Supporting the Troops

Riddle101 · 08-02-2013 05:02PM

Leftist wrote: »

looking down

I don't agree with the lionisation and idolisation of people who volunteer to be trained to kill and take part in occupations of countries half way round the planet.

Well then you must not have much respect for the people who fought in WWII, or fought in the War for Independence. We are fortunate to be in a country that isn't involved in conflicts like say the US, but that doesn't stop the fact that our countrymen has had to fight as well. They all lived by the same principles as soldiers today, although we never occupied another country. But if our countrymen didn't fight and kill, then Britain would probably still be in control of us now.

They have a choice to put themselves in that position. 'Serving your country' isn't a catch all, moral excuse.

It's a moral reason for most Americans. Keeping in mind that American patriotism is really strong. What you see as them just killing and occupying other countries, American soldiers see as serving their country. Leave the politics to the politicians, and do your duty.

But like I said, after 9/11 a lot of Americans were really angry. They saw 9/11 as an attack on their soil, which gives further reason to why Americans believe their soldiers are protecting their freedom. In a sick and twisted way 9/11 served as the perfect recruitment campaign.

There are people out there that volunteer to become involved in all sorts of dangerous conflicts. If you choose to do it when it really didn't need to be done then you have yourself to blame. Couldn't care less if it's american, irish or anyone. Nationality doesn't define it.

A lot of people do think nationality defines you. Why else would we have patriotism.

Like I said before, most Americans volunteer because they want to serve their country. I think for the most part, most american soldiers see the people the US military are fighting as evil, and considering the US's enemy are the Taliban and Al Queda. I think it's safe to assume that most american soldiers believe that they are doing the world good from fighting them, and don't see what they're doing as anything wrong.

Rented Mule · 08-02-2013 05:35PM

Augmerson wrote: »

I've been thinking about this for a few days now. I was on Facebook one night, and an American friend was talking to me about how there was a photo of the rapper 50 cent that a lot of people were pissed off about. Apparently, in this photo, 50 cent was wearing a Marines' uniform, the picture was up on Facebook, and this guy who was in the Marines wrote onto his page, giving out. He was fairly livid, really giving it loads, "how dare you wear that uniform, I know you never served in my corps" etc. The post had lots of likes and comments from people who seemed to have family in the military backing the guy up or were in the military or had been.

Some of it got kind of carried away, but anyway, it made me think about how the US armed forces are seen in American society. How can people be so pro-military, even when those forces serve in unjust wars like Iraq? Is it because of the fallout from the Vietnam war, when returning veterans were shunned from having served in such an unpopular conflict? Is it because so many Americans have family and friends in the US forces? Is it because they see the military as defending US values and freedoms?

It seems to me, if you join the military, it doesn't make you particularly brave or heroic. It's a tough, demanding job which can cost you your life but you have very little say about that at times. If you were against an invasion of a country, you'd still have to participate. Sometimes you will have to do very questionable things. Why do some societies glorify the military?

[and before anyone takes offence, I'm not against anybody serving in the military, it's your choice]

It goes back to the kids coming home from Vietnam in the 70s. They were getting off of planes and people were calling them 'baby killers' and spitting on them. The majority of them were drafted and sent overseas. It wasn't of their own volition.

In the mid-80s, a decade after the Vietnam war, you started to see the 'welcome home' parades for these veterans. Many of whom ended up broken, homeless with issues that you could only imagine.

Scroll ahead a few years in the lead-up to the Persian Gulf War (Kuwait/Iraq I). The guilt from the way the Vietnam veterans were treated was fresh in everyone's mind. The then-Bush Administration made a conscious effort to get it across to the American people that you could be 'antiwar and not anti-warrior'. Considering how quickly the American forces returned after sweeping through Kuwait/Iraq, there was a sense of national pride as well.

Now ....add the September 11th attacks to the bigger picture and now you have nationalism and anger wrapped up into all of this. They are 'defending our way of life' message was put forth from the 'W' White House. It is still that way to this day.

That's it in a nutshell.

Rented Mule · 08-02-2013 05:38PM

Riddle101 wrote: »

Like I said before, most Americans volunteer because they want to serve their country.

That all depends on what branch of the military services you are referring to.

I would say that a good portion of the people who were sent to Iraq/Afghanistan were there trying to pay for college/university. The National Guard/Reserves were all called up and put on active service. The majority of them never dreamed of having to go overseas.

tomlad123 · 08-02-2013 06:54PM

mathepac wrote: »

How does shooting civilians (or "terrorists" for that matter) in their home country, protect American lives in America?

Surely they have learned that every innocent civilian accidentally shot or blown up acts as a recruitment poster for the "terrorists"?

Surely they read their history-books before they ventured into Afghanistan (for example) to murder without trial one of their own US-trained and US-funded "terrorists"? "Wars" in Afghanistan are un-winnable as has been proven to many invaders over the centuries.

The Americans haven't won a war since 1945 - not the war on drugs, Vietnam, poverty, illegal immigration, world hunger, obesity at home - nothing; they are losers and have been for generations. What they intend winning in Afghanistan isn't clear to anyone (maybe another reconstruction project if the shooting ever stops) but they will not get the outcome they want (other than making billions for the arms manufacturers back home).

To suggest that the military should go about their allotted tasks in an unthinking, robot-like manner just following orders is to do them a great dis-service; many of them are there simply to avoid serious jail-time at home.

Definitely the worst input to this thread. I havent even voiced an opinion and this post im making is more relevant

Capt'n Midnight · 08-02-2013 07:02PM

Riddle101 wrote: »

Their country was attacked at 9/11, which means they were under threat and they went to Afghanistan over it. Personally if I was an American who watched a lot of my countrymen die at 9/11, I'd want the same thing. As for the killing of innocent people, well unfortunetely casualties happen in war. Do you expect a war to go without any consequences?

Why didn't they go after the people who trained, funded, and supplied weapons to the attackers ?

Why didn't they do anything to Saudi Arabia where 15 of the 19 attackers came from ?

If the intention wasn't anything other than destabilising Iraq for the foreseeable future why did they disband the Iraqi army without pay before securing the weapons depots ?

Attacking countries for the actions of a small group of individuals isn't going to create a more stable world. Apart from those released from jail and those squirrelling away government funds the average Iraqi is worse off than under Saddam and if you claim that that Afghanistan is better than under the Taliban you have to acknowledged who stoked the fire that got them into power.

The US may be breeding a new generation of people who understandably may blame them for being bombed back to a pre-industrial society.

Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.

Yes the soldiers are brave, and no politics or religion ever stopped a bullet from a gun, but the people who put them in harms way should be accountable. There may also be the problem that in some cases the military are stationed in regions where the population is hostile. This wasn't the case in WWII and I'd almost imagine it's less likely in just war. The problem with a hostile population is barriers are created and you are heading down the it's us vs. them road and no good can come of it.

The more I read about Winston Churchill the more I realise how many lives were needlessly lost. It's the same with US policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Coronel - Churchill had a small part to play in the loss of two armoured cruisers and 1,570 men

darced · 08-02-2013 07:08PM

This post has been deleted.

Pumpkinseeds · 08-02-2013 07:27PM

I think its important to bear in mind that a lot of Americans join the army because they come from dirt poor backgrounds and have little to no other employment options. That is not intended as a criticism of those soldiers, its merely a personal observation. For many it is possibly the only way that they can provide financially for their families. Of course those aren't the only reasons why people enlist.

An army life isn't one that I'd want for myself or my loved ones, each to their own. However, I can see that serving and ex military personnel would get annoyed by some 'celebrity' donning a uniform for self-publicity. They take pride in the job that they do and whether we agree or not with their sentiment is irrelevant.

smash · 08-02-2013 07:36PM

Average Americans killed each year as a result of 'terrorism' = aprox 68

Average Americans who die each year as a result of heard disease = 400k +

Guess which gets around 30x the funding...

awec · 08-02-2013 07:41PM

smash wrote: »

Average Americans killed each year as a result of 'terrorism' = aprox 68

Average Americans who die each year as a result of heard disease = 400k +

Guess which gets around 30x the funding...

If they spent less on defence do you think that number would be as low as 68?

smash · 08-02-2013 07:47PM

awec wrote: »

If they spent less on defence do you think that number would be as low as 68?

Defence? Lol

My friends husband is American and is a disabled vet at 29 because a grenade blew up beside him. He hates the American military with a passion, and everything they stand for. Not because he's now disabled, but because it's complete bollox. He was in Iraq and Afghanistan and wholeheartedly agrees that both 'wars' were bullshít.

smash · 08-02-2013 07:53PM

Just to add to that he sat in the pub one night talking about how it's drilled into them from kids, where first thing every day they pledge allegiance to the flag and honor the 'heros' fighting for their 'freedom'. He compares it to religion in that it's drilled in so much that they actually believe it.

There's no slavery like that of perceived freedom!

Rented Mule · 08-02-2013 08:01PM

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I am going to guess that you have never been to America.

Principal Skinner · 08-02-2013 08:03PM

smash wrote: »

Just to add to that he sat in the pub one night talking about how it's drilled into them from kids, where first thing every day they pledge allegiance to the flag and honor the 'heros' fighting for their 'freedom'. He compares it to religion in that it's drilled in so much that they actually believe it.

There's no slavery like that of perceived freedom!

Well luckily for you and him you can express those opinions freely thanks to the thousands of men who died for your free speech.

smash · 08-02-2013 08:08PM

Principal Skinner wrote: »

Well luckily for you and him you can express those opinions freely thanks to the thousands of men who died for your free speech.

Anyone can express any opinion they want. And free speech is a myth!

darced · 08-02-2013 08:15PM

This post has been deleted.

darced · 08-02-2013 08:19PM

This post has been deleted.

smash · 08-02-2013 08:21PM

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Blood thirsty? You follow orders or you're fùcked. You don't have to like them but you have to follow them!

Principal Skinner · 08-02-2013 08:22PM

smash wrote: »

Anyone can express any opinion they want. And free speech is a myth!

Depends what your governmental type is. You express that opinion in china and see how it goes.

Capt'n Midnight · 08-02-2013 08:33PM

it's terrible when people respect the uniform but not the person it contained http://i.imgur.com/Ro1NY51.jpg

if symbols matter more than people or principles it's not good

Principal Skinner · 08-02-2013 08:35PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

it's terrible when people respect the uniform but not the person it contained http://i.imgur.com/Ro1NY51.jpg

if symbols matter more than people or principles it's not good

What do you mean?

Capt'n Midnight · 08-02-2013 08:41PM

awec wrote: »

If they spent less on defence do you think that number would be as low as 68?

Did you ever read / watch President Eisenhowers Farewell Speech ?

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

Who was it who commented upon the renaming from Department of War to Department of Defense as being a very bad move because prior to that the US military could be wound down to prewar levels but now it's become this huge conglomerate that has to justify it's existence ?

08-02-2013 08:42PM

Principal Skinner wrote: »

What do you mean?

That supporting the troops shouldn't end when they take off the uniform. Too many vets are left to fend for themselves with no support, I believe they have a huge incidence of mental health problems. High price to pay for being heroes only while they wear the green.

crockholm · 08-02-2013 08:53PM

I am quite happy to live in a world that is dominated militarily by the USA,

there are people in other parts of the world whom are less than happy,
As superpowers go,I believe they have been the best to date, so the day that the USA is demoted militarily, as all empires must fall,will be a sad one.

someone will always fill the void,will the chinese be as benevolent towards us?

After all,they are a great bunch of lads

smash · 08-02-2013 09:31PM

Principal Skinner wrote: »

Depends what your governmental type is. You express that opinion in china and see how it goes.

I'm guessing you're American?

Riddle101 · 08-02-2013 09:49PM

smash wrote: »

Average Americans killed each year as a result of 'terrorism' = aprox 68

Average Americans who die each year as a result of heard disease = 400k +

Guess which gets around 30x the funding...

Tbh, the Americans are capable of so much more then we've seen. They have a lot more potential then they realize and I think they only use a small amount of it. Think about the resources they have at their disposal, or the scientific genius, or the fact that they are a really influential country. They could do so much more, but they seem content to stay the way they are right now.

Principal Skinner · 08-02-2013 10:03PM

smash wrote: »

I'm guessing you're American?

No, I'm just a person who doesnt live with their head in the clouds. And sees war for what it really is, an unfortunate necessity, for as much as the anti-Americans try to deny it there are bad people who need more than sanctions to be stopped

mikom · 08-02-2013 10:07PM

"These are great days we're living, bros.
We are jolly green giants, walking the Earth with guns.
These people we wasted here today are the finest human beings we will ever know.
After we rotate back to the world, we're gonna miss not having anyone around that's worth shooting."

smash · 08-02-2013 10:09PM

Principal Skinner wrote: »

No, I'm just a person who doesnt live with their head in the clouds. And sees war for what it really is, an unfortunate necessity, for as much as the anti-Americans try to deny it there are bad people who need more than sanctions to be stopped

Well if you're not American then why did you tell me that thousands died for MY freedom of speach? Because Irish people don't talk like that.

Principal Skinner · 08-02-2013 10:18PM

smash wrote: »

Well if you're not American then why did you tell me that thousands died for MY freedom of speach? Because Irish people don't talk like that.

Well, if no one defended against the nazis in WWII would you have free speech

smash · 08-02-2013 10:21PM

Principal Skinner wrote: »

Well, if no one defended against the nazis in WWII would you have free speech

Ireland was neutral during WWII. You're clutching at straws here!

And for the record, freedom of speech in Ireland? You know we have a blasphemy law right? Which consists of things like "blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter".

Supporting the Troops

Comments