
Another fellow (not KW) had suggested, I think, that my own rather dismal ideas on the rise of barbarism and the decline of civilizations could be countered by reading a certain book.
My response was that I could not see how a book could counter my own experiences, especially considering the subject, title and author: Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined.
In this response I included this line "Violence is a big part of my industry, it is NOT in decline. It is in a growth phase."
The result was the comment/question of the day!
"How many brown people have you killed while elbow deep in the visceral reality Mr. Professional Barbarian?"
Wow! Incoming hippy-dog-shit-mortar round!!!
I will answer this question, in the best way I can, so that in the future I may simply post this link.
"Not a whole lot of any coloured people, actually.
As you noted, I am a professional and so were/are my lads. We did the minimum and avoided violence altogether if we could. None of us enjoyed the 'shit'.
Further, I would like to direct your ignorant mind's shrivelled attentions to the fact that I did not fight in a war against a specific racial group or tribe. I am not a Hutu or Sudanese militia man. I am a NATO officer.
Also, communists are not a race of men , and Islamism is not a race.
I am not sure where the race card came from, but I should inform you many of the enemies I fought in SWA were as pale as any Dane. That may, in fact, make me the 'brown' person in these conflicts, no?
Many of the enemy, initially, were 'white' or 'Caucasoid' by your 19th century racial definitions. Many were what I would expect a fellow like you to call 'yellow', too. Later many races of foreigners joined them. Jihad has that effect.
I did not fight in a single theatre, or against a single nation of men. I lead forces against a bloc of ideological enemies across 3 continents. A bloc that STILL opposes and seeks to damage my nation and her allies to this day.
To me they are not brown, red, yellow, black, white, blue or any 'race' - they are simply the enemy.
To be respected, understood, and defeated with prejudice - but with humility and mercy.
They are NEVER to be underestimated.
For the modern military mind this is not some tribal river war over ear length, nose size, or skin tone, it is an ideological long war with real goals that include infrastructure and resource control.
I would also query to the questioner, by way of post script, that if soldiers are professional barbarians...then what are the civilians? Professional victims?
You sure come off like one with that comment.
Maybe you're right, by Crom!"
So it has been written, so shall it be done!