"Stop looking at these kids as heroes," says vet who made war documentary.

[Cooky]

To make an effective soldier, who will obey orders quickly, reliably and without question, you first must strip away 18 years of social and religious conditioning. A soldier on the battlefield won't be very effective if he stops to think about the morality, or social or political ramifications of his every decision.
Pasting the veneer of civilized behavior or out-group compassion back on after discharge can be tricky.

I’m so glad I never ruined myself by joining the military. Instead, I just ruined myself in other ways.

...There are just so many options out there.

 

[PureX]

I think it's possible to maintain effective military readiness without stripping away reason and compassion in lieu of blood lust and blind obedience. What happens in an actual battle is not what needs to happen to maintain readiness. With proper training most soldiers will behave reasonably well even under the intense strain of combat. Some will not, and that, I think, is inevitable. Which is why actual combat should be an absolute last solution, and not a 'tool of political influence'. The more we muddy up the purpose of combat, the more it will go 'awry' when engaged in. And ratcheting up a young, testosterone-driven male's lust for blood and glory in peacetime should be considered a crime, not a military readiness strategy.

 

[Valjean]

What a radical post. Why go so far? You should be careful what you read.

And I thought my posts would be the radical ones...

He does make some good points, though think most of the psychopathy is more post hoc than pre-existing.

Neurologically, a million years as hunter-gatherers has wired us for intense, in-group loyalty and altruism. and for out-group competition and aggression.
To paraphrase Johnathan Haidt, our minds are designed to bind us into teams, and to oppose other teams.

The military is very skilled at twisting our innate psychology to their own ends.

 

[Valjean]

I don't want to speak for the militaries of other countries, but in Australia, "obeying orders" is definitely part of military training, "without question" is more complicated.

In the US a soldier -- in theory -- has a duty to disobey an illegal order, but is trained not to think about the legality of every order. Anyone actually taking the time to think about obeying the orders he's given would be out of the military so fast he wouldn't know what hit him.

 

[BSM1]

In the US a soldier -- in theory -- has a duty to disobey an illegal order, but is trained not to think about the legality of every order. Anyone actually taking the time to think about obeying the orders he's given would be out of the military so fast he wouldn't know what hit him.

Or dead. Say what you will to denigrate these kids that swear an oath to defend this country (be they naive, mislead, or whatever); you have that right mainly because of their real or potential sacrifice. And, yes, war is not pretty and there are atrocities that may or may not have been preventable, but having a strong, effective, and highly visible military force has prevented far more deaths of innocents than it has caused, IMHO.

 

[Revoltingest]

Obviously. There are unfortunately people in the military who joined because they needed the money or college prospects, but as I understand it, there are so many members that it's completely voluntary to see war. Anyone who would volunteer for that is a psychopath, and if they somehow weren't already, then being trained to murder people for the sake of rich people's checkbooks encourages tendencies in that direction. The American military has a long history of acting like this; the My Lai Massacre is one of the better-known and recent examples -- but children, women, and noncombatants die every day from U.S-sanctioned murders. That Marines "swear at children" is nothing.

Something that rarely enters the popular consciousness is that PTSD isn't just caused by what soldiers saw. It's caused by what they did. The military is an institution for training murderers; nothing more. No veteran since WWII is a hero or should be considered one. Fighting for the interest of the ruling class isn't honorable.

We must remember that the military is a collection of
individuals, the shared culture & training notwithstanding.
There are both good & bad people in it.

 

[Valjean]

Or dead. Say what you will to denigrate these kids that swear an oath to defend this country (be they naive, mislead, or whatever); you have that right mainly because of their real or potential sacrifice. And, yes, war is not pretty and there are atrocities that may or may not have been preventable, but having a strong, effective, and highly visible military force has prevented far more deaths of innocents than it has caused, IMHO.

No, I have that right by 'natural law', as Jefferson put it.
The military does not defend my freedom. In fact, our military adventurism and its blowback have created something of a military-surveillance state in recent years, and our adulation of all things military has created an aggressive, violent culture.

Our current military adventurism threatens our safety and prosperity.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Do you think you were a nicer person prior to joining the military, or do you think you were always this way?

Good question. I'm a very different person to who I was before my time in the military. IMHO, I'm "nicer" now, but also harder.

 

[Shaul]

The military is a necessary institution. It is neither inherently evil nor good. The U.S. military, despite some opinions here to the contrary, is one of the most professional and moral military forces the world has ever seen. Those that have never served should be slow to criticize that which they clearly don’t understand.

I am proud to have volunteered and served in the U. S. Marine Corps. Yes, it made me a better person. More importantly I am thoroughly convinced the U. S. military helps make it better and safer for America and peace loving people around the world.

 

[BSM1]

No, I have that right by 'natural law', as Jefferson put it.
The military does not defend my freedom. In fact, our military adventurism and its blowback have created something of a military-surveillance state in recent years, and our adulation of all things military has created an aggressive, violent culture.

Our current military adventurism threatens our safety and prosperity.

Never said the military gave you that or any right, they are there to make sure no one else takes it from you. Even with all the actual or perceived 'evils' foisted onto our military, I doubt anyone in their right minds would seek to abolish it.

 

[LuisDantas]

No. Most join to serve their country.

That is inherently never more than an excuse, though.

 

[LuisDantas]

The military may be necessary, but is inherently designed to be unworthy of much praise.

And it shows. There is a contradiction in the very idea of a "military hero" when firearms are involved.

 

[Revoltingest]

That is inherently never more than an excuse, though.

An excuse for what?

 

[dawny0826]

‘Stop looking at these kids as heroes,’ says veteran who made documentary featuring wartime footage of Marines

Looks interesting. Thoughts?

I think it would be an interesting watch for a perspective on experiences that I'll never have.

I have reverence for the sacrifices that members of the armed services (and reserves) and their families make.

I don't apply "hero" loosely to those serving in the armed forces. Not every service member does anything worthy of the title.

 

[dawny0826]

That's the sentiment, but "serving our country" and "protecting our freedoms" is rather broad and vague; to what to degree do military operations actually serve and protect? Does the nation as a whole really benefit from most of it? What poses a legitimate threat to our liberty other than our own legislators?

I think that the greatest benefit of our military is what we don't see through surveillance and readiness initiatives.

Americans who aren't impacted directly by natural disasters, as an example, don't realize how vulnerable and even violent people can become in times of crisis. When infrastructure is compromised, it's not uncommon for the military to be engaged to serve and protect. During Hurricane Harvey relief efforts in Texas, people were transported to shelters in military vehicles as they were best equipped to navigate the flooding. That's one of a plethora of examples as to how the military serves us in less grandiose, but, nonetheless, important ways.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What I take exception to is the idea that one can be an effective soldier while retaining values of peace, love, brotherhood and equality.

Desmond Doss - Wikipedia

He tried to help wounded Japanese, too.

 

[Twilight Hue]

That is inherently never more than an excuse, though.

?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Do you have evidence for that claim? And even if that's what most members say, what does it mean, exactly? I certainly say serving my country was part of why I joined, but is my idea of serving my country the same as others who said the same thing? Further, while "serving my country" was part of my reasons, it sure wasn't my only one. Pay, for example.

Yes every member in my unit. That's evidence enough

 

[Brickjectivity]

Its characteristic of a volunteer, paid, standing military group. Plus these are young people, mostly men, who don't understand the value of life yet.

 

[Duke_Leto]

No. Most join to serve their country.

How am I as an American ‘served’ by the Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Iraq War, or the Afghan War? They don’t serve their country; they serve the interest of the state and the military-industrial complex.