By: Jonas
[2002-03-27]
I Hate Soldiers
So The Globe & Mail proclaimed March 4 as "the worst day of the war"
So The Globe & Mail proclaimed March 4 as "The Worst Day
of the War" -- seven American soldiers were killed and a journalist
injured. Now, since I'm not writing a letter to the editor I don't have
to be all eloquent'n'shit, so I'm just going to get into this:
So what?
First off, the American forces have absolutely no qualms about killing al-Quaida and Taliban:
"It
seems [the al-Quaida and their supporters] have chosen to stay and to
fight to the last, and we hope to accommodate them." - Gen. Richard
Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
"[T]he enemy
forces have sustained much larger numbers of killed and wounded [and
there] will be many more. We intend to continue the operation until
those al-Quaeda and Taliban who remain either surrender or are killed."
- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
"Some [enemy forces]
have, in fact, attempted to flee from one part of this objective area
[Shahi Kot area] and they have been killed." - Gen. Tommy Franks,
commander of U.S. operations in Afghanistan
Presumably the
number of enemy dead is greater than seven--and if it isn't, the U.S.
probably isn't going to stop at seven. I think the Americans are doing
pretty well, even given the gross disadvantage of fighting in foreign
territory handed to them when they undertook this struggle. So what's
the big deal about losing half-a-dozen?
My second point I
would like to get into by way of an analogy. If you could meet the
framer who built the house I live in, would you say a) "It's such a
tragedy about that poorly-built house, let's put it in the paper and
get all grief-stricken over it, you poor framer"; or would you say b)
"What kind of half-assed job was that? You moron, everything is
crooked! Get a level!" Don't deny it, you'd probably say the latter.
Thus, why the big upset about soldiers dying? It's their job: kill or
be killed. A soldier who dies did his job poorly. Harsh? You see the
logic though, right? Allow me to elaborate further on my seeming
callousness.
It's the primary duty of a soldier to kill
people--enemy people, but people nonetheless. No matter what kind of
soldier, they receive weapons training, the point of which is to shoot
people. Most everything they have (guns, rockets, tanks) are designed
with killing in mind, or the prevention of being killed (armour,
carriers) whilst killing. And none of it is really in self-defence.
Walking around in hostile territory, or people who hate you, armed to
the teeth, is a little too antagonistic to claim self-defence.
Now,
it's my opinion that killing is wrong. Call me crazy, but it's just a
feeling I have. And despite the claims of people from George W. Bush
down to Augustine, I think almost-universal tenets such as "Thou shalt
not kill" and "All life is sacred" pretty well disqualify such notions
as "just wars" and "holy wars". So with what I view as an entirely
indefensible job, soldiers are up the creek without an amphibious
personnel carrier; because I believe that a person who takes on as his
so-called duty the destruction of human life relinquishes, at that
moment, his own humanity. The only thing that then separates him from a
sociopath is his rakish uniform, and the dozens of others he's trained
to kill with--oh yeah, and the fact that he freely chose that life,
whereas the sociopath can at least claim chemical imbalance or
psychological trauma (conscription notwithstanding, but that?s a
non-issue).
But that couldn't justify my killing them--partly
because they're far better-armed than I, but mostly because that would
be hypocritical of me. They're still human beings, if at least humans
with seriously misplaced social responsibilities: duped by the notion
of "defending freedom" from Communism terrorists; well, I could cut off my arm and say I prevented having to deal with a broken hand.
So
that's where the callousness comes from: I have no sympathy for
soldiers. A soldier who dies gets what he signed up for. I don't
advocate their deaths, but I'm pretty indifferent to their
lives--besides, they're so intent on killing each other anyway that I
don't have to do much more than stand aside, and shake my head--in
resignation, and embarrassment at the conduct of my own species. And
I've no sympathy for grieving families: that's their own tough break.
Soldier-son died in battle--who'd've thought it? What a shocker. I'm
sure he had plenty of other job opportunities: police officer, federal
investigator, diplomat, doctor/nurse, mediator, social welfare worker,
Counter-Strike game-tester.
And what about war veterans?
They'd probably be pretty offended over this. Not my concern: again,
that's their own tough break. I certainly didn't force their hand; and
if I lived then? I wouldn't fight. And if I was in a position of power
that would determine such a thing? I hope that I would have the resolve
and the intelligence to avoid fighting.
Seven soldiers dead? A good start, but we've still got a ways to go.
Yes, losing seven soldiers isn't much in the big picture. When nations have a go at each other, or organizations of comparable power, seventy or seven hundred casualties are still negligible.
On the other hand, you have seven dead people with families and friends.
Then again, on the opposite side you have hundreds of casualties, some of them inevitably civilians who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, or your average dumb guys who had no strong convictions and who just didn't know when it was time to run. They, too, had their webs of relationships.
On the other hand, most of the people US troops are there to kill are either members of a terrorist organization (The difference between war and terrorism being that in the former, civilians are collateral damage. In the latter, they are targets.) or soldiers of the Taleban, which I don't have to vilify here. They have done it themselves over the years.
On the last hand, it's the guys on the ground on both sides who do the killing/dying thing, either for a superpower who is arguably failing to live up to its lofty ideals, or a Dark Ages revisionists wanting to outlaw pretty much everything.
I think you shouldn't so much hate the soldiers than the reasons both sides have them, or that it took a terrorist attack at United States to really make anyone do anything about the Taleban. (Disclaimer: I think the US military response is justified and controlled. I just think there existed enough justification before.)
Certainly the Globe & Mail would be an authority on the quality of twenty-four hour periods of conflict.
Conveniently sidestepping all of your points about the idiocy of lamenting seven combat deaths in the midst of a "war", I prefer to look at the utter meaninglessness of the newspaper's proclamation. Strategically, March 4 was almost certainly not the worst. None of the bigwigs were reported to have eluded American forces. It is debatable whether March 4 was even the worst day for the Army's PR. There were no "collateral damage" scandals, and no Red Cross warehouses were bombed. Tactically it was announced as an American victory. But mourning has been de rigeur since the big terrorist attack. Label it a tragedy for a public primed for mourning, and they will buy the papers. It seems awfully cynical to sentimentalize seven combat deaths. Not only is the proclamation somewhat shameful, but it is also premature.
Of course, it is easy to criticize when one's livelihood does not depend on selling newspapers or impressing Congress.
Journalists certainly have a way with words, I would have thought that Sept. 11th was not a particulary good day of the war. I am reminded of the war film, "The Young Lions," where a soldier get killed while taking a crap with his trousers around his ankles. Usually, someone finds a way to describe the event in such a way so that the soldier will get medals, knighted, and sainted because we need to think of wartime deaths as heroic, and not a stupid waste of life that would sap our morale if we thought about it. I think that there was one Navy Seal who fell out of a helicopter, and while it was heroic that he fell out of the helicopter while trying to save a fellow soldier, falling out of a helicopter is kind of a dumb way to go, but not as bad as getting shot while taking a crap. This weekend was not a particulary good day of the war, while the Center for Disease Control Conference on Bioterrorism allows as how a smallpox attack could infect 100 million and kill 20 million indiscriminately, not just soldies who signed on for it as part of the job. In college, my planning advisor gave me a bunch of books from the series, "National Security Management," one of which detailed several kinds of nuclear war; Type I would be launching most of the junk at the same time and targeting both population bases and industrial infrastructure; Type II would be targeting only infrastructure; and Type III would be trading shots over a period of months. Thinking about and planning for mass casualties is not a particularly good day of the war. But you know, it would indeed be a supreme irony if Osama bin Laden died in the recent earthquake as a mud brick hovel collapsed, done in by primitive architecture after surviving the massed might of modern military technology. I think that the best way to settle this dispute is to have a cage match between Bush and bin Laden, winner take all.
not all soldiers go voluntarily. just pray that they don't instatiate a draft once that 7 soldiers becomes 7000 and they are out of military men to die voluntarily. i just hope i make it out of draft age before they start the next world war.
Don't get me started, Jonas - I'll only piss off everyone. You're so right! No! Fuck it, I'm going to start anyway, dammit! What the hell is this Iraq shite about? Ooh, the evil baddies have weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION. Boo and snubs, we must invade, etc. All the pinko bleeding heart liberals (i.e. me) are up in arms. But the Iraqis are so nice / all starved / don't actually have weapons of mass destruction. Well actually, what I think is so bloody what if they have? They're a legitimate nation state and they're entitled to build bombs if they want. The problem is if they want to use them, so Dubya and Tony want to solve the problem. How? By blowing shit up with weapons of mass destruction! So how are we better than Iraqis then? We say they should have a revolution to get rid of evil leaders yet our own leaders can do as they're bribed to. It's a disgrace!
Any needless loss of human life is lamentable. But yes, if you have voluntarily joined an army and voluntarily trained to kill-or-be-killed, there are certain occupational hazards that go along with the job.
I've seen more right-wing types who have virtually no sympathy for Afghani civilians. "Well they should run away from the bombing zones" is the best answer they have for civilian casualties. But the fact is, civilians didn't ask to be put in the line of fire, whereas soldiers basically did. So yes, it's sad when they die, but hardly an unavoidable tragedy.
The kind of mentality that enlists in the military and ends up in a combat unit tends to be that of a fairly ineffectual person outside, yes, but it's still shitty that their memorial ends up being someone else's PR. The Bush administration is not responsible for the military response except to say that we should have one (since as usual we're not fighting a legal war, no declaration by Congress), but you can't criticize his various acts that mark him as a bad president (this is not to say I think Clinton was or Gore would have been a good president) because the majority of the population is easily swayed by halting speeches full of the short, easy words they love so well, the ones like "evil" and "freedom" that lose a little bit more of their real meaning every time they slide out of a politician's greasy mouth. I don't hate soldiers any more than I hate other people on their side of the bell curve. I hate professional politicians.
That needed more punctuation. Anyway, I thought I'd clarifiy about the president not being responsible for the military response - much as hardcore Republicans would argue otherwise, a more liberal president wouldn't try to hug the terrorists. And for what it's worth, a more liberal president wouldn't investigate further before deciding who's responsible, nor would he modify foreign policy to cut down on the likelihood of this happening again. The only difference between the two parties, really, is paying 40% of your income to taxes and paying 39%.
There was a supposed to be a strikethrough through "Communism". I don't advocate The Globe, just citing my source. I don't hate soldiers, per se, I'm just trying to keep with the spirit of the site--soldiers, war, and other related crap just get no respect from me. You know that minute of silence on Remebrance/Veteran's Day? I'm not silent at all. Actually, I'm probably sleeping. Well, now I'm missing class. I'd like to respond a bit more, but not on an 800x600 monitor. GOD I HATE SMALL MONITORS.
terribly sorry about the missing strike. apparently html elements don't copy and paste between outlook and IE even though they're both Microsoft products and it does all sorts of weird annoying stuff when copying and pasting between MS Office applications...
strike has been added
"Counter-Strike game-tester."
This is not a real job.
But I still contend that war should be discarded and replaced with soccer matches--I mean, if physical force is really what it takes to settle a dispute. Otherwise our talents of verbal communication (what seperates us from the animals--'cept dolphins) should be put to use. On the other hand, if the dispute is "I bet I can kill more of your people than you can mine" (cf. Israel/Palestine; India/Pakistan--and I really don't think that's an oversimplification), then by all means, kill each other to your heart's content. But aren't we all taught "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" (among other things which those who teach don't follow anyway--god, I'm so disillusioned)? And what about "If someone's bugging you, ignore them and they'll just get tired of it and they'll go away"? I've found it to work flawlessly on the microlevel--how about employing it on a macrolevel?
Bin Laden: "You evil Americans! I will kill you all!"
Bush: "Yeah, look, I'm busy."
Bin Laden: "Hahaha, soon you will be dead! Stupid Americans!"
Bush: "Whatever, I've got things to do."
Bin Laden: "Run away! You pussies! I'ma gonna take down your system!"
Bush: "..."
Bin Laden: "'N I'ma gonna wipe out your degraded morals! That's right! Hey! ... I'm yellin' at you! I'm gonna beat you into the ground! I'm top dog! ... I'm gonna... I... ... I wish somebody loved me."
Welcome back, Lou. BBQ season is here, and your WL is being put once again to tasty use.
I used one bottle of Winking Lizard Sauce in short order, and I usually have 4 or 5 kinds of bbq sauce. I hate to admit that I still have one bottle of WL, and I am afraid to look to see what kind of preservatives it has, as it's not sprouted blue mold and still tastes ok. Final solution to the Afgan War: ham grenades.
Thanks, life's been chaotic and I've been run continuously ragged for some months now. So I read and I lurk, but I rarely have anything to say.
Ya, folks, E-Mail me if you need another WL fix. At this moment I'm in a highly cash-negative condition, but I have a number of irons in the fire. At least one of them could move me into a debt-free condition within a very short time frame ... at which point I'll be able to buy all the WL sauce anyone could want.
Well, then, in the meanwhile, do you want me to send you some bbq sauce? Don't ask for fireflies, because I'm working on that with limited results. And don't ask me about any bbq'd fireflies.
as your average jingoistic and biased american, I say: go america! I enjoy hearing reports of how many taliban we wiped our asses with today. "we?" you ask? Yes. even though I am not part of the fighting forces, and I have never killed anyone myself, I still feel part of it all. I am saddened by the death of my fellow countrymen and I revel in the slaughter of faceless foreigners.
in sum: america is number one baby!
Samuel Johnson said that patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels; but I think that religion must be the first refuge of scoundrels, knaves, charlatans, and rogues. And also snake-oil salesmen.
Geez, what kind of soft-handed, white-bread Berkeley world did you grow up in? I'm not a jingo, but let's face it, war is sometimes necessary. I have an analogy: Your next door neighbor has a large family, and sometimes, members of that family come over to your house and kill members of your family. Do you a) Lament your family, but pick some flowers and say "Gee, life's too sacred, and going to their house would be "antagonistic" or b) Go over with a group of your family and make sure they couldn't do it anymore.
War sucks. I hate the fact that some people will continue to be a threat until you take the combat out of them. Sometimes that means arrest, sometimes severe beating. Sometimes it's a bullet.
Sorry, but have you ever tried ignoring a bullet? I've met some corpses who weren't aware they were speeding towards their unprotected flesh. My wife works in a large medical center, and I can guarantee you that if some jackass kills her, there won't be a single one of his religion/movement/cult left on this planet when I'm done. The idea of ignoring an assault is one that only a privileged upper-class pseudo-hippie could manifest in his over-educated mind.
Ask the families of the 3k people if ignoring the tons and tons of concrete pouring from heaven could have saved their loved ones. No offense, kiddo, but I'm sure my wife would tell you to go hang, because the next attack, I might be running in to pull people out.
BTW, I work with more than one combat veteran at my job. They're effective, compassionate people, and they've saved several lives. All of them enlisted.
Generally, I find the least effective people to be the ones who can't make the two-second decision when it's needed. They tend to be those whose tests have been alloted large amounts of time. You know, college brats. :)
said that Johnson was wrong, patriotism isn't the last refuge of a scoundrel, it's the first.
Winchester, I should have thought a bit more before I made that blanket statement. Combat veterans you say, I'm guessing they served in Vietnam, not any of the PR "wars" of recent memory. It seems like the military now is a catchbasin for stupid people or an alternative to jail. I can't say what it was like in the olden days, but I've met some older veterans who were OK. Whether this was because age and experience improved them or because the military had higher standards then, I do not know.
It just depends on the soldier. Several Vietnam vets I know are well-adjusted individuals. Several Vietnam protestors I've known are total psychos. It's anectdotal evidence, and reports from the media are going to be skewed. Don't forget the secret actions taken all the time by special forces of various types. Even those guys vary. In my experience, I like Marines best of all. Pilots are pretty cool, too.
Our current military operates as a mercenary group, but that doesn't mean all those who join are mercenaries in mindset. I'd like to have joined the military, but I sleepwalk on my flat feet. Also, I scream and wet myself around loud sounds.
was mainly a setup for the subsequent clever dialogue. I'm just one person and until my weather-control device is active, don't really count for much. So I just pop up every once in a while to make a sardonic quip or two.
BTW, my tests are never allotted any more time than absolutely necesary. Also, the implication in "unable to make the 'two-second decision' becauses tests are taking up too much time" works for me. I'm sure if bin Laden's September had been spent trying to get into full sections, buying textbooks, and figuring out where his student loans went, he would have forgotten all about terrorist attacks.
So you have contempt for those who voluntarily put themselves at risk in order to:
1. Reduce the risk that you will be murdered.
2. Prevent you from experiencing first-hand the sort of oppression perpetrated by the Taliban and Ba'ath Party.
Do you have any grasp of the differences between attacking combatants and occasionally accidentally harming civilians and deliberately targeting civilians? Can you really not see the distinction between war and murder?
One reason it is reported as seven rather than 'some' deaths is because it is possible to know the exact number. Also, the news is being reported to a population that has a connection, if only cultural, to those soldiers. So of course their deaths are bigger news than whatever number of terrorists were killed. Not reporting even an estimated number of enemy deaths also keeps the DOD from getting caught up in the numbers game played with the press during VietNam.
There may be a miniscule fraction of US soldiers who serve because they relish the thought of combat. In my experience [six years active duty], those guys failed to pass Basic and got kicked out before ever having an opportunity to fire a shot.
Also, staniel: 'their side of the bell curve'? Get over yourself.
First, I'd like to say that I like Dr. Johnson if for no other reason than he had Tourette's Syndrome, and would whoop, whistle, and shout at random times; I find this endearing in a social philosopher. I once saw a small pamphlet that Camus had written about how to stop war, and it was essentially to get uniforms and weapons, and kill all the soldiers, but it begged the question of what to do with all of the leftover guys with uniforms and weapons. Presumably one could get some more guys with uniforms and weapons to get rid of them. One thing about a hit-and-run guerilla-style war is that it is cheap to run, and it costs a lot to counter it; so, in the long run, a well conducted guerilla, economic, and psychological war(net war) has an advantage over the conventional military route. I don't know how successful an American netwar response to the situation will be, especially against the "wetback delivery system."
You have to think about small systems of weather impacting big ones. Control a region to make a decent profit to bankroll more powerful devices. Too many evil minds go right for the big takeover. Start small, like Frankie Muniz, and next thing you know, whammo!, youve got them by the nickers!
Back in my day, we didn't have fancy ray guns and bombs. If you were really evil, you'd just walk up to a guy and smack him in the head.
It's good to see I can push buttons, too.
Oh dear god, we've lost 7 soldiers in one day! Oh the humanity! This is nothing like the trench wars, where all battles ended up in a bloody, several thousand (even hundreds of thousands) casualty stalemate! This is worse! This is modern warfare, where all our soldiers are perfectly trained war machines!
Though it is tragic that lives were lost, I feel that they're lucky that only 7 died. I don't even call this a war, nor do I think that The Gulf Skirmish was a war. They're more or less just minor disagreements involving firearms and vehicles.
on one hand; i totally agree, on the other; i disagree. i agree with you on the hypocricies of the american government [and media, although i suppose it is expected of them] which are so perfectly presented in this latest campaign against afghanistan [and, no; i do not mean al qaeda]. on the other hand; we would not have our freedom had soldiers not sacrificed their lives. yes; the killed people, and chose to do so, but i can't help but feel sorry for, if not them, their families. if both sides agreed to settle this without fighting and without death, we would both be better off, but neither side are going to do that, because when it gets down to it, they want their revenge. by they; i mean george [w] bush, and not the american population as a whole. still though; can we condemn soldiers whilst enjoying the benefits of their actions. would you be able to post an article like this, which is fairly anti-governemnt, were it not for soldiers fighting for your freedom of speech? in conclusion i would like to say that i have [as per usual] utterly confused myself, and have no real point to any of my rambling.
Holy shite, Jonas, you are absolutely correct. May I email this to some friends?
I was sore with the belief that nobody understood why I cannot respect soldiers. Thank you for your published opinion!
-Baby J.
Me: army vet, gulf war (yes, war), disabled
If you do not think the Gulf was a war and/or cling to apathy (or worse) against soldiers, do yourself a favor and read 'Prayer at Rumayla' by Charles Sheehan-Miles and gain some understanding of what it is you hate (and obviously have no real understanding of).
Wouldn't the world be loverly if there were no war. Wouldn't Earth be Utopia if Humanity were that Humane. It isn't. We aren't. I could go on about Protecting the Freedoms of Voicing Opposing Views and the like. Or I could point to the obvious WWII We'd all be Nazis allegory and such. But, the opinions here seem beyond the simple naivety those points would benefit.
Soldiers are, in the great majority, kids. Chosing the military while peers are in college is, again in the great majority, a way to afford college with a bit of (dare I say) social responsibility thrown in for good measure. I enlisted because I felt I owed a debt to those that came before. Those that fought and died so that I might grow up in safe and free environment. I was a kid. I learned to detest many things about the military and my country as I grew, but still served to fiercely defend my right to have those dissenting opinions.
I could rage that you, having never served or fought, do not have the right to berate those that do and have. But that would go completely against my point, wouldn't it? You do have that right, because of those soldiers.
One more thought before the onslaught of flames begins: Nobody hates war more than a soldier.
I hate war. The thought of taking a human life is disgusting to me. I graduated at the top of my high school class. Several years later, I attained my law degree from Harvard. I had also obtained teacher licensure and actually published a novel.
I am now a Captain in the United States Army. This war, contrary to popular belief, is a war of self-defense. We were attacked on our own soil, and it will happen again repeatedly unless we go in and ferret our enemies out. I did not join up because I want to die. I joined because I don't want some terrorist crashing a plane into my kids. I find it quite ironic that my comrades sacrifice their freedom and then bleed to allow you the right to speak your mind, and you turn right around and use it to criticize them for protecting you.
Just goes to show: democracy doesn't work.
Your comments are prety calloused. But since my friends and I have taken an oath to uphold and defend your constitutional rights, at least have the courtesy to appreciate our sacrifices. Your harsh comments toward US Soldier's deaths in our war indicate you didn't think before writing. Keep in mind the quote by George Orwell, "Americans sleep peacefully at night because rough men are ready to do violence on their behalf."
We are not on a "Jihad" to exterminate those who we feel are not worshiping God as they should-like our enemy. We seek only to protect our fellow Americans-our own friends and families-from these twisted, evil individuals who seek to kill for the sake of killing.
Before you defend those "innocent" civilians killed during the actions against our enemies, remember thes were the same people dancing in the streets in celebration when over 3,000 innocent men, women and children were killed on in the US on September 11, 2001.
Most were American citizens, but numerous foreign visitors were among those in the "wrong place at the wrong time." My Commander-on Chief, the president of the United States, has ordered me and my friends into harms way to ensure these people don't get a second chance-perhaps saving you and YOUR faomily from future threats.
Please keep this in mind before you write such critical words like "I hate soldiers". My fallen comrades died not to kill, but to protect you, and ironically, your right to free speech in order to lambast us, who die to provide you that right.
You sure as Fuck dont hate your freedom.
Hate Bush. Not the U.N. that Bush(like Hitler)
doesn't give a shit about. Don't Hate the Soldiers.
Hate who they risk their lives for. One being yourself.
Go fuck yourself, you speak Peace cause you have it.
You love it cause someone ELSE gave it to you.
I would have to disagree with your un-sympathetic speech. There are some of us that are willing to fight for this country so that people like you can have some feedom. Then again, some of us joined the Armed Forces because our life was not nice and pretty and maybe this was the best thing for us to do. I was not one to grow up in a Jerry Springer home, however, I am sypathetic towards those that were. The men and women that have had to be men and women because they could not be children due to their families economic hardship or family differences. You cannot or should not be self-centered and talk down about us, military folks. You should be ashamed to even post something like this. You make me not want to fight for bastards like you that do not appreciate anything and just walk around this world caring for themselves. You might be living a good life today but you might be the begger at the corner tomorrow. Do not laugh at others sorrow. The military has actually helped some of us grow. We have grown out of the high school teen mentality into adults that laugh, think and cry about what we have experienced in the sacrifice of defending our rights, but, most definitely, your rights. You can write like an educated adult, unfortunately, the words in your writing cause nothing but anger towards people so selfish as yourself. You did not put a gun to my head and I joined. The act of taking it upon myself willing to die for my country, you and others is what makes me better than you. I say this with a big smile because too bad you did not have the balls to join. Take this from a female.......
First of all the author of this must be as unamerican as Saddam Hussein. I am very proud to be ib the United States Military, and second of all I am ashamed to say we protect pussies like you. If it werent for fuckers who are hell bent on putting an end to the "Infidels in the West" which you are one of them, then we would not have to kill, we have no problem killing them so they dont kill your un american ass, you are probably a canadian or something on top of that, who comes and reaps the pleasures of the American life and complains when something that has nothing to do with you comes up and we start killing people, I am in the Middle East right now in Qatar, where are you probably on your fat ass eating corn nuts in your office job selling butt plugs to the masses of truly immorral people, so I suggest if you want to keep being an American you keep your fucking mouth shut. Dont let whatr we do as a military concern you because if you dont want to hear true Americans mourn the lives of fallen soldiers no heroes then get off your fat ass turn off the TV and go jog or find a way to eend violence you little pathetic piece of shit. Thank you that is all for now.
I hope the war lasts a long time so more of these fuckers can die , hopefully suffer.
Your opinion is your own. Like my opinion is I hope you and your family rot slowly. Your mother or father being slowly cut into bite size sections? Mere numbers...
I agree that most soldiers are a waste of space. I know a bunch of soldiers personally and they spend their time drinking anf getting into fights. They are mostly young, uneducated idealists who sincerely believe that might makles right. They go abroad and kill arabs by the tens of thousands and wonder why we don't respect them. It's sad.
Anyone who dedicates their life to fighting/killing whoever the government tells them to is a person unworthy of any respect or support. Most soldiers like the idea of "action", so the sooner they're gone the better.
i am surprised by the number of soldiers or soldier-supporters who believe that, historically, rights and freedoms have been won by militaries fighting on behalf of their own population. The oppositie is the case.
Most rights and freedoms that we appreicate in the wesat were won y citizens - protesters mainly - who fought their own government for rights which they were denied.
In most cases, the military was used AGAINST its own people for the sake of stability, not enhancing freedom!! To say otherwise is ridiculous.
It is the people, not the soldier, who fought for our decentr society. it is the military and the police who have killed or fought against all types of protesters, from gay rights protesters, to labour workers, to immigrants, to all sorts of groups who pressed their one-time unjust government into becoming more just.
Of course, most soldiers are uneducated fools who don't know squat about the evolution of our own societies into democracies. Military and police.were almost always used against society.
This is history 101!!
i am currently in the United States Marine Corps. and i have no problem with you disliking soldiers, its a dirty business. but at least show them respect because if soldiers did not volunteer YOU could possibly be forced to fight. and we all know pussies cant fight so lets be thankful because our military would get our asses kicked by everyone and we would have no freedoms. i will agree that fighting is inhuman, and evil. but its a nessecary evil, never forget it. world peace is only a pipe dream because of politicians that have no idea what war is like and use it freely.
if bombs were going off in your neighborhood and enemy soldiers were shooting at you and your family. who would you turn to? your countries military. if that situation were true and i knew it was you and i knew you hate soldiers, would i let the enemy kill you? no, because it is my job to defend those who cant defend themselves, even if they hate my guts, i know they will at least secretly thank me later.
i do wish that in the future, all of you, will at least learn to respect those that are brave and are willing to die for your freedom. if you would like to know, i hate war too. i hate the whole idea. but i am willing to fight and die, but not for a politician, or some ideal. but for the guy next to me that is relying on me to cover his ass. we fight for each other (soldiers) imagine your friends are going to a war zone, would u stay at home? or would you go with them and help them fight to protect them.
any responses to this, use my email, id love to hear some feedback.
all the protesters in the world would not have let the British GIVE us independence. all the protesters in the world would not have stopped America from becoming Nazi or under Japanese control. and all the protesters in the world cannot stop terrorists from attacking our people. Nor would they prevent any kind of invasion by a foreign enemy.
before you lecture on history, remember that your a dumb-fuck and shut the fuck up.
Let me tell you something. My dad has been in the war for 2 years now. Even though he has been absent in my life i still support him and all the other soldiers fighting for this country.No matter what you think they are fighting for you.they are fighting so you have the right to say that you hate them. Let me give you a little hint. If you don't stand behind our troops, stand in front of them. i'm sure they want a break sometime.
The only reason some of you fuckers can even say all the horrible trash talk about our soldiers is because of the same soldiers your trash talking. You only half the man/ woman that those troops are. I am honestly sicked and disgusted with most of what I have read here.
