Oversensitivity With the Military

[Rageaholic]

I noticed that whenever there is a discussion involving military or soldiers, there are always a few people who will fly off the handle, taking a disagreement very personally because they or someone they love is in the military. Like if you're against a war, that must you're against the soldiers and want them dead. With some people, any criticism of the government is a personal attack against them because of their involvement with the military.

I wasn't alive during the vietnam war, but my mom explained that she was against the war and was worried her brothers were going to be drafted. She was involved with anti war protests, but her father (and by default my grandfather), who faught in WW2, was against the protests. He eventually came around and understood her side, but I know of people who still would have supported that war.

And that's another topic right there. I believe that NO ONE should be drafted under any circumstance. It's one thing to voluntarly join the army under your own free will or love of your country. It's something I could never do so I have the upmost respect for anyone who would do it. But when the government forces people to join, even though they may not be fit for the military, that is when I have a problem. And of course, I've seen discussions on drafting turn ugly; as if draft dodgers are traitors to this country who should be shot. Even though they really should have never been drafted in the first place.

So to stop myself from rambling and get to the point, this is not an anti military post. I'm not hating on anyone in the military and have known some awesome people (like my aformentioned grandfather on my mom's side of the family. god rest his soul.). What I'm against is people acting like they're gonna rip your head off for disagreeing with the decisions people at the top make.

[Ginger Tea]

My dad was in the airforce after school and then moved to the Army, he resigned his post and we moved back to blighty in 1980 and when I was older, he said to me and my brother "Don't join the army, they will only get you killed." he didn't mean, you could die in action in a war, he meant those above you in command, from his experience, lacked the necessary field skills going from new recruit to officer without any knowledge of what it's like to actually 'serve' and some of his officers actions endangered his unit too many times.

My mum didn't really Like him being in the army and away for long times with the possibility that he might not come home alive one day, but being a child I don't know how much friction if any this caused. But she married a service man and knew what the army did, just like marrying a firefighter, it carries certain risks and no spouce should turn around to their newly wedded firefighter and say "Mow your married and you could one day die in a fire, I want you to quit and get an office job." same goes for the armed service.

My brother did join Army Cadets for a few years and I joined him on a few occasions to see if I liked it, it wasn't for me, I wouldn't be fit for service anyway as I later found god knows how many things wrong with my legs that I had not noticed befor as I had them since birth and to an extent wasn't aware of them.

So when our boys are out securing the oil of the middle east and a few civilians along the way (I never kidded myself about the 90's gulf war) I see them as wholesale mercenaries and our MOD hiring them out.

You join the army you fight, regardless off the cause or enemy.
You are in the army and don't believe in what you are fighting for, you know where the door is, resign your post via the official channels and someone else will fight and possibly die in your place, I won't feel ill of you for doing so.

Parents and loved ones, accept that said loved one or child wants to or is joining the armed services and could very well die, accept that and wish them to get home safely, don't be like that woman in the green day video for "when september ends" where she almost became audiable only to dogs.

I have long since thought the tag line for our armed services "Join the army/navy see the world" made it seem like a travel cruise than a dangerous job.
"Join the army, possibly die in a war you don't belive in." is more accurate.

Blair was Bushes poodle and sent our boys where ever Bush wanted them instead of risking his own troops on more than one occasion, fine, its what we are paying them to do, not sit around playing cards on the tops of tanks.
But we have never really been at 'war' with anyone for some time, Northern Ireland was never officially declaired as one although the word was used from time to time.

So again, Mercenaries fighting for someone elses agenda untill a time that the nation is at risk itself.
Like the protest banners said "Not in my name."

Lowest rung battle field squaddies, no beef with, the powers that be, don't say were doing something noble etc.

[Greenday]

I just don't appreciate people bashing what we do out here. I've been called a baby killer, a Muslim hater, a brown hater, a fascist, etc. all because I got a job working out here. And I don't even get to carry a weapon. I believe in the mission.

The phrase "Don't hate the player, hate the game" never applied more than now.

[Rageaholic]

The phrase "Don't hate the player, hate the game" never applied more than now.

That's what I'm getting at. But some people act like hating the game and hating the player is synonmous.

[Greenday]

That's what I'm getting at. But some people act like hating the game and hating the player is synonmous.

It's hard for the game not to overlap the players at least somewhat and people tend to not put any emphasis on not hating the player.

[Gravekeeper]

I recall this being a huge issue when Bush was making the laughable case for the Iraq war. The US vs Them thing. You were either with the troops or against them. For the troops but against the war was not an acceptable position.

[Mytical]

I am one of those who is against the war, but respect the soldiers. I think we should stop playing world police. It's not our job. However, the soldiers will ALWAYS have my respect in general. They are individuals, so I will also remember that, and treat each as such. The vast majority will get my respect, but I am sure there are individuals who will not.

[SkullKing]

I must confess I have an intense dislike for the military, but I live in a place that was a military dictatorship until 1985. And it shows.

This only worsened when I had to enlist. It´s lucky that I wasn´t accepted.

[Sleepwalker]

My position on soldiers is similar to my position on police. I respect them, I don't trust them, and I think they deserve whatever protection we can give them. So no wasteful wars.

[mikoyan29]

I have a great deal of respect for our military men and women. They have been asked to do a monumental task and have somewhat lived up to that. I don't think we should have gone into Iraq though and I especially don't think we should have gone in as unprepared as we were. But then again, if we would have gone in with the manpower required....it never would have happened.

As for our military budget...I think it could be pared down alot. Right now we spend more than the next 10 nations combined. And I think our contractors get too much money and we get too little in return. The F-22 has been in development for over 20 years and there are still issues with it (and the reason 20 years sticks in my mind is because I had a model of a YF-22 in college). The F-35 seems to be going down the same shaky road. But bring any of this stuff up and you're called "weak on defense", whatever the heck that means.

[Greenday]

My position on soldiers is similar to my position on police. I don't trust them

Why don't you?

[guywithashovel]

I graduated from high school in 2000, and I started working at Wal-Mart in spring of that year. Sometime during the summer or fall of that year, a guy came into my department and needed help with something. As I was helping him, he started talking to me about life and giving me general advice. This included him telling me about his military service during the Vietnam Era. He looked me in the eye and said, "Let me tell you something. If they start another war, you leave the country. Don't ever get involved with that."

That has stayed in my memory ever since then, not because we got into two wars shortly thereafter, but because I had never heard an adult say that before. One time, in my 12th grade Government class, we talked about the draft, and several of my classmates said that if they got drafted, they would dodge it somehow. In not so many words, the teacher said that would be a dishonorable thing to do. Depending on the reason for being drafted, he was probably right to an extent.

[senor boogie woogie]

I was very fortunate to be part of a generation where there was no draft. If I was of age during the Vietnam War, I would do whatever possible to stay out of it, even if this means running to Canada (with a debate about whether living in Canada for the rest of my life or surviving a year in Nam would be preferrable.

I went to Vietnam in 2005. Nice country, liked the people, loved the food and enjoyed the scenery. I want to go back again. Ho Chi Minh City, formally known as Saigon was/is a beautiful, colorful, comopolitan city. But I was mindful of the fact that 58,000 troops were killed there, basically to keep the country from reunifying and because our government did not like their form of government. South Vietnam was a dictatorship ran by crooks who were as ruthless as the Communists. Now Vietnam is a somewhat prosperous "Asian Tiger" country.

I do not support the "wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan. I say "wars" because these conflicts are not declared actions. Invading Iraq especially. Over 1 million Iraqis were killed in this invasion with several thousand American/Brit whomever lives. Bush told bold (or is it bald?) faced lies about why this "war" happened, actually insulting our intelliegence by saying that Saddam and Al Queda had a causal link, which was pure BS. America is also tangling with a worthless country named Pakistan who has clearly played both sides against the middle in this so called "War on Terror". A "war" that Obama has not stopped (and not all the troops will leave at the end of the year). Gitmo is still open, torturing detainees and violating their 6th Amendment right to a trial (and no, they can't be enemy combatants, because there is no declared war!)

In effect, these "wars" do not get as much press and most people dont care too much about it because there is no draft. The people in the military, including soldiers and marines, volunteered for duty, knowing that they would be assigned to Iraq and/or Afghanistan
. I can't say I am against the war but for the troops. I dont want any young person getting themselves killed, but if you want to join the service to go kill little brown people under the banner of "Freedom", you roll the dice on yourself coming back alive.

Iran is a big boogyman in all of this. There is good reasons why Iran is angry at the USA. In 1953, the American CIA toppled a DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED government and placed Reva Pahlevi as the Shah or Iran. The Shah was a dictator with his secret police and the fun stuff of torture and general brutality, not to mention that the Shah and his minions were corrupt and robbing the country blind. The Shah did a few good things. He tried to modernize the country and liberalize the rights of women. But that doesn't negate the fact that he was an authoritarian bastard, who was supported by the supposed "Land of the Free" (USA), a foreign non Islamic nation that for some reason enjoys tinkering with the governments of other countries (Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Grenada, and now Libya not to mention hot war places like Iraq, Afghanny, Vietnam and Korea). So in '79 the Shah got the boot and another set of authoritarian assholes took over, but at least these Mullah dudes were their authoritarian assholes.


I am an American citizen, but I am not patriotic. I see countries as artificial divisions between peoples. Humanities golas for the next hundred or so years is to knock down these artificial borders and barriers somehow. One problem that will never go away that is the problem is religion.

In totalitarian states, patriotism and worshipping a country is mandatory. Why does anyone have to "respect" and love their country. Again, to me, a country is nothing but an artificial barrier, ran by a form of government.

America doesn't seem very free anymore anyway. Unemployment, underemployment guns everywhere, one of the highest incarceration rates in the World, violence, rampant drug use, horrific debt, casinos and 7-11s are hiring instead of manufacturing and industry, an incompetant, lying, underhanded bunch of people running every facet of government.

[Rageaholic]

I am an American citizen, but I am not patriotic. I see countries as artificial divisions between peoples. Humanities golas for the next hundred or so years is to knock down these artificial borders and barriers somehow. One problem that will never go away that is the problem is religion.

In totalitarian states, patriotism and worshipping a country is mandatory. Why does anyone have to "respect" and love their country. Again, to me, a country is nothing but an artificial barrier, ran by a form of government.

America doesn't seem very free anymore anyway. Unemployment, underemployment guns everywhere, one of the highest incarceration rates in the World, violence, rampant drug use, horrific debt, casinos and 7-11s are hiring instead of manufacturing and industry, an incompetant, lying, underhanded bunch of people running every facet of government.

Very well said. I think it's nice when people want to wave their flag, stand during the national anthem, and praticipate in all that symbolism. BUT it shouldn't be required, especially if we're a free country. I think people who get all high and mighty over someone not displaying their patriotism need to take a fucking chill pill. People may have died for our right to do something, but they also died for our right to say no.

[wolfie]

As for our military budget...I think it could be pared down alot. Right now we spend more than the next 10 nations combined. And I think our contractors get too much money and we get too little in return. The F-22 has been in development for over 20 years and there are still issues with it (and the reason 20 years sticks in my mind is because I had a model of a YF-22 in college). The F-35 seems to be going down the same shaky road. But bring any of this stuff up and you're called "weak on defense", whatever the heck that means.

Canada is set to blow a crapload of money on the F-35. In the past year, there have been intercept missions by our current F/A-18 aircraft that would have been beyond the range of the F-35. Going with the F-35 means we'll need to either replace or extensively modify our tanker aircraft, costing even more money. Also, by one of the standard measures of performance under degraded power output, the F-35 is inferior to a number of WW2 vintage piston engine fighters. Why not just get the updated version of the F/A-18? Of course, the ideal solution would be to get an upgraded version of the CF-105, but Thiefenbaker blocked that one.