I mean its irrelevant in the scope of history. Militaries get deployed to accomplish certain goals. The ethics of how those goals are accomplished is ultimately irrelevant. What's remembered is whether or not the goal was achieved, and what tactics were employed. Not how the locals felt about it. How moral the Romans were in taking Greece is nowhere near as significant as the simple fact that Rome took Greece. How they achieved it, in ethical terms, doesn't really matter.
I'm not saying that militaries are unethical. I'm saying that whether they are or not bears no significance in the long term. And this is speaking of military actions as a whole. On an individual basis soldiers will obviously have different ethical conducts and yadda yadda.
Last edited by Tore; 2013-02-07 at 09:10 PM.
it really bugs me some people call people in the armed forces murderers who should be locked up in prison, if anyone invades your home please go tell your armed forces "hey killings bad so uh plz dont do anything i like these new faces who are going to ransack our homes il just go watch some youtube videos and tweet shit"
i live by one motto! "lolwut?"
9/11 was a terror attack, carried out by a privately run terror organization. It was an attack on the free world, with the USA as it's main protagonist, hence why it happened on US soil.
No army on Earth can protect a country from Terror attacks. No Army.
For all it does is to create even more terrorists..
The USA's war on terror is NOT fought openly by the army to be exact. It's fought by special units, and with different tools like drones etc.
The war on terror uses intelligence tactics which are rather related to spying than open warfare. You can't just flatten any country because you believe a bunch of terrorists may hide out there.
By whom? What nation? Where they from Iraq?
---------- Post added 2013-02-07 at 03:10 PM ----------
I will as soon as someone invades our soil, but that will never happen because no nation is that crazy or stupid, only some people.
Red Dawn was just a movie.
Last edited by Roose; 2013-02-07 at 09:12 PM.
I like sandwiches
I think the scope of history is still being written. The military (at the very least the Army) is switching to a more technical/education driven force. In doing this it is obviously raising it's standards. Not only are they raising the standards on what they expect of people, but they're raising the standards on what those soldiers expect from them. There are too many ways to get hemmed up nowadays doing things wrong.
The changes are starting from the ground up. Requiring higher ASVAB scores to even get in. The national average of 40 or so when I joined baffled me. They're also finally letting non combat-MOS leaders take the higher positions.
I know plenty of guys who chose to join the military and became better people as a result. Even if its a person's last option, that doesn't make them a "social loser". My uncle joined the Armed Forces after he graduated college with no idea of what to do with his life, and now is an extremely successful person because of it. The Armed Forces, while for some people is an option of last resort, per say, is absolutely not a disgraceful career path.
No it isn't at all. It's a legit choice. And truthfully, someone choosing the Armed forces and using it for further education deserves respect. He/She clearly shows more efforts than someone who chooses to do nothing on their situation, and maybe ends up in the backstreets as part of some gang of crooks.
Preemptive strikes are pretty much the main issue. That was the reason they used to invade Iraq. It is bullshit.
I saw a Red Dawn type movie that was set in Australia, Tomorrow When The War Began. It was much more believable because it had an Asian country (presumably China) invading Australia to claim their natural resources. Their justification was that they simply needed them more.
I like sandwiches
Somehow, yes..
America's policy is based on the old saying: Attack is the best defense.
The idea behind everything is to interfere with military force to hold potential aggressors down. To avoid for them to gain powers and being able to attack the USA. That would be a legit approach, if the targets would have even remotely such potential. But, most recently over the past 4 decades, that just wasn't the case. Not a single country that had to face military intrusion from the USA had any of such potential. Not right there, not down the road.
No one could fight terrorists with conventional warfare.
Terrorists are similar to guerrillas. They work underground. They require spies and intelligence to scope them out before they can strike.
The sight of an army drives them into hiding. And terrorists are really the only thing Americans have to worry about.
they aren't serving anyone or anything except their commanding officers. as human beings they might act out or disobey orders due to higher conscience.
/thread
---------- Post added 2013-02-07 at 09:30 PM ----------
I agree, it was a bad reason to give to the public from a pr perspective.
They are just doing there work as a hired worker. Please dont be blind to this, they get fine pay (Atleast inn Denmark).
Dont make there job seem like its anything more worthy than other things.
Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/djuntas ARPG - RTS - MMO
Hmm, interesting topic and I see both sides of this topic. One thing that does bug me that is that I do not get discounts like military people, firefighters and cops.