Cadwiz

I started to put this in general discussion, but figured it would get moved here anyway.

I would like to state that I am in no way trying to intentionally piss anyone off. I am stating my feelings on a subject that I take very seriously. I have edited the following several times in an attempt to rephrase what might be considered inflammatory to those who hold differing opinions. I would be interested on the feelings of others on the military in their respective countries. Please feel free to agree or disagree.

I was just listening to the radio and heard a song by Shelly Wright. I'm not particularly fond of it, but the story behind it has my attention. Her brother is in the Marine Corps, and he sent her a bumper sticker to display. She puts it on her SUV and this lady flips her the bird. How she knows it is for the sticker, I don't know. So, she writes this song to get back at the lady.

I am very proud of my service to this country. I also have great respect for those who have served, or are currently serving their home countries. I appreciate and am very humbled by the show of appreciation from this community to it's veterans.

However, I am saddened by a growing resentment toward our military. There are people out there that think military personnel are heartless, warmongering, blood-lusting bastards. We are categorized as less than intelligent for the beliefs we hold and for whom we tend to vote. It is not as bad as it was for those coming back from Vietnam, but it is disturbing none the less. And to think it has only happened in the last sixty years.

What misguided hatred it is to be directed at the military for fighting and dying in an unpopular war. And why are they dying? They are dying because they are trying to fight a humane war against an inhumane adversary that doesn't have to play by the rules. I believe that it is naive to think that the most powerful military on the planet couldn't start at one side of that country and march death and destruction across the land while sustaining minimal casualties. The only thing that keeps this from happening, is trying to save civilians and limit collateral damage.

Even though I would prefer that we had not went into Iraq, we are there now. As much as I would like a civil end to this conflict, we won't be talking our way out. Furthermore, if we leave without finishing what was started, it will be ten times more difficult when we have to go back.

__________________
Semper Fi

Coppertop

Interesting. I have never experienced this. Then again, I was born the year we left Vietnam. I guess there will always be people out there with totally whack priorities.

shakran

I have yet to talk with a war protestor who hates the military. I have talked with a number of bushies that like to paint the protestors as hating the military. So far, from what I've seen (and I've talked with a LOT of protestors) the idea that they hate the military is total horseshit.

The anti-war crowd hates what the soldiers are doing, but they do not blame the soldiers for it. They realize the soldiers were sent there by the leaders of our country, and it is at those leaders that their anger is directed.

martinguerre

i live in a precinct that went 73% kerry...and there are signs up all over. "Peace is patriotic" is probably the most common, but "Support our troops, bring them home" is #2. when anti-war becomes anti-soldier...then it's distortion.

__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.

-John 3:16

Tarl Cabot

It's hardly a shock considering we had a "loathe the military" president, Bill Clinton, for eight long years.

Then, of course, Clinton and Gore tried to disenfranchise the active duty soldiers in 2000.

Which brings us to Kerry, who told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee stories about American troops cutting off heads and ears, razing villages "in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan" and committing "crimes . . . on a day-to-day basis."

His apology was that his words were "a little bit excessive . . . a little bit over the top."

I'm still amazed that he tried to be elected president on the basis of his four months in Vietnam.

Then again, he sure couldn't run on his Senate record.

Paq

seriously, i have known some HARDcore anti-war people and none of them ever, EVER insult the soldiers or military in general. They will go after bush/co, rummy, etc, but as far as the soldiers are concerned, none have any disparaging remarks.

I will say, the ONLY time i have ever heard someone attack the actual troops was in nyc by a homeless socialist who was merely saying he doesn't support the troops at a free-speech rally..he had nothing specific other than "Well, you support the troops, but i don't" sentence directed at the crowd..

otherwise, the troops are respected while the driving force behind them are attacked...

__________________
Live.

Chris

JumpinJesus

psst....the election is over, pass it on.


To address the comments in the original post, I too echo what shakran posted. Disagreeing with the war in Iraq does not equal hating the troops. After our experiences with the returning Vietnam soldiers, I don't think the American public will ever make that same mistake again.

__________________
"I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses

Justsomeguy

I totally agree with the poster. I have a girl in one of my college courses that puts down the military for standing for a cause. It's really sad in my opinion. Also, she tends to use an argument that our troops support killing innocent people. I find it hard to believe the entire nation of Iraq is innocent people. It's not like we have been anything other than hostile towards them in the past 20 years.

Rdr4evr

That, for the most part sums up my feelings towards military personnel. Although it is the administration that sends them to war, it is the soldiers that make the decision to go kill people for whatever 'cause' they may believe they are 'fighting' for.

Regardless of popular opinion on this matter, I believe most people are afraid to express hatred towards the military, be it for any country, because society tells them they must “support the troops.” Most people unfortunately don't think for themselves, but rather let society and media do the thinking for them.

irateplatypus

yeah... the notion that the anti-war crowd isn't anti-military personnel also doesn't stand up to my personal experiences. i've run into countless people who would agree with rdr4evr.

but then again... what do i know? i'm just a heartless, warmongering, blood-lusting bastard.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Seaver

Really? because LONG before the Iraq war... on Sept 13, 2001 I was walking in unifrom and got called a baby killer, got food thrown at me, and had a hippy try to fight me. Though of course according to the UCMJ I couldnt do anything but keep walking.

Oh, and Rdr4evr go fuck yourself

Justsomeguy

If this post is serious, it's very very sad. The soldiers' jobs are to follow their commanding personnel. They're doing their job. If you believe the commanding chief is acting on false pretense, then so be it. But, how can you fault people for doing their job? As far as they are concerned, their job is necessary in defense of the nation. They cannot be held responsible because their commanding chief acts in a way that many people disagree with in some aspect.

However, the post I'm replying to seems to be the toughts of a very small minority of people. I would think most people feel this opinion is a radical thought and would quickly reject it. Therefore, I won't waste more of your time to continue to argue a point.

irateplatypus

i'm w/ya seaver... but i'd also rather this thread not get locked immediately.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

RAGEAngel9

I was in ArmyROTC during Sept. 11 and we weren't allowed to be in uniform for the week following to avoid any chance of events occuring.

Ilow

This is absurd. When people join the military, they are not supposed to think for themselves, if they did the whole system would be thrown into disarray. Soldiers, for better or worse, are the laborers, not the decision makers. You have to hold the Administrators (President, Joint Chiefs etc.) almost completely responsible for where our military is and why. I'd be willing to bet that, like a majority of the rest of the U.S. citizens, a fair percentage of the soldiers in Iraq could not have found it on a map before they left. They are there to do a job, nothing more nothing less. Just as you may not approve of the new skyscraper they're putting up, you can't blame the iron workers.
For my part I am very pro-military, but I believe that we should be extremely judicious in their use. Fro instance I believe the action in Afghanistan is justified while the war in Iraq is not. I do not condemn any of the soldiers, however, which I feel is typical for this country now, unlike during Vietnam. Even the most liberal people in this country such as Michael Moore say that the best way that we can support our troops is to support people who will not put them in harm's way unnessarily.

__________________
"Religion is the one area of our discourse in which it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about"
--Sam Harris

Rdr4evr

"and Rdr4evr go fuck yourself"

Typical response I would expect from a miltary individual....I'm not surprised in the least.

guy44

Your post is below response. It is inaccurate, hateful, and closeminded. I shouldn't have even written this much. Blech.

Actually, I'll take the low road: why is it OK to disrespect Kerry's Vietnam service but accusing ANYONE else who served of anything is treason? Just curious.

I also want to say that I don't know anyone who actually hates the soldiers. I go to a very, very, very, very liberal college (and I fit right in), and I don't know anyone who does that. It is a small college, and everyone kind of knows almost everyone else. One student who was in the reserves went to Iraq for a year and a half and just recently returned. Everyone greeted him with open arms. He gave a well attended speech with a student from Iraq, and there were no hard feelings towards anyone. My cousin's commission starts on January 1 with the Army.

The point is, we lefties hate this war. It's wrong, should never have happened, and dramatically counterproductive for America. But we don't hate the soldiers. We just want them home, safe, or if it is absolutely necessary, fighting somewhere we need them to be.

__________________
"You have reached Ritual Sacrifice. For goats press one, or say 'goats.'"

archer2371

In the immortal words of General Douglas MacArthur:

"The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war."

I shall say no more, on this Veteran's Day.

__________________
"This ain't no Ice Cream Social!"

"Hey Grif, Chupathingy...how bout that? I like it...got a ring to it."

"I have no earthly idea what it is I just saw, or what this place is, or where in the hell O'Malley is! My only choice is to blame Grif for coming up with such a flawed plan. Stupid, stupid Grif."

irateplatypus

this is only partly true. while it's true that the soldiers themselves aren't the decision makers, they are completely free-thinking and autonomous individuals. in fact, i would say more so because while war is an abstraction to the protester in the street... it means sweat and blood and tears to the soldier. trust me, we think about these things... a lot. the various moral implications are always in our minds. we do not relish taking human life and are keenly aware of the circumstances that have been arranged to make this unavoidable to the soldier on the front lines.

the difference is the sense of duty and discipline soldiers possess. the discipline they MUST possess. they realize that the common good isn't always going to be in line with their own personal good. because of a faith and commitment to the common good (and to the institutions who direct the efforts to safeguard the common good), they make sacrifices to promote that ideal. don't mistake a sense of duty for a lack of critical thinking or understanding.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Ilow

you bait the bear and the bear bites you, I wouldn't be surprised either.

__________________
"Religion is the one area of our discourse in which it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about"
--Sam Harris

shakran

Look I never said there aren't nutcases out there. There are bad eggs in the military too - remember tailhook?

The anti-war movement is not anti soldier. Anyone who claims to be anti soldier is not upholding the values of the anti war movement.

The vast majority of those of us who are against this war frankly feel it's astonishing that people who want to bring the soldiers home where they are safe are considered anti-soldier while people who want them to go fight a war they don't need to be in where they run a high risk of getting killed or maimed are considered pro-soldier.

How the hell does that work?

sprocket

Actually I think most people are smart enough to realize that a military is necessary in this world. Necessary for survival. Without it, we would be the slaves of those who do not share your qualms about killing. They also recognize that in order for a military to function properly in life and death situations, orders must be followed without question, and sometimes you have to take part in actions you may not agree with. But by doing so you ensure the people you serve have the protection they need.

So I guess since we realize that a military is essential for our existence we are all sheep.

__________________
Remember, wherever you go... there you are.

JumpinJesus

While realistically soldiers do think for themselves, they are in fact trained to think alike and follow orders automatically.

On my first day of basic training, our drill instructors told us, "There are no individuals here, there will be no individuals here, and if I find an individual, I'll kick his ass out!"

The whole point of basic training is to drill out individual behavior. Not saying this is a bad thing, because in a war people need to be interchangeable, which means you need to know what the guy next to you is thinking, what his actions will be, and how he will respond to situations. Your life depends on that.

I got out of the military because I didn't like that I had to spend most of my time in groupthink.

__________________
"I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses

irateplatypus

i've been through similar training jumpinjesus... though my perspective is that of an officer. not having been trained as an enlisted man, my experience could have been different.

my training to be an AF officer clearly puts a premium on groupaction but doesn't even seem to address groupthink.

perhaps if i were an infantry soldier it might be different?

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

SecretMethod70

Mod: This kind of personal attack is not tolerated. You've earned a time out. Let's avoid the personal attacks folks.

See above. Keep it civil.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Rdr4evr

Unfortunately, humanity has failed so miserably, that the mentality that war is necessary for survival is how far we have come. Sadly, this has been true from the beginning and will continue to remain so, until people realize that killing is not the proper solution. What is even more disturbing is that the end of humanity will most likely be caused by humanity themselves, rather than a natural event.

irateplatypus

war will always be necessary as long as there is a single group at any time who is willing to kill to get what they want.

it just takes one country. we're to choose between the likelihood that ALL will not choose violent means of getting their way or the possibility that some will and defend, as best we can, against it.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

JumpinJesus

I only made it up to E-4 sgt (Air Force) before I got out. That was when they had E-4 sgts.

Groupthink may have been the wrong term to use on my part. However, enlisted people were definitely were not looked upon highly when we attempted individual thought. Socially we could be as individual as the military allowed.

I remember being a 22 year old E-4 sgt, back when the Air Force still had E-4 sgts. Our flight commander was a 23 year old 0-1. Socially we were similar, but militarily we were worlds apart. I could always sense his discomfort when inspecting a 35 year old E-6 who had been in 15 years. Yet, because of his rank and training, he was in command of the veteran enlisted people, and while the sgts would sometimes rib him behind his back, we never questioned his orders or his behaviors because that was how we were trained.

Basically, in the lower enlisted ranks, any sign of brass caused us to instinctively snap to attention and suddenly become more aware of our appearance and actions. We were trained to hold the officer class in a much higher regard than other enlisted.

__________________
"I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses

analog

While unpopular, it is still his opinion- and was presented in a civil, calm, and honest manner.

Telling someone to go fuck themselves, as a response, is not civil or calm, and lacks any useful discussion- and feeling "baited" is bullshit- this is the real world, not kindergarten.

If you can't behave like an adult, that's what time-outs are for.

Locobot

Of course this would be a fundamental difference between officer and enlisted training irateplatypus. See jumpinjesus's reply.

Groupthink does not only refer to, say, invading a country under false pretenses. It is also a necessary component of "groupaction." You were being taught to direct groupaction not succumb to it.

irateplatypus

what i valued most about jumpinjesus' reply is that he was speaking from experience.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Locobot

Yeah, me too. My actual experience with anti-war protesters, which is quite extensive, has been that they're across the board 100% in support the soldiers in the field. I've never even heard something as tame as RedReaver's post in opposition to the military. I don't even take qualm with the military voting strongly Republican in almost every election. Support for the troops does not at all equate to support for the war.

jack's liver

Michael Moore also has said he never supported the war in Afganistan. If no circumstances warrent putting our troops in harms way - why should we have a military? Michael Moore's answer would be we don't need one, but then again he lives in fantasyland. How many of the terrorists in Fallujah do you think would be caseing buildings in the US if our military wasn't over there?

I love the Military - the one place I hope my taxes are going.

smooth

If you seriously believe this way, then you might get more bang for your protection buck if the military were to line up, shoulder to shoulder, around the parameter of the United States.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Manx

I can fault anyone for blindly following a command of their superior or boss. If I work at an accounting firm and my boss instructs me to cheat on a clients taxes, I would be at fault if I carried out that instruction. Soldiers have the ability to determine if they support the overall actions of the people at the top giving them commands. If a soldier feels it is immoral to continue the actions as outlined by those at the top, the soldier has a responsibility to disobey those orders.

Simply because they are in the military does not preclude them the ability or requirement to judge the actions of their country. They are not robots, even as much as they are trained to be. They remain human, and if they forsake their humanity for their country, they are at fault.

Personally, I find fault in killing innocent people for the political machinations of the President and the Defense Secretary. I find it inexcusable for a soldier to accept the killing of innocents (or even the guilty if there are other avenues towards defense) for those political machinations. Therefore, I find fault with the soldiers fighting this war. Do I consider them baby murderers? No. That's a loaded description. I'm certain they feel they are doing the right thing, even while I know they are not. Their intentions are admirable, even as their actions, on behalf of the President, are deplorable. They are simply misguided - in every sense of the word.

Tarl Cabot

That's an interesting topic. Are you referring to the partying pilots, the admirals who lied about being there, the people who wrongly denied Bob Stumpf promotion, or Paula Coughlin?

Just for the record, a friend of mine had breakfast with LT Coughlin the next morning. His account of her statements at that time varies dramatically from her later ones.

fibber

I have no problems with your moral objections, but as a matter of practicallity, I would have to assume that a soldier rarely has time to consider the morality of his actions until well after the fact. I can only imagine the sheer chaos of being in an urban battle. I would certainly think fear and self-preservation would override any internal debate of the morality of each individual action. Again having never been in anything that I think could even come close to replicating the terrifying stream of emotions and thoughts that must run through those guys I feel wholly unquallified to make any substantial remark for or against them.

-fibber

wnker85

In a war, there is no humanity. Those who want to be nice to those that are shooting at them die. The great writers around the American civil war wrote out against war and the fabric that caused it, but they still understood that if the soilder was humble, he would most likly be killed. (present example is in Saving Private Ryan)

War is not something that can be equated to logical everyday anwsers. It is pasion. As my history prof loves to say: "War is started with pasion, and War is ended with Pasion." In war one can not logicaly think about what he is doing, there is no logic in killing a man.

But, with that said. War will still be a definning part of human existance. Even if we make it to a would peace like in Star Trek, there will still be war with someone else. Like the BORG

Bill O'Rights

My question, to those that compare the job of the U.S. military to that of a tax accountant, and to those that claim that military personnel are indeed heartless, warmongering, blood-lusting bastards, is where are you getting your information...and off of what experience are basing your opinion?
I know from where my own viewpoints are based. I've lived it. I walked the walk. I possess a basis of experience from which I can draw to formulate an informed belief system.
Do not presume that you know what the military is, and how it operates, just because you've seen it in a movie.
I've seen Star Trek...that doesn't qualify me to speak with any authority on intergalactic space travel.

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

denim

Yes, the rest of us just think it, consider your "'tude" a major black mark against you personally, and keep it in mind in the future. Seaver simply told you. Which do you prefer, the one who just tells you what he thinks, or the rest of us who just note it and make it come back to you later?