Supporting the Troops = Supporting the war?

[Amoreyna]

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice.

Then who will protect the country... ?

People will join the army for serveral reasons
1. Poor education
2. Adventure
3. Benefits

All those many intermingle, but when push comes to shove they all serve our country and hold our support. When they come home we better damn well get off our asses and have a parade for those soldiers. This is not vietnam again, not never. Even if you hate the war, love the people who fight it, go to the parade. Hate the right-wings later, love the people who risked their lives now.

Not to sound rude - but you do know people join out of patroism and also for to continue on their family's tradition of fighting for their country. I was both and I know others who were like me.

Poor education - I assume you mean the person going in has a poor education? This may surprise you but you do have to pass a test to be in all branches of the armed forces and all branches have just risen the bar again. You need a solid educational background to be able to pass and if you want any job specality then you better hope to get into the 90's. A lot of people fail the ASVAB over and over again and there are those who are never able to pass it. Also for some jobs, like being a linguist, you have to not only pass the ASVAB but pass another test as well. For the linguist job: this test is all audio, everything is read to you and you aren't allowed to take notes. The last thing you'd want is a poor education.

 

[Beffudled Sheep]

I support the war in Afghanistan and the troops. When it comes to Iraq i only support the troops. I hate our rules of war. Am i the only one who thinks that our rules of war are a bunch of bull?

 

[Devil's Due]

Riddle: Which country am I talking about? Hints: It's a very rich one, it's located in eastern asia, it's been nuked in WWII and, most importantly, has no fucking army since then.

What riddle? You just came out of no where to talk about Japan.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

If there were no armies there could still be war.

It would just be disorganized and full of raping and pillaging and unnecessary brutality.

Armies were invented you know, invented to wage war better.

And have they gotten any better?
More efficient, probably.
Better? No.

War actually has gotten better. For example the practice of capturing enemy civilians as slaves has fallen into disuse.

 

[Specter_]

Out of curiosity, have you gotten a chance to talk to any troop returning home from these conflicts? Their take on what is actually happening because they are over there might just surprise you and conflict with what you are being shown on TV. I am going to use the Iraq war as an example of this (positive) because it's where my experience is. While the news media has deemed the war pointless, that we aren't doing anything over there etc. I have meet several troops who talk about citizens meeting them in the streets waving American flags and cheering. And they aren't doing it out of fear of US troops - they are genuinely happy that they are there and are welcomed. This doesn't happen in all areas but it has happened and it's not something we get to see on the nightly news. You also don't get to hear about what the actual goals of the conflict are and how close they are to being acompished. I urge you to talk to these troops and get their take on what is happening and if they think they are doing any good. It will help in your support of them, especially when talking to ther people and your understanding of what is actually going on and what they are experiencing.

In fact, I did and while there were stories of pure... cuteness is the wrong word, but they bring a smile to your face and a light to your heart when you listen to the soldiers talk about the kids they meet (and I don't smile very often these days) they also told me about parents who shoved their kids infront of patrol vehicles so they are run over and the german government pays them about 800? compensation.
But then here in germany you have to actually volunteer to go to Afghanistan, so the people who have been there wanted to be there.
I wanted to join the ranks myself to help rebuild that country (I actually joined, but dropped out again for personal reasons) so I did take some time to face the ups and downs of it with the conclusion that while I would have volunteered to put myself into harms way the reasons and concepts for OEF and ISAF are total bullshit.

This is a point I've thought plenty of and thank you for bringing it up so I can speak my mind. Republicans purposely equate supporting the troops with supporting the war, so that when people say they don't support the war, the Republicans can say that they therefore don't support the troops, and therefore hate America, and therefore denounce their opposition to the war. It's a horrible tactic that unfortunately hasn't been seen through, or atleast not enough. You can support your country's troops but not support them being in a war. In fact, if anything being opposed to a war shows you support the troops even more because you care about them and don't want them dying for a bad cause. That's how I feel.

That's a really nice way to put it. And I do feel the same way as you, that's why I brought it up

 

[new_age_reject]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

If there were no armies there could still be war.

It would just be disorganized and full of raping and pillaging and unnecessary brutality.

Armies were invented you know, invented to wage war better.

And have they gotten any better?
More efficient, probably.
Better? No.

War actually has gotten better. For example the practice of capturing enemy civilians as slaves has fallen into disuse.

True, but civilians are more likely to just be blown to bits instead.
I miss the olden days of war when it was soldiers, fighting soldiers with sword and shield.
None of this randomly shelling heavily populated areas.

 

[cainx10a]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

If there were no armies there could still be war.

It would just be disorganized and full of raping and pillaging and unnecessary brutality.

Armies were invented you know, invented to wage war better.

And have they gotten any better?
More efficient, probably.
Better? No.

War actually has gotten better. For example the practice of capturing enemy civilians as slaves has fallen into disuse.

True, but civilians are more likely to just be blown to bits instead.
I miss the olden days of war when it was soldiers, fighting soldiers with sword and shield.
None of this randomly shelling heavily populated areas.

Ah the old days, when the losing side land, women and children were turned into the properties of the victors.

 

[Good morning blues]

I still don't understand what "supporting the troops" is. All of the definitions I've heard generally centre around not showing them disrespect based on the fact that they are or were in the military, and not actively hoping that they get killed. There are plenty of people that I don't disrespect and whose deaths I don't hope for; that certainly doesn't mean I "support" them.

"Supporting the troops" is just another way to militarize the population and normalize military action.

 

[RufusMcLaser]

From what I see, as soon as you start reasoning we shouldn't be in Afghanistan, some bloke comes up and blurts something about "go support the troops" or in bad cases goes to length about how you support the taliban. I know it's always the loud assholes you hear, but that's part of the reason I made this thread, to get a new angle on what reality is like in the US and UK.

Fair enough. There are loud assholes everywhere. In my opinion that sort of knee-jerk reaction indicates someone who has only the shallowest understanding of what's going on, and I wouldn't chime in to support that kind of argument either.

And have they gotten any better?
More efficient, probably.
Better? No.

Something smells of troll.

...a very rich one, it's located in eastern asia, it's been nuked in WWII and, most importantly, has no fucking army since then....
...But my point is that the military might not be as important as you convince yourself it is. Okay, some countries really need an army, but there are reasons for that and those countries are responsible for them themselves (mostly).

Are you being willfully ignorant? Even leaving the otherwise. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Self-Defense_Forces] Japan's neighbors view this with an understandable amount of concern, naturally, but in my opinion the national character of the Japanese is not conducive to renewed expansionism.

Finally... Not every person in the military will serve in a given war. You might not support Afghanistan, or Iraq; that's probably your right. (A right guaranteed by the soldiers, granted.) Please consider that other soldiers are serving as peacekeepers, or involved in humanitarian relief operations, or training to keep the home territory secure. Do they have your support?

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

If there were no armies there could still be war.

It would just be disorganized and full of raping and pillaging and unnecessary brutality.

Armies were invented you know, invented to wage war better.

And have they gotten any better?
More efficient, probably.
Better? No.

War actually has gotten better. For example the practice of capturing enemy civilians as slaves has fallen into disuse.

True, but civilians are more likely to just be blown to bits instead.
I miss the olden days of war when it was soldiers, fighting soldiers with sword and shield.
None of this randomly shelling heavily populated areas.

If by "the olden days of war" you mean specifically the Greco-Persian wars then you might have a point. If you don't then after the sword on shield brawl was done there was much pillaging and enslaving to be done.

Randomly shelling heavily populated areas is not something that is done anymore, at least not by Western armies.

 

[WolfThomas]

Part of my not supporting this is to criticise both the US government and my own for sending troops over there. This is in the attempt to get the people back home. It's not a "Ha ha you fucking idiot for joining the army. You clearly wanted this war to happen." That kind of attitude is just as destructive as anything else, and it's stupid.

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice. As an Activist I'm going to try to keep them out of unnecessary wars and get them home as soon as I can afterwards.

I let everyone in a little secret about professional soldiers (or at least Australian ones) that I've found out from my mates in the army, the majority of them want to go to war.

They get paid amazing amounts of money when in a foreign country, an Australian private on "danger pay" can pull in almost 100k a year. The infantry in particular want the adventure of being in a foreign country. There is a greater chance of promotion during a war also.

Australian tank crews have high amount of corp transfers simply because our tanks have not been deployed any where since Vietnam, they get there train and then realise they're stuck in Darwin or Brisbane indefinitely.


Now this is completely different when conscription and national service is put on the table, conscripts or national servicemen (whichever way you name it) don't want to be in the fighting. So in Vietnam's case, I accept and support all the protests against conscription, though I cannot accept the traitors who raised money for the Viet Cong.

Also what is happening with the USA and its national guard being sent overseas is horrible. The whole point of reservists is to keep them at home.

 

[Specter_]

I still don't understand what "supporting the troops" is. All of the definitions I've heard generally centre around not showing them disrespect based on the fact that they are or were in the military, and not actively hoping that they get killed. There are plenty of people that I don't disrespect and whose deaths I don't hope for; that certainly doesn't mean I "support" them.

"Supporting the troops" is just another way to militarize the population and normalize military action.

I think my main reason for supporting (and actually respecting) them is that they did pledge to defend me as a civilian with their lifes. Not in Afghanistan, but should Poland (those are sneaky bastards ) decide to invade us (again ), their ass would be in the line of hurt to keep me safe.

I let everyone in a little secret about professional soldiers (or at least Australian ones) that I've found out from my mates in the army, the majority of them want to go to war.

They get paid amazing amounts of money when in a foreign country, an Australian private on "danger pay" can pull in almost 100k a year. The infantry in particular want the adventure of being in a foreign country.

As I said before, all german soldiers in Afghanistan are there by their own wish.
About the pay, that's quite different here. Of course you get some danger-bonus, but payment still sucks. It sucks even more when you take in the risk of being wounded, mangled or even killed.
So at least for the german soldiers it's not the money.

 

[Jursa]

If you want piece, prepare for war... It's ironic that such a stupid idea is actually the most close thing you can come to, to explain the need of armies during peace. War is like a disease and the soldiers are symptom. Where there's war there's soldiers, if there are no soldiers then there is no sign of war. War itself is an amazingly stupid process, on both sides there will be soldiers scared to death for their lives, fighting for something that doesn't often involve them, neither side wants to kill or die, but still fight because someone said they should.

 

[new_age_reject]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

If there were no armies there could still be war.

It would just be disorganized and full of raping and pillaging and unnecessary brutality.

Armies were invented you know, invented to wage war better.

And have they gotten any better?
More efficient, probably.
Better? No.

War actually has gotten better. For example the practice of capturing enemy civilians as slaves has fallen into disuse.

True, but civilians are more likely to just be blown to bits instead.
I miss the olden days of war when it was soldiers, fighting soldiers with sword and shield.
None of this randomly shelling heavily populated areas.

If by "the olden days of war" you mean specifically the Greco-Persian wars then you might have a point. If you don't then after the sword on shield brawl was done there was much pillaging and enslaving to be done.

Randomly shelling heavily populated areas is not something that is done anymore, at least not by Western armies.

I guess what I'm saying (with much beating around the bush and hokey pokey) is that wars have always been terrible and always will be. Different events and traits have marked different periods of war. Early times we had pillaging and raping, WW1 we had stupid commanders shovelling troops into death zones, WW2 was pretty much the birth of civilian bombing (Dresden, London, Hiroshima, Nagasaki etc) and of course there was the genocide of the jews , today we have the stuff that's happened in Rowanda and the humiliation that's happened in Abu Ghraib jail and who knows what the future may old, probably just nuclear holocaust. So war, I think, has never and will never be better, just get worse.

 

[WolfThomas]

I let everyone in a little secret about professional soldiers (or at least Australian ones) that I've found out from my mates in the army, the majority of them want to go to war.

They get paid amazing amounts of money when in a foreign country, an Australian private on "danger pay" can pull in almost 100k a year. The infantry in particular want the adventure of being in a foreign country.

As I said before, all german soldiers in Afghanistan are there by their own wish.
About the pay, that's quite different here. Of course you get some danger-bonus, but payment still sucks. It sucks even more when you take in the risk of being wounded, mangled or even killed.
So at least for the german soldiers it's not the money.

Its not the money that's the main draw for our soldiers, it just really helps them do what they love while pulling the money they deserve.

 

[Specter_]

Its not the money that's the main draw for our soldiers, it just really helps them do what they love while pulling the money they deserve.

To clarify my statement: for german troops the payment is a reason to not go to war. They are so underpayed, it hurts my soul to see them wounded/killed. Even the family-support for a fallen/severly wounded soldier is a joke.

Which brings me to another rant-point about german politics (and another reason to get our men back home asap): As soon as August 2008 the german politicians used the word "fallen" for fallen soldiers. Before that an IED/suicidebomber was an "accident".
What the fuck is the point to send soldiers into a fucking war if you don't aknowledge that it is a fucking war?

Yeah, I get upset about it...

 

[new_age_reject]

Its not the money that's the main draw for our soldiers, it just really helps them do what they love while pulling the money they deserve.

To clarify my statement: for german troops the payment is a reason to not go to war. They are so underpayed, it hurts my soul to see them wounded/killed. Even the family-support for a fallen/severly wounded soldier is a joke.

Which brings me to another rant-point about german politics (and another reason to get our men back home asap): As soon as August 2008 the german politicians used the word "fallen" for fallen soldiers. Before that an IED/suicidebomber was an "accident".
What the fuck is the point to send soldiers into a fucking war if you don't aknowledge that it is a fucking war?

Yeah, I get upset about it...

You know what really pisses me off about war.
The lack of treatment that our soldiers actually receive after coming home. Often they have terrible ailments, either mental (post traumatic stress disorder) or physical (limbs removed etc) and a great deal of the time, the government fails to give them the adequate treatment they need. There are many charities in place to help the veterans but its not nearly enough and we shouldn't even need the charities to do the governments work.

 

[s0ap sudz]

Definitely not. In the U.S. the shameful treatment of the Vietnam vets seems to have led to a general resolve never to let that sort of thing happen again, which might be why

...people who say it's not a just war attacked for not supporting the troops

-by some.
Only I haven't seen it happen that way here in the U.S. There's a lot of arguing over the war, but no one is marching around calling the troops baby-killers- at least, no one that matters. It happens, but not on the scale it did thirty-five years ago. I'm glad for that.

You'd be surprised. Happened to a friend of mine a couple of years ago in a mall.

 

[WolfThomas]

Its not the money that's the main draw for our soldiers, it just really helps them do what they love while pulling the money they deserve.

To clarify my statement: for german troops the payment is a reason to not go to war. They are so underpayed, it hurts my soul to see them wounded/killed. Even the family-support for a fallen/severly wounded soldier is a joke.

Which brings me to another rant-point about german politics (and another reason to get our men back home asap): As soon as August 2008 the german politicians used the word "fallen" for fallen soldiers. Before that an IED/suicidebomber was an "accident".
What the fuck is the point to send soldiers into a fucking war if you don't aknowledge that it is a fucking war?

Yeah, I get upset about it...

To clarify my statements also, our soldiers are fighting for generally the same reasons as yours, it is a terrible shame your soldiers are not paid as well as they deserve.

 

[McClaud]

I still don't understand what "supporting the troops" is. All of the definitions I've heard generally centre around not showing them disrespect based on the fact that they are or were in the military, and not actively hoping that they get killed. There are plenty of people that I don't disrespect and whose deaths I don't hope for; that certainly doesn't mean I "support" them.

"Supporting the troops" is just another way to militarize the population and normalize military action.

I'm a veteran, and your post/statement doesn't exactly upset me because I understand what you are trying to say.

To answer your question, "supporting your troops" mostly means to understand that they are basically by law under the oath to obey orders and defend the country. Most soldiers are willing to die for the defense of their country. It's a mentally and physically challenging occupation, even when not engaged in a conflict anywhere. It's 4 or more years of their lives that they sacrifice that they really can't "quit" and go work somewhere else (well, there are ways to get out of the service, but most of the time, those who take that route probably shouldn't have joined in the first place).

So when someone like myself comes back from a conflict, all we ask for is that you don't pelt us with rocks or ignore us or treat us as second tier citizens. We should be able to get the right care for our ailments and wounds, we should get some respect for our contributions to your defense and safety, and just that we can go back to being regular people when our time is up.

Now I'm not saying support war criminals, because there are rules of engagement that need to be followed in times of war. Nor do I expect people to treat some soldier in the Army who comes back and acts like a total superior dick to continue to respect him. Just that you don't abandon or exclude the troops. They are just doing what they were trained to do, and ordered to do.

If you have an issue with them being at war, you need to take that up with your government representatives and follow procedure to get your compaints heard. I'm pretty sure there's plenty of soldiers who don't support the reasons for the war in Iraq, but they can't just leave their brother and sister soldiers without support. People train side-by-side so that they can protect each other. Deserting only weakens the entire effort of supporting and defending each other so we can come home safe.