"Shut up because I'm a soldier!"

[Snoozer]

America is pretty strange about their military. How they always are so proud of their soldiers that protect their country (while actually causing more people to become a potential threat to it)
Also in movies, the American military has way to much of a positive reputation.

That's because if a movie depicts the army it has to pass a military board and get approval otherwise it wont be allowed in theaters. If it doesn't present the military in a positive light, it doesn't get approval.

My god! Really? I have no words ... but this explains a lot.

No, he's full of shit. The only thing the military does is loan out its equipment to movies under the condition that they depict the US military positively.

Ahh ok, I think they do sponsor some video games as well. I still don't really like that, but "board approval" would be simple cencorship.

 

[templargunman]

If the $700 billion in bailout money was given out to every one of the 300 million American's, each American would get about $2300. The fact of the matter with being a solider is that you do get a lot of life experience, but I'm assuming that this guy is not part of the norm for soldiers. This is a guy who's heard a lot of propaganda from conservative politicians, and then when someone counters his argument as false, he uses his get out of jail free card of being a decorated vet. Also, George Bush started the TARP bailout, Obama just continued it.

 

[Comando96]

My Dad was in the SAS... its my easiest retort to this level stupid...

You say the words SAS then all lower (Ex-)military personal in Britain appear to go quite and show respect... it seems that is the only thing my drunk dad gave me. Its the easiest way to catch them at their own game. You just 1 up their illogical stance. The "I'm a soldier" remark is designed as an attempt to get respect for their opinions and as you are a civilian you are in their mind due to the ranking system, a level below you. Don't be too harsh on it as this system of ranks is drilled into the minds of all troops.

If you wanted to risk getting a fist in your eye or mouth then there is the alternative retort which is "so you got a degree in economics while in nam? I think not."

Another... quote to them the Art of War... as a soldier they can't argue against.

Art Of War - Sun Tzu
2:11

11
On the other hand, the proximity of an army causes prices to go up; and high prices cause the people's substance to be drained away.

Inflation in action, explained by the ultimate soldier.

 

[Spongebobdickpants]

In Finland we don't have that problem (yet) since everyone here (male) has to do military service. Very few have actually been in a war zone but we all have military training (or at least most of us).

Thats cause your country is so scarsly populated that if someone declared war on finland (what kind of monsters would do that)and only a small fraction of your country was trained it would be over in a day ^^

 

[Sunrider]

Being non-American, I can't relate to it directly, because we don't have the same view on soldiers and our situation is far different, but I can relate to you being annoyed. In Sweden, the immigrant issue is really tense at the moment, and you can't question or argue against our current immigration policy without people throwing the racist card in your face and thus automatically "winning" the argument.
I know it's not the same subject, but I feel the same annoyance as you do, and it sucks.

 

[Kathinka]

America is pretty strange about their military. How they always are so proud of their soldiers that protect their country (while actually causing more people to become a potential threat to it)
Also in movies, the American military has way to much of a positive reputation.

That's because if a movie depicts the army it has to pass a military board and get approval otherwise it wont be allowed in theaters. If it doesn't present the military in a positive light, it doesn't get approval.

My god! Really? I have no words ... but this explains a lot.

No, he's full of shit. The only thing the military does is loan out its equipment to movies under the condition that they depict the US military positively.

Ahh ok, I think they do sponsor some video games as well. I still don't really like that, but "board approval" would be simple cencorship.

it still is, in a way. without the help of the military most movies simply can not be done..you need advisors, lent weapons, experts..and the only way they are going to get it is if the army gets a say in the making and tone of the film. it can be worked arround, but it's still a fairly effective censorship mechanism.
buffalo soldiers for example was such a case where everything had to be begged, borrowed and substituted, because it was deemed 'unpatriotic' (a word that i find repulsive by itself, especially if used by a military that goes arround the globe conducting illegal invasions in the name of a country that once stood for freedom and progress..the gall..)
biggest source were private collectors and old german tanks that got pieces of colored sheet metal on them to appear as american tanks.

 

[Kolby Jack]

Here's what you do when they say something like that.

"Thank you for your service, but you are still completely wrong." Or something along those lines.

Although most army folks I've met have been... cocky, I suppose (including my brother), they all have had respect for civies and their opinions, at least face to face. So I'm glad you aren't letting one curmudgeonly old veteran color your opinion of the entire military.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Though, I have promised a friend that if, when I join the Royal Marines I ever call a regular person a "civvy", he's allowed to punch me in the face.

If you make it to the Marines, you can call anyone you like a Civvy, including squaddies.

Why? Because you're a Royal Marine. No one but nobody's going to pick a fight with you...

Speaking of which, one of my school buddies joined the Marines, he came back from Afghanistan with several pieces of Russian calibre metal in his chest (and lived, thankfully).

For God's sake be careful out there man!

 

[Hipsy_Gypsy]

Snip

Ohh, I see where you're coming from. It's not just soldiers, though I definitely see what you're talking about. That very statement will is enough just to turn me against the individual, regardless of where my own personal view point stands, hopefully that made sense.

I know how you feel - many times I've been.. debating (Totally not arguing!) in a group of people, and someone will say "I'm a soldier!" and suddenly he's automatically right.
It's gotten to the point that now I'll just argue against anyone who says that, even if I hold their viewpoint.
Of course, if I win and now everyone agrees with the new viewpoint, I have to switch back and argue once again. But in the right way, not just bringing up jobs.

That statement is exactly how I feel, except it's more to do with whenever people say "It's art therefore fantastic". No, it looks like, for example, the "artist" was testing out his/her paint brush.


x

 

[Aulleas123]

I think the OP can be right if such a debate or discussion has to do with domestic political issues, religious, or something else that has nothing to do with conflicts abroad. I think that a 'foot on the ground' approach can be legitimate if it has something to do with the conflict abroad. For example, if someone who served in Iraq commented to someone who suggested an incorrect or overly-formal use of the Arabic language (spoken in Iraq), then I'd take his/her advice. However, if the conversation grows to something more general like 'what should be our overall strategy in Afghanistan?' then I may have a problem with the use of a soldier's credentials unless he/she has some strong backing from higher ups (like he/she served with leading generals overseas).

Overall, I see the OP's point; the flagrant use of a soldier's credentials can be obnoxious. However, I think they can bring some insight that is not seen here in the safe ol' USA or any place else that isn't plagued with IEDs and crazed violent fundamentalists (note, key word is 'violent'). I all depends on the context of the argument, just like saying 'I'm a doctor' really doesn't bear much weight when talking about the best written TV show on Thursday nights. It doesn't mean the doctor (or soldier) is dumb, it just means he/she shouldn't use their credentials as a crutch to win an argument.

 

[jaketaz]

Soldiers deserve the respect they get for being willing to do things most people wouldn't consider doing, and being willing to defend our country if called upon.

This says absolute nothing about, and is not relevant to their knowledge in other areas of life. Being a soldier means you are a soldier, and the only way to be right about something is be right about it. Case closed.

 

[Snoozer]

America is pretty strange about their military. How they always are so proud of their soldiers that protect their country (while actually causing more people to become a potential threat to it)
Also in movies, the American military has way to much of a positive reputation.

That's because if a movie depicts the army it has to pass a military board and get approval otherwise it wont be allowed in theaters. If it doesn't present the military in a positive light, it doesn't get approval.

My god! Really? I have no words ... but this explains a lot.

No, he's full of shit. The only thing the military does is loan out its equipment to movies under the condition that they depict the US military positively.

Ahh ok, I think they do sponsor some video games as well. I still don't really like that, but "board approval" would be simple cencorship.

it still is, in a way. without the help of the military most movies simply can not be done..you need advisors, lent weapons, experts..and the only way they are going to get it is if the army gets a say in the making and tone of the film. it can be worked arround, but it's still a fairly effective censorship mechanism.
buffalo soldiers for example was such a case where everything had to be begged, borrowed and substituted, because it was deemed 'unpatriotic' (a word that i find repulsive by itself, especially if used by a military that goes arround the globe conducting illegal invasions in the name of a country that once stood for freedom and progress..the gall..)
biggest source were private collectors and old german tanks that got pieces of colored sheet metal on them to appear as american tanks.

I agree with that. Happy to live in germany, where patriotism is seen as the unreasonable idioty it is and people are critical towards any military intervention. There is not a single reason to blindly love your country, it's only dangerous.

 

[vxicepickxv]

*I'm a soldier** so I can say that

**If Amercorps counts for the man at the draft board, it counts online

And nothin but respect for veterans and active women and men in uniform. Our country needs to treat you better.

It's not even the whole country, it's just a certain group of people up in a certain district that need to calm down a figure out what the hell they're doing.

 

[v3n0mat3]

I live with one such person. He's not family, or anything. He's just living with us. He uses his "I was in the army" excuse to be generally rude to people. For instance: I brought him to a local gaming store. This place has one policy: when kids are around, don't cuss. He does, anyhow, and when asked to stop, he says "oh, I was in the army". Mmhmm. And he's generally rude to me. Not to my brother or father. Me. Why? Because I'm unemployed. So is he, but, since he was in the army... see where I'm going with this? I refuse to invite him to my gaming group, and I barely talk to him. I'm a very polite person, I have a lot of patience, and I can tolerate a lot, but his bullshit towards me... I have been controlling the urge to snap at him.

 

[The Funslinger]

Though, I have promised a friend that if, when I join the Royal Marines I ever call a regular person a "civvy", he's allowed to punch me in the face.

If you make it to the Marines, you can call anyone you like a Civvy, including squaddies.

Why? Because you're a Royal Marine. No one but nobody's going to pick a fight with you...

Speaking of which, one of my school buddies joined the Marines, he came back from Afghanistan with several pieces of Russian calibre metal in his chest (and lived, thankfully).

For God's sake be careful out there man!

I have weird luck, and I've been stabbed before, so I figure I have as good a chance as anyone to come through in one piece.

And yes, they are the most bad ass people ever.

 

[kiwi_poo]

It is my opinion that people who join a military organisation willingly and is an idiot.
1. these people are wasting the public's money so they can kill people who have nothing to do with the country in question (that is the offending, attacking, country).
2. these people go out and get themselves severly scarred, mentally or otherwise, and then act surprised about it. seriously, they could do some research about the how horrible war is before jumping into it headfirst.
3. this one really bugs me, and it seems to happen in america more often than other places: "thanks for fighting for our freedom". now, unless your country is actually bing invaded, your country (the US in this case) is not losing its freedom, and thus fighting for it is not necessary.

the times have changed and war is in my opinion obsolete. it has been changing ever since 1914 and has now, in the day of the internet become redundant. we don't need people being sent to kill other people and then get killed themselves. we need a group of well-educated people who can do two things:
1.care enough about the world and politics -large scale and small scale- to form a reasoned opinion.
2.are able to question things around them and think for themselves, not just taking some idiot with a microphone's opinion (*cough* *cough* fox news *cough*) and calling it their own.


PS the first part largely doesn't apply to people who ave no option but to join the military due to external pressures, such as financial problems, or your country being invaded.

PPS again: this is my opinion, and although i respect other peoples opinions, mine will likely not be changed

 

[AlloAllo]

Eh. You know, this actually sounds just like a parent going "Speaking as a parent..."

As Ed Byrne said, "Oh, then call the people from the other room! Call everyone! He's speaking as a PARENT now! He was just speaking like an arsehole before, but now he's speaking as a parent! Speak, oh wise one!"

This is to say, yeah, it's not a problem that only soldiers have, and Jesus is it annoying.

 

[maninahat]

snip

I actually have to point out that that isn't how inflation works. Inflation currently is based on the interest rates set and on international trade. Current inflation is not based on the amount of currency in circulation. Also, if Inflation were based on currency in circulation, the inflation amount would have been the same regardless of whether the bailout money went to the people or to the banks like it did. In fact, because of the way lending and banks work, it probably would have caused less inflation had it been payed to the people. Prices would increase, but only because people would be more willing to pay higher prices, the demand curve would shift, it has nothing to do with inflation.

Sorry about that, but misunderstanding inflation really bugs me, it's a peeve. Other than that, i agree with your post. Being a soldier doesn't make you any more right than anyone else.

Does that mean.... I could be a millionaire right now...? But instead we threw a fortune at the people who created the problem in the first place?

More or less. Yeah, life's a *****. Welcome to government for big business.

I don't think that is entirely fair to blame big business for everything. Recessions are largely about consumer confidence, so whilst foolish, selfish bankers might have started the crisis, it was us members of the public who perpetuated it by stuffing the matresses, spending less, and ensuring more businesses would run out of cash. Giving money to businesses and banks and restoring confidence is (unfortunately) the only way to get things moving again.

I didn't blame big business, I blamed the government for putting big business ahead of everything else leading to 40 years of bad economic policies that had absolutely no other logical endpoint than a horrible recession like the one we've been facing for 10 years.

No, that is keynesian economics which is highly suspect and debated. Largely in part because if it worked than we wouldn't be in an recession any more.

Small recessions can be caused by consumer confidence, this one has nothing to do with consumer confidence. It is a result of much deeper problems like low manufacturing, low taxes on the highest tax brackets, too many tax loopholes, and Keynesian economics justified overspending on a completely unsustainable level for a completely unsustainable amount of time, and lastly the controlled inflation that has been perpetrated for the last few decades in order to prevent us from being crushed under that debt at the cost of destroying american savings and devaluing the dollar.

Also, to address something you said specifically, this has nothing to do with stuffing the mattress. The vast vast majority of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck because they can't afford to save money. Prices are rising, wages aren't, and unemployment is skyrocketing. If you include discouraged workers(which you should but the government doesn't in order to look good), then it's absolutely staggering. If you use the method that the government stopped using around 1980, then in June of this year the unemployment rate in the US was over 25%

My understanding was that Keynesian economics was the way out of this, but I concede that you probably know far more on the subject than I do.

 

[Soviet Steve]

It's called appeal to authority, it's a logical fallacy. An argument should be examined on its own merits, not on who makes it.

 

[derelict]

"I'm a soldier and I had three tours in Vietnam and that's not how it works."

Sad thing is, this is correct, even in context. What he's done there is basically explain the following: In an argument between two entities, the one that's unable to finish the argument is the loser. This is how global politics works, if you think about it, and being the guy with the gun for so many years, that's basically what he'd be thinking. You could spend all day giving him points and impressive proof of concept through spreadsheets and what have you, but if he blows your head clean off your shoulders, you'll have difficulty continuing to argue.

On a more serious note, yes, he's dumb, but he's also a headstrong 'Nam vet. If he's interested, he'll figure it out on his own. Else, well, it's certainly not going to hurt you to be smarter than someone else. If that were the case, I'd have terminal cancer by now and major parts of my body would be falling off, given the level of intellect of the average local here.