View Single Post
Old 05-20-2019, 07:36 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,699
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Spinoff from this thread:

In more detail, my position is this: The basis of whether military action by one's country should be considered should be based on the underlying risks, rewards, rationales, and causes of the possible military action. But IMO, if you support a military action, and you advocate that young people in your country be sent overseas and face unpleasant circumstances away from their families as well as risk of injury and death, and you have the relative youth and health that would enable you to join them, then if your proposed military action comes to pass and you choose not to join them, you are a gutless coward (even if the military action really is necessary!). If you are too old to serve, but you have children that have the youth and health appropriate for military service, and you advocate for military action while privately working to dissuade/prevent your children from participating in the military action (or use money/influence to get them into a non-combat unit or organization), then you are also a gutless coward.

Further, I believe such cowardice should lead to public shame and humiliation (by society, not law or government). I believe that this would be an effective societal deterrent against unnecessary wars, and thus would be greatly beneficial to society -- especially a society, like American society, that often seems to lean towards unnecessary wars in recent years.

I believe such cowardice is pretty common, but that doesn't make it any less cowardly.
Well, does that extend to everything then? I mean, if I support gay marriage, do I need to become gay and get married? If I support the right for a woman to choose, does that mean I have to get pregnant?

It doesn't seem reasonable to me that if I support some position of my government that means I have to directly participate in it. Seems all sorts of crazy to call someone coward that supports the US in a military action by not joining the forces...hell, I think calling someone a coward is foolish in any case, as you can't know what is in their heads or how they think. Conversely, I don't see how being in the military gives anyone the right to be the only ones who can support the government in military action. That, also, seems ridiculous to me, especially considering the fact that our own system specifies that it's the civilian branch that controls and directs our military. What you say, if taken to it's logical conclusion, is that ONLY military people can support US military action, and anyone else is an extreme coward if they do but aren't in the military, or aren't rushing off to join. That's contrary to our entire system.

I get that you are trying to make a point...but it's not a good point. IMHO.

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!