george bush's iraq war is the gift that just keeps on giving.

:(

All are to blame. The "leaders" and everyone who follows their command. And that is true on both sides of the fence, not just one military or group.


I don't know you, my post was generalizing. You could be a complete mess or totally have your shit together, I don't know. But we both know the majority of you who see war do not come home the same. There is a reason for that. Serving and seeing war are two different things.



Oh, the irony of that statement. But yes, you are correct. NO ONE but those doing the killing, want to see mass killings. However, more killing for years on end also isn't the answer. It never is the answer. It just creates more problems and breeds more "terrorists." You know this, I know this, everyone knows this.

All of these middle eastern "dictators" rule their people with an iron fist. That is the only way you can control people who are not ready for democracy. Look what happens in every country the USA "liberates." It's chaos. And how many people die in the process? The USA creates more "terrorists" than it can ever kill. ISIS didn't exist until Iraq was destroyed to the point of allowing their existence. Who's fault is that? Sadaam would have never allowed such a thing to happen. But the Jolly Green Giants had other plans, and look at how that turned out. Look at how Afghanistan is turning out. Both are a total mess with mass casualties on all sides, and the killing continues as I write. And for what? How many Americans were sacrificed, how many innocent civilians in those countries were murdered or maimed for life?

I do agree that there are times when you can't sit back and do nothing, like everyone did during the Rwanda massacre, or the Khmer Rouge, but you also shouldn't pick fights that you don't stand a chance of winning, or are not ready to give everything you have to finish the job. I loath war, but do agree that sometimes it may be necessary. But I'm not here to debate war, my original post was about choice. You said soldiers don't have a choice, but they do. Everyone has a choice, they just don't like the consequences.

I personally thought the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a terrible idea from day 1, but back then Bush and Cheney had most everyone, including both houses of congress, sold on the idea.

To presume that the rank and file of the US military should have somehow known better is a bit... well, presumptuous don't you think?

I do not agree, as a double refugee I refused to kill ethnic minority X for government Y over bullshit political reasons Z and I did this 2x in my life, loosing practically everything that I had except my education...this gives me the right to judge people who volunteer to fly the fuck over half the globe to bomb others over politics...

Join the military, you take an oath. You follow the UCMJ.

I believe that you can not blame the military personal as they are following orders, they take an oath when they join, they follow the UCMJ.

I served on a submarine, we had no weapons at the time that could be used against land based targets, but the Ballistic Missile submarines have enough fire power to make a complete country disappear. There are a lot of safeguards in place to make sure that they can only go off with the proper commands. It's a deterrent, One I hope is never used.

The firepower on our submarine was scary enough, we had some very scary weapons...

But if we had orders to use them, we would have.

That is just pure cruelty.

I forget; what has Iran done lately?

i think they will regret this action.

Btw are these guys the same as those who fight "for democracy" in Syria (against dictator El Assad who uses chemical agents)

That's not what I'm saying. I mean that when given an order to kill, each soldier has a choice to follow the chain of command, even if he knows the order is morally or legally wrong, or disobey the order and be court-martialed. No one wants to deal with the consequence of disobeying an order, so they kill like attack dogs when told to. However, that is a choice they make. No one forces them to pull their trigger, push a button, or throw a grenade.

I understand that. You gave an oath, but what exactly does that mean and how far does one go to keep that oath? This may sound extreme, but would you rape a child if your commanding officer ordered you to? Or would you do the right thing, disobey his order and face the consequences? How far are you all willing to go for that oath? And if the answer is "whatever it takes" or "all the way" then why can't you (soldiers) have the same courage to disobey an order when it is morally wrong and evil?

There isn't much difference between raping a child and murdering one. Both are horrid, evil acts that have no place in the world. However, one of them is regularly accepted by the military and conveniently called "collateral damage."

I don't know you, but I find it hard to believe you would have willingly launched a missile from your sub knowing it was going to hit a school full of kids or a shopping mall full of innocent people. I would like to believe you would have disobeyed such an order.

Let me straighten this out for you.
If you launched a missile from a submarine, it would take out over a million people. Not just a school yard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trident_(missile)

That's something that was never my burden, I wouldn't want it, I did spend some time in missile school.

What I did was a major part of the Cold War, with the exception of being off the coast of Iran during the Iran Crisis, or the 444 days. We had orders to blow up anything that approached the fleet and we would have without a second thought with extreme prejudice!!

As far as rape, that's against the UCMJ

Uniform Code Military Justice.

There are many things listed in the UCMJ that an officer can not ask of you, period!

Bullshit. No one is being drafted [here] so don't ask them to hire you if you are not willing to follow orders. :2 cents:

those who say that you only follow orders - do you think it made the things the german army did ok too?

You didn't really just post against freedom and in favor of brutal dictators, did you?

He's one of the people I have on ignore

The UCMJ says murder is legal, so it is. But that doesn't mean it is right. So what you are saying is, so long as the UCMJ says something is legal, you and everyone else will simply follow orders no matter how horrendous it is, because the UCMJ says it is OK. Is that a fair assessment and what draws the line, even if it is not morally right?


I can't imagine everyone who joins the military does so with the hopes of going to war and killing. None of the guys I know joined for that anyway. So there you are, you joined to have your education paid for, hoping you never, ever have to go to war, and suddenly you're given an order to do something that is going to take the lives of innocent civilians, men, women and children. YOU THEN HAVE A CHOICE to follow that order, or disobey that order and face the consequences.

That is hardly bullshit. I'm sure that happens all the time. Why do you think so many soldiers take their own lives after coming home from war? I'd bet it has a lot to do with being forced to do things that are against their moral code as a human being. Why do so many turn to drugs and booze? My old man told me stories about Vietnam. He was a train wreck when he came home and never recovered. The first person he had to kill there was a little boy and it was all downhill from that moment on. He was just doing his duty and it ruined his life. Normal people simply are not programmed internally to do things like that. He had a choice to make, he chose to follow orders, and he regretted it for the rest of his life. But the bottom line is, he and every other soldier out there has the choice. They just don't want to accept the responsibility of disobeying an order.

UCMJ article 118

?Any person subject to this chapter who, without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when he??

(1) has a premeditated design to kill;

(2) intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm;

(3) is engaged in an act that is inherently dangerous to another and evinces a wanton disregard of human life; or

(4) is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of burglary, sodomy, rape, robbery, or aggravated arson; is guilty of murder, and shall suffer such punishment as a court-martial may direct, except that if found guilty under clause (1) or (4), he shall suffer death or imprisonment for life as a court-martial may direct.

There are many reasons people join the military. While it's easy and tempting to speak in generalities as to their reasons from the relative comfy position in an armchair - it's ultimately uninformed and doesn't paint an accurate portrayal.

I served as a regular (not reservist) in the Canadian Armed Forces as an artilleryman. I never saw active combat duty since Canada was not involved in skirmishes during my enlistment. I trained with and came to know a lot of guys (and gals) in the service - all of which had various reasons for enlisting. We had our weekend warriors, Rambos, pacifists, meek, timid, gnarly and quirky. All walks of life - from all over the country. Different backgrounds, experiences, hopes...ambitions.

The Armed Forces isn't in the business of philanthropy. There's a price to be paid in exchange for them funding your education and training. It's not Club Med. The price is your obligation to step up to the plate when required and follow orders. Given that your country has invested a great deal in your education and training...what right do you have to suddenly become a conscientious objector simply because it doesn't sit quite right with you?

That's not the deal. Only a simpleton would fail to understand that when you voluntarily enlist - you are expected to follow orders in exchange for the investment they made with you. It's a binding oath, a pledge - a contract of service.

Orders are given - expected to be carried out - or people on your side can potentially die. How would you feel if you disobeyed an order that said you had to 'take out' a 14yr old kid aiming an AK-47 at guys in your platoon - and he takes out a half dozen of your closest buddies with a burst round?

This coming from a father of two young daughters - no doubt, it sucks big time having to fire on a 14yr old. But in the back of your mind, you try and justify it by saying YOU didn't put that kid in that position with the rifle. Instinct and survival kick in and you do what it takes to survive - you follow the order.

Could YOU write a letter home to the family of your buddy who's head was blown off as a result of your refusal to follow an order...and explain your version of morals and ethics?

What reception would that letter get?

If the earth was a dirty fat guy's hairy ass, Iraq would be his asshole.

There is the rub, it's all justified when it comes from your "leaders," is it not?



Sorry, but this is the mindset soldiers have. It was beaten into your minds, day in and day out. HUMANITY trumps all. If you can't see that, it is because they made you that way. You were not born with the mindset that you are there to kill or die if you have to because your government has invested in you. That is perhaps the most unnatural thought a person could have. "Welp, they spent a lot on me, or will in the future if I live, so here I am, use me until I am of no use or dead." In this industry we would call that a whore. I would like to believe you guys are more than that.

See post above.

A child charging you with a weapon is not an innocent bystander. You are talking about survival. I am talking about the murder of innocent people for no reason other than you were told to do it. Charles Manson is in prison for the same thing, telling others to kill on his behalf. Guys like him are crazy, but the guys giving orders above you are not. Strip all the BS away and it's all perspective.

I'm not debating that. If a 14 year old kid broke into my house and had a gun, I'd smoke his ass too. Again, that is survival.

What letters do the guys write when they bomb a village or blow up a school by mistake? Do they write the parents of those kids, or the husbands of the women killed, to explain what happened? No, they chalk it up as collateral damage.

I get you guys have a hard job when you serve, it's unfair, it's scary, there is a brotherhood, you gave an oath, I get it. And I'm not talking about when you are attacked and have to defend yourself or your brothers. What I am talking about is when you know you are doing something wrong and do it anyway because you were ordered to. "Just following orders" is a cop out. Nazis were just following orders too. Perhaps that is what is wrong with those who do serve, that you put your oath before your humanity. If that is the case, that explains everything. It would also explain why so many come home as broken men, no longer able to cope with society. When you cease to be a human first and foremost, you're ruined.

Enjoy the freedom of being able to express all that. :)

We'll simply have to agree to disagree - since no amount of back-and-forth is likely going to change either of our minds.

Right, because without modern war we would all be unable to express our feelings and forced to work in Manila sweat shops.

It could be debated, but my country hasn't actually fought for American "freedom" since WWII.

That I do agree with. :thumbsup This is an endless debate and there is no winner. Only perspectives.

No, I said it's not out job to give them freedom. If they are too in capable to hold on to what we set up, then it's no longer our problem. They were given an opportunity and they have squandered it.

If they cared about freedom, then their military and police wouldn't give up and walk off the job allowing extremist the ability to just take over entire cities. They don't deserve freedom if they aren't willing to do what is needed to keep it, if they want to just bend over for what ever group threatens them, then they deserve to live under a dictatorship.

No it isn't, where the fuck did you get that?