Military arrogance, elitism and stubbornness

I am currently watching a TV series from around 2005 - "Into the West". It is well done, quite gripping, and shows the experiences of the many "sides" (Native Americans, colonisers, Chinese) involved in the expansion of the USA into the continental west of that part of North America. 

It's obviously a mainstream media production, so it doesn't get too graphic, but makes a reasonable attempt - so far - to include the problems, including the bigotry and the massacres. 

There's a moment in one of the episodes where one of the military characters, at a crucial moment when peace could be achieved, says something to the effect that the army "doesn't negotiate with" and refers to Native Americans disdainfully (to put it mildly). Custer is also making an inelegant appearances, along with a few other well known historical bigots, and, even if one didn't know history, it is clear what will be happening. 

And a lot of that is military stupidity - bigotry, blindness, and arrogant elitist stubbornness. 

And then, this morning, I read of the growing risk of civil war in Burma, and what was that caused by? Military stupidity - inability to cope with difference, insistence on hierarchical obedience (which they mistakenly think is "respect"), and an arrogant elitist greed for money and influence (i.e., power). 

Similar, much? 

I haven't titled this post "military stupidity", however, as there are also at least some good people in the military - something the TV series is hinting at, something shown by people like Hugh Thompson, Jr. (who is on my heroines page), the military leaders and ex-leaders who warn against war, and even those in the military who learn and adapt and thus try (with mixed results) to reduce civilian  casualties in war - albeit, given the changing nature of conflict, perhaps unsuccessfully (my view tends to be influenced by the major wars, which is why we need researchers and academics working in this area [and elsewhere]).