Killer for hire, how dare he!?!?!

Post Reply New Topic

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. It normally depends which end of the gun you're looking at.

I agree that soldiers are necessary for defence. But I think the armed forces get far too much money which could be used more constructively to fight suffering and inequality so people wouldn't start fights in the first place. Most wars start because someone feels hard done by.

The biggest enemies of all are extremism and intolerance. These are better fought through education, awareness (social morality), justice and an emphasis on individual responsibility. Armed conflict should always be a last resort.

I'm not keen on the jingoistic "jock" mentality of some soldiers, either. Or the way they are taught to become desensitised to the pain which they inflict. I find that dangerous and, quite frankly, scary.

The standing army kept by this country has become a prodigious waste of resources and lives.

I don't agree with the people who say don't blame the soldiers. Do they disagree with the results of the Nuremberg trials or is it different when it's a Nazi or an "enemy combatant"? When our soldiers will actually bomb neighborhoods with lots of people in them because Saddam might be in one of the houses, then American soldiers have crossed a line that they should know not to cross.

Self-accountability is one thing that Americans used to take pride in. Some even practiced it. Now we don't even have to pretend. The only time that anyone at any level of the military is held accountable is when they can't prove that they were acting on orders, as in when officers such as the ones who ordered the atrocities at Abu Ghraib didn't take responsibility for their actions.

The American soldier and the American citizen have been falling down on their jobs and we are paying the penalties for this. We will be paying for generations.

Did someone miss the fact that the current war is a war of aggression against a much smaller country? How about the fact that the amount of radioactivity that the US had added to the soil around the region is the equivalent of thousands of nuclear bombs?

Sounds like to me that this guy is about as bright as sack of hammers. Sadly, there are pinheads that have alot of disdain for those who are serving our country. This genius seems to be obe of them.

Meanwhile, tell your bfriend that I said thanks for protecting us and I will be praying for him.

Better start looking for a place in France. Since that country is made up of mostly cowards, you'd fit right in.
Leaning towards a police state? Something tells me you have the mentality of a jellyfish.

Jaguars_fan, it sometimes takes more courage and intelligence to refuse to fight.

How ironic, that's was exactly the motto of France during World War 2.

How ironic, the U.S. has entirely forgotten the Nuremberg trials. A lot of people think of those as a joke.

Also, Germany invaded France. The U.S. invaded Iraq.

Personally I'd be tempted to respond with something along the lines of "What an overly simplistic yet utterly ret*d question!"
He obviously does seem to have something against the armed forces if he's unable to make the distinction between a soldier and the commander-in-chief. The fact that the leader is a moron has nothing to do with the intelligence (either way) of the troops. Once they're in, they effectively have no choice. Not following orders is regarded as dereliction of duty and in some cases insubordination and can result in severe penalties including, but not limited to, jail time.
Insofar as the 'killer-for-hire" jibe, on behalf of myself, my father, my stepfather, my aunts and uncles, my grandfather, and a very close friend of mine currently serving in Iraq, please feel free to let your friend know that he's more than welcome to kiss my ass.
If y'wanna get overly pedantic about it, yes, a soldier is a killer for hire. However, that's too simplistic. The correct term for a soldier for hire is a mercenary. They follow the money. Soldiers in a nations' standing army do not kill indiscriminately and are authorised to use lethal force only under certain conditions. If those conditions are not met and they use lethal force, they can, will, and have been court-martialled and punished for doing so.
A hired killer does just that: they kill. A soldier, ideally, protects life, in many cases at the cost of their own.

I agree military should be used only for self defense, and only as a last resort or a defense against an immediate threat. I also agree our current leader, Bush, and his cabinet are leaning towards trying to establish a police state (albiet possibly now theyr loosing steam).
Soldiers in general should not be held accountable for the war in Iraq, theyr doing what they were told to do, and ultimately they have no choice in the matter. Now, I remember back in Viet Nam there were some US soldiers who went over the line and attacked innocent civilians out of sheer ignorance. And, signs are showing it is possibly happening again in Iraq. If this is happening, then those soldiers involved should be held accountable for war crimes. And believe me it's not too hard to see some of them doing something like that.
But a military is neccessary to keep a nation safe. You silly libs go out there and try to do things your way and then we'll get taken over by another country and you'll complain "don't fight back or your being racist".... Is this about right?
I do not agree with our current war, or our **real** reasons behind them. I do not believe a military should be used to push an ideology by force. And I am utterly repulsed at other things conservatives have done too, integrating church into the state, things like ban on gay marriages, 10 commandments on the court grounds, trying to make "under god" mandatory in the pledge of allegiance, amoung other things. Yet, I try to remain open minded, not all christians are bad, it's those extremists who are intolerant of other belief systems and tend to give their religion a bad name. The same can be said of Islam.
As far as our troops go? I support them, but I don't support their commander in chief, and I don't support his crooked motives behind it...... America really needs a 3rd party.

Our brilliant commander in chief got the World Court to exempt the U.S. from war crimes tribunals. It helped him avoid getting the same rap that his father did.

The point of Nuremberg was that there is some place where soldiers should refuse orders, just as was once thought correct under the constitutional law of the United States. Those lessons have been lost.

The newspaper wouldn't report on that Werbert, they can't print something that long it wont fit on the page.

Perhaps he does just liket upset you, but could it not be possible that's how he feels? And that he's entitled to feel that way?

Besides, whether you like how he phrased it or not, he did hit a good nail. Are you OK with how the army will change your boyfriend? Or do you seriously think he's going to be the same person? Psychologically, going from civilian to military or vice versa is traumatic. It's like culture shock, and in terms of stressful life changes, it's very high on the scale. It's a trememdous shift in one's sense of self and individuality, in their priorities and how they percieve others and the world. In turn that effects all their relationships. How are you going to react when he comes home and talks about his army buddies like he's closer to them than to you? Or is more interested in his army life than the stuff that goes on in your civilian life? How are you going to take it everytime he goes "We can't get away with that on base" and starts complaining about how civilians do things differently than the military? Are you going to be OK seeing him literally conform in manner, behavior, and appearence to what the army expects rather than want he likes or used to be like?

You friend may have been harsh and biased, but he made a good point nonetheless: have you really thought about these kinds of things? Or are you just being gulliable and think he's going to stay the person you knew and came to love? Maybe he is trying to upset you - but perhaps he's doing it to get you think about these things, because he's genuinely concerned about you.

You're forgetting money, but that is beside the point.

The person who sent that email is an extra "the" in a sentence, ignore them.

I am not going to debate the morality of the current situation in Iraq. I have my own opinions, you all can have your own. But I do have an opinion on Deccajay's friend.

After 9/11 my husband (NT Bipolar) wanted to join the military to help with the war on terror. I was pretty much in favor of invading Afghanistan at that point, since the Taliban was a hostile regime that basically allowed Al-Quaida to exist, train, and operate within that country. However, I was NOT in favor of my husband joining the military due to his moods and his need for order in life. He also can get pretty pissy about authority if he doesn't agree with it. He didn't join (thankfully), and then the US started talking about invading Iraq and he gave up the idea altogether because we disagree with invading Iraq (again, I'm saying this without talking about why or attempting to engage in a political debate).

Seeing my husband go through this military phase made me realize that a lot of the people who joined over the last few years or WANT to join now are pretty idealistic. They think that they are going to go to Iraq, or wherever, and help the local people or spread freedom and democracy. Personally, I don't agree. I would not want to be at the beck and call of Dubbya - the worst sort of NT - and his unqualified cronies who are leading the Middle East into a regional war. Still, I don't think that your friend joined the military because he wants to kill people and get paid for it. He may be idealistic, or he may want to go to college and not have the money (another thing that the military can be useful for) If you have any doubt in your mind, ask your friend what made him want to join the military - I am sure that he will tell you. Then you will be able to rationally talk to the other friend that sent you that email (unless that friend wants to shoot his moutn off about the other friend that joined the military because he knows it will piss you off. In that case, let it go.)

I find it downright pathetic that our men who are putting their lives on the line TO PROTECT OUR FREEDOM are being bashed by a select few who are usually your garden varity cowards.