February 26, 2008
-
Supporting the Troops
The other day I linked one of our troops preparing young men to go out and fight the war. I asked people to go over and give him encouragement. I received a few messages that I want to paraphrase.
The comments went along the lines of “I can’t support the troops or I don’t feel comfortable supporting the troops. They volunteered to be in the military and therefore they have decided to fight in an unjust war.”
I thought about this for a bit. The war in Iraq began in March of 2003. That means a great deal of our military has been in a position to reenlist during this time frame (Enlistments are usually either 4 years or 6 years long).
If the war is unjust and troops have volunteered for an unjust war, are those who continue in the military unjust?
Comments (202)
Yes.
I never really cared for the troops. Fuck ‘em, really.
Whether people think the war is just or unjust is an opinion. And unless your way up the chain of command, it’s pretty much an uninformed opinion whichever way you think. It’s not for any of us to judge the righteousness of individuals in the military.
No.
They need money- 15 grand reenlistment bonus. That’s why my ex-husband reenlisted- but he cannot wait to get out! And he doesn’t want to go back to Iraq for a 3rd time.
The people who won’t support their country are unjust. That first commenter, especially.
if i accept your premise that the two points are unjust then yes that would result in an injustice for those who continue.
however those are faulty premisese in my opinion and the failure to support troops is a greater injustice. whether or not the war is just or not in the individual’s mind.
I only support the killing of other people for amusement, not for oil-related purposes or political distraction, so I think we should bring back coliseums and say “fuck war”.
no. i think perhaps there were serious errors on the part of the executive powers but our troops are doing their job to restore order to a country falling apart and despite the hateful bias of the media (owned by liberals) our troops are doing a good job. here’s a hint- stop looking to mainstream media for your info- they’re not reporting the news, they’re reporting their interpretation of the news. WND is a great news source that intentionally looks for underreported or misrepresented issues in the news in order to give readers the other side of the story. there are others just like it, you’ll just have to search for them, AM radio is another good source. sorry for the tangent there…
war, no matter whether it is just or unjust, is a terrible thing but i believe at times it is necessary. i doubt Hitler would’ve cooperated with any other method from the international community…
No!
People don’t enlist in the military to fight a war. They enlist because they believe in freedom, happiness, liberty and many other things and want their fellow countrymen to have these rights.
Yeah. I can’t in good conscience be on board with killing people; to me there is no “justification” for war. Doesn’t happen.
besides how can anyone in a capitalistic society find injustice in the pursuit of capital? military pays like any other job which means the soldiers obtain capital. therefore they are fully acting in the social structure as useful citizens.
AND it is not about money for most troops. Military wife speaking here. It most CERTAINLY is not about money because the money is DEFINITELY not enough!
They are not the ones who decided to go to war as a nation. That blame goes toward our government leaders. I have many problems with this war, but if it weren’t for those men, Bush would have already drafted my butt overseas. Frankly, I thank God every day for men like them who are willing to fight and risk their life for my freedom. There are few people out that that I give more respect than our soldiers. To those of you who say “fuck the troops,” you should be ashamed!
no, because they’re fighting for their country
Tough question. If you really think that the war is unjust, then it makes sense to believe that those who willingly fight the war are in the wrong. But that argument, I think, only works if the soldiers themselves believe the war is unjust and are fighting anyway. But what if they think they are doing the right thing and merely lack the knowledge that would otherwise change their mind and actions? Do we condemn a soldier for merely following his orders? How should we treat a soldier that disobeys an order because of conscience? I don’t know.
NO!!!!!!!!!!….its a good thing we have those who continue in the military unjust?…and those that sign up to go and fight for our country and freedoms…..those that feel we are fighting over in Iraq as unjust…..you need to get the hell out of the USA….most of you that feel this way are really the low lifes of society that have no clue …………I guess you would rather the battle be fought here in the USA where all of the idiots can come over and bomb your house, kill your families and friends…..those that are over there are protecting you!!!!!!………I guess someof you feel we should just do away with all of the militaries…….hell while we are at it lets get rid of all of the police departments………
NO! — Besides the last I checked the military does not go off and fight on its own they receive their orders from a CIVILIAN commander in chief – if you believe the war is unjust your issue is with the CinC not the military. As far enlisting to fight in the war, you enlist to protect your country and the ideals that it espouses such as freedom of the press that allows everyone to publish their thoughts on any subject
They do have the choice to enlist. As you said, some (and maybe even most) made that choice after the fact. Once they do join, they follow orders. Deciding which orders to follow or which war is “just” is not an option. All that being said, i support their “right” to die as much as i do anyone else’s. The difference between right and wrong (just and unjust) is where you stand~
@NightCometh -
“I confidently trust that the American people will prove themselves …
too wise not to detect the false pride or the dangerous ambitions or
the selfish schemes which so often hide themselves under that deceptive
cry of mock patriotism: ‘Our country, right or wrong!’ They will not
fail to recognize that our dignity, our free institutions and the peace
and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure
only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: ‘Our country—when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.’”
- Carl Schurz, Oct. 17, 1899
Well, isn’t this a tricky question. No, I wouldn’t say they’re unjust. Misguided, perhaps. I’m not going to pretend that I know how troops feel, and saying that they all feel one way or another about this war (even just those who reenlist) would be to deny their individuality.
But I can say that at this point, anyone who still believes that this is a just war, or that it has been or will be prosecuted effectively by this administration, are willfully ignoring reality.
If the war is unjust and troops have volunteered for an unjust war, are those who continue in the military unjust?
———————-
Absolutely not. I’m a bit too tired to flesh out my ideas on this issues. (You can be sure, I didn’t settle on my position for the same cheap feely-good, support-our-country reason that many others use.)
But I’ll ofer this: If the reinlistment by troops in this “unjust” war is immoral, then just as immoral is our continuation of paying taxes or of remaining as American citizens. Even more so than physical manpower, our monetary contribution to our country’s military complex keeps it going. Guns, bombs, and bullets aren’t conjure out of thin air by our department of defense.
@JimiRy -
I highly doubt that these eloquent words can be wasted on a ‘cry’ of “f*ck ‘em” to the honest men and women giving their lives in the line of duty.
Unjust is a tricky word to use here. Not sure if it’s even applicable to describe an re-enlisting soldier.
There are too many other reasonable reasons why a soldier would re-enlist to make that kind of blanket statement.
Anyone who condemns all (most) soldiers as unjust for reenlisting is being way too judgmental and unjust themselves.
Nope. These men and women are doing what they think is best to support and protect not only this country but the freedoms and rights due all mankind. Regardless of whether you think there is any justification for war or not (in any form, fashion, time, and place), the reality is that it is here and will always be here. People who choose to support or not support our troops based on whether they believe the war to be just or unjust are fickle and inconsistent. That’s like saying you will only support your hometown football team when they play defense and not when they play offense. And let’s take this argument to its logical conclusion. If you don’t support them when they are fighting an “unjust” war, you are, by implication, supporting the other side……. that in and of itself is harrowing enough.
@NightCometh - The people who won’t support their country are unjust.
What the hell does this even mean? Are you saying that we’re not allowed to disagree with the government’s direction without an automatic “immoral” brand or as you saying that our actions in Iraq is proper and just?
EDIT: MOST of these men and women WHO RE-ENLIST are doing….
@huginn -
I mean it is UNJUST for people to expect protection and support from troops, when they give them none in return. It has nothing to do with being immoral. That is a separate issue.
Wow… I had never thought of it either way. I suport the troops because without them we would lack freedom. They deserve our support. they go where they are told, the dicissions aren’t up to them as individuals. So I suppose you could say they give up a large amount of their personal freedom to insure that we maintain ours.
this is one of the most cowardly statements that i have heard in a long time
@RaVnR - Yeah. I can’t in good conscience be on board with killing people; to me there is no “justification” for war. Doesn’t happen.
Well, were always decent reasons for going into Iraq. Our commander-in-chief just happened to use all the wrong ones.
But your position is interesting. Are you saying that in general, philosophically, there can never be a sufficient moral or overall justification for a country going to war? (Let’s rule out the obvious okay-scenario of a country protecting its own borders).
@NightCometh - I mean it is UNJUST for people to expect protection and support from troops, when they give them none in return. It has nothing to do with being immoral. That is a separate issue.
To me, issues of justice or injustice (as “unjust” implies) necessarily calls for moral and ethical considerations. And thanks for the clarification
Some people have no other alternative. Who are we, people outside of their lives, to judge their decisions?
Yes, the war may be unjust, or however you wish to describe it. But the troops didn’t choose this war. Some people join the military just so that afterward they can have some job or some job skill that they can use to support themselves, or money to get themselves through college. And for some people it’s their career.
You may not support the war, but you should support your fellow Americans… the support is not so much for or against the war but for the morale and safety of someone’s loved one who happens to be in the military.
I’m not gonna support a troop just because you suggested it.
I work with retards. Do you think I could make money if I started up a porn site, sexytards.net, and tried to profit from it?
“C’mon, I’m not that different.”
Fuck you, and yes.
I’ll be dead before that happens.
God bless our troops and our president.
I don’t think the war is unjust. The dirty truth of that the pacifists don’t like to acknowledge (because is invalidates their philosophy), is that they can be pacifists is because people are in the military (and police force)… terrorists can’t be emboldened, that’s why we’re fighting… think about that.
@huginn -
a) when you use ‘reply’ you really don’t have to quote me.
b) I’m saying that philosophically there is no reason for killing anyone ever.
This has nothing to do with the troops but can you please help out Perfection Barbie with her current entry:
http://www.xanga.com/PerfectionBarbie/644335789/item.html
Go to the link of this entry where she explains it all. She’s basically asking you to join Zootoo.com who are having a promotion to give an animal shelter a $1million dollar makeover. Her shelter in Rockingham County really needs renovations and assistance to help the animals. They only have a small amount of cages, and they can’t hold the animals for very long, after 2 weeks they need to be put down. That prize money would really help the animals and the shelter to offer better assistance. Go to her page and she explains what to do. I joined, and already the county moved up to #72 from #73 in ranking.
-Heidi
@kbevl1 - I completely agree with you and Nightcometh…you guys took the words out of my mouth.
So my answer is no. It is because of our troops that you people- who do not support them- have the right to speak your mind.
Of course not. I’m proud of all the troops- they are doing their duty and following orders that hopefully will help us all.
I like to believe they don’t enlist for war-they enlist for peace
No, most of them are just financial hostages who don’t know any better.
No.
I don’t understand those who have something against the those who protect and fight for us. We can’t do anything but defend ourselves when war is declared.
No, they are not.
If martial law was put into action and the troops had their rifles pointed at you- would you still support them?
totally hypothetical scenario- I know.. just wondering how far this “support the troops” goes.
And nobody bash me- I’m sensitive to the troops- I know many, a military wife for 8 years and dealt with 3 deployments- delivered 2 babies while husband was overseas. He’s my ex now- but that’s irrelevant.
But I do think there’s a problem in this country where we all feel we MUST support the troops no matter what! And if you dissent then you’re unpatriotic. I think that’s sad. We know Bush lied- we were told of WMD’s and connections of Saddam to al qaeda- it turned out to not be true. Come on.. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. If you can’t see that this war is about other interests- then you’re blind and uneducated.
How can we support the troops when our govt. clearly doesnt?
I don’t put much blame on soldiers- they have to carry out their orders. But many are misled.
Ok, sorry, rambles.
Yes. 100%.
I would guest that many people enlist because they want a career, not because they want to fight a war. I would not consider that unjust.
kbevl1–People don’t enlist in the military to fight a war. They enlist because
they believe in freedom, happiness, liberty and many other things and
want their fellow countrymen to have these rights.
As a soldier, I say you have it right.
@huginn - I am not a pacifist, but I really do not believe most wars are justified at all.
The last justified war we participated in, in my opinion was World War 2. Preventing a genocide from a dictator that conquered other nations and was slaughtering people.
I think most civilians are misled–how can they know what is really happening in Iraq? Do most civilians actually know that we did find WMDs?
I also believe the reason people are pressured to support troops, is because the U.S. as a whole has matured since Viet Nam, and we do not wish to repeat the humiliation they went through, dead and alive alike…and most of them were drafted or volunteered because of the draft.
No- Terrorism is what is ”unjust”. Furthermore, It is their JOB. They chose “soldier” as their [current] occupation.
No, they are patriotic and loyal citizens serving in a necessary role. The military is merely a tool of state wielded by higher political powers. It is civilian leaders at the top who wield it and make the decision to engage in just or unjust wars and it is they who should be held accountable.
@NightCometh -
Well, he’s just trying to offend people, you know. I was using that quote more in line with those of us who are shocked and horrified that they’re being used in such a way. I’m certainly not going to spit on any soldiers I may see coming home just because I disagree with George W. “The Constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper” Bush.
Aaaah…have some people forgotten the injustice of murdering 3,000 people on September 11th, 2001? It’s too bad some morons don’t feel “comfortable” supporting the troops. I guess none of his/her family or friends died in the Twin Towers. Wow! weren’t they prividledged! Well, people might feel uncomfortable…including the troops who are presently defending your right to criticize them and to keep your American freedom safe..and they are willingly spilling their own blood for this disloyalty. Shame on you.
@desinflar - too bad you weren’t in the WTC…
…these people concern me…
War is always unjust , its bloody and greedy and no good ever comes from death. Where do wars come from? Ideas from radical individuals or governments but there is nothing more pure than the soldier
people who have never put their life on the line for protecting something have no right to slander the giving The government may of waged the war poorly but at least thoses men and women out there are fighting any dying for something they believe in .
No, people stay in the military for their own reasons be it a free education, patriotism, to travel, and so forth. Very generalized question Dan, boooo!
My son’s father decided to reenlist because we both would be getting out at the same time and it would have been really bad with two parents with no jobs!
wowo , that last one was a thought, but yea i wuld say you got me, but i would say unjust is a bit more then a feeling being presented , and i think it cantreally be done, i really dont know if i make sense. please tell me, but i know you can understand the main.
I think every person is entitled to his or her beliefs, and if he or she decided to fight for those beliefs by joining the military, he or she has my blessing.
On the other hand, the military is one of the major paths that can lead to college for those who couldn’t go to college directly from high school. Do you really think that all of the people who are in the military right as Iraq ground troops are fighting for the cause?
Another factor to consider, and you can talk to any of the former and current soldiers, that they will reach a certain point in their tour duty where they were fighting for one another’s survival and be completely desensitized of the cause. Should that also consider a factor?
Regardless of whether people think the war is unjust or just, we must still focus on the important aspect of tying up our loose ends in Iraq and finishing this war while leaving Iraqis on their feat. If the soldiers believe they are fighting this war to help stabilize Iraq, then I would question those who call that an unethical reason. Granted, we invaded Iraq, but I don’t think the soldiers enlisted because they like to invade other people’s countries. If the soldiers sincerely believed they were fighting for a just cause, and if they sincerely believed (like many did at the time) that the attack on Iraq was JUSTIFIED, then they are not at fault. Now that we’re in war in Iraq, our top priority is to stabilize the region enough for the nation to maintain a semblance of order, if not flourish just yet. I don’t think the soldiers chose to fight in Iraq because of expansionism, let alone oil.
@GrapiesWordsofWisdom -
You would do yourself and everyone else a service by ceasing to spout false rhetoric about 9/11′s connection to Iraq. How, exactly, is the invasion of Iraq keeping us safe?
Let’s say you trample all over your neighbor’s yard, just really mess the land up, right? And then they knock your mailbox over. How do you justify burning their neighbor’s house down?
Oil is a freaking non-issue. I honestly believe that it is just something to make people think we’re running out of fuel…then people will buy more before it gets “too high”. Does the gas pump ever stop before you fill the tank? No? Do gas stations post a limit of how many gallons one can purchase? No? Are the prices sky rocketing above the world gasoline price average? No? Then I guess we are not short on oil. Quit believing everything the media feeds you.
You know what I love about all this Dan? The fact that no matter what everyone’s opinion, our current troops (and those who have gone before them) are out there fighting so that we (and others) can continue to have the freedom to make comments like this and the ones before mine.
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!
PLUS, look at all the plastics we make. EVERYTHING is plastic, even vehicles. We have gone years without using plastics, and now that we’re short on oil, everything is made of plastic. Let’s add two and two together please.
No. and I am proud to say I am joining the Navy.
The troops are the ones on the front lines, seeing the dangers firsthand. They know the “ins” and “outs” of this war. And yet, we see many signing back up because they don’t see it as an “unjust war.” They see it as their duty to not only stand up for our country, but to fight for the freedoms that other people do not have yet. How can we sit back moaning and groaning about the war, when these men and women are putting their lives on the line? They are serving their country. They follow orders. They are not unjust people, they are people fighting for “The American Dream” for ALL people.
Yes
but your premise is BS
No. Don’t even get me started on this…
That’s a tough one.
i find it amusing that people actually believe there is such a thing as an “unjust” war. a war takes 2 sides, an agressor, and a defender. the question is never, “is this war just”. but rather, “which side is justified?” in this case, by saying that the US soldiers are the unjust ones, you are saying, by default, that suicide bombers, and terrorists who use women and children as walking bombs are the good guys.
as to world war 2 being the “last justified war” take a look at Korea, i can think of a few million people who would strongly dissagree with that. and frankly, it’s an extremely humbling experience when a man who was alive during that war says how greatful he is that the US came to their defense against N. Korea. but you wouldnt give a damn about that would you?
when no one is willing to fight all that’s left to do is die. the bad men arent going to lay down their arms just because the people who protect you, me, and every other citizen on the planet do, including but not limited to the US military.
@RaVnR - Most philosophers would disagree with you on that statement. War has 3 reasons. As much as I dug around in my Ethics notes from last semster I cannot find the 3 reasons accepted by most philosophers, but I will *try* it from memory, and I am admitting the reasons may be a bit off.
1. The attack has to be lead by a sovereign of the country. (that one I am positive)
2. The war has to have a reasonable chance of being won and must have a conclusion. Example: We should have gone to Iraq, done X, X, and X and left by X-date.
3. I can’t remember it damn it…
Philosophers all throughout history have been working on the reason for a justifiable war. If there is never a reason for a war ever, then why would people try and figure out justifiable reasons?
Furthermore, you can’t honestly feel that WWII was not a reason for countries to go to war? A mad man on the loose committing genocide is reason enough in my opinion for the rest of the world to stand up and say HELL NO.
@OfElection - Of course people don’t know it…the news reports it. However, if you ask a solider who served there, I imagine like yourself, you WILL hear a different answer to that very same question.
Yes. But most of them don’t give a fuck about the war- they just want the money that the government takes from MY pocket to give to them (and friends and family of GWB).
All I said in support to the guy was that I hope he could come home and see his family soon. That’s all I can really say to someone who would willingly train others to murder.
I support soldiers willing to fight to protect our country, or willing to risk their lives for people they’ve never met.
I don’t always agree with the President of this country, in fact I rarely ever do. However, we can’t blame the soldiers for the president’s mistakes.
That is “if” it is an unjust war……
What is it my friend said? (her brother is in the Marines, and the other the Air Force) It’s something along the line of…. “I don’t care if you support the war, but you need to support our troops.”
I am very curious to see what some of you anti-war/anti-kill people think in regards to people who are “living” on life support. I keep seeing it over and over that killing and murder is not justified, but can you draw that same black and white line into every single aspect of those kind of situations? If someone was killing you, could you sit there and die because you think it would be wrong to kill them back?
The words always and never are usually not good choices when it comes to Ethics and Philosophy.
no. that sucks. it’s super upsetting to see people say screw ‘em to young people out there who have signed will and testaments before going out to iraq. it’s like a cop saying screw you and walked by you while you were getting mugged.
yeah it’s an exaggeration, but where’s the support man? how can you say screw you to a person who is willing to sacrifice his/her life for others?
and what about those who really dont have much of a choice. ya know, no job, no future, no college, no money.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - Is that the same thing you would say to a police officer who trained other officers two to use a gun and protect themselves?
Why is it people act like the military are the only people in the world who are trained to professionally kill someone IF THEIR JOB REQUIRES IT?
no.
if people don’t stand behind our troops, then they should stand in front of them.
also they volunteer to be in the military because other sorry ass losers, like the people who live in this country but don’t support the people protecting it, won’t join.
to the people who don’t support them, sorry our troops are keeping people from kiling you let’s hope they don’t try as hard next time
And lastly, to answer the original question:
Absolutely not.
Keep in mind….even after people choose to leave the military, they can STILL be called back to duty for a certain number of years. My future sistr in law was out for less than a month, and was forced to come back and go back to Iraq. She didn’t volunteer for that…
@Momentkeeper - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_War
I think that’s what you’re looking for. But it’s a load of shit.
As for the two you gave- who decides who in a country is eligible to make that decision? Can GWB single-handedly tell us we’re going to war, even without the aid of congress? Why does “country” status change the need of a people to “defend” themselves?
Also, if the war must have a reasonable chance of being won, then it is either only just on one side (in which case the losing side is automatically unjust), or both sides will have an equally good chance – and the war will continue for years before concluding.
“If there is never a reason for a war ever, then
why would people try and figure out justifiable reasons?”
This is very dangerous logic! Why do people ever try to justify murder, rape, theft, or torture? Surely if people try to justify those things, they must be ethical.
@Momentkeeper - The news, as should be well known, reports some of the story…and while I haven’t deployed yet, every soldier I talk to that goes over there has a very different story from the media. No, they aren’t all the same, but no one I’ve talked to agrees with the media. As for the Anti-war/anti-kill, that only comes from the comfort of someone living in freedom. Let them enjoy their position, especially since they are a minority. Do some history on the Mennonites or Hutterites and you’ll find that they have had to run in fear, leaving their beloved homes. The only time they have not had to do that is in the presence of a larger entity that is willing to protect them, using violence. Like the USA.
I’m glad there are men “willing to train others to murder”, because if our country wasn’t protected by “murderers”, even disregarding the situation in the middle-east for a moment, we would be murdered.
But, all we can say is “I hope you can go home to your family soon”, because, we certainly can’t support sanctioned murder!
@Momentkeeper - Self-defense is different than attack. A policeman has the right of any citizen to defend himself if necessary. However, he does not have the right to shoot anyone unless they are directly threatening someone’s life or health.
I don’t know about just or unjust… But either way, those comments are extremely selfish. I’m not going to be all “Holier than thou” about this, however, I didn’t leave the troop a comment, either. I definitely don’t have anything against it, though, and I think now I just might because answering this question has really made me think. They’re putting their lives on the line for this country whether it’s just or not, and even if it doesn’t help this country at all, they’ve still sacrificed way too much to be treated that way.
It’s the intent. Whether it’s right, wrong, just, or unjust, they’re doing something that THEY feel is necessary, and for them to be treated as if they’re not doing enough for us, when a majority of us sit around on our fat butts and complain and have no idea what it even means to put EVERYTHING on the line for our country, it’s just sad…
God Bless,
Chris
@OfElection - Self-defense is different than offensive attack!
If I go to your home and shoot you, I am a murderer. If you come to my home and try to shoot me, but I shoot you first, then I was acting in self-defense.
Quote: This is very dangerous logic! Why do people ever try to
justify murder, rape, theft, or torture? Surely if people try to
justify those things, they must be ethical.
I agree with that comment.
@ionekoa - if the only people we killed were terrorists and suicide bombers, that’d be great.
Unfortunately, we’re currently waging war on citizens. We are bombing women and children, and we are the aggressors. We are ENCOURAGING martyrs to sign up to kill us- no wonder they see us as the bad guy if we’re destroying their country for no reason.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - Yes, I also agree with your next comment…but that LTC trains these men to kill, not because we need to go murder Iraqis, but because they need to know in case someone wants to kill us. However, Uncle Sam then says, “Hey, they can kill! Send them here….”
That was my point, that officer wasn’t training these men to murder Iraqis, in fact, as far as I understand our tactics, we won’t ever just go to someone over there to kill them. We only kill if we are attacked, or are about to be, or if there is someone we know is coordinating attacks and has caused death to U.S. troops and/or allies.
Generally, I think we agree in principle, but we might draw the line at a different point.
@RaVnR - a) when you use ‘reply’ you really don’t have to quote me.
Yes I do. For other readers, it provides context for my rebuttals; and quite seperately, it provides structure for my responses. As you may have noticed, I favor a line-by-line style of argumentation.
b) I’m saying that philosophically there is no reason for killing anyone ever.
You can’t be this idealistic. A lot of times, the scenario we’re provided with scenarios where both action and inaction leads to killings and death. A police officer may shoot to kill to prevent a mass murder. A Clinton may authorize Serbian bombing to forestall genocide.
@kbevl1 - how many soldiers do you know? I know quite a few, and they all enlisted for money.
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!!!
Desinflar, I’m ashamed that you live in the same land as I do. If you don’t care about the troops, the same uniform that formed this great land, then leave.
The “conflict” is one thing, those in it are another story. Just remember that those who are out there FIGHTING are the same people that PROTECT us.
Some people in the service are there for a job and get called over, some people were in before and were ordered over there, and alas, some are there because they choose to be. Different people and different situations, one country.
Those troops are our friends, family, countrymen… Love your troops.
Quote: Unfortunately, we’re currently waging war on citizens.
That is because “citizens” (did you mean civilians?) are attacking us. In case you didn’t know, Mr. leader-Hajji of such and such a cell is also the vegetable vendor on Mosque Street. Yeah, we’re fighting civilians because that is all they’ve got…no organized military, and no enemy combatants that abide by the Laws of War.
@huginn - my “monetary contributions” aren’t voluntary. If I don’t pay my taxes, they come to my house and kidnap me. If I refuse to be kidnapped, they shoot me.
@RaVnR - what if someone is shooting at you? It certainly must be morally permissible to shoot him in self-defense!
Quote:how many soldiers do you know? I know quite a few, and they all enlisted for money.
What the crap? I didn’t enlist for money? I could have continued college having it completely covered. I joined for several personal reasons that pretty much better me as a person.
Looking at normal jobs though, who doesn’t do them for just money? Well, lots of people do a job for money, and because they enjoy it, they believe in the organization, etc. etc.
Jacked up, that HTML didn’t come out right…the quote stops at the first “money”.
@OfElection - “Do most civilians actually know that we did find WMDs?” Source?
@OfElection - Ok, that’s fine. I’m not saying that every soldier enlisted for money, but all the ones I know did. I just disagree with your analysis of why soldiers join – I’d bet most of them don’t even know half of what the constitution says, let alone want to protect it.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - my “monetary contributions” aren’t voluntary. If I don’t pay my taxes, they come to my house and kidnap me. If I refuse to be kidnapped, they shoot me.
Then you’re saying that the war is unjust, but not unjust enough for you to bother with jail time. During the Spanish American-War, Henry David Thoreau famously refused a few dollars taxes on this very basis. On his idealism alone, he sepnt a few nights in jail.
@OfElection - citizens/civilians are used interchangeably to me. Civilians is the more appropriate “military” term, I suppose.
If you seriously think that the elderly, the women, the children of Iraq are going to come to the US and destroy us because we’re free and Christian, you are really mistaken. The Middle East hates us because of our occupation there, our installation and support to dictators (like Saddam himself), and our current desecration of their countries.
@huginn - I don’t care what they’re using the money for- it will be unjust for them to steal it in the first place. I get to pick whether I want my liberty or my property stolen. Right now, I’d rather have my liberty. I have classes to attend, and other business.
If someone holds a gun to your head and steals your purse, are you responsible for the drugs he buys with that money and sells to children? Of course not. How is this any different?
@la_faerie_joyeuse -
I didn’t say the middle-east was coming over here to kill us, or old women and children are. I’m not saying we have substantial justification to be over there. But the middle-east isn’t the only country that hates us.
I am a citizen of the U.S., but I am not a civilian…that is the difference. No Iraqi insurgent or terrorist is not a civilian…unless they have enlisted in the Iraqi Army…but they aren’t supposed to be our enemy.
As for a source:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
Quote: If someone holds a gun to your head and steals your purse, are you
responsible for the drugs he buys with that money and sells to
children? Of course not. How is this any different?
Are you comparing taxes to stealing, or did I miss something?
@OfElection - Yes, I am comparing taxes to stealing. What’s the difference?
It’s too easy to call the troops themselves unjust. I do believe that this war was unjust from the start, and I don’t believe in the “war on terror”, but I don’t condemn those who join the military. I don’t understand why someone would join the military knowing that they might kill someone- several someones- or die, but that’s another question.
On the other hand, “support our troops” is a catch phrase that really means “support this war”. I can’t encourage someone who’s going to Iraq. I can only pray for them.
The difference is you agree to taxes by being a citizen of the U.S. I suppose you could try to find someplace that doesn’t have taxes, but it is the general way a government is able to function. That is supposedly why we vote, so that the money we give Uncle Sam doesn’t go someplace we don’t want it. You don’t have to pay taxes…unless you want an American job, American products, etc.
Why do you feel taxation with representation is thievery?
@OfElection - If soldiers were truly acting in defense of this country – which they are not in Iraq – then yes, they should be lauded. There have only been three wars in our history which would qualify: revolutionary, 1812, and civil war (southern soldiers only!)
As for the source, last time I checked, mustard gas is NOT a WMD. Sarin is also too inefficient to produce “mass” destruction, mostly because it’s extremely hard to disperse. I wouldn’t necessarily trust a Republican congressman to tell the truth, either. I saw a PBS documentary on chemical/biological weapons and they discussed Iraq – both the lab stations that we set up, and their inability to really be used for effective warfare.
Okay, but I’m not going to dig up every source I know, my point is, you can find them if you look hard enough. I could just as well say I wouldn’t trust a PBS documentary…pick your source. Some of my sources are not media, however, but redeployed soldiers.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - really, the last i checked, we prosecuted any soldier who killed, or even injured an unarmed civilian. in fact, we’ve been rebuilding schools, hospitals and important infrastructures such as water systems and electrical systems. we’ve been training their police and their soldiers to fight against terrorists.
http://www.shaneclapper.com/
@OfElection - So, by the fact that my father owns property in a certain part of the world means that he owes dues to the local mafia (government)? I’d be quite fine living with no taxes and no suffrage – my votes don’t count anyway.
I don’t care whether my job or purchases are American or not. Why would that matter?
I am NOT represented. I have voted once, and my candidate lost. As one of my favorite quotes says, “Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.” If everyone else in the country decides that they want to enslave me, then they certainly have a majority, but it’s most definitely not just!
no, the troops are not unjust. im joining the marine corps this summer after i graduate. i totally disagree with the conflict in Iraq. but im joining the military because people like the men and women who fought in any war up to and including world war 2. if it wasnt for those veterans…we could all be speaking german or japanese right now. im joining the military to keep up the integrity, honor and tradition that has been created.
(and i can totally use the money for college)
Hmm, you have some interesting (not sarcastic), if not peculiar, views on government. However, I have a PT formation early tomorrow, I must get some sleep. Good night.
@OfElection - fair enough.
And goodnight.
@ionekoa - I’ll check out the link tomorrow- I have class in less than 8 hours and I need some sleep. But I send you a sincere thank you for the info- and I promise I will read it.
@krnangel631 - it’s not an exageration, its just wrong. while i agree with what i believe you are trying to say, it’s more like this.
an officer stops a man from robbing someone, but before running away the would be robber stabs the cop in the throat. the victim then spits on him, calls him a “pig” and leaves him there to die.
The short answer No. Wait a second here. My Brother who is a wonderful man re-enlisted recently He has been overseas twice now to sevrve this country so that people like you and I have the right to sit here and discuss if they should be there or not. If this war is unjust or not. It is unreasonalbe for me to think that there can’t even be a little support for the men and women who serve this country. Who leave their spouses and children to risk their lives so that people can say things like F*&^ Them? in Public! The Journalist aren’t figting wars to have the freedom of speech. Just let’s think about it this way. What would have happend if our troops just decided one day to say f*&^ it and pack thier bags and come home. How would people feel if America Said F*&^ it when those planes crashed into the world trade centers on September 11, 2001. We aren’t going to do anything about it. Were going to sit here on our butts and let those people come into our country and do whatever they want to us. Would you feel violated then. Would you be asking where all the F*&^$#@ Troops were to protect you and your precious freedomes. Just or not. They are protecting us! NOT JUST US BUT OUR CHILDREN AND OUR CHILDREN’S CHILDREN. Grow up give our troops some support. It is lonely and miserable to be there wondering when your going to get your rear end shot off and wondering when you get to hear the sound of your children lauging again or if you will ever get the sound of gun blast out of your head. Would it kill people to use the right that our military men and women fought for and drop them a line saying HI. I was thinking about the situation your in right now and I want to thank you for your support because if you didn’t do it I might have to be garding my front door right now so that terriost don’t break in and rape, beat or kill my family members. I might have to get my hands dirty. I might not get to go play on the computer and leave stinking comments like F*&^ them. They don’t for support from us we as family members… Sit here and wonder if we will get to see our loved ones again outside of a box we are willing to put ourselves out and ask perfect stranges to give encouragement because ”we” sometimes are just not enough. In response to the money Get a grip I’m not willing to get my Ass shot at for two nickles to rub togather. These men and women are doing our country a service. You say thanks to the fat broad in the drive thru window but can’t be bothered to thank our troops. Thats pathetic. THANKS ANTHONY FOR BEING THE MAN THAT YOU ARE. THANK ALL OF YOU LAIDES AND GENTELMEN IN THE SERVICE I AM GREATFUL EVERY DAY FOR THE SACRIFICES YOU MAKE ON MY BEHALF.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - I don’t care what they’re using the money for- it will be unjust for them to steal it in the first place.
It’s not stealing. By being a sane, non-retarded member of our soceity you’ve acknowledged the rules and spirit of its governance. Ever heard of the Social Contract?
I get to pick whether I want my liberty or my property stolen. Right now, I’d rather have my liberty. I have classes to attend, and other business.
Sure. Then you do agree with my argument and that consciencly paying taxes is morally equivilant for volunteers enlisting in an unjust war. You’ve really made no actual rebuttal to this point itself.
If someone holds a gun to your head and steals your purse, are you responsible for the drugs he buys with that money and sells to children?
Of course I’d give you the purse. You’d probably have more use for a purse than I would. Though, I really hope you’d have better use for the money.
Of course not. How is this any different?
In this case, you’re holding the gun. In my painted scenario, you’re freely giving the gun to the killer.
The amount of people insinuating that Iraq was responsible (or even just involved) in the 9/11 attacks is frightening. Those of you were currently think that retaliation for 9/11 was a legitimate reason to go to war with Iraq need to do some research. Not even too in-depth. Bush backed away from those comments awhile ago.
We invaded Afghanistan in response to 9/11. For those arguing “that to do nothing would be insulting to the victims of 9/11″ are 1) making yourselves look foolish and thus 2) making the side you are arguing for look foolish. So please stop.
@la_faerie_joyeuse -
“So, by the fact that my father owns property in a certain part of the
world means that he owes dues to the local mafia (government)? I’d be
quite fine living with no taxes and no suffrage – my votes don’t count
anyway.”
A position of that there should be absolutely no taxes (property/sales/income, etc), is essentially a position in favor of no government- anarchy.
The problem with this is you might have a hard time retaining your freedoms and liberty with no government to provide protection. Maybe an Anarchy can work, but history really doesn’t get us any viable examples. Usually anarchical states shift into dictatorships somewhat quickly.
@huginn -
If la faerie joyeuse is an anarchist (which I really don’t know, though a disagreeing with taxes would imply she is) she would view social contract theory as bullshit, since social contract theories assume that government provides more benefits than disadvantages.
Whether or not the war is unjust is an opinion. Soldiers shouldn’t be condemned for thier actions based on opinions about the war they’re fighting.
It does seem like a pretty straightforward syllogism:
“The war” is “unjust.”
Reenlisting soldiers chose to participate (“act”) in “the war.”
Reenlisting soldiers chose to “act” “unjustly.”
But if a person makes a choice to act a certain way, does that necessarily mean that the person is a certain way?
And, of course, the validity of the conclusion is determined by the validity of the premise… and we happen to live in a nation divided over the issue of the validity of that very premise.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - They also hate us because their minds are shaped by a media that is as biased as ours is.
@whataboutbahb - she [la faerie joyeuse] would view social contract theory as bullshit, since social contract theories assume that government provides more benefits than disadvantages.
Anarchists have open to themselves the emigration. By making the conscience decision to remain in their resident country and integarting themselves into general society, aren’t they tacitly agreeing with the ground rules of the country’s governance?
@huginn -
An anarchist arguement could simply be that no suitable anarchist state (hmmm kind of an oxymoron there, but let’s continue…) exists, thus there really aren’t provided an option in the first place. Also even the majority of social contract theories believed in the fact that the state could act unjustly, so revolution was allowed in those instances. So just because a person lives in a country does not mean he necessarily has to accept everything the state does, if the state is acting grossly unjust.
But yes, I would generally agree with you that a person living in a country has indirectly agreed to accept government as an authority that is for the greater good for the populace. Now if the form of government is deemed unjust, changes can and should be made. But the concept of the acceptance of government, in some form or the other, is present. Be careful in assuming everyone believers in the social contract theory, though. There are also pretty strong counter arguments against the concept of the state of nature and social contract theory as a whole. The first opponent to these ideas that I think of off the top of my head would be Jeremy Bentham (and I’m pretty sure John Stuart Mill wasn’t a big fan of these concepts as well).
“that is for the greater good for the populace” add- “and for the individual as well.” An important thing to clarify since believers in social contract theory believe the individual to be better off out of the state of nature and under government.
bush is a big fat liar…thats all
No. Whether or not you think the war or the troops are “unjust” shouldn’t mean that you should dislike them or disrespect them. They each have their own, personal reasons for enlisting. A lot of my friends that decided to join are doing it because they want to better themselves or because they want a decent shot at college. Not to go fight some war – I don’t know that very many people at all walk into the recruitment office with every wish and hope to go out onto the battlefied and shoot somebody and watch their friend get shot beside them.
Your opinion is not an excuse to be a douche bag to people just because of their occupation or what they believe, that’s really all there is to it.
I served so that shitbags like that could have their opinion without governmental intervention.
I don’t require their thanks.
Those shitbags spouting their filth is thanks enough for me.
God it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
I’m sorry, who are we at war with?
@ionekoa - Also, why are we taking care of iraq? Last time I checked the united states still had it’s own poverty problems. Interesting how the government spends a shit load of money on another nation, than on taking care of its own poor.
Yes, we should end this war before it becomes the longest war ever.
@Momentkeeper -
I don’t care what most philosophers say; I’m a Kantian. Thx.
@huginn -
Uh. NO. I don’t think one human, without power to give life is entitled to take it away. Ever.
@la_faerie_joyeuse -
The law says so, and I have been in a self-defense situation *unarmed* but I still think, perhaps I could shoot the person but not to kill. See above.
Regardless of whether or not you don’t agree with the war; these men and women that go over there are brave to put themselves in the face of danger and deserve support. Some may have signed up after the war began with the hopes of going someplace else that was not Baghdad but ended up there anyway.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - ”unless they are directly threatening someone’s life or health.”
That my dear is a case and point for war. A police officer who shoots a criminal for threatening anothers life or health is the exact same thing as the military going into a hostile zone and stopping the threat, the only difference is the scale it is played on.
NO
I think those that join the Military want to work for our country, they Can not control where or who they are sent to fight..
They Have No opinion – they have to go or do what is asked of them..
@lotta_valdez - Actually have to disagree with you there, many military families are not “financial hostages” as you say. Many of my friends in the military, and my husband as well, joined because they feel a sense of patriotism to “support and defend the constitution of the United States of America.” Many come from a long line of military servicemen and women, who have devoted their lives to serving the needs of their country, whether or not they agreed with war. Many serve to gain job skills that would have otherwise been unattainable. Many join to leave behind lives that were robbing them of whatever future they wanted for themselves. Many joined simply because they wanted to travel the world. There are many reasons that men and women join the military and to say that they are incapable of attaining financial success outside of the military is doing them a great disservice.
Besides if you think that the military pays well, you are seriously misinformed.
@desinflar -
Wow you truly are an ass.
(Sorry Dan I couldn’t keep that to myself.)
@Anderson_Mania - I would have expected this sort of ramble from someone not connected to the military.
Supporting or not supporting the war is your own prerogative, but how can those same feelings be extended to the men and women serving in the military. How can you condemn them for the actions of the government. We must support them because at this moment there are countless men who will have to wait to meet the children that their wives are giving birth to. There are countless men and women who can’t hug their spouses and kids at this moment. They give up a lot to fulfill their duties to our government and whether or not you agree with the war you should not project your feelings towards the military. Protest the government if you feel it unjust, go to the steps of the Senate or the gate to the White House if you feel you must, but leave the military out of it. And the martial law scenario is totally irrelevant in the present debate.
@finalsights - wow tell that to six million Jews…
@la_vida_linda -
Well then you’re comment is completely irrelevant. I DO support the troops right now silly goose. I was saying that IF the troops turned on American civilians, the ones they are supposed to protect- THEN what would you do? If you don’t address that question- then that whole paragraph was irrelevant. Do you not know that troops right NOW are being trained for martial law? And many soldiers when asked if they’d shoot civilians have said Yes, cause of course that’d be the orders they’d be carrying out. They are misled. US troops should NEVER be used against citizens. So they’ll probably bring in Canada (google North American Army), or maybe UN troops.
Totally hypothetical- but I was just asking WHAT IF. Not saying that I don’t support the troops. I probably have given more than most Americans. But whatever, I said something bad about the war so I’m just an asshole.
At least those people are being honest. I HATE it when people say, “I oppose the war but support the troops.” It’s such a load of carp.
@Anderson_Mania - I didn’t say you were an asshole, and the fact that they have to be trained in martial law actually doesn’t bother me. They are in place to protect and defend from any threat, whether its from outside or inside the US. Not to mention that same training is applicable in situations of urban warfare outside of our borders…
It was hypothetical.. to make you think.. y’know? Like.. things that make you go hmmmmmmmm
@whataboutbahb - An anarchist arguement could simply be that no suitable anarchist state (hmmm kind of an oxymoron there, but let’s continue…) exists, thus there really aren’t provided an option in the first place.
Yeah. I’ve thought about this a while ago. At this point, though, anarchists can go with the next best option: The state closest to meeting their political and social needs. Towards this end, there has to be better alternatives than the U.S. Even within the U.S, Alaska seems pretty rad.
Also even the majority of social contract theories believed in the fact that the state could act unjustly, so revolution was allowed in those instances. So just because a person lives in a country does not mean he necessarily has to accept everything the state does, if the state is acting grossly unjust.
Point taken and agreed.
…Be careful in assuming everyone believers in the social contract theory, though. There are also pretty strong counter arguments against the concept of the state of nature and social contract theory as a whole…
My feeling of the matter is that there is always a general will, and with it, rules to a society. But I also took your above point: The geopolitical setup could be such that no state even comes close of meeting the needs of an anarchist.
@ondiep - Not only do you fail to use proper punctuation, spelling, or grammar in every sentence, you also make absolutely no sense.
The reason for 9/11 is that we’ve been occupying the middle east for decades. If we’d get the hell out, and stop killing innocent people, then there would be no problem.
People like you are exactly what’s wrong with this country.
@huginn - Social contract theory is bullshit, and here’s why. There must necessarily be a social contract between a society as a whole and its government, otherwise the government would be overthrown. However, if a minority group within a society, or even a single individual, rejects the government- they have no right to refuse payment. If taxes were voluntary, then yes, social contract theory would hold up. But if I try to lead a revolution against the government, claiming that it’s violating my rights and I don’t want any of its services, I will be imprisoned or killed. My options are:
1. Live here and pay taxes.
2. Live here, refuse to pay taxes, and be taken to prison/shot.
3. Move to live under another government, where I will have options 1 & 2.
That’s sure as hell not a contract to me. Remember that according to democracy, 99% of the citizens of this country could desire to enslave the remaining 1%. Simply because a majority of people agree with the violation of someone else’s rights does not make it moral, and it does not imply consent of the victim.
I really don’t understand how being forced to give up my property is anything like voluntarily signing up to go shoot people. If I agreed with the war, then yes, that would be morally equivalent. If I donated extra money to the war effort, then sure. But someone holding a gun to my head and demanding my money or my life? Of course I’m going to give them the money. It is not by free choice.
@whataboutbahb - Right in one. Though personal rights could be upheld through several means of private, voluntary exchange. If you’re interested in theories of how that would work, I could point you to some anarchist literature. The problem is that the majority of people have to actually want an anarchy, which is doubtful to happen within my lifetime, anywhere in the world.
http://www.freedomainradio.com
@to_da_lou - too true!
@RaVnR - fair enough. We disagree only moderately on this issue, and I respect your position on it- makes a lot more sense than what most people say.
@Momentkeeper - You don’t know anything about the war in Iraq, then.
We’re talking about unjust war here.
@honestalan - a valid argument, but irrelevant as to the question of whether or not soldiers are unjust for enlisting in the military at this time.
No, and they DESERVE our support and respect. PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Absolutely Not!
@la_faerie_joyeuse - There must necessarily be a social contract between a society as a whole and its government, otherwise the government would be overthrown.
If you’re asking for unanimous confirmity, then you know it will never be achieved in practice. In a Democracy, the rule of hte game is this: The conditions of governance is a reflection of the general will. It is majority rule with minority rights.
If you disagree with the paritcular rules of your state, you have 49 other varaitions. If you disagree with the fundamental premise setup by the constitution and practiced by our government, then you can renounce your citizenship and find your best fit elsewhere. (A third option is to start a movement for change. If you’re lucky, we can get your ideas in the book as a consitutional amendment).
However, if a minority group within a society, or even a single individual, rejects the government- they have no right to refuse payment. If taxes were voluntary, then yes, social contract theory would hold up.
Here’s the exchange: Some of your rights, a set fraction of your income for the common welfare. If you don’t like the particular terms of this deal, search for another elsewhere.
This is not question as to whether social contract theory holds up. It’s a matter of whether one considers it to be fair and applicable to the desires and philoophies of himself or herself.
But if I try to lead a revolution against the government, claiming that it’s violating my rights and I don’t want any of its services, I will be imprisoned or killed. My options are:
1. Live here and pay taxes.
2. Live here, refuse to pay taxes, and be taken to prison/shot.
3. Move to live under another government, where I will have options 1 & 2.
There are legal and non-violent recourse for change. Our country’s history is full of them.
I’m sure if you tried, you’d be able to find remote corners of the earth with minimal governance.
That’s sure as hell not a contract to me. Remember that according to democracy, 99% of the citizens of this country could desire to enslave the remaining 1%.
You have an irritating tendnacy towards overstatement. The Bill of Rights outlines and guarentees fundamental rights. I’m not sure what sort of “enslavement” you keep prattling about.
Simply because a majority of people agree with the violation of someone else’s rights does not make it moral, and it does not imply consent of the victim.
Fundamental huamn rights are guarenteed and enforced from the constitution. If you’re speaking of your inalienable rights to not pay taxes, then you have my earlier mentioned options.
I really don’t understand how being forced to give up my property is anything like voluntarily signing up to go shoot people.
Because you’re not being forced. Granted, your alternative to not paying taxes (jail time) is worse than netural, but against the moral weight of the supposed injustice of the Iraq war, it only mitigates but not nullifies your moral responsiblity.
All you’ve been telling me is that if given the choice between jail time and the murder of a complete stranger, the moral action is to accept jail time.
If I agreed with the war, then yes, that would be morally equivalent. If I donated extra money to the war effort, then sure. But someone holding a gun to my head and demanding my money or my life?
If anyone is holding a gun to your head, it is of your delusional construction. The penalty for not paying taxes isn’t Uncle Same in top hat with pistol to your poor, poor head. No. It’s jail-time.
If you artifically skew the stakes, you would change the outcome of the moral question; and that’s what you’re doing.
Of course I’m going to give them the money. It is not by free choice.
It is a free choice. The only difference is that your altnerative to paying taxes is worse than neutrality. This however, only serves to mitigate; but not elminate moral responsiblity.
well, our country decided to do this. If you want to be an individual, then you should rescind your rights that you get from being part of the group. If it is immoral, so do something that we change the decision we as a group made. Yes, I know this one is appointed to do this, etc. But essentially we have support and endorsement from and elected congress who acts on our behalf. And a president who is similarly elected. So if you don’t like it we DO have the power to change the law. Support those who are supporting the law. Rule of law is an awesome progress if you look at history.
I have nothing but admiration for people who are willing to lay down their lives to protect our country. My issue is with the “powers that be,” who have decided that in a post-911 world preemptive action is necessary. That makes us the aggressor, and I’m not o.k. with that.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - There is always free choice. You could make one of the following:
1. Live here and pay taxes.
2. Live here, refuse to pay taxes, and be taken to prison/shot.
3. Move to live under another government, where I will have options 1 & 2.
According to you those are your choices and you freely choose #1. And I seriously doubt you would get shot in this country for not paying your taxes.
I can’t totally say I agree and support the troops, but I know one
thing I don’t support the war… I don’t know why and I don’t blame
them for enlisting…
@la_vida_linda - if someone kidnaps you and asks whether you’d have your left or right hand cut off, and you ask them to cut off your left hand instead of your right, then you chose freely, right?
Between two coercive options, there is no free choice.
And if you don’t think they’d shoot me for not paying my taxes, then what exactly would they do? Sure, they’ll send me notices first, and I’ll throw them away. Soon, they’ll come to my house and knock on my door. I will ignore them still. They will break down my door, find me, and tell me to come with them. I will remain seated. I will ask them to please leave my property immediately. I will not even ask them to pay for the damage they have done to my door. They will ignore me, and they will threaten to physically take me to jail if I will not come voluntarily. I will tell them that they are already violating my property, and that if they touch me, any self-defense is justified to prevent my kidnapping. They will attempt to pick me up and forcibly carry me from my home to jail. I will resist, just as I would resist any kidnapper from coming into my own home, with guns, and pulling me from it. They will either overpower me, or, if they are unable (or if I have a gun of my own), they will shoot me, claiming that they did so in self defense, when they came onto my property, and threatened to kidnap me. Why do their blue uniforms make any difference? To me, they are thugs who want to steal my property.
@la_faerie_joyeuse -
Here are the choices you make freely in the scenario you pointed out:
1. You choose not to pay your taxes.
2. You choose to ignore the notices they send you.
3. You choose to ignore the knock on the door.
4. You fight back against officers enforcing the law.
Those are all choices that you make, and claiming that you don’t make them by your own free will is ignorant. No one holds a gun at your head telling you that you must be a citizen of the United States. No one holds a gun to your head telling you that you must follow the laws of the United States. These are choices that you make of your own free will.
OKAY, this need to be put out there for those that are all hell bent on people joiing for an ass-ton of money from the military. The ONLY financial benifits that you really get from the military is the POSSIBLY, not promised enlistment bonus (that varies on your MOS and time of enlistment… sometimes even availibility of your MOS), and money put towards schooling. However, as for actual income from the military, you don’t make jack. Its not much above minimum wage. Its close to a little over 9 dollars an hour.
There is of course one exception that comes to mind… Air Force. Some of those cats make some fat bills for what they do. For some reason though I don’t see this whole debate being directed very much at the AF.
So, if you didn’t know… now you do.
@huginn - By “society as a whole,” I mean a majority. Since when do we have minority rights? I think the fundamental premise of all government is immoral- I should not have to move, but I would want to do so, if there was a free, voluntary society anywhere on Earth or on any known planet. There is not.
If social contract theory is unfair to any single individual, then it cannot be applicable to individual rights. It cannot be used as a moral justification for government.
I would never gain the popular support for voluntary taxation; even if I did, the media wouldn’t print the stories, every politician would strike my ideas down, and I would be detained by the federal government as a suspected terrorist. All of those people have a vested interest in stealing my money.
If you know of some “remote corner” of the world with moderate weather, which has little to no government controls, please let me know! I neither know of nor have ever heard of such a place.
The Bill of Rights? When was the last time anyone listened to that? I was suspended from public school for “offending” someone. We are soon to lose our right to have guns. I’m studying con law right now, and the general legal interpretation of the bill of rights is absolutely absurd. I can give you some examples from my notes if you’d like.
Enslavement occurs when one person is forced to work for someone else, especially with little compensation. There is almost always some form of compensation – in the old South, slaves were given food, clothing, and shelter. Today, I am forced to give the product of my labor to an outside entity, and I receive little benefit from it (roads, a shitty public education, and police protection). I can, admittedly, choose not to work, receive welfare benefits, and watch all those suckers out there try to make it on 50% taxation rates. However, this is an even more abhorrent option – I cannot accept the stolen money out of other peoples’ pockets.
Any threat of violence is threat of death. You are claiming that it is moral and just for me to be taken to prison, to starve, become dehydrated (probably to death or hospitalization), or be raped, simply because I don’t want to give up my own property. Though, really, if a few kidnappers come to take you to a dank, smelly prison, would you willingly go with them? It would ultimately come to a conflict that would cost my life.
@ThisEmptyApartment - Yes, I know this. But many people who sign up see the big $$$ by the enlistment bonus, or have no other way to pay for their college, so they join the military.
This isn’t everyone, but you cannot deny that the initial payment is a huge incentive to join.
@la_vida_linda - A choice can NEVER be free if it is made under threat of death (or any other bodily harm).
You didn’t mention that you freely chose to cut off your left hand, to save your right. You forgot to say how empowering it was to have that option open to you.
It’s people wanting to support their country, and with so many of our citizens hating on it, it’s nice to know that some people do still care and are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for our proctection. In my eyes, soldiers garner our respect, and while others may disagree with me, my opinion will not change on that matter.
@la_faerie_joyeuse -
A choice is a choice whether you feel it was forced or not. And since you asked I would say neither and fight back because despite the fact that it was not an option they mentioned it is still one that I have open to me. So you see that same logic can be applied. You don’t want to pay taxes, they say pay your taxes or go to jail. You say f*** you and become a citizen of (insert your next best option for a country here). The fact that you are apparently limiting your own options and being “forced” to make a decision that you don’t agree with is still your choice made freely with full knowledge of the implications and consequences of your actions. In your cutting off of hands scenario, I choose to resist which will more than likely still result in my hand being cut off, but the choice to resist was still made by me leaving me with the satisfaction of not letting them choose for me. You mention that you’ve only voted once, in any given year you are given opportunities to vote on a variety of things, elected officials being one, you also have the right and responsibility to petition or if necessary protest your government when you disagree with laws or actions. You choose freely not to participate in things that are your right and responsibility as an adult citizen of your country. The only thing that I can draw from your statements is that you are all talk and no action. You fear the consequences of doing what you think you should, and that is just plain sad.
@la_faerie_joyeuse -
Last I knew there was no government in Antarctica…that might be more pleasant that being “forced” to pay taxes to fund unjust wars.
@kbevl1 - Yes, because, as we all know, the United States is the ONLY country in the world that has freedom, happiness, liberty and other rights. And of course those rights are kept intact by invading another country in the name of O.I.L. Operation Iraqi Liberation is definately the way to protect those rights. Not to mention an endless supply of oil and killing of innocent people all for the fun of it.
The military of the United States has performed countless terrorist actions therefore, if you volunteer to help perform these actions I would say that you are assisting.
So, YES, those in the military are unjust.
@la_vida_linda - I’m 18, so I’ve only had the chance to vote once, and I took it. My candidate lost, even though I voted for him, campaigned for him, and donated money to his campaign.
I have petitioned the government at least 4 times for a redress of grievances. I was ignored each time. I consider this comment itself an act of protest, so I protest daily.
@huginn -
“My feeling of the matter is that there is always a general will,”
I don’t have time to respond to anything else right now since I have class soon, but felt the need to point out I don’t believe there is such a thing as the “general will.” Rousseau was a captivating writer and probably the most quotable political theorist of his time, but I disagree with most of his actual concepts and theories.
@la_vida_linda - Actually, Antarctica does NOT have a free society. It doesn’t have any society:
“There are no permanent human residents” (wikipedia)
Furthermore, in order to survive, I would have to trade with people from other regions of the world, where plants actually grow. I would still be paying taxes to all of those governments.
And it is not free from government. “The area between 90° W and 150° W is the only part of Antarctica not claimed by any country as of yet.” (wikipedia) Yet all of it is covered by the Antarctic Treaty and The Environmental Protection Protocol. It is international government, not national government, which controls Antarctica.
Also, there is severe risk of SAD (which I experience mildly even in Georgia), and “Sunburn is often a health issue as the snow surface reflects almost all of the ultraviolet light falling on it” (wikipedia). My skin is really pale, and again, I get sunburnt while wearing sunscreen if I am in the sun for 15 minutes. Admittedly, these are personal considerations, though I don’t really understand how they’re much different from refusing to live on, say, Mars, for the inhospitable climate/conditions. I already own property here, and I shouldn’t be forced to sell it just so that I can live in a place where I’d be miserable, sick, and hungry.
It is unfortunate that there is a fine line between justice, and what is right and wrong. We should give our support to our troops by praying they make it back alive and preferably in one piece. As soldiers, they must still follow the orders of their superiors within their chain of command. It is unjust that the conditions are undesirable. It is unjust that their tours are extended again and again, exhausting those resources we have overseas. It is unjust that they can not see their families because certain politicians refuse to let them cycle out with fresh troops. There is much that is unjust in this war we find ourselves in, but is any war truly just? Is it just to have loved ones killed and maimed for the sake of pride? Each soldier has a duty that is not so pleasant to those of us who sit comfortably in our homes wishing that things could be better. Every soldier is dedicating their lives so that we have the opportunity to seek justice for what is right. Their loyalty goes far beyond justice. Their blood pays for our freedoms. They deserve our support and our prayers.
@la_faerie_joyeuse - I am merely pointing out that there is a corner at least on the whole planet that is free from an established government, the fact that you are obviously not willing or capable of living there isn’t necessarily my concern. And the fact that you are not sick or miserable or hungry here speaks highly of the government that you are so quick to condemn. Selling property and renouncing your citizenship is one of the many options that you have available to you, the fact that you choose not to take advantage of it is no one’s fault but your own, stop whining.
yes or no
yes
Hoo boy. Troops. Tough one. Not really. Commenting Onward!!
I think those that continue are dedicated and believe in their cause.
I, myself, would not make a good troopster!
*HUGS*
I am extremely proud of the US military forces, and thankful that we have such a good military force. I hope that they don’t become discouraged with people coming out in public and saying bad things about them. I like this video some of them made a while back( before pepsi used this song):
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a2c_1179122466
@la_faerie_joyeuse - YOUR OPINION OF ME IS NONE OF MY BUSINESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THANKS ANYHOW.
I think that’s actually really messed up that someone can not support the troops simply because they think the war is unjust. First of all, just because they think the war is unjust, doesn’t mean that it is. Honestly, I don’t believe in the war and I think it’s ridiculous, but I would never say that the people risking their lives for us are unjust.
Secondly, not everyone is in Iraq because they support the war. In fact most soldiers don’t support the war. Some need money, some want to go to college afterward, some were already enlisted when the war started, some have parents who pushed them in (like army-brats), some have an dutiful sense of honor and pride in our country, and some signed up for one tour of duty not knowing how awful it would be, and then were tricked or forced into a second tour of duty. There are also people over there who are simply there to save the lives of those who are fighting for us (like doctors, or computer technicians), risking their own lives in the process.
And whether you support the war or not, it is still going on and people are still needed to fight, so our troops should be especially honored for risking their lives for a cause that they don’t necessarily believe in, simply to help us in America.
As a liberal, democrat-voting military wife, living on a military base, I have to be very careful about what I say and do regarding this issue. There are a lot of young vets around here. Whether I support the war or not (which I don’t), I have to support them. These men and women are not the ones who decide to go to war. They just do their jobs. Even when they voluntarily enlist, there’s no guarantee that they will actually go to war (there are other careers in the military aside from gun-slinging and sleeping in foxholes). You can blame Bush and Congress for this war, not the military. Executive branch = mayor, US military = police/fire dept
These men and women are putting their lives on the line for all of us, they’re missing the births of their children, marriages are falling apart, and the lack of respect I’m seeing for their sacrifices is horrible. I’m a diplomat at heart and I think there’s never a reason for war, but re-enlisting doesn’t equal “I want to go war!”. Military healthcare is excellent, the pay is steady, and these men and women are going back in to feed their families.
That is a tricky question. I don’t believe the soldiers are unjust, not at all. I think they were lied to and led to believe that they are defending this country. I support these boys. I don’t believe this war was just, however. Someone (and we all know who) was simply a trigger happy cowboy who couldn’t wait to wield his power. We are ALL paying for it, the soldiers most of all, and also the innocent children and bystanders caught in the crossfire.
Wonder how many congressmen’s chidren are in Iraq?
@thetheologianscafe
@soy__artista
Why is it that people feel the necessity to USE this site to tear people down based on their comments? Dan, you asked a question. I answered based on my opinion as a military wife and US citizen, but for some reason this asshole feels the need to CRITICIZE me DIRECTLY based on my comment here, AND twisted my words to say things they did not even say. So, I guess my point is, because you disagree with what I said does not, in fact, mean that I care to hear YOUR opinion or that I deserve to be criticized. GIVE your opinion as a comment on here, but do NOT criticize MY opinion. Oh yeah, and your opinion that you gave is based on what, just a “feeling” you have or something? At least my opinion has a strong basis given my status as a military wife, and perhaps you should consider my opinion with higher regards based on this status!
@la_faerie_joyeuse
@thetheologianscafe
Once again, I do NOT believe that Dan’s page is intended to be a place for us to attack one another based on our beliefs, but because you drew first blood, I will reply.
First of all, SOLDIER is a term referring to people in the ARMY. I know quite a few soldiers, as well as airmen, marines, seamen, and any other member of the military. My husband is in the military. THAT is where my basis of my comment came from, NOT that I need to defend myself to you, or anyone for that matter. Yes, you can say that some people join for the money, my point was that if that is the case, the money is CERTAINLY not enough to risk your life, be called up at a moments notice etc. You THINK the bonus is attractive, but trust me, it is a very SMALL bonus compared to the bonus that several people in civilian jobs doing the same job receive. So, while military are PAID to do their job, I do not think that HARDLY any of them join FOR the money.
@la_vida_linda -
@la_vida_linda -
What about the jews? The holocaust was a massacre of innocent civilians . A war is a conflict between nations played out by their soldiers . Even on the battlefield, no especially on the battlefield honor must be maintained because that’s the only thing separating men from dogs.
@la_vida_linda - I’m so sorry that I don’t want someone pointing a fucking GUN at my face.
@kbevl1 - “it is a very SMALL bonus compared to the bonus that several people in civilian jobs doing the same job receive”
Really? Find me a civilian job that will pay completely unskilled non-high-school-grads tens of thousands of dollars just for agreeing to work for them.
And while it’s nice that you have the personal experience of living with someone who is in the military, that doesn’t make you more right about this. My boyfriend is in the military, too, so does that make my opinion right? Of course not. It does give me more insight, but it’s not a monopoly on truth.
@nessi1 - ONE congressman has a child serving in Iraq.
According to theory. But as individuals, no-
But they are still people. Aren’t we supposed to forgive?
@la_faerie_joyeuse
It is so WRONG for you to say that members of the military are unskilled non-high-school-grads. First of all, to join the military (you should know this since your boyfriend is in the military) you have to get a decent score on the ASVAB. While standardized tests do NOT measure intelligence, in my opinion, it does set certain standards. I also think it is just plain ignorant to call what military personnel do something that does not require skill. I would actually go so far as to say you yourself probably could not do many of these so called “unskilled” jobs. And, I do not think I have a “monopoly on truth”, I was just saying my opinion is not based merely on some random idea, but rather on life experience. Give up. Quit arguing with me. I don’t really have time or energy for your petty fight.
@kbevl1 - said
“It is so WRONG for you to say that members of the military are unskilled non-high-school-grads.” said
This is what la_faerie_joyeuse said:
“Find me a civilian job that will pay completely unskilled
non-high-school-grads tens of thousands of dollars just for agreeing to
work for them.”
She never stated that all members of the military are unskilled, non-high-school-grads. She merely said the army pays thousands to recruit unskilled, non-high-school-grads…..which they do. You do not have to have to have your high school diploma to join, and the physical fitness requirements are not too strenuous. I have a friend who didn’t meet the eye requirements, and his recruiter told him not to worry about it, he’d handle it. This is not to say I am saying the military is corrupt or anything like that, but merely the military does provide significant financial incentives for young adults with few other options. There are also many very, very smart people (one of my brother’s friends in highschool, a person who almost scored a perfect score on the SAT joined the Air force after highschool). The military appeals to many different groups for many different reasons. And one of these reasons, for some, is financial security.
@la_faerie_joyeuse -
“Though personal rights could be upheld through several means of private, voluntary exchange.”
I’ve read a decent amount in the topic and can’t get past my belief that the not all things can be done better by private enterprises. Don’t get me wrong, I believe the private world is usually much more efficient and effective then government. But things like police, firemen, and the army are things that I think should be left to the state. Imagine life where the police force or firefighters were employed by a neighborhood or, in some cases, individuals. Poor neighborhoods, in some cases, wouldn’t even be able to afford these 2 necessities (at least I view them as such). Even if charity provided money to get either one or both, the level of quality would be most likely very,very wanting. I know there are valid complaints about the level of our police force in some areas, but imagine what capitalism would do for this system. Sure, for the rich and the upper-middle income people the police force might be much improved. But for the lower-middle income and lower income people……..
And in an area where no state existed, there would always be a threat present versus the minority. It’s inevitable. In a constitutional democracy, at least the rights of the minorities can be protected.
And I doubt the general public could be convinced of creating an anarchic state in the next few hundred years. I think it would take a nuclear war or something of that magnitude to get people thinking in that direction. I would consider myself a classic liberal, and even that thought is distasteful to the vast majority of U.S. citizens. People like their government. Even if it has been getting bigger and bigger ever since the New Deal.
Btw, I think you might like David Friedman, son of Milton Friedman. While I’m a much bigger fan of his dad, David is an anarcho-capitalist and does have interesting thoughts from time to time on his blog- http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
p.s. Somalia is the closest thing we have to an anarchist state if you ever get around to selling your property here
Though the funny thing is it is also a prime example of the power of private industry, since economically Somalia has been outperforming its neighbors due to the lack of dumb, stifling government trade/market regulations. Though everything I say right now might not be the same anymore, since I really haven’t seen how things have been going in the last year or two.
@BrownBarbie_2006 - Well said. The war may be unjust, but that doesn’t make it illegal. I would prefer it if the troops were brought home but there still has to be an organised phased withdrawal. Now as someone who has been against this war from day 1 that sounds hypocritical, even to me. The point is sometimes you have to do the best you can in the circumstances you are in. In war, in relationships, in life.
unjust is not a word for re-enlistment.
having a few thousand dollars bonus does not match up with the loss of time you can have with your children and family. no sex or alchohol beverages for a long time doesn’t sound fun either. It is easy to sign up, but It is not easy to re-enlist specially during conflict. There is an eight years reserve contract for all military personals , even if you don’t reenlist, solder got to serve in reserve after the initial contract is done.
I am proud of those that choose to re-enlist in the middle east during this hard time.
No it doesnt… My Dad is a soldier and I have to say.. I disagree with the war.. but him being over there in Iraq.. did’nt make him unjust.. Most of the people over there are doing a bunch of nothing besides sitting around.. Just being there to be there.. We need to bring them back, we need to have twenty five hundred over there TOPS. If we are so worried about terrorist then why do we send all of our troops over there?.. To protect that country.. We should have them here.
Sorry I had to put my two cents in though, I wonder if I woul feel is was unjust if my dad wasnt in the army..
I’m not really very fond of the whole thing.
@whataboutbahb - You make some good points, and filling the gap in defense is one of the hardest points in anarchism (mostly because classical liberal philosophers – and societies – have already shown that everything else can be done easily, fairly, and efficiently. Anarchy is relatively new.)
I think that everyone, even the poor, could manage better police protection than they have now. Property owners would buy insurance on their property, which would not only serve the commonplace function of paying out in event of weather damage/fire/whatever, but would also serve as an immediate protection service. Imagine if the same company ran the fire protection service, and had to pay for every seconds worth of things the fire destroyed. I’d say that’s incentive (in addition to the free-market competition). If someone is trespassing, call the insurance company- they’ll send out guards to remove the trespasser (whether a robber, a rapist, or simply an annoyance). It would not be hard for apartment owners to subscribe to these services for little more (or maybe less!) than they currently pay in property taxes alone. Police/fire protection in other places, such as parks, shopping malls, and restaurants, would work in the same way.
It is true that the majority could always overtake a minority. That is true regardless of whether a state exists, though. The constitution is a piece of paper – one that most politicians regularly wipe their asses with – and it doesn’t have the power to stop majority tyranny. There are two things that can do this: a well armed minority, and a sense of ethics.
I agree that most people love their governments. Mmm, masochism! This is not an argument against anarchy, though- as you admitted, it applies equally well to classical liberalism.
I’ll check out the David Friedman guy. Thanks.
Somalia, hm? I’d have to learn Somali, but I wouldn’t mind that terribly. I’ll look into it.
Not everyone thinks that this war is unjust. Besides, the military life isn’t so bad. Yes, the extended deployments suck, but if these fine men and women weren’t re-enlisting, then we would probably have to go back to the draft and that would be WILDLY unpopular!