I will post this in ATMB.
#1 and #2 are explicitly against the rule. #3-4 are not against the rule, but are pretty jerkish and thus could potentially draw warnings depending on the perceived intent and context. #5 is fine, as Moderators don’t have mothers.
How does #3 and 4 not run afoul of :
There is a thread in ATMB, so as not to further derail this current gem we are posting in now…
Many of the current Spanish recruits are inmigrants and women who want to learn trades that are still seen as “traditionally male”. I remember a perky blonde sergeant grinning ear-wide as she explained that “here, nobody batted a lash when I said I’d like to become an electrician.”
Others are from military families, or people who think they need structure in their lives and if there’s one thing you know the military will give you, it’s structure. A couple friends of mine are in the military because they had “restless feet” and figured that joining one of the corps that get sent “to places abroad” would help still them down.
Are they being sent to Irak? Not right now. But they were. And they are in Afghanistan, and they’ve been in the Balkans… while our president insists in presenting our current Army as some sort of green-dressing branch of the Red Cross, the recruits I know mostly knew better (there’s some idiots who went in blindfolded, but we got those in Engineering School too! Stupidity is not profession-restricted).
So long as they’re making the choice with their eyes open, it’s fine, to me.
Personally, I think anyone who enlists in the military of any country that is currently engaged in a war of aggression or hostile occupation carries culpability. Sure, you may not personally be put anywhere near, say, Iraq, but you standing guard in, say, Germany, frees up another soldier for duty there. So you carry a part of the blame, and willingly so. This is why I have a lot less beef with the individual IDF soldiers, for instance. even though I don’t agree with a lot of Israeli policy, I realise most Israeli troopers are draftees not enlistees.
Outside of such a war of aggression, or one clearly looming on the horizon, I don’t see anything wrong with enlisting in the military. It’s a great opportunity to serve your community, provided it is used properly - i.e. for self defence or legitamate international peacekeeping efforts under a UN flag.
Bad example, I think. It is one thing to provide for the common defense, but Bush’s war is providing for the common offense — unless I missed the news reports early on about Iraqi gun boats headed up the Potomac.
Holy shit! Please tell me you were kidding.
Am I twisting this one?
Should I hold my breath waiting for an apology?
No, I’m not. And I’m amazed and amused to see so many people get so excited over a casual comment; a comment that is at least as justifiable as the ones supporting the troops, since supporting the troops means you are rooting for the death of Iraqis.
It’s interesting how rooting for the bad guys to lose becomes “evil” and “insane” and “stupid” when the bad guys are American soldiers.
The funny thing is, I completely get your point.
One of my primary reason for wanting to end the war is that we are asking our troops to kill, not that we are asking them to risk being killed.
But taking the exact polar opposite view of “supporting our troops”, that is, wishing them dead, is just as vile. If the deaths of Iraqis need to be treated with the same respect and concern as the deaths of US soldiers (and I believe they do), then you would still have to maintain the sanctity of the US soldiers lives for your point to be best made.
That post was in response to one claiming that the military exist for killing, in a general sense.
Regarding your offense/defense, are you of the mind that one must necessarily be struck first before striking? Let’s start there.
I would say that if we had credible evidence that we were going to be attacked, a preemptive attack could be justified.
It has become painfully obvious that any threat to our security from the Iraqis was trumped up, or woefully misinterpreted.
Yes, let’s.
Did Saddam have the intent or the capability to strike the United States? Did he give any indication that he was going to?
No?
Boo-yah. Aggressive war. Everybody loses.
But then again, how many of those soldiers that were shipped overseas (regardless of the fact they knew about the status quo) really wanted to end up in Iraq and in a pointless war? To condemn them to death because it was a life choice they felt that they needed to make is about the most asinine remarks I have seen in awhile. I am anti-war and think it’s ridiculous. But I certainly don’t blame the soldiers for it. War is fought by politicians whilst using the military as pawns. Hate the politicians and wish them death, but not the poor souls that are shipped off to an uncertain death.
A certain world leader decided that God had told him it was his duty to go kill brown people. You may have heard of him.
While I think this is generally true, why do we give individual soldiers a pass for voluntarily agreeing to be the ones who pull the trigger the prima facie evil actions such as Iraq?
The whole “I’m just a pawn of my government” excuse doesn’t work for the Janjawiid in Darfur, and I don’t think it applies to many of our soldiers in Iraq, either.
Good lord. After you graduate and get to Blue Jean College you may gain some perspective. What you are arguing against is the concept of the standing army. If each soldier were allowed to decide exactly when and where to engage the enemy, we might as well not have an army.
I agree with you for the most part. I think the national emphasis on empty flag-waving almost makes a kid feel guilty for not signing up. I’ve never been a “my country right or wrong” kind of person. I believe our country is WRONG in this case. I don’t believe the war can be won in any current definition of the word. I believe Bush has done irreparable harm to us (and to the world, as our capacity to assist others in more “just” conflicts is in the toilet).
However, I have a hard time with the “you made your bed” mindset, only because they’re all so young. I don’t think they have the ability to understand the gravity of their decision fully at this point in their life experience. Our place within the political spectrum can be hard to sort out without more life experience (or with it, for that matter). It takes years of adult reasoning and world input and such to really get an understanding of who you are and where you stand on these issues. Which, of course, is why they like to get 'em when they’re young.
Agreed.
Now, as in the past, a powerful military is the only thing that makes it possible for us to enjoy the rights we have. It takes a fool like der trihs to be unable to make that connection. Thus, military enlistees are doing something inherently noble, IMO.
That said, I detest this war.