Why I don't 'support our troops' (and why no religious person should)

[averageJOE]

I will put an exception right at the top of this post. If you're drafted, most of what I say here does not apply.

Why support a volunteer soldier?

I've been faced with this question quite a bit coming to age in the Bush years. The conclusion that I've finally landed on is, there is no reason.

A volunteer soldier signs up to be an agent of the state's war machine. In doing so, he/she allows the state to demand him/her to kill another human being. Questioning said authority is a crime, and is understood to be so when the soldier signs on the dotted (or is it solid) line. I don't believe that an individual soldier is responsible for the greater evil of said war machine, but the willingness to do exactly what that entity demands nullifies their innocence. In the modern war era, the soldier is aware of what he/she is getting into. With the abundance of media the terrors of war can actually be seen with merely a click of the mouse. The days of soldiers not knowing exactly what they are getting into are over.

Most major religions have a rule against murder as a top priority, but it seems that their followers take the 'patriotic' stance of 'murdering one person is a bad thing, but murder in mass for the sake of [national security/protecting national business interests/protecting culture] is required and in some cases God's will. This is contradictory to the very ethics of the religions of these 'patriots'.

Being in the United States, I am surrounded by Christian war-culture, but I have yet to hear a solid argument for what I hear termed a 'just war'. It is simple:
If killing is wrong in one case, it is wrong in all cases.

I'm a soldier.

War is the sole reason why are able to live the lives they live. The Untied States would not exist if it were not for war. Your freedom of speech and expression is the direct result of war. The reason why a person has the right to stand on a street corner with a sign that says "Don't support our Troops" is because of war. People, like me, are willing to die so we can continue with those rights.

But do I need people's support? Nah. In fact it gets real old when people contantly tell me "Thank you for your service." I appreciate it, but it does get old.

 

[Mr Cheese]

There are reasons we should support our troops even if we don't support the wars:
1. Soldiers, sailors, etc are human beings who have families to support.
2. Those same soldiers, etc feel as though they are protecting those families and their country
3. Not all soldiers, etc kill- there are the ones who repair things or fix meals, etc. I was in the Navy and I never killed anyone or worked on any weapons. I fixed communication devices.

4. they are being right royally screwed, in many cases, by those in charge

that being said I personally oppose any war
but I understand sadly, due to human nature it is inevitable at our current time in history

 

[Mr Cheese]

I'm a soldier.

War is the sole reason why are able to live the lives they live. The Untied States would not exist if it were not for war. Your freedom of speech and expression is the direct result of war. The reason why a person has the right to stand on a street corner with a sign that says "Don't support our Troops" is because of war. People, like me, are willing to die so we can continue with those rights.

But do I need people's support? Nah. In fact it gets real old when people contantly tell me "Thank you for your service." I appreciate it, but it does get old.

I dont support you

just kidding

 

[enchanted_one1975]

I signed up because I needed the money to support my family. There is a certain pride in what I did. Oh, and not all of our troops are "killing machines." Each member of our military has a job. We have doctors, clergymen, cooks, firefighters, dentists, medics, etc... Any blue collar job that exists in this world also exists in the military, both here and overseas.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I will put an exception right at the top of this post. If you're drafted, most of what I say here does not apply.

Why support a volunteer soldier?

I've been faced with this question quite a bit coming to age in the Bush years. The conclusion that I've finally landed on is, there is no reason.

Here's one:

You are responsible for what the soldier does. In a democratic society, the soldiers are accountable to their commanders, who are accountable to the elected officials, who are accountable to the electorate. Ultimately, the electorate (i.e. all voters) are responsible for holding the government, and by extension the armed forces, to task to ensure that their actions are for good.

A soldier has agreed to obey whatever legal order he receives, and the chain of responsibility for those orders ends with the electorate, of which all citizens are a part.

If you lived in a dictatorship, things would be different, but you don't live in a dictatorship. You jointly hold ultimate authority and responsibility for your government's actions along with all the other voters. If you condemn your army, then you also condemn the people of your country. And you are one of the people of your country.

When you condemn the soldier who acts on your behalf, you condemn yourself as well.

 

[dust1n]

I agree that violence should be avoided if possible. But I don't believe that violence in and of itself is either morally right or morally wrong.

What makes the difference is the motive of the person or entity. In my opinion, self defense or the defense of another person is not wrong, even if that defense includes violence.

Good idea. I should walk into an armed man's house in another country with a gun, and when he pulls out his gun to defend himself, I can defend myself. How moral?

War by it's very nature is often ambiguous morally. In those cases, I believe that God knows our hearts and motivations - and He's the ultimate judge and jury.

So God ignores the ignorance of his own laws in determining whether or not they are sinning?

 

[Mr Cheese]

Good idea. I should walk into an armed man's house in another country with a gun, and when he pulls out his gun to defend himself, I can defend myself. How moral?

how dare you question the american nigthmare scenario....

of these men breaking into your house..and the need to kill them.

I have heard this a million times....

Heck it leads to people believing its sane to be prepared to machete an intruder to death......

fear, death, machetes and charlton heston..... I love america

 

[dust1n]

However, I can never say I think killing is wrong in all cases, across the board. For example, if a person breaks into my home and directly threatens my life or the lives of my loved ones, I will kill him if necessary.

So then, wouldn't he be in self-defense if you killed him at that point because you were trying to kill him?

 

[Mr Cheese]

So then, wouldn't he be in self-defense if you killed him at that point because you were trying to kill him?

This actually happend in England....

A guy shot an intruder with a double barrelled shot gun....

surpringly the intruder wasnt in a happy place after....

but then, different culture....

Americans like their guns..and the ability to mortally maim or shoot someone

Its that pesky culture of fear thing....

"If God made man they say, Sam Colt made him Equal"

I dont get it personally....

I know I always have a kitchen knife...a spork or a bottle of Hydochloric acid under the sink that I used on the last victim when I put her in the bath to melt the body last time....

 

[dust1n]

Oh, I agree completely.

I think that if the Palestinians could produce a Ghandi, that would be the first step towards peace. A visionary who convinces the Arab states to follow non-violence would end the conflict forever.

Well, violence didn't end after Gandhi, only British occupation of India ended after Ghandi, and that was after years of continuing British violence.

 

[*Anne*]

So then, wouldn't he be in self-defense if you killed him at that point because you were trying to kill him?

I can see this conversation is pointless.

 

[Mr Cheese]

I can see this conversation is pointless.

Well I can understand if you lived in a bad neighborhood...you may have a reason

I know a guy, left his wife and moved...he ended up living in a part of Indiana where the drug stores actually had armed guards outside after the sun went down.........

Now thats the good old America we all enjoy!

Of course if people bothered to invest in the poor instead of sucking the penis of the right wing political stance that this country has had for decades....... but no, the poor are the poor.... "let them eat cake"

So what we have is cure not prevention...we dont prevent gangreen, we just saw off the leg; we dont prevent the culture of fear, violence, gun toting crack fiends......we just shoot them to DEATH.

but I'm just a crazy liberal

 

[dust1n]

how dare you question the american nigthmare scenario....

of these men breaking into your house..and the need to kill them.

I have heard this a million times....

Heck it leads to people believing its sane to be prepared to machete an intruder to death......

fear, death, machetes and charlton heston..... I love america

I just don't understand... how are you defending yourself or loved ones by being 1000 miles away from them?

 

[dust1n]

I can see this conversation is pointless.

No it's not. That would be self-defense in the same sense the other person was self-defensing. Articulate the difference between the two that would hold true in all cases, by means of premise and conclusion.

 

[Mr Cheese]

I just don't understand... how are you defending yourself or loved ones by being 1000 miles away from them?

oh different issue...

in a word...terrorism

but thats a whole can of worms

 

[dust1n]

Well I can understand if you lived in a bad neighborhood...you may have a reason

I know a guy, left his wife and moved...he ended up living in a part of Indiana where the drug stores actually had armed guards outside after the sun went down.........

Now thats the good old America we all enjoy!

Of course if people bothered to invest in the poor instead of sucking the penis of the right wing political stance that this country has had for decades....... but no, the poor are the poor.... "let them eat cake"

So what we have is cure not prevention...we dont prevent gangreen, we just saw off the leg; we dont prevent the culture of fear, violence, gun toting crack fiends......we just shoot them to DEATH.

but I'm just a crazy liberal

You mean.. that if people weren't poor, which is a result of the society with which they exist, than they never would be violent in the first place, thus the lack of need for defense?

 

[Gunfingers]

This thread has taken an odd turn. :-/

 

[*Anne*]

Initial intent, Dust1n.

A family man's initial intent for the evening is to tuck his kids into bed and go to sleep.

An intruder's initial intent for the evening is to break into a house that isn't his, take what isn't his, and possibly kill anyone who makes this difficult for him. Sometimes the intent is to simply kill, all by itself.

Do you not have crime where you live?

I say this conversation is pointless because you seem to be unable to tell the difference between the average person and a criminal.

 

[Mr Cheese]

You mean.. that if people weren't poor, which is a result of the society with which they exist, than they never would be violent in the first place, thus the lack of need for defense?

no, I'm saying there'd be less gun toting drug fiends breaking into people's houses or drug stores in order to feed addictions, to live etc etc etc

Poverty is a large factor in crime,.....

the only one? no

but I doubt if poverty wasnt so bad in that area of Indiana, just outside of Chicago.... that aremed gaurds would not be needed outside of a drug store!

Maybe I'm just weird in that I find the idea of armed guards outside a store...being "ridiculous" to be polite.....:sarcastic

Maybe its normal for other parts of america..and it is just me that is unaware that this is how America IS?....

Perhaps you can inform me....

 

[sandandfoam]

I say this conversation is pointless because you seem to be unable to tell the difference between the average person and a criminal.

There generally isn't one