What do you think of soldiers?

[Lovely Mixture]

I actually made a very short documentary (though it comes off as more of a video poem) about this topic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5kBkqum7hI&list=UUQwUr5_BqGlcycY02OG7fAQ&index=9

Ultimately we have to judge people as people.

A person going across the world to risk their life for what he believes to be the right thing? I can respect that.
A person going across the world to burn down some houses and kill people cause it's fun? I don't need to tell you what I think of that person.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Oh good, this thread's gonna end well.

I respect the ideal, and I admire the commitment it takes. I think more than a few people don't exactly realize what they're getting into. Because you're giving four years of your life to pretty much be at the bottom of the shit pile.

I've ran into my fair share of idiot soldiers, but I also have known some genuinely good soldiers. It's a job like anything else.

 

[laserwulf]

Army combat veteran, checking in. I'm eternally grateful that I've never had to kill anyone, even while I had to lug a 17 lb. machine gun around everywhere on base in Afghanistan (even to go to the on-post coffee shop or use the bathroom). But then, fixing computers and setting up teleconferences with the other side of the planet meant that I wasn't exactly kicking in doors, either. I may be an anomaly, but in my down-time I love watching the news, and keep up to speed on national politics. Now that I'm out, I've used my G.I. Bill to earn degrees in network security and digital forensics. I prefer BF over CoD, since the gameplay seems more thoughtful to me, but the Civilization series is my bread & butter. I didn't agree with military action in Iraq, but in the U.S. military we respect the lawful orders of our civilian Commander-in-Chief. And for me personally, making sure the computers & radios worked properly meant I was doing my part to see my brothers & sisters in arms safely got back to base, and therefore safely back to our families.

Yeah, I guess I'm not the least bit equipped to deal with the complexities of war. :| But all other U.S. servicemembers and I literally put our lives on the line for your right to say that. And yes, I personally knew at least one guy who gave the ultimate sacrifice.

Anywho, to end on a cheerier note, if anyone has questions for a soldier, I'd be happy to answer as many as I knowledgeably can!

 

[Brotha Desmond]

I don't particularly care for soldiers. The idea of a soldier is one who risks their lives to fight "evil", but it's been decades since the last time we (the west) fought an irrefutable evil. In the end, regardless of how validate it, soldiers are just people sent to a foreign country to kill.

 

[MrMixelPixel]

Someone has to do it, so I'm happy there's enough people who volunteer to do it, so I don't have to. With that said, I respect those who honestly think that they are helping their countrymen by protecting us.

 

[Arduras]

I've been there and served in the Royal Australian Navy in my younger years and got to say everyone I met there can honestly be compared to people I met with my girlfriend during her University studies: Jocks, Nerds, Adult learners, Childish people etc. etc.
Every member there was there to do their job and learn skills that they enjoyed, none of them cared about 'killing people' or 'learning to be a killing machine', they all wanted to serve their country and/or have an exciting lifestyle.
What the majority of "intellectuals" believe is that Modern militaries want to recruit people with killing potential and a social tendency to be violent, which is completely false: many of people I knew when I was recruited would have made fantastic killers, but they were kept out of the forces.

Comparing the 'regular' soldier to others in my current workforce (Emergency Rescue) I've seen many more people I fear there then I ever did in the Military.


This thread is great to try and spread discussion, but please, before you throw around abuse at the people that are just there to work a job provide information that's proven, not what you've read on the interwebs.

<- To lighten the topic

 

[sabercrusader]

Well, as someone who has quite a few close friends about to go into military right after graduation, which at the time of this post is only a few days away for me and my friends, I hold a deep respect for soldiers. The willing to possibly sacrifice themselves is something that shouldn't be taken lightly. Does that mean I like all soldiers? Hell no, I personally know one who is probably one of the people I hate the most, it's just that I respect them. It's all based on case by case.

 

[Commissar Sae]

Well, having both worked with and befriended some military personnel, they tend to be pretty normal people. Most of them are just doing their job and are perfectly rational and decent human beings. You tend to get some morons and jackasses attracted to the work, but only slightly more than some other jobs.

Each soldier is an individual, so the army as a whole is made up of a mix of people. Some are hero material, others are potential monsters. Basically they are just people.

 

[TehCookie]

I don't think anything of them, I've met nice soldiers and I've met some who are total dicks. Their job doesn't change how I view them as a person.

 

[LordLucan375]

They perform a task most of their detractors have neither the courage nor the conviction to perform.

That being said, I believe Jack Reacher said it best when he outlined the four reasons people join the military:

1) Family trade

2) Want to serve their country

3) Just need a job

4) Want a legal means of killing other people

So, yeah. There are definitely bad eggs in the lot.

What about my Swedish buddies Mr. Reacher? If they had weaseled out of their mandatory service they would have been arrested.

 

[PeterMerkin69]

while agree on the Bomb part there are unfortunately UN sanctions or laws or whatever they get called on the global scale that forbid/prevent that or Ol'Dubbya would have nuked the whole of their country neon green

Haha. While the Bomb certainly would have worked(or perhaps even Bombs), I think even just cruise missiles/drone strikes/targeted operations of the latter George II and Obama eras have been more appropriate. Ignore Iraq and assassinate terrorists/terrorist leaders. Kill more, save more, spend less. Also, robotic instruments of death are just plain cool.

 

[sleeky01]

Not the military; soldiers. What do you think of the people who serve in your country?
Personally, I respect them a great deal, but I don't think that being a killer makes one an automatic hero.

I'm more curious to know what sparked this question.

 

[TheLogicalGamer]

The Reacher Classifications sum up my opinions on this. I think someone already put those up, but here they are again for completeness's sake.

1)Family History of Service.

I call this the Hadvar route because I'm a Skyrim fan and thats basically his backstory. Your father was a soldier, his father before him, and his father before. Your entire family has always been military, so you can't imagine another way to live. I respect those guys, if only because they do what they believe they were born to do.

2)Patriotism, and a drive to defend one's country.

They serve because they think they will be able to protect people by doing so. They accept that they may one day fall in battle, so that several people won't have to. To paraphrase Gavin Dunne (also known as Miracle of Sound): They accept that they may fall for the weak and the lost. The willingness to make that sacrifice if the need arises gets you a lot of points in my book. I probably respect this variant the most, even if their actual service never puts them in the place where such sacrifices are necessary. Its the thought that counts here.

3)Need a Job.

Fairly common here. They do what others do, but with the simple reason that they need a paycheck. Can't say I can dislike someone for going into the service because of that in this economy. As for my opinion on the kind of people... to paraphrase the Sniper: Army's a good job, mate. It's challenging work, out of doors. I guarantee you'll not go hungry. Cause at the end of the day, as long as there are two countries left on this planet, some government will want another gone. They are like police to me, just a job with decent benefits for what they do, and way too little pay if they are going into actual danger.

4)People who want a legal way to kill people.

They are Rabid Dogs to me. Might as well have them somewhere they have an off chance of doing something good in the world. Don't quite respect their motives, but I can respect their potential usefulness. It keeps the sociopaths in places where they can do some good for the world after all, or some evil depending on your politics.

Basically, if someone enters the army because they think that its a way to make the world a better place, they can have a spot in my hall of fame. If they do it for a job, its a good job, and they do something I sure don't want to. If they want to kill people, then at least we are keeping them pointed at something that is at least approaching being a threat to us.

 

[Namehere]

It's 12:30 at night, roughly - or in the morning if you must ? so being bored, I'll bite...

War is highly politicized. And some have suggested that if we got rid of guns war might become economic... It already is and will be for the foreseeable future. Economic warfare is one of the oldest kinds and is almost unending, thus our general acceptance in the western world of capitalism. Not to mention all the times western governments screw each other over casually. Rest assured, the world is in a state of economic warfare right now! It just sounds a lot more exciting then it is... Oh, this is also where you get ideas like an 'economic embargo.'

To my mind judging the individual soldier with out any knowledge of the person is just blind prejudice. So many different cultural and social factors play into whether or not a person wishes to enlist... and then there are those countries where you're 'wishes' are irrelevant; those with mandatory service.

It's common practice for the US forces to recruit natives out of Canada because many come from warrior cultures and feel that they should grow up to be warriors. A lot of them don't join the Canadian Forces because of how they've been publicized in Canada. There's a general view that if they join the CF they'll never see any real action, where as the US is forever sticking it's foot into something and they're bound to prove their warrior prowess in those situations.

Really the individual soldier really isn't what you want to examine when looking at a fighting force. You want to examine the force as a whole. Armies are a great deal like chains of course so there is a weakest link element. After all, you can have all the Rambo's in the world, it doesn't mean much if they're either starving to death because of your crippled supply lines ? weak link ? or unable to be deployed do to a lack of either naval or air power. A few years back there was a general call put out by the then Secretary of NATO ? it was a back hand but still worth noting in this instance ? when the US started kicking up a fuss about NATO forces exclusively relying on US planes for heavy lift capability. He, to the surprise of everyone, agreed with the US's complaints and advocated that more NATO forces invest in their own capability.

Which brings me round to the unsung heroes of supply and logistics. Most of the posts have focused on 'combat infantry' which is all well and good and probably ? what roughly? - 10, maybe 15% of most western military forces?

I think in the final assessment, wherever you're from or looking at, 'soldiering' ? which counts as anyone acting in a nationalized armed force, to put it very narrowly ? is generally dull, dirty and dangerous and I for one welcome the advent of the automated machine age. After all, once we've stopped loosing people at war, we might not be so eager to kill people there either. And once people get sick of being killed by machines whose operators they will never meet let alone strike back at, they might just be willing to stop dieing for what is tantamount to false hope.

We should be so lucky were all warfare 'only' economic.

Jeez, this didn't take much time or appear overly complex. Sorry about the text wall.

 

[laserwulf]

During my entire enlistment, I never once encountered a fellow soldier who -wanted- to kill a fellow human. Excited to go to the range and shoot at some pop-up targets? Sure. Eager to go on convoy training and let loose with the HMMWV-mounted .50-cal or mk.19 at some scrap-heap targets? Definitely. But when the time comes where you're in a position to shoot at someone, that also means that there are people who know the immediate area better than you and are actively trying to kill you. That single fact puts things in perspective really quick. And if one of my soldiers ever expressed any sort of homicidal or sociopathic tendencies, they'd be getting their ammo taken away immediately, and sent straight to Mental Health, if not the MPs.

 

[lacktheknack]

Gee, I sure like having people who know what their doing ready to protect me in the event that I'm attacked!

Basically, I like them and think of them the same way I think of police officers (ooh, NOW the thread can go down in flames).

 

[Gameguy20100]

Depends on the kind of soldier.
Will they follow every order regardless of what it is or what they think? Then they can go to hell.
If told to murder innocents or engage in a battle that come be won through peace but refuse to listen to those orders even though they'd be court marshaled or jailed for life? Then I have the utmost respect for them.

Then again this is more depending ont he kind or "person" they are and not their day job.

I'd like to think that most soldiers wouldn't do that, but then again Nazi Germany. To be honest, I really don't know how far someone would go in the vain of 'following orders'. Speaking just for myself, I would never go seriously out of my moral compass to follow orders, if someone told me to execute a prisoner instead of taking him back to the base (Hurt Locker, anyone?) I wouldn't do it and I would try as hard as possible to make sure nobody else did either. Granted, I probably couldn't stop it, but I could try.

Still, I don't think that kind of thing happens as much as people think it does.

Every person on either side who dies is someones Child or parent or lover and they all die for pointless reasons and people try to justify it and that fucking disgusts me.

So if someone is threatening to murder a 4 year old and I shoot them because that is the only way to stop them it is not justified because that piece of shit is someone's child? I'm going to give you some time to think about that logic.

Thats not the same thing yes killing someone who is about to kill a child is justified.

But Soldiers don't they kill adults and large amounts to there is a big difference between killing some **** who is about to murder some kid and gunning down 6 or 7 armed men.

It also disgusts me how people go "our side are hero's the other side deserve it".

 

[Mycroft Holmes]

I don't hate the soldiers, but neither do I really respect them anymore than I do anyone else who is basically just doing a job. The OP said people who 'serve their country.' Solders barely serve the country at all. The actions of every war for the past 50 years(if not arguably longer) has been to the detriment of the American people and usually to the detriment of whatever country is being attacked. Our wars serve a very few people with political and economic agendas. We destroy local industry, remove tariffs and then make giant profits off of the conquered because they can no longer produce goods of their own and are forced to buy most everything from the US. Those are the kind of people that 'our' soldiers are serving. Arms dealers, politicians, PMCs, our captains of industry, our robber barons, and those with equal claims to both titles. But not the American people.

A person going across the world to risk their life for what he believes to be the right thing? I can respect that.

Do we get points for believing we are doing the right thing? There are very very few people who legitimately believe they aren't doing the right thing. Even when people understand they are doing something morally wrong they justify it by believing they are doing more good than harm. When Mao initiated the great leap forwards he did it with the best of intentions; but it got tens of millions of people killed. Jumping in and trying to do the right thing only means something if you take the time to understand what you are doing and why.