Just how much should citizens support their military?

[SickNic]

I'm a former soldier who served in Iraq, and I can tell you from first hand knowledge, most of the people in the military are either there to earn some $ for college, to make a better life for themselves, or are very patriotic. Others just love the thrill of being a part of something bigger. I don't think that hundreds would just stand up and refuse to go to war. These people joined the millitary to better themselves in some way. Some came from crappy neighborhoods, some can't afford college. I joined up after working at McDonalds for 5 years and now I am going to college part time while working on computers full time. I went through hell to better my life, as many other soldiers are doing besides me.

Even though we went to war on false pretenses, and even though the majority of poeple oppose of it, most of the troops are there because they are working hard to better themselves. Getting up and walking away isn't always an option, certainly not for those who would lose everything to go back to a crappy life.

I'm kinda stuck in the middle here with your question. I encourage freedom of speech, and opposing the war (which I now do) should be anyone's right. But when you're in the millitary, you don't really have any freedom of speech, and you volunteered to join up in the first place. Why would it make sense to volunteer, have the millitary invest thousdands of dollars in you and your training, give you thousands more for college, only to decide you don't want to go over there? If you didn't want to go over there, you shouldn't have volunteered. If it was a draft, then that is another thing.

I joined up before the Iraqi war was a blip on the radar. Sure, I was scared to go to war. But I was much more scared of going back to work at McDonald's for the rest of my life.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: SickNic
I'm a former soldier who served in Iraq, and I can tell you from first hand knowledge, most of the people in the military are either there to earn some $ for college, to make a better life for themselves, or are very patriotic. Others just love the thrill of being a part of something bigger. I don't think that hundreds would just stand up and refuse to go to war. These people joined the millitary to better themselves in some way. Some came from crappy neighborhoods, some can't afford college. I joined up after working at McDonalds for 5 years and now I am going to college part time while working on computers full time. I went through hell to better my life, as many other soldiers are doing besides me.

Even though we went to war on false pretenses, and even though the majority of poeple oppose of it, most of the troops are there because they are working hard to better themselves. Getting up and walking away isn't always an option, certainly not for those who would lose everything to go back to a crappy life.

I'm kinda stuck in the middle here with your question. I encourage freedom of speech, and opposing the war (which I now do) should be anyone's right. But when you're in the millitary, you don't really have any freedom of speech, and you volunteered to join up in the first place. Why would it make sense to volunteer, have the millitary invest thousdands of dollars in you and your training, give you thousands more for college, only to decide you don't want to go over there? If you didn't want to go over there, you shouldn't have volunteered. If it was a draft, then that is another thing.

I joined up before the Iraqi war was a blip on the radar. Sure, I was scared to go to war. But I was much more scared of going back to work at McDonald's for the rest of my life.

So I'll ask you what I asked everyone before: do you support the actions of the nazi's in WWII for obeying their orders? How about our other enemies? Do you think the ones that walked away or surrendered to us should be put on trial for their refusal to follow orders, no matter how morally repugnant they were? I'm not trying to compare the two in the present sense, I'm asking if you think what's right in America for Americans is right everywhere when it means HURTING Americans.

This is an important question of theory that needs to be decided. Is it RIGHT to do WRONG when it's an order, or is it RIGHT to do WRONG in order to not do WRONG in another way?

 

[SickNic]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: SickNic
I'm a former soldier who served in Iraq, and I can tell you from first hand knowledge, most of the people in the military are either there to earn some $ for college, to make a better life for themselves, or are very patriotic. Others just love the thrill of being a part of something bigger. I don't think that hundreds would just stand up and refuse to go to war. These people joined the millitary to better themselves in some way. Some came from crappy neighborhoods, some can't afford college. I joined up after working at McDonalds for 5 years and now I am going to college part time while working on computers full time. I went through hell to better my life, as many other soldiers are doing besides me.

Even though we went to war on false pretenses, and even though the majority of poeple oppose of it, most of the troops are there because they are working hard to better themselves. Getting up and walking away isn't always an option, certainly not for those who would lose everything to go back to a crappy life.

I'm kinda stuck in the middle here with your question. I encourage freedom of speech, and opposing the war (which I now do) should be anyone's right. But when you're in the millitary, you don't really have any freedom of speech, and you volunteered to join up in the first place. Why would it make sense to volunteer, have the millitary invest thousdands of dollars in you and your training, give you thousands more for college, only to decide you don't want to go over there? If you didn't want to go over there, you shouldn't have volunteered. If it was a draft, then that is another thing.

I joined up before the Iraqi war was a blip on the radar. Sure, I was scared to go to war. But I was much more scared of going back to work at McDonald's for the rest of my life.

So I'll ask you what I asked everyone before: do you support the actions of the nazi's in WWII for obeying their orders? How about our other enemies? Do you think the ones that walked away or surrendered to us should be put on trial for their refusal to follow orders, no matter how morally repugnant they were? I'm not trying to compare the two in the present sense, I'm asking if you think what's right in America for Americans is right everywhere when it means HURTING Americans.

This is an important question of theory that needs to be decided. Is it RIGHT to do WRONG when it's an order, or is it RIGHT to do WRONG in order to not do WRONG in another way?

I guess there can be a lot of interpretation to the rules. Early in Basic, you are taught many values, and one of them is that you can disobey an order if you find it illegal or morally wrong. Obviously different people have definitions of morality. But what I tried to say in the previous post was, if you are morally oppose to the war, why would you join the military?

I'm in a sticky situation, as I joined after 9/11 but before the Iraq invasion. I went to Iraq and served my time. Now, I could be called back to serve at any time through the Inactive Reserves. I became opposed to the war after I got out of the Army, and I probably would ignore any orders to go back over there. I truly feel pride for us liberating Iraq. It was apparent that it needed to be done when I was over there. But I do think we did a piss poor job of reconstruction, restructuring, and occupying Iraq, and that is why I oppose us being there.

So to answer your question, I think it's acceptable for people in uniform to refuse to deploy. But I think that if they do, there are consequences. They should be discharged, and they should be striped of any benefits they were going to receive for being in the millitary. But I also find it unacceptable for people to sign up in the middle of war, and then refuse to go over during active duty, as if they had no idea they would be sent over. I feel for the soldiers who got out, or retired, and started their lives again, only to be ordered back for a 2nd or 3rd tour. It disrupts and destroys lives.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: SickNic

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: SickNic
I'm a former soldier who served in Iraq, and I can tell you from first hand knowledge, most of the people in the military are either there to earn some $ for college, to make a better life for themselves, or are very patriotic. Others just love the thrill of being a part of something bigger. I don't think that hundreds would just stand up and refuse to go to war. These people joined the millitary to better themselves in some way. Some came from crappy neighborhoods, some can't afford college. I joined up after working at McDonalds for 5 years and now I am going to college part time while working on computers full time. I went through hell to better my life, as many other soldiers are doing besides me.

Even though we went to war on false pretenses, and even though the majority of poeple oppose of it, most of the troops are there because they are working hard to better themselves. Getting up and walking away isn't always an option, certainly not for those who would lose everything to go back to a crappy life.

I'm kinda stuck in the middle here with your question. I encourage freedom of speech, and opposing the war (which I now do) should be anyone's right. But when you're in the millitary, you don't really have any freedom of speech, and you volunteered to join up in the first place. Why would it make sense to volunteer, have the millitary invest thousdands of dollars in you and your training, give you thousands more for college, only to decide you don't want to go over there? If you didn't want to go over there, you shouldn't have volunteered. If it was a draft, then that is another thing.

I joined up before the Iraqi war was a blip on the radar. Sure, I was scared to go to war. But I was much more scared of going back to work at McDonald's for the rest of my life.

So I'll ask you what I asked everyone before: do you support the actions of the nazi's in WWII for obeying their orders? How about our other enemies? Do you think the ones that walked away or surrendered to us should be put on trial for their refusal to follow orders, no matter how morally repugnant they were? I'm not trying to compare the two in the present sense, I'm asking if you think what's right in America for Americans is right everywhere when it means HURTING Americans.

This is an important question of theory that needs to be decided. Is it RIGHT to do WRONG when it's an order, or is it RIGHT to do WRONG in order to not do WRONG in another way?

I guess there can be a lot of interpretation to the rules. Early in Basic, you are taught many values, and one of them is that you can disobey an order if you find it illegal or morally wrong. Obviously different people have definitions of morality. But what I tried to say in the previous post was, if you are morally oppose to the war, why would you join the military?

I'm in a sticky situation, as I joined after 9/11 but before the Iraq invasion. I went to Iraq and served my time. Now, I could be called back to serve at any time through the Inactive Reserves. I became opposed to the war after I got out of the Army, and I probably would ignore any orders to go back over there. I truly feel pride for us liberating Iraq. It was apparent that it needed to be done when I was over there. But I do think we did a piss poor job of reconstruction, restructuring, and occupying Iraq, and that is why I oppose us being there.

So to answer your question, I think it's acceptable for people in uniform to refuse to deploy. But I think that if they do, there are consequences. They should be discharged, and they should be striped of any benefits they were going to receive for being in the millitary. But I also find it unacceptable for people to sign up in the middle of war, and then refuse to go over during active duty, as if they had no idea they would be sent over. I feel for the soldiers who got out, or retired, and started their lives again, only to be ordered back for a 2nd or 3rd tour. It disrupts and destroys lives.

I think I was confused that you made a distinction of signing up during the war and then not deploying, versus being in and confronted with a new war that you couldn't agree with. I absolutely and totally agree with all your points, and I felt pretty much the same way when I was in. Thanks for answering.

 

[cwjerome]

Topic Title: Just how much should citizens support their military?
Topic Summary: Should we put our men and women in uniform on a pedestal?

It's a complex question. If we were to invade Liberia to set up a new government there, I would not support the military's mission. But that doesn't mean I won't support the concept of the US military and it's overall role. The military just does what it's told to do.

I support the police the same way. There may be a certain law I don't like, or the police may have a procedure I think is dumb... but my overall general support of "the police" is unwaivering. They provide a crucial service, often with significant sacrifices and great danger. Just like a serviceman or servicewoman.

People like this deserve our admiration and respect... as a whole. Sure there are lazy or stupid or immoral people in every field, but we should still look at the job and those that fill it with high regard.

It's not the journalist that protects free speech, it's the soldier. It's not the lawyer that gives us due process, it's the soldier. See where I'm going? In the end, the vital role of the US military is to protect us and our way of life, and there is no more important task.

Putting them on a pedestal may go a little too far. This isn't about worshiping anyone... it's about giving a group of people the proper dignity and appreciation they deserve.

 

[piasabird]

First of all the military swears in an oath to defend this country, and alegience to the same and to follow the orders of the commander-in-chief. Military personnel are prohibited from engaging in politics while they are serving on active duty. They also volunteered to serve for whatever reason that they may have had at the time. For some people it is financial, some people it is desparation, and some people it is an honor and a privilidge to serve this country. I was in the military and I think that most people get out after one term of service if they do not get along with the military. This is probably a good thing since some people are not well suited for military life.

The military go where they are sent and they more or less do what they are asked to do no matter how difficult the task. Therefore once they are in harms way we have a responsibility to provide them with the funds and the equipment they need to do the job. To deny them this is to not act responsibly. Members of Congress including Pelosi made speeches declaring the need for military action and voted for using military force. Now these same people are claiming somehow that they were tricked into voting for military force. I say they were not tricked into doing anything.

The senate and/or the House can vote against fuding the troops, or to cut off all funds for the troops. However, they are still responsible for bringing them home in as safe a manner as possible. The USA also owes the country of Iraq the chance to try to straighten out the mess that we helped to create. The military forces of the USA are the people that have to do this job. We sent them there and we owe them the courtesy of returning to our soil with their heads held high for a job well done. You may not like war, you may not like Muslims, and you may not care to help anyone in the middle-east; however, we owe this much to our own soldiers.

Our soldiers are not pawns on a chessboard. They are people who deserve at least as much respect as the most important politician. So lets vow to support them with our pocketbooks.

The president can be impeached, but if you take this action then everyone that voted for the war should be impeached along with him. I could agree with that. I told my wife before this war was voted on that the president moved the troops to the middle-east and had every intention of fighting this war before they had authority to do so. I also said that I knew that the terrorists would never rest as long as we were in the middle-east. I thought to anyone but an absolute moron this was perfectly clear; however, she disaggreed with me.

So here we sit in our comfortable houses while the military are still dodging bullets and are not allowed to shoot back until we order them to. We arrest the military when they do what they are trained to do and kill people. We should be ashamed of ourselves. If I had been in charge of the military a lot more people would have died and Baghdad would have been a giant smoldering pile of rubble. If we are going to fight a war we should fight it like we mean it. There is no such thing as a kindler and gentler war! War is hell for a reason, and we should never forget that!