Soldiers aren’t robots or superhumans…they are just flesh and blood like me and thee, but with a mentality that can handle being constantly disciplined and putting up with shit, in a way similar to that of an institutionalised criminal at their worst, and in a way that they can carry out acts of seeming heroism and endure regular hardships, at their best.
I know a fair few squaddies who were into Ecstacy, cannabis, getting shit-faced and knocking holes out of the locals when they were home on leave.
You know soldiers with lots of maturity and who were/are respectful of other cultures - not all experiences are the same, and yours are no more relevant than mine.
It’s this kind of thing that makes me cry for the state of our educational system. Between the fundies on the right saying not to teach about condoms, and the fruitcakes on the left holding hands and singing “We Are The World”, it’s amazing that anyone at all graduates with any kind of perspective.
Of course, I guess the internet magnifies the retard effect.
I don’t buy the line that the military is defending our freedom (though certainly it’s what motivates lots of service members), nor do I think it’s necessarily a more vital or noble or even dangerous job than lots of others that don’t get singled out for praise. Nevertheless, I think there’s a different reason for giving them thanks and respect: in a modern democracy the members of the military are our representatives and agents. They contract not with an employer or a corporation but with the rest of society, and they do what they do on our behalf. Moreso than for civil servants or postal workers or building inspectors, the actions of the military ARE to the rest of the world the actions of the country they represent and its people. If they acquit themselves well in that role, they deserve the thanks of those on whose behalf they act. I don’t agree with most of what America’s military has been sent to do, and I have no idealized view of who they are - some of them are torturers and murderers, and the best of them are essentially paid killers. The vast majority are just people with limited opportunity trying to make an honorable living. But I want them to do their jobs professionally, humanely, and in a way that reflects well on their country (and hence on me). I have a right to demand that they do so, and a consequent duty to be appreciative when they do so. I think it’s in everyone’s interests as well - I don’t think a demoralized and dispirited military is likely to benefit anyone. I think the emotional attacks on returning Vietnam vets was one of the failures of the anti-war movement and caused far more harm than good. Much better, I think, would be to hold up the best of the military traditions of honor and decency and encourage the military to embrace them. I think the willingness of most of us anti-war folks this time around to support and encourage the military even while opposing their mission is a good thing.
So to any active or former US service members reading this, thank you! We gave you a shit job, and despite the few fuckups who make the news, the overwhelming majority by almost every account I’ve read have tried to benefit the people you came in contact with and to make the US look good by actually doing good whenever possible. If that sounds like you, congratulations, you did well and you made us proud!
This makes you sound like a fucking moron, though. Cops kill people. Are they paid killers? No, because killing people is something that happens incident to their duties. Soldiers, on the other hand, kill people… incident to their duties.
What a way to “thank” people: “Hey, good job on doing a service to your country. I respect that, even though you’re a bunch of jackbooted psycho thugs with a few people who are just OK with killing people for cash”.
Maybe I expressed myself poorly or maybe you’re reading too much into it. Probably both. I don’t much like the idea of paid killers, but I don’t think it’s a terrible thing to call someone either. As I said in another thread, I am in awe of what the snipers did in the recent rescue of the ship’s captain from pirates. It was the right thing to do. Killing isn’t incidental to what snipers do, it’s essential to it. And I certainly wouldn’t want to suggest that we shouldn’t have snipers in the military. I only meant that I don’t romanticize it. It’s dirty, distasteful work, and I probably wouldn’t get along with the people who do it. At the same time, I wasn’t being facetious or sarcastic when I said that the ones who do it are among the best of the military. I may not like their work but I sure as hell respect and appreciate it, especially when, as I mentioned, it is done responsibly with honor, discipline and professionalism.
Too late to edit again, but I wanted to add that my feelings about the military are definitely conflicted, and that is probably why my compliments seem a little back-handed. I don’t mean them to be. I was raised Quaker and I have a deep discomfort with war and with the military as an institution. At the same time I’m not a pacifist (most of the time). I actually considered a career in the military at one time. (I imagine most of my extended family would have disowned me if I’d gone through with it.) I don’t at all think that members of the military are all jackbooted thugs. I think they are as varied as any other group. I think the majority are probably in it as a job like any other probably due at least in part to limited economic opportunities back home. I think an overlapping group of them, possibly also a majority, are there for noble purposes which I may or may not agree with, such as defending democracy, spreading freedom, or fighting terrorism. A tiny percentage, no different from any other group of mostly young men, are there for the joy of violence. And of course, lots and lots of people are some combination of the three. I don’t think any of this is particularly relevant to the question posed by the OP. Despite my discomfort with the institution, my heart swells like that of the most jingoistic patriot when I think of people willing to die for me and my family. I really do appreciate the service of the military, even when I don’t appreciate the mission.
They are people who engaged in a war of conquest, killed an awful lot of innocent people for no good reason, and committed atrocities. Why should I put my seal of approval on all that by thanking them for their acts ? As for their “sacrifice”, it is our victims who have been doing most of the sacrificing.
These aren’t noble, self sacrificing heroes. They are thugs in uniform.
So’s driving a cab, or working in a convenience store, being a fisherman, or working on oil rigs. Those are thankless, low-paying jobs with shitty hours, shitty assignments and a pretty high risk to life and limb, but nobody seems to overflowing with thanks for these poor saps.
Invalid comparison. Being a person in military uniform and being placed in a situation (that you do not have control over) where you may have to kill or be killed, and then live with the consequences, is pretty unique to the military (and to police, etc to a lesser degree).
You don’t have to be necessarily thankful for what they did in Iraq, but you should be thankful overall that they defend your life and liberties when you choose not to yourself. Whatever you think of your country’s involvment in Iraq, many of those men have endured circumstances where, for a very long time, they feared for their lives almost minute to minute. Thank them for that, knowing they would do it for you anywhere, not just Iraq. You don’t have to agree with the political dynamics of a conflict contrived by the hierarchy to be thankful to grunts who, by orders, participated.
Wow, that certainly is a narrowly-focused view of the Iraq war. Though I think there might have been one or two soldiers who didn’t commit the atrocities you accuse.
So, if ever you had the courage to enlist (maybe you have, I don’t know), you’d disobey direct orders to Iraq based on your above criteria? If so, you are brave, so much moreso than these yellow-bellied so-called soldiers merely “following orders.” But as it is, you’re just sitting in a computer chair, typing on a keyboard.
I weep for all the poor service members who don’t have the “Der Trihs seal of approval.” Here’s some news for you, bud: your opinion is worth absolute shit. It’s actually worth less than shit, because farmers can use shit to grow food.
No, countries shouldn’t have armies at all. Unfortunately they have because others countries have them too.
The second best situation is that armies are only employed in self defense: not an invasion of another country.
Common soldiers should be taught not to be so idiotic. Officers above certain rank ought to be imprisioned together with your former president and his inmediate staff. But that will also never happen.
Wow, nice black and white. So, when Dictator A kills millions of his people, are we more moral if we sit back and watch? “Shoulda moved here, buddy! Sorry you’re being killed, but my hands are clean!” Of course, given that you come from a country that has provided fewer troops to stop genocide in the last 50 years than the U.S., maybe you’re living up to your morality.
(Note, I shouldn’t have to say this, but since you appear to be mentally defective, this is not neccesarily a description of Iraq or Afghanistan or any other real country. This is a hypothetical intended to illustrate that there is a vast range of morality other than “only have an army in case you are invaded”.)
Your second statement, I believe, was meant to be an illustration of the kind of simple-minded glib thinking that passes for discourse among the ignorant; as such, it was perfect.