Dude, I'm not trying to come off like a dick. But most of this post is ridiculous...
Whether or not someone thinks something is right or wrong has no relation to the act committed. One of the problems it that we try to sanitize war by couching the rhetoric, censoring the pictures and ignoring the whole situation.
Have you watched TV or been online within the past 13 ears? The war has been far from sanitized and censored. It's a fact that the Vietnam and Iraq war has been more in anyone's face than ever before and uncensored since Vietnam and the Gulf war. With smaller technology, and instant means of communication (primarily via Internet), you can see things like never before. Dude, there's people in Afghanistan rocking go-pro's and putting up raids & Fire-fights on YouTube now.
Inarguably, no other war in history has been so uncensored and in your face than Afghanistan and Iraq with so many videos and pictures of what goes on. I remember this website called "b0g.org" back in the day (it got taken down by the FBI for animal abuse) had so many war videos and pictures from the Iraq/ Afghan war it was unreal.
Call it killing, call it murder, use any euphemism you want. At the end of the day, its a human being killing another human being. No matter how one lies to themselves, or how they are lied too (by the government, or anyone else), the psyche is effected by this internecine activity.
This is absolutely false. There's been studies that prove that combat PTSD doesn't effect everyone. Some people are more resilient to psychological trauma due to a combination of factors, such as genetics, supportive social structure, "cool down" (time spent after combat deployment relaxing), just to name a few.
Some people who have been in combat are able to pick up and return as if nothing has happened. There's countless stories/ examples of this.
As a matter of fact, women have the higher levels of PTSD than male combat PTSD survivors due to worrying about rape from their own side in combat zones, as well as combat. That's a fact. If anyone reads this and is interested, I'll link the book below as to where I'm getting my information.
I think if we as a society were more clear about exactly what it is soldiers do, and what exactly war is, we'd all be able to make more informed decisions about war (as far as participation as a soldier and also support at a citizen).
Dude. We're in the age of information. You can find out literally whatever information about any job you want to do in any branch of the service there is. This isn't the late 90's or early 2000's where you were winging it by asking some random guy at a recruiters office.
With social media, you can go on any FB page and leave a message to a group, or even do an ama on Reddit (which I've seen numerous of), and people will tell you exactly what war is. Of course, everyone's different in terms of how they experience war & relay their experience, but what you're saying is absolutely not true.
As far as "support as a citizen", that's a whole different ballgame. As much as Reddit in general is anti-war, and anti-military, you have to remember this. Right now there are people being hacked to death, women being stoned to death, kids being forced to kill, etc.. Some people join to actually help those people believe it or not.
The military doesn't constantly do combat missions in Iraq/ Afghanistan. They also do humanitarian missions such as building schools, roads, helping show the locals how to make potable water, etc..They did the same thing in Haiti after the earthquake.
But for some reason, all of you anti-military people seem to confidently forget this.
The truth hurts because it doesn't have sensibilities to offend.
I'm not trying to sound like a dick, but this makes absolutely no sense.
Intent is meaningless.
No, intent isn't meaningless. If so, why can you go to prison for intent to distribute. Or, intent to supply? Intent has purpose. There's many things you can intend to do that has meaning.
The mother who beats her infant child to death because she intends to drive the devil out means well. She is trying to save her daughter. In the realm of objective reality, a woman is beating a child to death - nothing is less relevant then her intent.
Dude, the mother could be more than likely be suffering from postpartum depression. That isn't her fault.The mother doing these things isn't in her right state of mind. Her intent is skewed by her mental state. Not trying to sound like a dick again, but this is a horrible analogy.
You aren't forced to do anything.
You're absolutely correct with this. No one is forced to join the military. Hypothetically speaking, if every able bodied male went in protest and decided not to join the military tomorrow, what would happen? Conscription. You honestly think it wouldn't?
I don't agree with our military action overseas, but I appreciate our military for what they do. Believe it or not, there's some scary assholes out there that would do horrific things to you if they could get their hands on you.
This is why there was such a big controversy over "stop loss" policies that prevented military personnel from ending their service a few years ago. Too many soldiers in critical military jobs were leaving in droves because they were being over worked for combat tours and deployments. There's quite a few infantry personnel that became conscientious objectors that were assigned to non-combat jobs as a result of this.
Its absolutely absurd to say that someone who voluntarily signed up for the army, voluntary picked up a gun and voluntarily flew to a foreign country to kill people is being "forced to defend themselves".
No, it's not absurd. Everyone that goes overseas isn't flying over to a foreign country to kill people. This is absolutely ridiculous. So the guys that do route security against bands of rebel warlords in foreign countries shouldn't defend themselves when the U.S. Is delivering food and medical aid on a humanitarian mission? They have every right to defend themselves if it means helping others.
There are no sides. Anyone who picks up a gun or any other weapon and kills another person is responsible for that, period. It doesn't matter who told them it was okay.
Yes, there are sides. Anyone who picks up a weapon and kills someone isn't responsible in the way you're trying to make it appear.
What you're basically saying is along the lines of, "anyone who chooses not to breathe is responsible for not breathing, period." Killing isn't this black & white.
People can kill for self preservation, and the preservation of others lives, self preservation is a natural instinct. You mean to tell me that if I broke into your home and I was going to kill you, and you were armed, that you wouldn't kill me first out of self preservation?
Your killing me would be a direct reaction to the threat of me killing you. It's not your "fault" that you're killing me. You're just trying to survive. Which is a valid reason to kill.
Did you know that in WW2, Americans and Nazi's would sometimes end up in the same trenches and not kill each other? They call a truce and wait until,the conflict was done and part ways? I would be glad to source this book as well if anyone is interested.
It doesn't matter whether or not they were paid. It doesn't matter what their intent was.
This doesn't make any sense, either. What does pay have to do with anything? And intent actually matters a lot. It has been proven that people who think they went into a conflict with good intent often cope easier when they get back. For instance, WW2 veterans. They were fighting "The Axis of Evil". They were an enemy bent on basically taking over the globe.
According to you, in order American WW2 soldiers to not be "responsible for killing" they should have sat idly by and let politicians try to reason with Germany and Japan? Their intent was to prevent the Germans and Japanese from attacking us further. Their intent and killing were warranted in order to save American lives.
The whole point of the post is that the psyche of mentally healthy people is damaged by the killing of other people.
No, it isn't all the time. Everyone handles stress differently. And I've stated this above. So this completely voids your next statement:
The psyche is damaged by participation in mass campaigns of violence, no matter what the rationale or intent.
After reading everything you wrote, you obviously have a strong anti-war agenda. I do as well. But don't sit here and make up bullshit to validate your beliefs with half-ass facts, lack of perspective, and barely incoherent "I'm so smart" one liners that really make no sense.
The guy you responded to was right in some ways, and you are wrong in some ways. That's the same way war is. Everyone's opinion is subjective in terms of conflict and reasoning into entering war. But try to remain objective in facts and piecing together information. That's what brings together a meaningful convict resolution to begin with besides stupid arguing and conflict.
Again, I apologize for being a dick. These sorts of posts irritate me because they're so half thought out, and people actually believe this shit without taking everything into perspective other than to push biased anti-war views.