You know, you make a good point, they are both wrong but I think diplomacy and political agenda are a separate conversation.
umm…there is a slight logical inconsistency here. By your own words, there is nothing wrong with serving in the military…there is only a problem at the current time with the American political agenda.
Therefore, anyone who is in any way affiliated with politics is to blame. Not just the soldiers.
And since I assume that Robert163 votes, then he is affiliated with the political agenda.
So, Mr OP, logic would indicate that you should start a thread in the Pit, announcing that Mr Robert163 is to blame.
And in the meantime, many millions of people who’ve worn a uniform with pride will be very glad that you are busy in the Pit, and not alongside them in basic training. Or even in freshman political science courses.
Me, when I need somebody to carry me off in a stretcher, I want to know he’s a buddy I can depend on. I guess I’m funny that way.
Given how the US military was actually deployed in WWII, or in Afghanistan, would it still be morally incorrect to serve?
I don’t see how the recognition that the US military has legitimate uses has lost all credibility. We had legitimate reasons during WWII, we had legitimate reasons in Afghanistan. If you are just talking about Iraq, how does that mean that it is wrong to serve in Afghanistan?
Abusus non tollit usum is the principle you seem to be missing.
Regards,
Shodan
Oh, good, because if someone says I have an appalling lack of something, at least I’ll know it’s not personal.
You are exactly the type of person I am protesting against. It is necessary for a nation to have a military. That is completely separate from a nations involvement in foreign affairs.
whatever, doesn’t change anything, your stance is still an immoral one.
A robust military serves as encouragement for politicians to get into wars they wouldn’t otherwise consider or be able to wage.
The US hasn’t needed a military action for self-preservation since WW2, and it’s hard for a modern democracy to philosophically justify invading foreign countries for other reasons.
Why?
After all, we’re talking about murder/death/kill here.
If there’s no crime worse than murder, rape, & slavery, than even paying your taxes and/or voting is evil, when it supports these activities. There’s NO grey area. Period. Right?
As long as we are approaching this from a point of moral relativism, you have a point. But my point is the exact opposite. The american military is an arm of a corrupt government and there is no relative examination of that statement.
The OP does not seem interested in debate. Perhaps a passing mod could move his rant to the pit.
the difference is you can’t avoid paying taxes. you can avoid joining the military. that is a very big difference.
No.
The US military does not/must not set policy.
Elect better leaders.
Just to add the the chorus here: your fundamental problem is that violence is used to “enforce [the] American political agenda.” Your dispute is with the American political agenda.
We know for a fact that the American political agenda can change: Bush invaded Iraq and there may have been plans to keep US troops there for a very long time; a couple elections later, all US troops are out of Iraq.
Since the American political agenda is the problem, you are saying that it is immoral to help the American government carry out its agenda by serving in the military. I understand that. Is it also immoral to support the American government in other ways? For example, please explain whether paying taxes to the US Government is more immoral, just as immoral, or not quite as immoral as serving in the military.
Was Libya immoral?
Would intervention in Syria or Darfur be?
In another thread, the OP said that it was justifiable in Serbia.
If you want to acknowledge that it is wrong but necessary, fine, we can debate that. But that is not quite what is being said here, is it?
Well, there’s no real response to that. I suggest your stance is an unreasoning or at least misdirected one, but no matter.
I didn’t call it diplomacy, I called it war, and I agree with von Clausewitz that war is an extension of politics.
I personally believe that serving in the military is morally positive. Whether the political aims for which the military is used are moral is a separate and more complex question, as your own list of justified and unjustified conflicts demonstrates.
So, a knife is an equally bad thing if it is held to a woman’s throat as she is raped, is used to behead someone, or chop parsley. A military is an equally bad thing if it slaughters millions of innocents or prevents the slaughter of millions by putting the men, women, and children of a particular flavor into gas chambers. It’s the same bad thing whether it responsible for the Cambodian killing fields or the raid on Entebbe?
As I asked, just where are you getting this nonsense from? What informs you to this position of yours?
fine, I’m glad you’re protesting. And that you’re free to do so. And that there’s a military which protects that freedom.
Yeah, I know it ain’t that simple…nobody is likey to invade the continental US tommorrow morning. And therefor most of the U.S army and navy is not stationed within the continental US.
But its a big complicated world out there. When you fill your gas tank at the local Shell station in Peoria, please remember that somebody is out there watching over the Straits of Hormuz.
If you dont like that, you can try to change it. That’s what’s neat about Democracy.
paying taxes is unavoidable. joining the military is not.
Please don’t think that I didn’t read the rest of you post. I did. But it’s all beside the point. People willingly join the military. That and that alone is the issue at hand.