Blame for the horrors of war goes to the government that sanction them, not the soldiers who fight for the governments.
This. My view would best be described as "Support our troops, send them home."
Imagine there's war and nobody shows up.
I've thought about this. I've seen some people use this as an argument that we plain out and out SHOULDN'T support our troops, because if they were worth supporting they'd commit civil disobedience. I think this is overly simplistic.
However, regarding my personal morality (This also answers FlyingPig below) I would not go overseas to fight in a war I deemed unjust. If I were drafted for an unjust war like Vietnam, I would attempt to get CO status, but its unlikely since I am not opposed to all war, just against STARTING wars, and I do not think we should just sit there and let another nation take us or an ally over if it came down to that (I do think we should be allied with far less people, there's just no good reason to be allied with half the world IMO, and I wouldn't prefer us to go to war for Pakistan, but that's another matter) so I'm not a pacifist. I'm simply opposed ot unjust war. If I were drafted for a war like Vietnam, I'd rather go to jail than participate in it, since I consider it to be immoral.
I think there are some gray areas where a war can be unnecessary without being unjust, and I wouldn't refuse to serve in such a war, but supporting one oppressive dictator over another solely because of our "National interests" applies pretty clearly as immoral, to me. Destroying Iraq because George W. had a personal bone to pick with Saddam (Or because they "Had WMDs" which is also none of our doggone business even if they did) would also be clearly against my morality, and I could not possibly participate in it. Nobody was drafted for Iraq so the solution in that case, for me, is simple "Don't joing the military" but if I were drafted for a war like Iraq, I would again, rather go to jail than participate in it.
OK, I'll bite this one - at what point does it become unacceptable to fail to say 'Mr President, this is wrong' when you are part of a chain of command? Clearly an individual private soldier or subaltern can't refuse to go to war because he disagrees with it, but equally clearly it must be the duty of somebody to refuse to carry out a decision against his conscience. Do note that I mean to resign, rather than to lead a coup.
I think it is ALWAYS acceptable. If he's doing something immoral, he's doing something immoral. I won't kill innocent people whoever tells me to do it, even if its "Legal." Call me an unpatriotic scum of the earth, I don't care, its against what I believe, so I can't do it. I can't participate in a war that isn't just.
I think a soldier can, and should, refuse to go to war against his conscience. Imagine if everyone had done so with Iraq? IIRC over a million people died in that war. Had our soldiers committed civil disobedience, those people would still be alive.
That said, I'm not going to demonize anyone for not doing so. I do not think they have necessarily sinned (Yes, I'm using a moral term here) by going overseas and following orders. I still respect them for doing what they THINK is protecting our country. But I know better, and I wouldn't do it.
I admire US soldiers for their general loyalty and willingness to do dangerous and difficult work for relatively low pay. On the other hand, I think there's a bit of a half-hearted veteran fetish of sorts here.
Here's what I mean- I often hear phrases like "Support our troops!" and such that implore us to honor veterans, call them heroes, and venerate their defense of our freedom. But these seem little more than hollow slogans. I have my doubts that most of the people who mouth those words or slap those bumper stickers onto their cars give much thought to what they mean, and even if they do, the slogans aren't quite right. "Support our troops" sometimes comes off as "Support war". Granted, most probably don't mean it like that, but there were times when people against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were jeered at for "not supporting our troops".
And how exactly were the soldiers defending our freedom? The Taliban may have been atrocious tyrants and fanatics who harbored an enemy, but they did not, and do not, intend to invade and enslave America. Saddam Hussein had no designs on our freedom, either. So it's really wrong to say that they're defending our freedom.
Then, soldiers are often called heroes. Certainly, many of them did heroic deeds like braving enemy fire to save their brothers in arms. But not all of them; many military members see no combat, and many who do do their duty without having to resort to heroism. This is NOT in any way to slander or denigrate soldiers, though I'll bet a nickel that someone here (I can guess who) will twist my words to make it sound like that. But even the military makes distinctions between normal soldiers and those who go above and beyond. That's why there are medals like the Silver Star and the Medal of Honor. Few win the former, very few win the latter. Being in the military doesn't automatically make you a hero. And lately, that term has been so heavily used in non-military settings as to become almost meaningless.
Yet for all this glorification of veterans, not that much is done to help them. Many people are perfectly willing to praise veterans, but how many go out of their way to provide assistance to veterans who become poor and homeless, or who suffer from PTSD and the like? I'm probably being too harsh- you can't expect most people to go out of their way to help any group of strangers- but there still seems to be something a bit hollow about it all.
By the way, great thread, Flying Pig! Being a former para yourself, what do you have to say about this!
I do object to the whole "Support the troops" (When reading between the lines its really saying "Support the war.' I don't support most wars, thank you very much. And I don't think it is the job of America to create a global empire by being everywhere at all times. But I still support our troops. I oppose their leaders. I oppose people like Bush and Obama that give them immoral orders to follow. That they obey because they don't have any other legal choice does not truly pass the blame down to them. And I support what they do for the BELIEF that they are defending our country, even if some of them aren't. But as a Christian I cannot do evil so good will come, I can't compromise, and I can't fight in a war that is morally objectionable.
