So, the US is better off without any troops?

[Alessan]

@Tripler

My $0.02

I don’t serve a President, I serve a document.

You don’t serve the People? You know, “of the United States of America”?

[DrDeth]

Naw, not now. The current administration is treating the troops like slaves. They call up the National Guard for an extended period- which is outside the scope of those men, and some good number are going broke because of it.

Then, they are calling back men who have been out of the service for decade- 50 year old men with families.

We should only do this in case of a very real 'clear and present danger". Iraq was not such.

[dnooman]

@DrDeth

Naw, not now. The current administration is treating the troops like slaves. They call up the National Guard for an extended period- which is outside the scope of those men, and some good number are going broke because of it.

Then, they are calling back men who have been out of the service for decade- 50 year old men with families.

We should only do this in case of a very real 'clear and present danger". Iraq was not such.

Thank you.

[CynicalGabe]

@DrDeth

Iraq was not such.

But they could attack the Eastern seaboard with pilotless drones spraying biological agents within 45 minutes! :eek:

[Airman_Doors_USAF]

@Alessan

You don’t serve the People? You know, “of the United States of America”?

We do, but our oath is to the Constitution.

I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Note that nowhere in that is the word “people”.

[Spiff]

@dnooman

Back then people used to back our country’s will without hesitation, the same cannot be said today.

And this is bad how?

I hope I’m not pulling a Godwin here, but really, wouldn’t the world be better off today if a majority of Germans in the 1930s “hesitated” before supporting their leader’s military plans?

[kidchameleon]

@Chefguy

On a purely analytical basis, I wouldn’t recommend the military to my kids because of:

poverty level pay
long hours
long periods away from family
tendency to alcohol abuse
potential for physical harm, either in combat or in day-to-day work (think flight deck crew on an aircraft carrier)
socialized medical and dental care

Sheesh, that could be the same arguement for not going to college…

[Airman_Doors_USAF]

The ultimate irony is that even with the impending failure of our privatized medical system he considers “socialized medicine” to be a detriment rather than a benefit. Isn’t that what Hillary Clinton was trying to create in the '90s?

[Chefguy]

@Airman Doors

We do, but our oath is to the Constitution.

I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Note that nowhere in that is the word “people”.

I think you may be splitting hairs here, since the Constitution is the Bill of Rights for the people. Ergo, defend one, defend the other.

[Inigo_Montoya]

I disagree Chef. Those docs are a set of principles developed for & by a certain populace, and the intent of those principles is to govern those people. The oath is aimed at making sure those principles remain in tact as they apply to 'merkins. Should an entity–even the people–threaten those principles, the onus is on the soldiery to defeat that entity violently, with shock and awe as it were. It justifies enaging even a large segment of the US Citizenry.

Trouble is, we have now an “I Robot” paradox (1. robot obeys orders 2. robot can’t harm people nor, through inaction, allow harm to people–can the robot take action which harms SOME people when it is clear that inaction will harm MORE people?), because The President of the United States is that entity. What’s the soldier to do? He must choose between obeying the orders of the POTUS or defending the principles which are the foundations of our government.

Personally I would recommend military service, even now with the potential danger of injury. The flip side of this is that Vet’s benefits must NEVER suffer from reckless budgeting or political pressure. Green Collar work needs to grant a mandatory social advantage akin to affirmative action. You serve, you get rewards that go beyond economic like, I dunno, free SDMB memberships, go to the front of the line at Chipotle, free wheel alignment…stuff like that which makes life just a little nicer but doesn’t strain the economy. Join up I say, and lobby the shit outta congress to make doing so worth the dangers.

[Ravenman]

@Chefguy

I think you may be splitting hairs here, since the Constitution is the Bill of Rights for the people. Ergo, defend one, defend the other.

The Constitution supports “the People,” even though the People might not always support the Constitution. Serving and protecting the People runs the risk of serving and protecting mob rule. Conversely, obeying only the Commander in Chief without regard to the limits that our forefathers placed on that office is an invitation to tyranny.

Thanks be to God that folks like Tripler and Airman Doors speak to what they are serving, rather than to whom some might wish them to serve. My hat is off to you, fine sirs.

[Chefguy]

@Ravenman

The Constitution supports “the People,” even though the People might not always support the Constitution. Serving and protecting the People runs the risk of serving and protecting mob rule. Conversely, obeying only the Commander in Chief without regard to the limits that our forefathers placed on that office is an invitation to tyranny.

Thanks be to God that folks like Tripler and Airman Doors speak to what they are serving, rather than to whom some might wish them to serve. My hat is off to you, fine sirs.

I’m not sure how you got from my thoughts alllllllll the way over to serving mob rule. As you first pointed out, the Constitution supports ‘the people’. By supporting and defending the Constitution, we (as a retired military man, I feel I can say ‘we’) support and defend the rights of the people of the United States. In simpler and more graphic terms, if an squad of infantry was to invade a building containing the Constitution, with the intent to destroy it, I doubt seriously we would declare war on the country of origin. But attack Pearl Harbor or the WTC and kill thousands of PEOPLE…