I don't "hate" the army per say, I just know that there are at least 2 people training to be US Marines right now that said that they only joined up the second they left high school, because they wanted to kill people, which is sickening. I don't hate the army. I do hate a fair number of the people among their ranks though, people like that to be precise.
Why do people hate the army?
- Thread starter chiefohara
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'll give you that, I apparently didn't realize exactly what you had meant. However, acting like an asshole sure wasn't called for. Maybe you should learn to debate without insulting the other person.Mortai Gravesend said:
Also, this debate is honestly pointless, we won't get anywhere with it, only more arguing and resorting down to insults. You're already doing it, and I know I will eventually. We aren't going to change each other's minds about the matter. So I present this idea, agree to disagree?
Because they're an imovable, indestinguishable, blob that eats up our tax dollars, and exists, almost primarily, to carry out the personal intrest of our heavily corrupted government...<.<
that isn't to say that they don't do any good, but most of what the military does these days equates to sticking it's head where it doesn't belong... though that equates more to foreign policy than anything else...
that isn't to say that they don't do any good, but most of what the military does these days equates to sticking it's head where it doesn't belong... though that equates more to foreign policy than anything else...
You know what else is a good way of preserving peace? Not having a military budget that helped contribute to the destruction of your own countries economy...The_Critic said:To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.
-George WashingtonTo be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.Matthew94 said:You can easily defend you borders without spending, AGAIN, $700,000,000,000 per year.The_Critic said:
Your navy almost has as many planes as the entire russian air force. You cannot say that is not excessive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Your military spending is greater than the combined spending of #2-#14 of the worlds largest militaries. That's right, if you combined 14 ENTIRE COUNTRIES military budget you still wouldn't match the USA, that includes China, the UK, Russia, France etc
You spend just under 50% of the total WORLD military expenditure on your military.
-George Washington
Also the reason we're not being invaded is because it's not goddamned 1989 anymore... we have no enemies big enough to even pose a moderate threat... we don't even have an enemy that could successfully combat the New York City Police Department... save Noth Korea and they're deteriorating... and pose even less of a threat now that Kim Jong Il has died... even if we cut spending by half we'd still have enough fire power to reduce any country we want into a smoldering pile of ash and everyone knows it... It's not about national security at this point... it's about a dick waving contest with a country that doesn't exist because we can't get over our blue balls at the end of the cold war...
Sacman said:You know what else is a good way of preserving peace? Not having a military budget that helped contribute to the destruction of your own countries economy...The_Critic said:To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.
-George WashingtonTo be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.Matthew94 said:You can easily defend you borders without spending, AGAIN, $700,000,000,000 per year.The_Critic said:
Your navy almost has as many planes as the entire russian air force. You cannot say that is not excessive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Your military spending is greater than the combined spending of #2-#14 of the worlds largest militaries. That's right, if you combined 14 ENTIRE COUNTRIES military budget you still wouldn't match the USA, that includes China, the UK, Russia, France etc
You spend just under 50% of the total WORLD military expenditure on your military.
-George Washington
Also the reason we're not being invaded is because it's not goddamned 1989 anymore... we have no enemies big enough to even pose a moderate threat... we don't even have an enemy that could successfully combat the New York City Police Department... save Noth Korea and they're deteriorating... and pose even less of a threat now that Kim Jong Il has died... even if we cut spending by half we'd still have enough fire power to reduce any country we want into a smoldering pile of ash and everyone knows it... It's not about national security at this point... it's about a dick waving contest with a country that doesn't exist because we can't get over our blue balls at the end of the cold war...
As an American citizen currently in high school I can see the massive amount of money that is spent on defense. Its a lot, and its something I and everyone my age I know will be paying for. I know that other countries have very large defense budgets as well and they have to pay for those with hard earned money. Looking at the name of the thread I can only answer for the people I know. The answer is as follows. The people I know see the military as a tool being used by people in power to advance their own ends to the determent of both their countrymen and the peoples of countries where the military is operating.
Now it seems to me like this is almost the definition of what armed forces have done for as long as they have existed. Certainly they can be used for perceived good (defense of your city-state from invaders) and evil (genocide). Were you to ask anyone, even the neo-hippies I know, what their opinion on the military was if the year were 1945, I doubt any of them would say it is "useless" and "evil." However they see it being used for causes and reasons they think of as bad, so that is their position on the armed forces.
Humans are irrational beings and how we feel about things changes on a day to day basis. Currently in liberal america there is a very strong trend against the military. Thats just how it is. Certainly the same feelings are widespread, Australia, Germany, the UK, etc. The people of those countries observe the same things and feel the same way. Most of the blame these days gets put where it probably deserves to rest, on the shoulders of the Bush administration. But thats just one person who has done things unpopular with a military and he is certainly not the first and wont be the last.
I wont say that armed forces are useless. Sure you don't need one, but the lack of a military does open you up for invasion. Does the United States need the sized army it has? Probably not. Did that make a lot of money for weapons manufacturers? Yes. Does it make some people feel safer? You bet. Make of it as you will.
As to individual soldiers. I would suspect that peoples prejudices simply carry over. Disliking the military and therefore disliking a soldier is like disliking McDonalds and therefore disliking a dishwasher. Sure they are both part of an industry that kills people (heart disease and warfare respectively), but I think its up to each person to decide how much each man or woman is responsible for the sum of their actions.
Now it seems to me like this is almost the definition of what armed forces have done for as long as they have existed. Certainly they can be used for perceived good (defense of your city-state from invaders) and evil (genocide). Were you to ask anyone, even the neo-hippies I know, what their opinion on the military was if the year were 1945, I doubt any of them would say it is "useless" and "evil." However they see it being used for causes and reasons they think of as bad, so that is their position on the armed forces.
Humans are irrational beings and how we feel about things changes on a day to day basis. Currently in liberal america there is a very strong trend against the military. Thats just how it is. Certainly the same feelings are widespread, Australia, Germany, the UK, etc. The people of those countries observe the same things and feel the same way. Most of the blame these days gets put where it probably deserves to rest, on the shoulders of the Bush administration. But thats just one person who has done things unpopular with a military and he is certainly not the first and wont be the last.
I wont say that armed forces are useless. Sure you don't need one, but the lack of a military does open you up for invasion. Does the United States need the sized army it has? Probably not. Did that make a lot of money for weapons manufacturers? Yes. Does it make some people feel safer? You bet. Make of it as you will.
As to individual soldiers. I would suspect that peoples prejudices simply carry over. Disliking the military and therefore disliking a soldier is like disliking McDonalds and therefore disliking a dishwasher. Sure they are both part of an industry that kills people (heart disease and warfare respectively), but I think its up to each person to decide how much each man or woman is responsible for the sum of their actions.
I think when people say they hate the army, they most often mean it in the same way I do. I know a few military people, and like most other people, they are just people, it's nothing to do with them. People hate armies because armies fight wars. Defence is not a valid argument against this as it is not one specific army people hate, it's the existence of combative forces. If no country had any army, no attack or defence measures, there would be no war. It's very simple.
Because the army is nothing but government-sponsored killers? Individual soldiers can be quite nice people, just kinda misguided in their choice of profession. But an army itself is an entity whose main funtion is to kill and destroy for the interests of a bunch of fat men in buiseness suits.
Wars and conflicts do not exist because of armies. Armies exist because of conflicts not the other wa around.
Since I am from Finland and we haven't been part of any armed conflicts since WW2 aside for peacekeeping operations, I can't say much about other armies or reasosn of war, but to us there is only one doctrine: To make it seem like we are too much trouble to start a war with, as the soviet general said after winter war "We gained just enoung land to bury our dead." is what we'd be after the next(extremely unlikely) time we are being invaded.
So in our case the existance of army is the only way to keep the war out, if we'd have no military of our own, it would not take long untill the one with army would take over us pretty damn fast. There will allways be an army, own or foreing.
Make your decissions people, since we are humans and history repeats itself despite majority attemptiong not to, but it is proven in the past that even the minority can make the decissions for the course of nation.
Since I am from Finland and we haven't been part of any armed conflicts since WW2 aside for peacekeeping operations, I can't say much about other armies or reasosn of war, but to us there is only one doctrine: To make it seem like we are too much trouble to start a war with, as the soviet general said after winter war "We gained just enoung land to bury our dead." is what we'd be after the next(extremely unlikely) time we are being invaded.
So in our case the existance of army is the only way to keep the war out, if we'd have no military of our own, it would not take long untill the one with army would take over us pretty damn fast. There will allways be an army, own or foreing.
Make your decissions people, since we are humans and history repeats itself despite majority attemptiong not to, but it is proven in the past that even the minority can make the decissions for the course of nation.
Army's cause death, I don't care about anything else, that makes them low in my mind, the Irish army however don't do all that much do they? I thought our army was just a specialised police force, Ireland is hardly starting any wars after all...
Nonetheless if it causes death without acceptable reason I don't like it >.<
Nonetheless if it causes death without acceptable reason I don't like it >.<
For me, personally, it's because I don't see invading oil rich countries under false pretences (no WMDs were ever found), capturing oil derricks and racking up an estimated 150,000 Iraqi civilian deaths to be "defending your country". The military is the hand that does this.
How many people just want to live peacefully in their homes with no conflict? Let's assume, for a minute, no country in the world had a military. How many people, individually, would be sitting at home just itching to expand their countries borders? How many individuals would independently assume they needed resources from country X, and that the only way to get them is brute force?
How many people just want to live peacefully in their homes with no conflict? Let's assume, for a minute, no country in the world had a military. How many people, individually, would be sitting at home just itching to expand their countries borders? How many individuals would independently assume they needed resources from country X, and that the only way to get them is brute force?
Well in Canada at least:
My father (Air Force), grandfather (peace keeper), and my great grandfather (WW2, as well as a great many relatives all have served in wars and in many capacities in the military.
A great many Canadians dislike the armed forces since they are not:
A) Peacekeepers (which is BS since PEACEKEEPERS are soldiers)
B) They sully the image that Canada is a peaceful nation of diplomats.
My Grandfather got called a baby killer when Vietnam was happening when he was not even involved in it, he was just a solider who was in dress uniform at a recruiting office in Calgary. In Canada at least it boils down to the fact that certain people believe having an army goes counter to our basic way of life which is peace keeping.
A great many people in fact rail against Canada being in Afghanistan, but I dont think their is any malice to it. Its a product of our government promoting peace keeping through the whole cold war era.
A great many Canadians forget though that over 100,000 Canadian soldiers have died in active combat roles over the last century or so.
Personally I wished we lived in a world without the need for a military. However if you dont have one, then you mind as well bend over and take it, since no one will care about what you have to say.
My father (Air Force), grandfather (peace keeper), and my great grandfather (WW2, as well as a great many relatives all have served in wars and in many capacities in the military.
A great many Canadians dislike the armed forces since they are not:
A) Peacekeepers (which is BS since PEACEKEEPERS are soldiers)
B) They sully the image that Canada is a peaceful nation of diplomats.
My Grandfather got called a baby killer when Vietnam was happening when he was not even involved in it, he was just a solider who was in dress uniform at a recruiting office in Calgary. In Canada at least it boils down to the fact that certain people believe having an army goes counter to our basic way of life which is peace keeping.
A great many people in fact rail against Canada being in Afghanistan, but I dont think their is any malice to it. Its a product of our government promoting peace keeping through the whole cold war era.
A great many Canadians forget though that over 100,000 Canadian soldiers have died in active combat roles over the last century or so.
Personally I wished we lived in a world without the need for a military. However if you dont have one, then you mind as well bend over and take it, since no one will care about what you have to say.
In Canada at least its a branch of the armed forces who does search and rescue, and disaster relief...or shovel snow from Toronto.Guilherme Zoldan said:
But sure if you want to believe that they are vile things, and ignore good things that armies can do go ahead.
It's interesting actually. I don't know about Canada, but the army has different roles in separate countries. Take for example France. In France the army is not really well liked at all, whereas the fireman(pompier) are well liked. The difference is in their roles.tmande2nd said:
The fireman are responsible for disaster relief and evacuations, while the french army just kills people (the main army, not the reservists, they just do it because they need money). Consequently if you want to help people, you join the fireman, and if you want to murder someone you join the army.
There's also a difference in admission policies and standards between the institutions. The fireman are far stricter, while the army is slightly more lax all least when it comes to the base soldier. The training for the base American grunt is even worse.
You're viewed as a failed policeman/ fireman if you ended up joining the army.
Things might be different in other countries. I heard that in the U.S, the army incorporates the roles of both the fireman and the traditional army, there's no distinction between the killers and those who want to "protect their country". However, in some cases the exact role of the army is to harm. In those cases they actually don't do any good things.
I don't hate the army and I do believe that the army is necessary in war times and in peace times, but I don't think that one deserves respect if he/she joins up in times of peace. You said you got into an arguement over someone telling you that the military are nothing more than mercenaries, this is in short my view. You get paid for killing a bunch of people from the Middle East, because of very dubious reasons at best.
And yes, this is a policy of the goverment, not of the individual, but you do know ( I hope) what you're getting into and that you might be sent off to Iraq/Afghanistan. Those people have not done anything to deserve to be invaded. You might say that Sadam Hussein and the Taliban are/were dangerous, and that might be true, but in the former case the investigation into whether or not any WMD's were in his possesion turned up nothing. Yes, he was a dictator, but then, there are so many others in Africa and at that time, Middle East.
If you joined up with noble intentions, then that's fine. But I know for sure that many others don't, like those soldiers urinating on corpses, so that might be a reason why people don't like the military so much. So yeah, take my opinion for what it is: the thoughts of some guy at the internet, and don't take too much offense, if any.
And yes, this is a policy of the goverment, not of the individual, but you do know ( I hope) what you're getting into and that you might be sent off to Iraq/Afghanistan. Those people have not done anything to deserve to be invaded. You might say that Sadam Hussein and the Taliban are/were dangerous, and that might be true, but in the former case the investigation into whether or not any WMD's were in his possesion turned up nothing. Yes, he was a dictator, but then, there are so many others in Africa and at that time, Middle East.
If you joined up with noble intentions, then that's fine. But I know for sure that many others don't, like those soldiers urinating on corpses, so that might be a reason why people don't like the military so much. So yeah, take my opinion for what it is: the thoughts of some guy at the internet, and don't take too much offense, if any.
Because the military is designed to kill people? why Is it that people find it odd when someone doesn't support mass killings? Look at what happened on the first day of the Iraq war, mass killings of civilians for no reason.
You're kidding,right?aba1 said:
Any "defensive" weapons technology is offensive and any defensive strategies can be offensive. Hell, the army is a great job opportunity if your relatively fit and healthy. I think you've been drinking too much hippie juice.
In response to sacman and that whole quote, which I can't seem to snip properly, I wouldn't be so sure of America being the most dominant country in the world that can crush any other country under it's heel. Sure, no one has any desire to attack America right now, nor should they, but once America starts to exercise too much influence over other countries, you can bet that they will do something about it. You're going to find yourself surrounded with enemies if you keep this attitude up.