Support Our Troops?

[Hygro]

So doesn't it then depend on what you're willing to risk your life for?

Jihaddists/terrorists sacrifice their lives for causes they do believe in. I can't see how this could be denied.

I'm not sure how gangbangers risk their lives. Perhaps the word means something different in American English. (In English English a gangbanger is someone who indulges in many-on-one group sex.)

Mercenaries risk their lives solely for money, as do career criminals - I wouldn't accord them much respect beyond the bare fact of their humanity.

People with dangerous occupations also risk their lives for money - but also for other reasons too. Some of them surely do deserve respect, like fire-fighters and paramedics. And fishermen. And possibly soldiers?

I'm not sure where this is getting us.

Gang bang, gangbang, and gangbanger are three different things. One is an act, one is an event, and the other is someone who slangs on street corners and shoots people for maintaining status or acquiring their business.

 

[Cutlass]

Let me take a random example:

Imagine I've been fighting across Eastern Europe for the past two years, seen plenty people die in nasty conditions, killed plenty of people myself and I finally reach Berlin. Am I going to behave like a reasonable human being? What honour would I have left?

I think the brutalizing effects of warfare are very often ignored and swept under the carpet. We like to distance ourselves from the actual process of killing each other, it seems to me.

I agree that any extended time in war is brutal on the soldier and that makes it hard for the soldier to not become brutal in turn. And here is where leadership, discipline, and training come in. There has to be someone watching for the turns to the worse and doing something about it before it gets out of hand.

 

[Formaldehyde]

In general, I strongly support those who devote their lives to protecting and defending this country. My own father was a career Army officer who enlisted at the very end of WWII.

But what I don't support are the attitudes of many of them and the reasons that prompted them to join the military. Being a responsible member of the military is in many ways just as difficult as being a responsible cop. While the ones who act professionally and don't abuse their power deserve a tremendous amount of credit, there are many who should have never been selected in the first place. Or they later show they should not be retained in that capacity. Yet they still are.

At least there has been remarkable progress in the past few decades making cops far more responsible for their own acts and views. In most cases, they can no longer be overtly racist, for instance. But there has not yet been a similar campaign to purge the military of those who do not belong. And perhaps there never will be.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Oh, sure. I was reacting to Celticempire's blanket statement that all the responsibility for what the military does lies with the government or military leadership, not individual soldiers. When they join the military voluntarily, they do so in full knowledge of what might be asked of them, and therefore they share some of the responsibility for it. The degree is obviously debatable, and you're right that things are different when drafting is involved.

For my actual views on supporting the troops, I entirely agree with Camikaze.

Iraq was in my view a pretty awful, pointless war and anyone who joined before 2003 may well never have expected to get tangled up in something like it.

Even if that weren't so though, I still leave most of the resonsibility with our leaders. They are the real problem. The soldiers obey because they don't really have a choice.

Should they join? I wouldn't, even if I would for every other reason, I wouldn't join because I think US foreign policy is deplorable, evil, and wrong.

But I'm not going to judge those who do. They are in fact trying to serve our country. They just don't necessarily believe the way I do about what's right for it, and even if they do, it isn't their decision. The responsibility lies with the President, and with Congress if and when Congress actually gives consent.

 

[Takhisis]

Tell that to the Serbs, Germans, Russians, French, British, Austrians, Turks, colonial troops, and Americans who all died in mud-filled trenches.

Tell that to the Kurds and people of Iraq that the bringing down of Hussein was evil, stupid, and pointless.

We are debating the means, not the ends. If the ends justify the means, then we might as well close the thread, same if the means justify the ends.

 

[holy king]

 

[Traitorfish]

I grew up with more than a few people who thought of "our troops" as referring to the Provos. Can't honestly say I find that much less reasonable.

 

[MobBoss]

In general, I strongly support those who devote their lives to protecting and defending this country. My own father was a career Army officer who enlisted at the very end of WWII.

But what I don't support are the attitudes of many of them and the reasons that prompted them to join the military. Being a responsible member of the military is in many ways just as difficult as being a responsible cop. While the ones who act professionally and don't abuse their power deserve a tremendous amount of credit, there are many who should have never been selected in the first place. Or they later show they should not be retained in that capacity. Yet they still are.

At least there has been remarkable progress in the past few decades making cops far more responsible for their own acts and views. In most cases, they can no longer be overtly racist, for instance. But there has not yet been a similar campaign to purge the military of those who do not belong. And perhaps there never will be.

This comment is simply uninformed. The 'campaign' to purge the military of those that do not belong happens every single day. This is easily verified by the factual records of those administratively discharged for a variety of reasons as well as those discharged via courts martial.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Yet even you were worried that many of the homophobic bigots might suddenly want to leave the military and endanger our supposed mission in Afghanistan for merely rescinding DADT.

If the military is actually actively trying to get rid of all the racists and the bigots as you allege with no actual proof, they are certainly doing a terrible job of it. And it clearly hasn't occurred on the same scale that racists and bigots have been removed from police forces in the past few decades. If it had been, it would be "easily verified" by the tens of thousands of sudden discharges which would have occurred as a result.

Racism in US military ‘alive and well’

The harassment of 19-year-old Danny Chen started in basic training-teasing about his name, repeated questions of whether he was from China, even though he was a born-and-raised New Yorker. He wrote in his journal that he was running out of jokes to respond with.

It got worse in Afghanistan, military investigators told his family. They said the other men in his unit showered Chen, the only Chinese-American in his unit, with racial slurs and physical abuse in the weeks leading up to his suicide in early October. Eight soldiers have been charged in connection with his death.

For some Asian-Americans who have served in the military, the racial prejudice aspect of Chen's alleged mistreatment comes with little surprise based on what they've seen or experienced. But others say the military is a place where everyone's limits are tested, and that the failure in Chen's case is one of leadership.

It's unclear how often military members experience racial bullying. Despite repeated requests, the Army did not provide any data and the Department of Defense said it didn't have any information since the service branches are each responsible for their own record-keeping. The Army did say that it has regulations against hazing and bullying in place.

Vietnam War veteran David Oshiro isn't surprised to hear of the accusations of racial prejudice. The 63-year-old Japanese-American said he didn't have problems with the men in his unit but often heard slurs from other enlisted Americans. When he was injured, military Medevac personnel assumed he was Vietnamese and nearly delayed his evacuation until all the solders they thought were American had been flown out.

“I got really upset, I started yelling back, 'I'm an American. You get my ass out of here now,'“ the San Rafael, California, resident said.

“It still upsets me, because I keep thinking, 'We're on the same team!'“

That wasn't Rajiv Srinivasan's experience. The 25-year-old Afghanistan veteran said sure, there were jokes about his Indian heritage from those who served with him. If they approached disrespect, he said he shut it down.

“No matter what race or ethnicity, the Army is going to test the solidity of your character and your identity,” the Ashburn, Virginia, resident said. “You could be the quintessential military brat-turned-soldier from Fort Benning, Georgia; the culture of the Army is still going to be pushing you.”

Daniel Kim, a 39-year-old Korean-American who spent 12 years in the infantry before leaving in 2004, questioned the leadership in Chen's unit. Among those implicated are a lieutenant and several non-commissioned officers.

“Who else knew? Who else didn't speak up?” asked Kim, who now lives in the New York City borough of Queens.

The Asian-American presence is small in the military, as in the US population. The most recent data show 43 579 Asian-Americans on active duty in 2010, making up 3.7 percent of those enlisted. Most were in the Army or Navy.

Among the officer corps, a little more than 8 400 were Asian-American in 2010, or 3.9 percent.

They're people like Anu Bhagwati. The 36-year-old Indian-American woman spent five years in the Marines, and said she left in 2004 largely because she was facing discrimination and harassment, even as an officer.

In her case, gender was the big issue, but she said she saw racial discrimination against others, including the few other Asian-Americans she saw in the service.

“The great American myth about the US military is that racism doesn't exist,” she said. “It's alive and well.”

In Chen's case, while his parents are immigrants, he was a New Yorker, born and raised on the lower East Side of Manhattan. He enlisted in the military after high school.

Chen told family and friends, and wrote in his journal, that he was teased about his name and repeatedly asked if he was Chinese. The bullying and abuse worsened in Afghanistan and racial slurs were used. At one point, when the soldiers were putting up a tent, Chen was forced to wear a construction hat and give instructions in Chinese, even though none of the other soldiers spoke the language, investigators told his parents.

On October 3, the teenager was found dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound in a guardhouse, the Army said.

Eight soldiers in Chen's unit were charged in the death. Investigative hearings are under way. In January, the military said one should be court-martialed on charges including assault, negligent homicide, and reckless endangerment, but not for involuntary manslaughter.

On Wednesday, the Army said two other soldiers should face court-martials. One is charged with dereliction of duty; the other is charged with violations including assault and maltreatment.

Asian-Americans have played a role in the major American conflicts of the 20th century. There's even some anecdotal evidence that some Chinese-Americans were fighting on both sides in the American Civil War, said K Scott Wong, professor of history and public affairs at Williams College.

In World War II, Japanese-Americans instantly fell under suspicion and their loyalties were questioned after the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour. Those already serving in the military were removed from active duty or discharged, and many Japanese-Americans were sent to internment camps.

They were later allowed to serve, segregated into the 100th Battalion, which was later put with the 442nd Regimental Combat Team. The 442nd became the most decorated unit for its size and length of service in US military history.

The Vietnam War had its own concerns, as Asian-Americans who fought alongside other Americans in an Asian country were sometimes lumped in with the enemy.

Chen's death was “a wake-up call” that issues remain, said Elizabeth Ouyang, a Chinese community activist who has been a spokeswoman for his parents, who don't speak English.

Asian-Americans “have always just wanted to belong, to feel like part of America, and the ultimate way of doing that is by fighting for your country,” she said.

Chen's situation sent “shockwaves through our community, that our effort to integrate, to contribute, to be part of America, is so undercut by the treatment that Danny received,” Ouyang said.

She said Chen's parents are determined to find justice.

“I've seen them slowly go from grieving to anger to wanting justice for their son,” she said. - Sapa-AP

 

[ArneHD]

Soldiers do a dangerous job vital to modern society, for which they should be thanked, but so do coalminers, who, if I remember correctly, are more likely to be injured or killed. The question becomes, why should I hold soldiers in higher regard than I do coalminers?

 

[Traitorfish]

If soldiers are indeed vital to modern society, then I'm not sure why modern society is something I should be in favour of.

 

[ArneHD]

If soldiers are indeed vital to modern society, then I'm not sure why modern society is something I should be in favour of.

Vital to the creation of modern society then.

 

[Borachio]

Soldiers do a dangerous job vital to modern society, for which they should be thanked, but so do coalminers, who, if I remember correctly, are more likely to be injured or killed. The question becomes, why should I hold soldiers in higher regard than I do coalminers?

The risk to a soldier overall might well be less than to a coal miner. (Though I understand fishing is the riskiest occupation.)

But when engaged on active duty or indeed actual combat, I think the soldier's risk is substantially higher. It depends where you take your measurements, I suppose.

 

[Leoreth]

Is Costa Rica not a modern society?

 

[Borachio]

Costa Rica constitutionally abolished its army permanently in 1949.[8][9][10] It is the only Latin American country included in the list of the world's 22 older democracies.[11] Costa Rica has consistently been among the top Latin American countries in the Human Development Index (HDI), ranked 69th in the world in 2011

Well, I never knew that.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Is Costa Rica not a modern society?

While Costa Rica (and Panama too) may not have a national military, they certainly do have soldiers. They're just officially considered to be a police force.

 

[Borachio]

The New Economics Foundation (NEF) ranked Costa Rica first in its 2009 Happy Planet Index, and once again in 2012. The index measures the health and happiness they produce per unit of environmental input.[17][18] According to NEF, Costa Rica's lead is due to its very high life expectancy which is second highest in the Americas, and higher than the United States. The country also experienced well-being higher than many richer nations and a per capita ecological footprint one third the size of the U.S.[84]

I like Costa Rica!

Costa Rica is among the Latin America countries that have become popular destinations for medical tourism.[87][88] In 2006, Costa Rica received 150,000 foreigners that came for medical treatment.[87][88][89] Costa Rica is particularly attractive to American tourists because of its proximity and short flight, the quality of medical services, and lower medical costs

 

[civver_764]

So doesn't it then depend on what you're willing to risk your life for?

I think so yeah. Otherwise we'd have no right to judge anybody as long as they thought they were doing the right thing.

Jihaddists/terrorists sacrifice their lives for causes they do believe in. I can't see how this could be denied.

Yes but I still don't respect them. I suspect that we're simply arguing over what the word "respect" means to us and that this discussion isn't going to go anywhere I do admire the bravery that they have, I'll give you that. I wouldn't make a day to commemorate them though.

Mercenaries risk their lives solely for money, as do career criminals - I wouldn't accord them much respect beyond the bare fact of their humanity.

Heh so they're ambitious AND willing to risk their lives? Capitalist heroes I'd say.

I'm not sure where this is getting us.

Yah agreed.

 

[Bugfatty300]

I like Costa Rica!

Costa Rica has also never had a single coup or civil war since it dismantled its military. But it still employs combat soldiers in the guise of police to fight border incursions by heavily armed guerrillas, poachers, bandits, drug traffickers, etc. Certainly they'd be capable of fighting a limited war like most small national armies. Whether or not those tasks are vital or important to Costa Rican society is questionable, I suppose.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

I think that before engaging in violence someone has to consider whether that course of action is correct and justified. The military doesn't allow soldiers to do that, so therefore it is not morally acceptable to serve in a military.

I would have some respect for volunteers who fight on their own terms for reasons they deem just. But people who surrender their entire morality to the whims of others are just mercenaries and should certainly not be venerated.