You’re setting the bar kinda high. Most dopers seem to be college educated adults. Most enlistees are kids right out of high school. How much knowledge of world affairs do you think most high school kids, particularly those that are not bound for college, are likely to have?
Factor in that many enlistees are from rural areas where employment options are limited–work on a farm, maybe get on at a small factory, flip burgers, construction or enlist. Huge numbers of military recruits won’t be going to Iraq. Even of those who do, not all are combat troops. There’s cooks, barbers, mechanics, clerks, truck drivers, and any other career field you can think of in the military. There’s more opportunity in the military than some people can find anywhere else–systems in place to recognize achievement, a fair shot at advancement, good health care, housing, insurance…in short, signing up, even today, does not necessarily indicate support for the policies of the current administration. I suspect that you are not now, and possibly have never been, in a situation where what the military has to offer would seem attractive. Good for you. Everyone is not so lucky.
Also, someone may be able to clarify this for me…I am under the impression that all the technology the troops are using to get “less dead” in combat requires considerably more support than troops from the Vietnam era ever needed. So while I think there may be fewer actual combatants, I believe we need more people in the direct vicinity to support them (and who are, by virtue of close proximity, in harm’s way as well). Am I close?
I’m not sure but other figures I found indicate that over 1 million soldiers have served in Iraq and Afghanistan so far, and US nmbers in Afghanistan have been 20k or so at any one time until recently.
And more than just combat brigades will be in theatre.
Thanks to everyone who responded in what I tried to make the spirit of the OP. I guess I might have assumed that this might end up in the Pit, but was hoping it didn’t need to. I was hoping for an open exchange of opinions, experiences, and perspectives - tho I offered a brief statement of my current opinion, that opinion is not a fixed bias, nor do I insist/expect others to share my opinion.
I haven’t had time to carefully read the entire 4 pages and have to get some stuff done, so I’ll be back later when I have more time. Just wanted to extend my personal and most heart FUCK YOU to der shits for intentionally shitting all over this thread and succeeding in his apparent goal of converting what could have been a meaningful exchange of views into dung-flinging.
On one hand I am dismayed in that there is a kernel of some of what he espouses that I sympathize with. But he chooses to express himself in such an exaggerated and offensive manner that whatever grains of merit might be hiding in his effluence are unnoticeable. Or worse, his arguments actually work counter to those who might otherwise agree with him, primarily because of the manner in which he expresses himself.
I guess he deserves some credit for consistency - tho I’m not sure being a consistent asshole is all that great of an accomplishment. :rolleyes:
Seriously tho, thanks to those of you who perceived the intention behind my OP and responded in kind.
While I don’t disagree with the first part of your post, where do you get off in writing that Zapatero is “presenting our Army as some sort green-dressing branch of the Red Cross.” ? Because he has never come across that way to me. Quite the contrary, unlike the fascist, Bush-ass-licking, Aznar, I think he is doing a fine job sending our troops where they are liable to do the most good – Afghanistan, Haiti and Lebanon. But I have no doubt that they (the soldiers) know that they are still an Army…and if someone fucks with them, they’ll get their just desserts.
Sure, there are remnants of Spain’s old guard that remain defiant of Zapatero’s clearly left-leaning positions inside Spain and also reflected in his foreign policy stands. Tough I say. Let them eat crow, we’re a democracy and have one of the most popular leaders in the world…despite the intense hatred of the old guard and their offspring.
I just want some more clarification. if Der Trihs had come in here and said “I think Airman Doors and everybody else in the militrary deserve horrible, painful deaths.” He would be banned. But if he says, “Everybody in the military deserves horrible, painful deaths.” He would be fine?
What I am trying to do here is get a range finder for the difference between 1) Total number of enlistees and 2) total number of enlistees who end up Iraq with a gun in their hand. The black rabbit and the red asshole seem to feel that enlisting in the Armed Services is tantamount to murder. I want to see how far they are willing to take it. Is someone who enlists as a cook a murderer, and so forth.
First of all, Nabil Shaath’s claim to the BBC of his memory of what George Bush told him isn’t exactly reliable. Was Bush speaking English? Were his words translated? Is Shaath just making it up?
Second, Nabil Shaath’s claim doesn’t bear much relationship to what **Black Rabbit ** said.
Dinsdale, I’m sort of surprised at your attitude…not that it’s exactly the same thing, since we don’t get shot at except during divorces/child custody cases, but lawyers generally get pretty huffy when Morally Self-Righteous Lay Person brings out the “by defending a murderer/pederast/corporate executive, you ARE a murderer/pederast/nazi” line (well, it always makes me laugh, but I think several lawyers on this board would rise up with fists a-quivering).
There have been a great many wars fought throughout history that I believe to be morally questionable-several in recent times, but it doesn’t change the fact that most states feel that it’s necessary to maintain a military. People should only join the military when their country is behaving MORALLY. Yeah, that’s going to work…I think I’m going to keep on living in the real world.
I simply don’t think we need to heap either adulation or scorn upon the heads of those who perform jobs that deal with the nastier, not-so-fun aspects of life (soldiering, lawyering, working for the IRS), unless they’re individually deserving of either emotion. Hey…someone has to do it.
So…is Der Trihs going to come along to call me a slavering Nazi now or what? I’d be rather disappointed if he didn’t.
Terrible analogy. The armed intruder is not a poster on this MB. There are active military who post on this MB.
As **Giraffe **explained the rule, it looks like DT did not commit a bannable offense. He’s still a jerk, though, and I think he should be banned for that. I don’t mean just his vile comments about the military, but his general behavior towards any belief or poster he disagrees with.
Well, not all lawyers make their living out of defending murderers/pederasts/nazis…
Personally, I’m not necessarily opposed to some type of universal mandatory service - tho my version wouldn’t be limited to military service. But we do not have that now. With a volunteer military how CAN you separate the contemporaneous foreign policy from the decision whether or not to enlist?
No, someone DOES NOT “have to do” what is currently being done in Iraq. We did not need to go in there and we do not need to remain. Enlisting, stepping forward to help the administration’s efforts, strikes me as at least in part an approval and enabling of the administration’s policy choices. I strongly reject the jingoistic “My country right or wrong.” If someone enlists in the military at the time a particular military action is ongoing, doesn’t that choice necessarily include an element of support for that military action?
In one respect the current environment strikes me as unfortunate because any young person who thinks like me that invading Iraq was a horrendously indefensible and amoral action, is either precluded from pursuing a military career, or must sublimate his personal judgment. Another version of “Don’t ask, don’t tell,” I guess.
I am all for the maintaining of a military sufficiently strong to defend our country. But I would define our national interests far more narrowly than folks who would advocate military action as a tool to protect our continued access to oil or many other resources. And I certainly do not support my government invading other sovereign nations and intervening in their domestic policies, absent a definite and immediate threat to us.
Yes, the world has seen a number of morally questionable wars, both large and small. That history doesn’t mean I should be glad - or silent - when my country unilaterally initiates a new one.
I have yet to see any convincing evidence that this adventure had anything to do with defending the US or its legitimate interests. Instead, it seems to have been - at essence - an attempt to achieve regime change. Which is not the function I personally desire of my military. (The sole exception I personally can imagine at present would be to prevent ongoing genocide. But I am unaware of anyone having advanced such a concern as a primary reason for our invasion.)
Actually, it does. That quote was the basis for my hyperbole.
As for the “killing brown people” bit, I have only the GOP’s military record for the past thirty years to go by.
PS: That’s more hyperbole.
I can’t speak for the furious one, but I don’t think it’s tantamount to murder. Everybody seems to agree that those who enlist don’t necessarily do it for heroic reasons. I just happen to think that in certain situations, it’s moral choice that is extremely fraught with potential pitfalls.
And yes, if the Army is still actually hiring cooks (I dunno - hasn’t that all been contracted out?), then they’re freeing up the next guy in line to go in to the infantry. If the law of unintended consequences is good enough for the people who say criticizing Bush is tantamount to supporting al-Qaeda, then it’s good enough for me.
Much of what you say is true - I am, indeed, a college educated adult, of (lowerish) middle-class college educated extraction. So what? Why do poorer folks get a pass on examining the consequences of their choices for other people?
Come to think of it, the only time I can think of that we actually do give poor people credit for doing harmful shit is when they do it in uniform.
I did plenty of jackass stupid things when I was a kid. I’ve done my best to make it up to some of the people I hurt, and to try to live mindfully of my affect on other people (pheremonally or otherwise.)
Yeah, and by staying here and paying taxes, you’re freeing up the next guy in line to be a cook, which then frees up the next guy to go in the infantry.
I wonder if any body joins the service expecting to face shooting another human being. It is a small percentage that actually does.
NYT article reprinted in Huffington Report says recruits with felony convictions is up 65 % in last 3 years. Barrel scraping time is here.
Several of my friends have kids in the service. they all went through college on ROTC. They joined the Navy to be a bit safer. They were not super patriots trying to protect America.
PBS radio had an interview with group representing returning veterans. The funding for psychological aid is drying up. They said 35 % of returning combatants have mental problems. This is not just a war ,but a particularly ugly one. Society will face very expensive problems and once they return they are just another cost to trim for politicians.
This war is ugly and cost is more than national treasure. It has divided the people .
Tell you what, since it’s tax time and all: you hold back the portion of your taxes that goes to stuff you don’t agree with, and get back to me about how sympathetic the IRS is, k?
Also, you seem to have missed this part, Mr. Reading Comprehension:
