Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

It's taken me a very long time to come to this conclusion but I don't really see why I should respect and admire military personnel anymore. I grew up as one of those people that thought one should always respect authority, police, and the military, but 20 years of the War on Terror's bad strategy and policy have changed my mind.

Now I'm not an absolute pacifist and I do think the US should have some kind of armed forces, but it shouldn't waste so much taxpayer money on experimental technology and "toys" made by no-bid contractors. Also, US military strategy is very careless and callous about "collateral" damage. How many innocent people were slaughtered in bombings and drone attacks?

Also, why do I owe military personnel a debt of gratitude? I used to think all veterans and service members deserved admiration for the difficult, dangerous work they do, but aren't they the willing enforcers of bad policy? Isn't a drone pilot or bomber basically a careless person carrying out bad orders? Why should I respect that?

The way I see it, regardless of military operations, it's the people who willingly serve that keep the rest of us from being drafted, so there's honor in that if nothing else. The machine will find its human meat one way or another.

I respect the ones willing to die in a pointless war to get a chance to go to college I guess

>but aren't they the willing enforcers of bad policy? Isn't a drone pilot or bomber basically a careless person carrying out bad orders? Why should I respect that?

That's where you lost me, bud.
This is the part where you tell every truck driver, cook, and pencil pusher that they're murderers and conspirators when all they're there to do is earn a paycheck. You brought up only bombers and drone operators, which tells me that combat jobs are the only jobs in the military you're aware of, and even if we're talking about the people in combat jobs, you talk as if you know their motives. "willing enforcers of bad policy," as if they're all cackling to themselves and saying "Yes, President Biden!" before hitting the "launch hellfire" button with twirly moustaches and monocles on their eyes. Calling them careless implies that you personally know that each and every one is implicit with the past four administrations' agendas, which is really unfair. You can't just assume you know the personal motives behind each and every soldier and sailor.

The issue is very multi-faceted. Yeah, there's jackasses with punisher skulls on their trucks who relish in these things, but thinking that everyone in uniform is one of those guys is lazy thinking. The only purpose that thinking serves is self-gratification, and it's unfair to the vast majority of people in the armed services. (Any armed services. yes, I'm extending this to militaries in just about every country, not just the US). The honest truth is, the vast majority of people in the military are just there for the check, or the GI bill. They're very ambivalent about the political ramifications of their occupation. They're not whooping and hollering as Afghan children lay dying in the street, but they're certainly a little numb, especially after 20 years of this whole failed national security project. It's not the protesting in the streets and quitting their positions you may be hoping for, but it certainly isn't jingoistic carelessness either. Those who are careless (and they certainly exist) are careless because of desensitization, not ingrained sadism, and while this does not rid them of responsibility or a need to self evaluate, you may want to ask yourself how your outlook on life would turn out after seeing disembodied heads and bloating corpses burning in the streets every other week. Once again, this doesn't mean poking glowsticks in neck holes is okay. I'm just saying stuff like that stems from a mind that, after prolonged exposure to combat and death, isn't going to be all okay. A very extreme form of jadedness is the best way to put it.

The "following orders" bit essentially boils down to this: We can blame soldiers for the orders of generals and cabinet members all we want, but does this change anything? Is this fair to the people we are blaming? Spitting on a guy in fatigues and telling him he's responsible for the Syria bombings isn't going to stop those bombing as fast or effectively as voting out the presidents who order them. You can tell them they should all quit and rebel, but how feasible do you think that is? Do you think that all 1.4 million government employees will just cut off their source of income off rip? Is there a plan to give them employment once they quit so they and their families don't starve? Who will carry it out? Who will finance it? Because I can absolutely assure you it won't be the government.

As for military expenditures, I agree with you on one thing: the Pentagon wastes WAY too much money. The F-35, the failed replacements for the Bradley and M4 carbine, all of it a waste of taxpayer dollars. What you don't seem to understand however, is the reason why this is happening, and I don't want you becoming one of those people who say "literally a CENT spent by the military is a waste!" The military needs money. For bullets. For uniforms. For MRE's. This is not a bad thing. What is a bad thing is the fact that those planning military expenditures have no damn clue what they want. I mentioned the F-35 and its astronomical development cost – 1.7 trillion dollars.. There's no way any one fighter platform should cost this much, not when other successful jets, like the F-16, had a development commission that only cost 37 million in 1979 – 143 million in today's dollars. Still a hefty check, but nowhere NEAR the amount the F-35's development has cost. So why has it cost this much? Incompetence. Bumbling. The Marines needed a new VTOL (Vertical Take-Off and Landing) jet to replace the aging harrier jets, so what do they do? Commission a new one? no. They bungle the already existing F-35 program by asking them to slap VTOL on it, nevermind how much that alters the core design of the jet. On top of that, it's just not a very good jet. Multiple computer defects and parts shortages have made it even more costly. The result is a bloated project that has spent well over a decade in financial and developmental limbo. What I want you to get out of this is knowing who to blame: saying "the whole military" is unfair. Saying "The DoD" might be a bit more accurate. In short, you point at the right problem. I just want to make sure you're pointing at the right people.

Last, but not least, the personal debt thing. Just about every service member who's not a flashy spec ops blowhard will ask the same question you asked. "Why the thanks?" I mentioned the pencil pushers and truck drivers and mess cooks earlier. I can tell you right now, they are not comfortable hearing "thank you for your service" when the riskiest thing they've done is drop a ladle or lose someone's 1080 form. Like I said, most people never see combat. They just work jobs, and getting overdramatic praise for it is not comfortable for them, so yeah, you shouldn't do that. Just not for the reasons you have been thinking. My grandpa served in Vietnam, but he never asks for a veteran discount, and he wasn't a pencil pusher. He saw combat. He just doesn't feel like everyone should be bowing at his feet for it. "I just had a job and I did it. I don't need people throwing me ticker-tape parades."

I guess, in summary, what I want you to get most out of this is, be careful who you place blame on for the bad things in the world. Be careful about whose shoulders you're placing these things on. Be wholistic. Recognize those bad things, but don't be so impatient for catharsis that you point the finger at the first guy you see. Hell, that principle applies to just about any situation where groups and wrongs are involved, not just the military. Too many people are racist because they see bad things transpiring and it just so happens that [insert race here] is involved.

People are people, in the end.

> I meant to harp on the people behind the consoles specifically. Why shouldn't the man who pushes the button take personal responsibility for his actions?
He's not giving the orders, and the "following orders" dilemma, I have already addressed There's no easy way out of it. Besides, Like I said, you don't know the though process of every drone operator. You don't know how many are truly callous and how many have nightmares about the white splatters on their screens. Hold accountable the ones who told him to fire.

>but why does the U.S. (and other countries) pursue policies that put people in these situations to begin with?
War does that period. War is hell.
As for the failed natsec project, ask Bush. He's the one who thought we could have a second foothold in the middle east (i.e. a second Israel) while completely ignoring his advisors on the cultural aspects that would render that impossible. Any way you slice it, the soldiers didn't pursue that policy. They sure as hell aren't now.

> There doesn't need to be no-bid contracts and pet projects for experimental technology that may or may not ever be used.
…Yes? I know? I addressed that in the second half of that paragraph.

> I don't see why people who want to see change, or less intervention, or less military budget are seen as "disrespectful" or "traitors"
That depends on how they go about it.
Say that Afghanistan or Vietnam were wastes of time and lives, and just about every veteran of both wars will agree with you wholeheartedly.
Throw water balloons full of piss at them while calling them "baby killers" however, or showing up to their buddies' funeral with "God Hates Fags" and "The Taliban are the true heroes!" signs will probably net you some stank eyes.

Like I said. Look at things holistically. You don't need to project your anger at the Pentagon's incompetence at some 20-something whose name isn't signed on a single one of the executive actions or orders that sent him to war. Be willing to look at people individually – and their deeds and misdeed individually, and don't fear the extra mental power it takes to do so. It's so much easier to just lay out blanket statements and accusations. People will do anything to satisfy their feelings, especially indignation and anger. Don't be part of that tragic majority who have a habit of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Beware your catharsis.

See a veteran? No, you don't have to kiss the ground he walks on (chances are he'd prefer you don't do that anyway), but you don't have to throw your drink on him either. Just know that whatever costly war he fought in, he's not the one who set off the multi-trillion dollar series of events behind it.

">That depends on how they go about it.
Say that Afghanistan or Vietnam were wastes of time and lives, and just about every veteran of both wars will agree with you wholeheartedly.
Throw water balloons full of piss at them while calling them "baby killers" however, or showing up to their buddies' funeral with "God Hates Fags" and "The Taliban are the true heroes!" signs will probably net you some stank eyes."

I'm not some halfwit who would protest at a military funeral or harass a veteran. I just want to see some social change to where we no longer have prolonged wastes of time and lives.

">Like I said. Look at things holistically. You don't need to project your anger at the Pentagon's incompetence at some 20-something whose name isn't signed on a single one of the executive actions or orders that sent him to war. Be willing to look at people individually – and their deeds and misdeed individually, and don't fear the extra mental power it takes to do so. It's so much easier to just lay out blanket statements and accusations. People will do anything to satisfy their feelings, especially indignation and anger. Don't be part of that tragic majority who have a habit of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Beware your catharsis."

I would never personally harass or berate a veteran, but I do think those whose intentionally take out soft, defenseless targets should have some form of accountability. That's what I'm ultimately asking? Why doesn't the Pentagon have any accountability? Why do anti-war movements fizzle out instead of leading to lasting change?

A lot of money goes into the military and the actual results are questionable counting for example how the Taliban was replaced with the Taliban.

But none of that is necessarily the fault of the military personel themselves so it's a complicated issue

I think if there's hate to direct, it's better directed to the head honchos in charge of the military and the politicians rather than the soldiers themselves. Don't blame John Doe from Nowhere, Kentucky for wanting to clear his student debts, when you should be blaming who got him into the war in the first place.

Here's a more pragmatic way to look at it: you're not obligated to owe respect to the military, but can acknowledged they put their lives on the line as part of their job.