give me a reason to respect the military

Great Debates
61

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
You assume that we benefit from the military.

Just suppose you had a magic wand. One wave of the wand, and ALL military people in every country will instantly resign. There will not be any military in any country ever again.

Would that be a net gain, or a net loss, do you think?
[/QUOTE]

Sure, it’d be a gain, but until we have magic wand technology, we have to make do. The benefit, meantime, of having an army is that someone else’s army doesn’t casually come in take all your stuff.

62

[Quote=Peter Morris]

This is what one military doper had to say:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSG Schwartz
Do you really … believe that … career opportunities presented by Military service should be shunned because you don’t agree with the current missions of US troops?

There speaks a man who quite openly puts career opportunities ahead of personal ethics. In the original thread he was giving advice to a mother who wants her son to enlist. But consider this: he is currently employed as a military recruiter. His career currently depends upon persuading people to enlist. He has a quota to meet, and is having trouble reaching it. Getting the kid into the military may advance his own career. However, it might not be so rosy for the kid. Why, then, should we trust his advice? Can we be sure that the advice he gave was honestly motivated? Or could it be entirely motivated by a desire for career advancement?

If lying will advance his career, why wouldn’t he lie? Of course, he may very well object to lying. But would that stop him? Should the career opportunities offered by the military be shunned because he does not agree with lying?
[/Quote]

I know this has been addressed by Tomndebb and Brown Eyed Girl, but I have to address this also. You have no fucking idea what my quota is. You have no fucking idea how well I am doing to achieve it. Were you at my last After Action Review? Do you really know what effect my being a detailed recruiter will have on my career? What gave you the idea that I am having trouble reaching my goals (note, GOALS, not quotas)? Can you be sure that the advice I gave was not honestly motivated?
What makes you believe that I have to lie in order to get people to enlist? What makes you believe that by getting people to enlist my career will be advanced? I would guess that is what you may have heard, or think is what happens. Give some credence for your beliefs, because I sure as shit don’t see you identifying yourself as an Army detailed recruiter.

So you don’t agree with the current operations in Iraq. Fine, don’t agree with them. There are those that do and proudly serve. Should there not be people to support them? Should the men and women that want to be in Iraq have to get by without communications equipment, without food, without working vehicles, without medical care, without spiritual growth because some people feel that we should not be in Iraq?

Let’s take this a step further. Let’s get away from the Army recruiters. How about the recruiters and hiring managers for employers such as KBR and Raytheon? They provide support for the military? Do you object to people working for these employers as strongly as you do those who serve in the Army?

Finally, if you do chose to parse my quotes, at least don’t change the meaning.

[D**k]

SSG Schwartz

63

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Using specific examples of actual posters and then labeling them bad by some set of rules that you do not even take the time to set forth for our consideration is only little more than launching personal attacks.
[/quote]

Oh, I’m sorry. I thought I’d made my position clear. I’ll rephrase and see if you understand me any better.

okay, hypotheticals it is.

Suppose we have a hypothetical person, Mister Smith.

Suppose Mister Smith has a personal sense of ethics. There are some things that he considers to be right. And some things that he considers to be wrong. They may, or may not agree with my opinions, or with your opinions, they are his opinions and nobody else’s.

Suppose there is a hypothetical war. Not the current one, just a hypothetical one.

Suppose that Mister Smith expresses an objection to the war, based upon his own sense of ethics. In his opinion the war is a wrong one, it should not be fought.

Suppose also that someone offers Mister Smith a large sum of money if he will go and fight in the war. Maybe they promise to pay for his college fees, for example.

Suppose that Mister Smith accepts the money on offer, and goes to fight in the war. Suppose that his ONLY reason for fighting was to get the money offered. Suppose that he still considers the war to be unjust, even while he is engaged in the fighting of it. Suppose that he says to himself everyday, “this is wrong” but nevertheless does it, in pursuit of money.

So, in this hypothetical scenario, this hypothetical person has betrayed his own moral principles for money. Is he a good person or a bad one?

Would you trust someone who doesn’t even follow his own moral principles?

let me put it another way.

This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.

what should we think of anyone who isn’t true to himself?

64

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
You assume that we benefit from the military.
[/quote]

Are you implying that you don’t think we do?

Well, I thought your only beef was with the professional soldiers in the national military that kill for the money.

Are you asking if I thought that it would be better if humans weren’t so violent or territorial? Yes, we probably would. But we ain’t.

You never answered my question if you thought that the military should serve without pay. After all, if they truly believed in what they were doing, they would do it for free, right?

The problem with that is that service member becomes completely at the mercy of the government and society they are in. They couldn’t support a family, save for college, or pay off any pre-service debts, just to name a few things. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect the military service member, the police, the fire fighters, doctors, lawyers, teachers, and yes, even politicians to have to serve for free.

To answer the question you asked about the Japanese of WW2, my answer is YES. I hold some respect for the enemy, because I don’t dehumanise them. I realise that “but for the grace of god, that could have been me”. He and I are alike in many ways. We are different in some cultural values. That won’t stop me from killing him to prevent him from killing me (or my shipmates). The whole thing is tragic (killing a fellow human). I wouldn’t take pleasure in it. Since I have never killed, I do not know how bad it would affect me.

A lot of US service people are suffering from the psychological effects of ending anothers life, and having their lives threatened in sudden brutal ways. There was talk of awarding purple hearts for the condition. I think that shows that a majority of the US military is the cold blooded killers for money that you say your holding no respect for.

65

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
I stand by the OP I wrote.

I will not accept your twisting my opinion.

Then answer this one.

The japanese pilots who served their country followed orders and bombed Pearl Harbor.

Should I respect them for serving in the military? Ought I to thank them for what they did? Did they do something good, or something bad?
[/QUOTE]

Your opinion might not be twisted in your head, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. What is printed in the thread, not so much. You’re all over the place.

For one, why would anyone care if you respect the military? I don’t care if you respect your own mother let alone people you have never met.

As for the hypothetical Japanese soldier, as someone who served I can and do respect those individuals who have served honorably. If you know your history you know that many did not. Those involved in the conquest of China, Korea, Burma, Phillapines… no I can not respect that. In fact in Japan at the time you had a military that ran the show. A military that could pick the wars they fought. Not a good thing in my opinion. Not real sure what you feel about it.

I still don’t understand what your reasoning is. If there is a need for military at all (and I think you said you agreed with that) there is a need for career soldiers. It is not unreasonable for those soldiers to want to be paid. It is not a hobby. They have families to take care of. It is not unreasonable that career and lifestyle consideration are part of the process for deciding to join and then to later decide to make it a career. Since most could make as much or more money on the outside, money is not the main reason why people make the military a career. It just doesn’t pay that well. Especially when you figure out the hourly rate. The fact that people work hard and expect to be paid for it shouldn’t determine if you respect them or not. Like I said, I have no idea what your reasoning is. And it doesn’t appear that you want either a debate or to hear anyones actual opinion.

66

[QUOTE=SSG Schwartz]
Finally, if you do chose to parse my quotes, at least don’t change the meaning.
[/QUOTE]

Don’t bother. I already called if on it. He didn’t think those parts were important. Of course it wasn’t, didn’t fit his prejudices.

67

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
Would you trust someone who doesn’t even follow his own moral principles?
[/QUOTE]
No. May I close the thread, now?

68

Please do. Especially since an official Mod warning for me came down from the mountain top. :slight_smile:

69

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
No. May I close the thread, now?
[/QUOTE]
I dunno, you got a magic wand that will make people civil so we can do away with moderators? I mean come on, the name of the thread is, " give me a reason to respect ________". It doesn’t matter what the last word is because the premise is a guaranteed boxing match.

70

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]

Would you trust someone who doesn’t even follow his own moral principles?

[/QUOTE]

Show me someone, anyone, who has not chosen to compromise their moral principles.

Whether it’s for money, love, survival, attention, even altruistic reasons.

The reason why moral principles are held in such high regard is because they are so fucking rare.

And don’t bring the argument of killing is the penultimate; it’s not.

71

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
…So, in this hypothetical scenario, this hypothetical person has betrayed his own moral principles for money. Is he a good person or a bad one? …
[/QUOTE]

My difficulty with your hypothetical construct here is that it seems to be developed in such a way that if you find one “bad” person, then that means the entire enterprise is bad. I have no doubt that you will find people who join the military entirely for the economic gain, despite their principles that military force is inherently wrong. I suspect they are few and far between, and I also suspect they are not likely to stay in the military for long.

But the more relevant issue here is that it is a fool’s errand to find any organization in which every member is whole-heartedly supportive of the corporate mission. Further, finding people who are not true to their own moral principles within that organization says nothing about whether there are others, perhaps a significant majority, who are in that organization precisely because they are following their own moral principles and because they believe that the organization’s mission is noble, meaningful, and (overall) positive.

Your opening post actually had several questions. You asked whether you should respect the military, but your examples focused on individuals, and therefore much of the discussion has been focused on individuals. It seems to me that you have been provided with numerous reasons why many individuals who serve in the military deserve respect. Clearly there are those who do not, and my experience has been that those serving in the military who are worthy of respect despise those who are not worthy to a much greater degree than does the general public.

This does not answer the question you originally posed about whether you should respect the military itself. That is a very different question. Organizations often behave differently that the individuals within it, and confusing the morals of an organization with the morals of every person within that organization is a common and unfortunate generalization. Likewise, finding an individual within an organization that is unworthy does not therefore mean that the entire organization is also unworthy. It may make it easier to dismiss the organization if one disagrees with its purpose or actions, but that seems to me to be a closed-minded and intellectually lazy means of developing and supporting a position.

72

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
No, it’s not a peculiar question. It’s the entire point of the thread.

Professional soldiers/ sailors/ airmen - are they good people? Those among them who fight for pay, anyway.

Was the attack on Pearl Harbor morally justified ? Were the pilots good people for doing it?
And, if in some hypothetical war, (not the current one but a hypothetical one) American or British servicemen did the same thing, would they be good people for doing it?
[/QUOTE]

Yes, and no.

What someone does for their work is usually not a good indicator of whether or not they are a good person.

Example: My brother is in Iraq right now. He re-joined the military not out of a sense of comittment to the Iraq war, but because he recognizes the fact that he is really unable to deal with the civiliaz world. He fails out here, but in the Army, he fits a role. For the most part, I feel he is a good man. A bit dumb about women, and his inability to function in the civilian world bothers me, but the fact that he volunteered again gives me faith that he is a good man overall.

He has told me about men who joined up years ago, before 2002, who he feels are not good men. They spend their leave doing unsavory things. They abuse the system that they are in, and will continue to do so. They are bad men. The fact that both of these people are in the military, in Iraq, would indicate to me that a given group of career soldiers are going to be an average mix of good and bad.

The difference is that the military does try to weed out the REALLY bad.

Choosing to join the military, for most, is not done because they want to kill someone. For the vast majority, the military is joined out of a sense of patriotism, or as a chance to learn skills and abilities that will translate to the civilian world.

For a lifer, someone that has joined the military with the intent of staying in for 20-30 years, they are doing so because they feel they can do the most good there, or they like what they are doing (which is NOT killing people, for the majority of our military personnel) enough to want to keep doing it.

For my brother, who rejoined the military during the current conflict, he isn’t real thrilled about being in Iraq, and possibly having to kill someone. The odds are against it, but it could happen. But when this is done, he’ll still be in. He didn’t join to go to Iraq, but it happened.

I will be working on Memorial day. I don’t like that, but it’s the nature of the job I volunteered for. I feel the same deal is there, just in varying degrees.

As for respect, well, I respect soldiers as a default, often for the same reason I respect police officers by default. They volunteered to do a job that isn’t easy, and can put them in harms way. And by that volunteering, they help secure my way of life. However, if it turns out an individual soldier or policeofficer is a douchenozzle, that respect is depleted (but only on a personal level… the overall respect remains).

I respect volunteer soldiers from other nations in much the same way, as long as we’re not actively fighting them…

73

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
You miss the whole point. I’m not interested in discussing the way the military is run. I want you to justify the morals of the individuals who join.

Some people are willing to and fight in an unjust war, purely because they are paid to do so. Not fighting tpo protect freedom. Killing for money.

Tell me where is the honour in their actions.
[/QUOTE]

Here’s your problem: is does not fall to a soldier to determine the justness of a particular war. He may evaluate a particular order, to determine if it falls outside the rules of military conduct or the rules of engagement, but all cause he is involved in are—and have to be—assumed to be just. The current war in Iraq is a good example, while there may be near unanimous agreement on these boards that the Iraq war is unjust, that doesn’t make it so. Now if a soldier comes to evaluate a war as unjust, he is free to object and not fight. There may be consequences for that decision, but welcome to life.

As far as people who are considering joining the military and are not soldiers already when a particular war starts, two things: 1) just because you think it unjust, they might not. 2) I doubt a person would join the service to participate in a war that they did view as clearly unjust. Do you know of any such person? I doubt it. at best, I’d say, you might be able to find someone who joined who is not a staunch advocate of the Iraq war, maybe someone who, based on the information he has, thinks it was probably not such a great idea. Then that person has to balance that questionable evaluation against the benefits of getting an education, training, and possibly, removing himself from a situation where his civilian prospects are clearly not too rosy.

74

[QUOTE=Peter Morris]

let me put it another way.

This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.

what should we think of anyone who isn’t true to himself?
[/QUOTE]

But he is being true to himself. He is evaluating many different factors and acting on them in accordance with the importance he places on each. It’s the same thing each of us does every day.

75

http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm
Smedley Butler the most decorated Marine of all time when he died ,Says war is a financial scam. It is about money. IO feel sad that people die so money can be made. I have no problem with the soldier but it is the war.

76

I joined the Army because I felt the pressure of going nowhere fast. I was jobless, broke, and my truck got stolen and set on fire to hide the evidence. I aced my ASVAB and got into the medic/nursing school. I currently spend my days taking care of wounded soldiers and civilian patients at Brooke Army Medical Center. I don’t agree with why we went into the war, but I can’t deny now that we are there our presence is the only thing keeping that country from falling apart.

The Army has taken care of me and now I’m able to help those who helped me when I was going through hard times. I know a lot of people who genuinely care about those we are protecting, but we tend to focus on all the bad events and forget about the good. We have to try to remember though.

77

Why shouldn’t soldiers have a right to chose their wars? If you believed your cause was right and felt we had to fight, you would likely be a better soldier. The pool of soldiers should be limited to those who say the war should be fought. If you have ethical or moral disagreements ,you should be allowed to do office work.

78

[QUOTE=Public Animal No. 9]
My difficulty with your hypothetical construct here is that it seems to be developed in such a way that if you find one “bad” person, then that means the entire enterprise is bad. I have no doubt that you will find people who join the military entirely for the economic gain, despite their principles that military force is inherently wrong. I suspect they are few and far between, and I also suspect they are not likely to stay in the military for long.
[/quote]

Thank you for a well thought out and politely stated reply.

I couple of clarifications are required. First of all, I’m not judging the entire enterprise by a few individuals. I’m judging each on their own actions. I made the point in my first post that there are a great many individuals who do get my respect.

Secondly, it’s not that “military force is inherently wrong,” as you put it. It’s the principle of “this specific war is wrong, we should not be fighting it, but I’ll go anyway if they pay me”

I’m sure they don’t. I’m sure that the kids working at Burger King don’t care if their company outsells McDonald’s or not. And they don’t need to. Doing their job does not require them to love their company.

The miliytary is different. The military kills people. And if you are going to kill people then you ought to have a damn good reason for it.

A good reason for it would be - I have to do it to protect the freedoms in my country.

A bad reason for it would be - it’s my job.

Yet I have encountered a great many who

Yes, my question is about the individuals who serve in the military. Each of them is different, but there are some things that every current member has in common. It is in fact a fundamental requirement. That is the willingness to fight for a wrong cause, if so ordered.

79

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Here’s your problem: is does not fall to a soldier to determine the justness of a particular war.
[/quote]

That’s not my problem, its my entire point. The fact that he is willing to fight the bad causes along with the good.

And if they think the cause is a just one, then their service earns my respect.

Yes. I’ve seen evidence on this very board. But under moderator’s orders I’m not allowed to name them.

80

Peter do you enjoy your freedom? Can you tell me how you would have that freedom if it were not for our military?