/lit/ - Literature

>>18250986
>but it's still SOME form of heroism that doesn't exist in modern war
That heroism is entirely in the eye of the beholder. The small, realistic actions of real men is to me far more heroic than whatever superhuman feats are portrayed in media. It's far more gripping and inspiring to see or read of something simple and human that you understand than it is to perceive some superhuman feat of "heroism."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_Audie_Murphy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oKMjTqdTYo
https://www.militarytimes.com/2013/03/27/self-sacrificing-courage-when-a-grenade-hit-specialist-saved-four-others-instead-of-himself/

>>18251016
>which is robots fighting wars for us.
Entirely untrue. What fight wars is still men, despite the ubiquitous prevalence of drone footage from third-world conflicts. There just aren't cameras to be found in those numbers elsewhere and the incompetence of subpar militaries causes confirmation bias in reference to the usefulness of drones. Likewise does the use of the footage in propaganda.
The flavor of modern warfare is the vast availability of information available combined with the blurring of lines between combatant and civilian. War is now fought on every possible aspect of society, from imageboards like 4chan to mechanized brigades on the battlefield. News from the front reach the entire world in minutes of things occurring and so everyone maintains the tightest possible information hygiene, using media networks and social media to construct their preferred narratives and frameworks for the people still stupid enough to watch MSM.
Guerilla tactics and un-uniformed combatants are now a staple of warfare; locals and irregulars are likely to handle frontline fighting while professional forces maintain presence in reserve, providing indirect fires and only fighting in crucial, decisive battles. Ukraine and Turkey's actions in Syria and Azerbaijan-Armenia, US in Iraq vs ISIS, are good examples of this.