Warfare = masochistic submission to the leader. Killing and dying for the state. Nothing to do with "male aggression." Precisely the opposite: male submission. It's happening right now. This is the way it always has happened. Male submission: dying when the leader asks the young man to do so.

People PRETEND soldiers are aggressive warriors. Appealing to their pride--so they will be more willing to die (for the country). Gaslighting the soldiers. How shameful.

I'm not going to provide a link to the opening scene of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN again. You can find it yourself. If you think the soldiers in that scene are expressing "male aggression"...

What is the motivation to say that young men fight in battles to express their male aggression...when this obviously is not the case? You might wish to pose this question to yourself. This is a question that requires serious thought.

Richard Koenigsberg 

PS: Or study the Battle of the Somme (First World War), or the Battle of Gallipoli (First World War), or the sadness of American soldiers landing on the beach at Iwo Jima. Makes one wish to cry. Bad enough that nations participate in the slaughter of young men. But then they want to "blame" the soldiers. Radical dishonesty.