From where I'm standing, those who are voluntarily joining the armed forces are doing a gigantic favor for those who don't wish to: the draft is not needed.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-12-11 04:01:08)
I feel opposite, I feel the majority of servicemembers have family and bills as a priority before duty. Most soldiers re-enlist simply because its good job security, free medical and dental for the wife and kids, a fat pay bonus on top of regular pay every month and, before late 2001, a pretty stable work environment. They do it to keep the lights running and put food on the table. and the retirement benefits are pretty outstanding.B.Schuss wrote:
well, I think get Bubbalo's POV. He is saying, that, in more general terms, an individual soldier in any army has to take full responsibility for the actions he takes, and cannot deny such responsibilty if people challenge his ethical or moral integrity.
Furthermore, he seems to say that those who voluntarily chose to join an organization like the Armed Forces also automatically sign up to that organization's beliefs, moral / ethical standards and goals.
And while I agree that this is probably true in general terms, I wouldn't exclude the possibility that some simply join the Armed Forces because they need a job, or because they want to help defend their country.
They most likely do not consider more sophisticated concepts such as moral or ethical behaviour ( theirs or that of the Armed Forces ) before enlisting.
It's a complicated issue, and not just black or white. For example, it is generally considered "wrong" or unethical to kill another person ( yes, I know, everyone has different sets of morals, but at least I do. )
Then again, as a soldier you are told to do just that under specific circumstances.
How do you resolve that ? Well, I think you try to find justification in greater causes, such as freedom, democracy, country, "the greater good", even god. Most people in the Armed Forces will probably tell you that they try to do the "right thing".
In the end, it's only a matter of perspective, people are different, and so are sets of values / morals.
Ultimately, though, I agree with Bubbalo with regard to one point:
if you join the Armed Forces voluntarily, you cannot deny responsibility for what that organizaton does. Since you are a part of it, you also carry part of the responsibility. Not for events that you did not take part in, of course, but in more general terms.
Which, in turn, might lead to you leaving that organization, because you consider its actions to be unethical, even if you never participated in such unethical behaviour yourself and have a clear "conscience".
would any of the former or current servicemen consider that to be possible ?
Shit........... were do I sign up?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I feel opposite, I feel the majority of servicemembers have family and bills as a priority before duty. Most soldiers re-enlist simply because its good job security, free medical and dental for the wife and kids, a fat pay bonus on top of regular pay every month and, before late 2001, a pretty stable work environment. They do it to keep the lights running and put food on the table. and the retirement benefits are pretty outstanding.
Life in itself is a battle. Keeping the wolf(tax man) from the door is a war.
That would mean everything everywhere then. So if a cop fucks up somewhere, every cop has to share responsibility? If a priest fondles a little boy, do they all have to share responsibility? If a muslim blows up an airplane or beheads someone, do they all have to share responsibility?B.Schuss wrote:
Ultimately, though, I agree with Bubbalo with regard to one point:
if you join the Armed Forces voluntarily, you cannot deny responsibility for what that organizaton does. Since you are a part of it, you also carry part of the responsibility. Not for events that you did not take part in, of course, but in more general terms.
Which, in turn, might lead to you leaving that organization, because you consider its actions to be unethical, even if you never participated in such unethical behaviour yourself and have a clear "conscience".
would any of the former or current servicemen consider that to be possible ?
well, I hope you realize the irony in your last statement, given the hatred arabs in general have been faced with ever since 09/11.usmarine2007 wrote:
That would mean everything everywhere then. So if a cop fucks up somewhere, every cop has to share responsibility? If a priest fondles a little boy, do they all have to share responsibility? If a muslim blows up an airplane or beheads someone, do they all have to share responsibility?B.Schuss wrote:
Ultimately, though, I agree with Bubbalo with regard to one point:
if you join the Armed Forces voluntarily, you cannot deny responsibility for what that organizaton does. Since you are a part of it, you also carry part of the responsibility. Not for events that you did not take part in, of course, but in more general terms.
Which, in turn, might lead to you leaving that organization, because you consider its actions to be unethical, even if you never participated in such unethical behaviour yourself and have a clear "conscience".
would any of the former or current servicemen consider that to be possible ?
Not by you in person, I assume, but when I look back at the last year or so in this section alone, a lot of people here have condemned arabs in general for the acts of a minority.
And yes, I'd say an argument could be made that they share part of the responsibility, because as a community, they have failed to exercise control over their fellow members.
I know it's a tight line between prejudice and legitimate mistrust against a specific community, but that can be the way the human mind works sometimes.
my 2c...
EDIT: just to clarify. I realize that some "communities" have stricter, more enforcable rules than others. Also, not all of them are so well structured, with a fixed hirarchy as the Armed Forces usually are.
But still, if one is part of a community, people tend to judge the whole of the community by the acts of one of its members. Nowhere else is that more apparent than on these forums....
All I am saying is that there might be cases in which such thinking is justified. Especially if said communities do nothing to sanction illegal or unethical behaviour among their members ( police, church, etc.. ).
I am not denying that.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I feel opposite, I feel the majority of servicemembers have family and bills as a priority before duty. Most soldiers re-enlist simply because its good job security, free medical and dental for the wife and kids, a fat pay bonus on top of regular pay every month and, before late 2001, a pretty stable work environment. They do it to keep the lights running and put food on the table. and the retirement benefits are pretty outstanding.B.Schuss wrote:
well, I think get Bubbalo's POV. He is saying, that, in more general terms, an individual soldier in any army has to take full responsibility for the actions he takes, and cannot deny such responsibilty if people challenge his ethical or moral integrity.
Furthermore, he seems to say that those who voluntarily chose to join an organization like the Armed Forces also automatically sign up to that organization's beliefs, moral / ethical standards and goals.
And while I agree that this is probably true in general terms, I wouldn't exclude the possibility that some simply join the Armed Forces because they need a job, or because they want to help defend their country.
They most likely do not consider more sophisticated concepts such as moral or ethical behaviour ( theirs or that of the Armed Forces ) before enlisting.
It's a complicated issue, and not just black or white. For example, it is generally considered "wrong" or unethical to kill another person ( yes, I know, everyone has different sets of morals, but at least I do. )
Then again, as a soldier you are told to do just that under specific circumstances.
How do you resolve that ? Well, I think you try to find justification in greater causes, such as freedom, democracy, country, "the greater good", even god. Most people in the Armed Forces will probably tell you that they try to do the "right thing".
In the end, it's only a matter of perspective, people are different, and so are sets of values / morals.
Ultimately, though, I agree with Bubbalo with regard to one point:
if you join the Armed Forces voluntarily, you cannot deny responsibility for what that organizaton does. Since you are a part of it, you also carry part of the responsibility. Not for events that you did not take part in, of course, but in more general terms.
Which, in turn, might lead to you leaving that organization, because you consider its actions to be unethical, even if you never participated in such unethical behaviour yourself and have a clear "conscience".
would any of the former or current servicemen consider that to be possible ?
People enlist for different reasons. Some give the ethical implications more thought than others.
Then again, wouldn't you agree that, given your regular working day, "soldier" is anything but a regular nine-to-five job, and that, as a result, we should expect those who want to enlist to give the possible ethical implications a bit of thought before joining ?
After all, we know that the physical aspect of being a soldier is not the most difficult. It surely is the psychological aspect...