Why do people hate the army?

[aba1]

Generally I think such idiots speak from ignorance and sterotypes.

Realistically you shouldn't need a army to begin with.

You really believe that? LMAO.

Sure I mean what is your country doing that makes people hate you so much they actively want to kill you?

I mean sure I can see defense but a huge army set in place for invasion is hardly defensive.

 

[sextus the crazy]

Realistically you shouldn't need a army to begin with.

First of all, we need an army for self defense.

But that is just it you shouldn't need a big defense because you shouldn't be out making a ass of yourself coercing others into wanting to attack you to begin with. There is also a difference between defensive military and offensive military as well. If your military is really meant for defense it should be almost solely homeland security.

I mean I get having some security and defense but there is a point in which it is just dragging down the country and holding you back from achieve economic success in a stable environment.

If you read my first post on this thread, you'll see I agree with you on this point.
Having a giant bloated army is something I'd like us to get rid of in the future, through budget reforms and the like. Having a shit-ton of bombers and air superiority fighters isn't exactly useful even in the type of wars we're fighting.

Your statement was just misleading, as it implied that the military had no function whatsoever.

I have also noticed a lot of people in the military tend to act like they can kick anyone's ass and are in general better than everyone else. I am not saying all people in the army are like this just most of the people I have come across.

Military seems to attract macho assholes, but not all of them are. In terms of military capabilities, we can kick any country's ass, hands down.

Didn't say all just most I as a individual have met. Also that is the exact attitude I was talking about regardless of whether you can or can't kick peoples ass's doesn't mean you should go throwing it around as if to be challenging others right left and center, show some complaisance besides it is peoples lives you are talking about not some game.

I never said that I was challenging other countries to a fight; that would be both expensive and really counter productive. I was pointing out that in terms of military capabilities, those soldiers are correct; they're just being assholes, is all.

 

[Amethyst Wind]

I don't agree with the idea of being conditioned to obey without question. I think it teaches diminished responsibility.

 

[manic_depressive13]

I hate the military.

Listen here. Your government doesn't like you. In fact, chances are your government is comprised of a bunch of fucking assholes. When you join the military, you are agreeing to take orders from a bunch of assholes. You are expressing willingness to go to another country and kill people on behalf of this group of assholes, simply because you were told to. I don't find that admirable. I find it extremely disturbing that many people believe those in military positions deserve extra respect by virtue of having a diminished capacity to empathise and think for themselves.

Yes, they risk their lives, but then so do people who drive while they're drunk. You don't call them heroes, even though they achieve about as much as anyone in the army- killing some civilians.

 

[the clockmaker]

Generally I think such idiots speak from ignorance and sterotypes.

Realistically you shouldn't need a army to begin with.

You really believe that? LMAO.

Sure I mean what is your country doing that makes people hate you so much they actively want to kill you?

I mean sure I can see defense but a huge army set in place for invasion is hardly defensive.

It is a sad fact of human nature that there will always be completely incompatable policies. the most obvious example of this is the middle east in that some, by no mean all but certaintly enough of those involved in the decsion making process see the western way of life as diametrically opposed to theirs. Simple things that we see as right or moral they see as abhorrent and vice versa and so there will always be the potential for conflict and the need for a deterrant against it.

The need to have a force that can interveane in foriegn nations comes from a couple of nessesities. First, in the event of conflict, it is always better for the fighting to occur on someone elses soil in order to spare your own civilians the horrors of war, second, the goal to defend as far forward as possible, giving yourself more room to fall back and manouvere and your enemy less. Third, part of what prevents smaller wars is the knowledge that just about everybody has a lot of treaty obligations backing them up, and to enforce treaty obligations you need to able to operate in other countries. Fourth, wars cannot be won by defence, you can use defencive tactics to regain the initiative and go on the offensive, but in the end, you cannot end a war without either removing the enemies will to fight or their ability to do so, trying to simply set up a defence and let the enemy attack either leads to the folly of fixed defences or mass casualties on your part because by focusing solely on the defence youare allowing the enemy freedom of action. Fifth, one of the functions of the modern military is intervention in foreign states, eg Bosnia, Timor or various peackeeping operations in the mid east and africa. Sixth and finally (for now, there are some others but this post is getting long and I think you get my point) a deterrant only works if it a real threat and so you cannot prevent war by simply being a tough nut to crack, you need to ability to fight back as well, I mean, what is more likely to be killed by another animal, the turtle or the wolf?

 

[manic_depressive13]

Because all soldiers do is kill civilians, right?

People like this person here, really should know what the fuck they're talking about before they start talking.

OT: I admire anyone who puts their lives in danger on a day to do basis (Soldiers, Cops, etc). I'm currently in the process of joining the Army. A lot of the hate has to do with people being entirely misinformed, or people who think their own ignorant view is the only view on the matter.

Tell me what our soldiers have achieved in the middle east besides kill civilians.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I respect soldiers greatly, since they put their lives on the line doing their job. I don't have to agree with where they are sent or what they do to respect something like that.

 

[Risingblade]

People hate authority figures yet they still expect to be protected by them. It's really just hate for the sake of hating. I can see disliking them for their actions but to judge everyone in that profession is just being a bigot.

 

[TehCookie]

Because peace and love man. If we all could just like, get along, we wouldn't need an army dude.

I'll respect the people who are willing to risk their lives to protect their country, and hate politicians for the wars.

 

[Yopaz]

I was in active duty both before and after 9/11, and I feel that a lot of people's opinions of the military are influenced by current trends, but also by a lot of misconceptions and assumptions. Especially when they don't know any military people, themselves.

I think this guy is onto something.

Personally I am against war when it can be avoided. Let's take either of the two world wars as an example here. One nation wanting to increase their financial standing expanded their territory and their wealth on the cost of nations they were able to defeat. This situation was not misinterpreted nor do I think it could have been solved without going to war. Then there's the war in Iraq which probably was necessary too, but the reasons for going to war were sketchy at best. There's also news about all the sick things some soldiers do in order to maintain the mindset they need to keep fighting. I probably shouldn't mention specifics in order to keep this civil. However to get on with my point this is what people see. They see the group of soldiers mistreating captives. They see a war they didn't want.

Soldiers don't go to war. Soldiers are sent to war. People seem to think that if we didn't have soldiers we wouldn't have wars. I am a strong opponent of war and I am a pacifist, but I still respect soldiers for the duty they are doing.

 

[Von Strimmer]

I have utmost respect for an Army/Navy/Air Force as an entity (Australian). However in saying that, I will judge the services when things like desecrating corpses or humiliating female staff is involved (read: skype sex scandal), I do think the treatment of women in the forces (especially in Australia at the moment) could be significantly improved. But even so you cant judge the entire service on the actions of a rogue few.

Finally, dont hate the army for following the orders of the government.

 

[SycoMantis91]

I think a lot of people mistake "hate" for common annoyance. I can't speak for all marines, but many I have met are the most arrogant, in-your-face assholes I've ever known. What they do is brave and honorable, but at the same time, they and their supporters, at least moreso than most causes are so loud and obnoxious about it, and so spiteful if you're not the same way, that it's hard at times for the whole thing to not just get really annoying, and I'm sure for some people that eventually boils into a form of resent or even hatred. Also, there are many times when people disapprove of a war being fought or something like that and they can't blame the government to their face so soldiers are the next best thing.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Because all soldiers do is kill civilians, right?

People like this person here, really should know what the fuck they're talking about before they start talking.

OT: I admire anyone who puts their lives in danger on a day to do basis (Soldiers, Cops, etc). I'm currently in the process of joining the Army. A lot of the hate has to do with people being entirely misinformed, or people who think their own ignorant view is the only view on the matter.

Tell me what our soldiers have achieved in the middle east besides kill civilians.

Disarming IED's in civilian populated areas. Provided Medical care. Have taken out many insurgent groups. Their main goal is to become friendly with the civilians in order to have cooperation so that they can protect them from insurgent groups.

Have their been some civilian deaths? Yes, as there as been in every war since the dawn of time. And if you think all the Army does is kill civilians, it just shows how much of a close minded idiot you are.

Their main goal is to install a government sympathetic to America so they can get cheap oil. America has been supplying Israel with warheads and creating unrest in the middle east for decades. This resulted in the 9/11 attacks which, while tragic, did not justify invading an entire country. The civilian death toll in Iraq and Afghanistan has reached over one hundred thousand caused by US and NATO activity alone.

The fact is that these people don't want us in their countries. Yes, I employed some hyperbole earlier, but while we may have done some small good, it is immensely overshadowed by the destruction our military has caused. If you think that we are actually there to help the citizens of these countries, you need a serious reality check.

Add to that the fact that 90% of women serving in the military report sexual harassment and 30% have been raped, I just don't see why anyone would volunteer to enter such an environment and propagate attitudes that the military deserves respect.