Soldiers humour - West-front -

Copyright unknown

*** Original post modified ***

Last edited by west-front on Thu Mar 26, 2009 5:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[k5083]

Very nice. Wish it were true.

Actually, warriors (and veterans) give us one thing and one thing only: security. What we do with the safe space they create is up to us -- the preacher, the reporter, the poet, the organizer, the lawyer, the politician, etc. For every veteran who fought for freedom, there is an identical one on the other side who fought for tyranny -- or at least what the first veteran's side perceived as tyranny. Veterans fought for evil as often as good, repression as often as freedom. And the ones fighting for evil and repression generally did so as honorably as the ones fighting for good and freedom. Because warriors don't generally choose their sides -- they just fight, for their homes, and because they have to.

All societies, good and bad, free and unfree, have essentially identical armed forces, military traditions, soldiers and veterans. That tells you that military institutions are not the difference between free and unfree societies. It's those preachers, reporters, poets, organizers, lawyers, and politicians who are the difference.

There is so much glorification of fighting and war on this site, mostly from the smug perspective of the winners. Fighting and war do not lead to freedom and rights -- ever. We owe those things precisely to the people your little doggerel says we don't owe them to. Veterans did their part, by giving us a safe place to build a better society. But we built it, not them. (Of course, many vets, back in civilian life, also helped us build a better society in other ways.) But that is all.

August

[McCollum11]

Fighting and war do not lead to freedom and rights -- ever.

I believe a few Patriots from the American Revolution would have a different view on the subject.

2ndLt M.S. McCollum USMC

*** Original post modified ***

Last edited by west-front on Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[k5083]

Fighting and war do not lead to freedom and rights -- ever.

I believe a few Patriots from the American Revolution would have a different view on the subject.

2ndLt M.S. McCollum USMC

They would be wrong. The American Revolution is a perfect example. Prior to the American Revolution there were two British colonies in North America, later to be known as Canada and the United States. The U.S. had a revolutionary war; Canada chose to get along and seek a gradual, peaceful path to independence. Yet, not for one single day have Americans ever been more free or had more rights than Canadians. Indeed, from the revolution until emancipation in the 1860s, the U.S. was less free, and even as to white citizens, the U.S. government was considerably more repressive than the Crown. The American Revolution was about politics, not freedom.

August

[michaelharadon]

Pieces like this don't serve anyone, least of all the veterans.

And I haven't seen anything as cheesy as that illustration since Mom stopped buying Velveeta.

*** Original post modified ***

Last edited by west-front on Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[JDK]

Thanks Michael, that was my feeling - glad to hear it from another.

The military follow orders, from the country's executive. Ergo they carry out the wishes of their country's government - hopefully a good one, and one following the wishes of the people. The military does not as such, have a social agenda for their citizens.

Military led countries...

And the real issue is what orders should not be followed?

*** Original post modified ***

Last edited by west-front on Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

[JDK]

I don't know James, sounds like you can't handle the truth

Think you've lost me there.

The 'poem' that started the discussion is both overwrought (an aesthetic view) and demonstrably incorrect.

Hardly 'true'.

Happy to follow data-analysis-conclusion, which leads to values of 'truth'. Slippery thing though.

*** Original post modified ***

Last edited by west-front on Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[Randy Haskin]

And the real issue is what orders should not be followed?

Can't tell you what any other country's military does about this, but I can tell you that this is extensively taught and studied in the US military.

In fact, every year I have to go to an academic class called Laws of Armed Combat that goes into every nuance of what orders are legal and which are not....and the individual duty to disobey unlawful or illegal orders.

Personally, I fall on the side of August in this discussion. Military "heroes" all depend entirely on which side of the war you are on. "Freedom fighters" and "insurgents" are the same people, just looked at through a different bias.

Simply taking up arms in defense of your cause isn't enough.

[JDK]

Not worth falling out over, West Front.

And the real issue is what orders should not be followed?

Can't tell you what any other country's military does about this, but I can tell you that this is extensively taught and studied in the US military.

Thanks for a thoughtful post Randy. As recent failures by the US Military (Abu Ghraib) indicate that even with those structures, some soldiers fail to adhere to the most basic standards of humanity. This is no criticism of the US or the US military per se, all armies have examples of poor to appalling conduct; while even the military of organisations such as Fascist Italy and Germany have very moral behaviour by some soldiers.

The issue was made stark at Nuremberg in 1945-6, giving us today the catchphrase anti-excuse 'I was only following orders'.

*** Original post modified ***

Last edited by west-front on Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[JDK]

Interesting views you have there James, you certainly stepped up to the plate with some dynamic opposing views.

Again, I'm not clear what you are trying to say. Democracies function on debate - is that a problem for you?

I've given example and evidence of the comments I've made, and they are a critical factor, as Randy's touched on, in the management of the military.

As for my 'dynamic opposing views', perhaps a short phrase from a great poet might be worth dwelling on in the matter. It's a lot more durable and thought provoking than the glurge at the top.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custo ... ustodes%3F