FOBs

The FOBbit: How the Army Turns Warriors Into PowerPoint-Slinging Indoor Cats

by

The Army has a remarkable ability to take a perfectly functional warrior, promote him a few times, hand him three computer monitors, and turn him into a PowerPoint-slinging indoor cat. Thus begins the evolution of the FOBbit: that mysterious creature who once went outside the wire but now survives on RFIs, synchronization meetings, Green Beans coffee, and Baskin-Robbins. The real horror comes when you finally look down at your ice cream, look at your clean uniform, hit “Send” on another 1600 suspense, and realize the terrible truth: Oh, $h!tt! I’m the FOBbit.

Forward Operating Base Flathead, Part 2

by

In the first article of this two-part series I discussed how Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) in combat zones compare to tribal Indian reservations in the United States. That was a general overview from a sociological perspective. Now, my focus will be how they operate in negative ways against the United States, and sometimes themselves. The first article concluded with the following anonymous quote from a friend.

Forward Operating Base Flathead, Part 1

by

At first glance, Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) in Afghanistan and American Indian reservations in the United States appear to have little in common. One is a temporary military installation in a foreign war zone; the other is a legally defined homeland for Indians within the United States. Yet when examined through the lenses of geography, governance, control, and purpose, certain parallels emerge. Both systems created spaces of isolation, imposed forms of authority from outside the community, and produced unique social and economic environments shaped by those conditions. At the same time, important differences in purpose, sovereignty, and permanence distinguish the two. For my purposes, I will not yet discuss how the Flathead Indian Reservation is shared with other Montana residents.