TVoT: Typo. I meant without the "s". But that being said, I know there's a lot of Americans giving back-up support even to the worst of their soldiers, and then my statement has to count for them as well.The Voice of Time wrote:It's mostly a question of taking risks. And some risks we can take, because they show courage and a sense of righteousness, others we can't take, because they show cowardice and carelessness/recklessness. Of course it's not that simple, sometimes courage and righteousness becomes foolishness and stubbornness, but it's very easy, when you weigh at what point that crossing happens, that you become a coward and a criminal through carelessness/recklessness, instead of just avoiding foolishness and stubbornness.SpheresOfBalance wrote:I'm sure AUK is not condoning the murder of civilians, I know I'm not, but the problem is that no one knows with certainty what a civilian or soldier looks like. Sure It'd be great, if like the US and other allied forces, they wore uniforms, so as to differentiate civilians, but they don't. As a matter of fact, I bet you couldn't necessarily pick, which of two Afghan's, was a soldier and which the civilian, assuming of course that we knew we had one of each.
It's very easy for me to talk because it's all so stupid that there's little good to say about it at all. To be honest, I'm not entirely against the Afghanistan war, the Taliban were cruel people born out of hatred for anybody but their own "ethically superior" kind (which of course was ridiculous as there's been few people with a more destroyed ethical sense than them). But it's mostly how the war was fought. First of all, it's the worst off people from the US who enters the army in promise of money, and, something I find most disgraceful for any welfare nation: education. That is, people would enter the army so that they afforded education ^^ The American people were as much victims of the Afghan war (not talking about 9/11, but the actual war in the aftermath) as the Afghans were victims (though at different degrees of course). The war was typical exploitation. "You come from a bad family? You have little money? Why not let the army pay for you and give you new hope! All we require is that you go down into Afghanistan and kill some Mujahideen!", of course, not taking into account, is that these people are young, they are troubled by experiences of poverty and socially unstable or come from bad social situations (that's not always the case, of course). They are exploited in the same way that young children can be exploited by adults, that is, some adults never grow sufficient personal strength to withstand other exploitative people. Because of their weaknesses they fall prey to easy deals and smiling officers. I mean, what do you expect, when people actually answer you as you give them such a shout like "you want to do duty for your country?" or "you want to kill Mujahideen?" or anything such bad-spirit propaganda. Only idiots answer people like that, not because I think it's completely wrong to kill Mujahideen (to protect others) or that it's wrong to do a duty for ones fellow members (assist a cause), but because the sentences are as meaningful as commercials, and are really just cheap mind tricks to prey on those who are easily persuaded because of their own lacks of the sophisticated thinking that can protect them from making bad choices or accepting other peoples reality just because it is offered nicely wrapped, or, for that matter, that they are desperate, and are easily persuaded by people juggling coins or offering brotherhood.SpheresOfBalance wrote:Also I see that it's easy for you sitting in that easy chair, with no pants on,behind your computer, talking like you are, but if right this very second, jets came flying out of the sky and crashed into all your neighbors, exploding their houses into balls of flames, killing them instantly, some of which were your best friends, and Al-Qaeda took responsibility, and your country sent you over there, and while walking through the villages, your best soldier buddies head suddenly exploded, such that you had to scoop his brains out of your eye socket and ears, being cut by some of his skull fragments, you'd be screaming for them to apprise the next village, that shelling would commence tomorrow, and that they should leave or else be blown up, before you and your second best soldier buddy, went walking through. And while it's hard for anyone to know how another would react to such events, let alone them selves, I'd be willing to bet, I'm correct. Which does not condone the killing of civilians.
When you send down people who are not professional soldiers in all the right aspects: mind, body and heart, you get people who do poor choices and who will commit to ruthlessness because they don't know any better.
What would I do? If the government tried to conscript me, I would refuse (mostly because I'm not soldier material, I'm too sensitive about things up hand in that I would despair at faults of my fellow soldiers and cry most of the time I killed somebody and would likely had gotten myself killed because I couldn't pull the trigger when somebody else were about to kill me as over time the killing or attempted killing would be too much for me to bear, but that weakness doesn't mean I can't use my reason to understand a middle-way). I wouldn't hate the people who did wrong by killing my fellows in the airplane attack, that I know, because it's not my nature, I would do what real human beings should do in such an event: mourn in the aftermath, and try to save and care for as many as possible in the happening. I think tragedies are not worthy of causing hatred, people grow hatred from a sense of possession, that they own other people, that other people are their property, their ownership, or that maybe a country is their property (or at least a shared property) and that it's transgression to cause it harm. I don't feel that way about people in general, I have felt it of course, but then again hatred is only worth it as long as the object of property exist. If I had a child, for instance, I would be able to feel hatred, I think, as long as the person was alive. If the person was dead, there would be nothing to hate for. That isn't to say I can't feel a need for retaliation, but then again only if there is a retaliatory target, a direct target, not like indirect targets like Mujahideen in far away country, and only if it will achieve some understanding with that target (even in my greatest rage I'm not mindless, I'm thoroughly objective-oriented. Unlike some people, I never feel pleasure from hurting anybody not for any reason, not even my mother (which you might think is because she's my mother, but to me it would be the opposite, I dislike nobody or would have anybody else more dead than her) for which I have the closest to a hatred relationship I've ever had over a long period of time with anyone).
That is very invalid thinking. If soldiers are idiots, then somebody should tell them, whether they themselves have ever experienced a fight or not. If your statement was really true, then the amount of resistance that military would face in doing things would be minimal, and we would be able to suffer at the hands of stupid people we couldn't argue against because we weren't them. It's exactly like saying that a serial killer can't be prosecuted and condemned because the people who would do that have never been serial killers themselves ^^ or we can't complain about the doctor's treatment of us if he makes a mistake because we've never done doctoring ourselves ^^ what a hell it would be if people lived like you offer in that statement.SpheresOfBalance wrote:Those never taking part in war, have no right to judge others for doing so, as they have no idea, with certainty, how they'd deal with it.
as I am in fact an American, if you'd dropped the "s," I would have not felt insulted as much, but even then, the 'soldiers' don't call the shots in war, the Generals do, as they experience 'the bravery of being out of range.'SpheresOfBalance wrote:I personally have always thought that Americans and Israeli soldiers are cowards and disgrace to humanity...
I understand why you have said what you have said above. Remember even though I gave 16 years service to the US DOD, I despise war. I do not believe in invading another land and have always felt that the only good war is one fought on my doorstep. Once, two men said: 'It's best to walk softly and carry a big stick' and 'I'm afraid they've awoken a sleeping giant.' Both were about the USA, and said during WWII. I believe that the USA should have always maintained that image/stance. But I am only one, I do not speak for those in charge, they only ever have $$$$$ in their sights. I see that Iraq should have never been occupied by soldiers, that was all about oil and contracts to make some of the American rich, richer. And as far as I see it as soon as Osama Bin Laden was taken, the US should have left Afghanistan. War is a profitable business, but rest assured, I'm getting no money from it, that I'm aware of, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
You misunderstood me when I said, that one, that has never participated in war, has no right to speak of it. I meant specifically as to how you'd deal with being forced to kill or be killed, and what that might cause you to consider, as to any means that might ensure, you made it out alive.
While I hate killing for no apparent reason, and while I know, intellectually, that no man is truly responsible for doing so, and thus deserves not to be punished, but rather treated for their insanity, emotionally, I'd kill anyone that killed one of my family members. Because with such a loss, of an innocent loved one, my emotions would override my intellect, and I'd be vicious, to the point of insanity, especially if I witnessed it.
You know the thing is, there is always much more to consider, than one realizes, when trying to view what's good or evil, through the eyes of another's perspective, because a lifetime goes into any particular individual perspective.
