the anti war hero thread

there have been alot of posts here saying thanks and praising all the soldiers in the war.

i'm not going to do thie opposite but merely going to say that not all soldiers are war heroes or even good people. a gun and uniform do not make you a better person. you are still the same person in iraq that you were at home. all of a sudden you do not command greater respect because you wear camo and have a gun in hand. if you were a thief, a liar, racist, abusiveor evil before you went into the service then you are still that same person. for me you do not command any kind of recognition for simply fighting in a war.

of course there are some people that do earn my greatest respect for things they do in the war. the guy who recently won the VC for instance. that is a man who everyone should hold high. there are many others beside him that do deserve a great deal of respect for what they have done.

but for the majority this is not true. some will just not perform anything brave or out of the line of duty and so have performed their jobs as soldiers in the same way an accoutant does for checking bank figures. some will shoot a few enemies this is again performing a duty rather than anything extra-oridinary. some may abuse their position, commit crimes and abuse either their comrades or others. most will not. but all have performed their jobs in the same way millions of others do every day.

i do not believe that every soldier deserves recognition for their job. but there are a few who deserve every recognition for what they have done. most though have not.

The duty itself is extraordinary. Duh.

I'm joining the military soon; hopefully I'll become a Navy Marine in due time.

the duty though is not extra-ordinary. to be extraordinary it has to be rare. it's not there a few hundred million soldiers in the world to proof that. to do something extra-ordinary while doing that duty needs tob recognised. but being a soldier does not. it isn't a grat feat of courage and bravery to sign up and go through training. to take a bullet for someone else. to throw back a live grenade is or in the case of the latest vc awardee to drive a take which is on fire through an ambush and take horrific injuries only to go back on duty and perform another feat of human courage is. to merely follow orders is not.

Quote:

---

the duty though is not extra-ordinary. to be extraordinary it has to be rare. it's not there a few hundred million soldiers in the world to proof that. to do something extra-ordinary while doing that duty needs tob recognised. but being a soldier does not. it isn't a grat feat of courage and bravery to sign up and go through training. to take a bullet for someone else. to throw back a live grenade is or in the case of the latest vc awardee to drive a take which is on fire through an ambush and take horrific injuries only to go back on duty and perform another feat of human courage is. to merely follow orders is not.

---

how many times have you been shot at working at McDonald's? How many people here go to work preparing to die while doing their job, and wouldn't trade it for a comfortable office job? Being a soldier or a cop is extraordinary in itself.

not all soldiers are shot at and very few wish to change jobs. they were not conscripted but joined of free will for whatever reason they did.

if you suddenly say that all soldiers are heroes then you must say the same about your enemy and all your enemies of past. and this is not true. and conversely there are some heroes on the other sides who have showed great courage. doing something makes you a hero not being something.

If you were in a uniform in Seattle, Washington. It's like your the enemy, you get spit on... I recognize them for all the they take from people who dont express thanks for what their doing in the service of their country. Regardless of the politics involved. Some of them give so much, give up so much of their time, and even some give up the ultimate sacrifice, their lives. It's not your everyday job.

Quote:

---

how many times have you been shot at working at McDonald's? How many people here go to work preparing to die while doing their job, and wouldn't trade it for a comfortable office job? Being a soldier or a cop is extraordinary in itself.

---

I agree totally.

And also it's May. Which happens to be "National Military Appreciation Month" here in the U.S. so I dont know WTF is wrong with showing appreciation. No one even hasnt posted in my thread yet ...

http://www.eyesonff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61746

you dont have to.

i wouldn't spit on a soldier well not unless they had commited some crime. in the same way i wouldn't spit on my local banker who protects my money in the country these men are protecting.

noname you actually put it fairly clearly "Some of them give so much, give up so much of their time, and even some give up the ultimate sacrifice, their lives."

the vast majority do not perform some great heroic deed. as you put it some do. those men have medals for bravery on their chest. those who perform even beyond this carry the vc (is the american equaivelent the MH?). but most will not recieve a brave for heroic duties or bravery because they did not perform as such. they performed their duties as they should and yes this should be respected and not spat upon but it should not be used to represent the greatest people on earth. not all soldiers are great men some are horrible, evil people. these maybe the minority by far. but then so are the heroes. being a soldier does not change a man. a hero in war would have performed to that level if he had chosen a different career as would a coward or criminal soldier would have stole, defauded or bullied in an office job.

Nothing like a little degradation to start my day. Thanks!

On average, people only think of themselves, extending their interest at most to their immedate family and friends. They go to work, they make money, they obey the law.

A soldier's primary duty is to protect. When a person joins the military, he or she gives up many rights and luxuries that nearly everyone else takes for granted. It's a higher calling - to selflessly defend the selfish. I'm not saying everyone everyone who isn't a soldier is selfish, but that most people don't usually worry about the livelihoods of someone they don't even know.

Anyway, it doesn't matter if a soldier is an F-16 pilot patrolling the skies, an army private sitting in a foxhole, or an airman at home with a desk job. The sacrifice is still the same - to serve, above all else.

Quote:

---

A soldier's primary duty is to protect. When a person joins the military, he or she gives up many rights and luxuries that nearly everyone else takes for granted. It's a higher calling - to selflessly defend the selfish.

---

I agree with this, although most likely in a different way than you do. A soldiers job is not to "protect people" it's to protect the interests of people. (In other words, political interests. To believe otherwise is foolish.)

Anyways, I agree with Cloud 9. Soldiers aren't hero's. They are soldiers. I expect a soldier to do thier job, because it's thier job. However, it is the few soldiers that go above and beyond that are hero's.

Also, the only reason the whole "hero" and "support our troops" thing even exists is to gain support for the war.

I don't mean to degrade soldiers, even though I know it is going to sound like I am doing just that. I don't think the term "hero" should be thrown around so lightly though. A hero must go above and beyond what they are required to do. (And when I say 'above and beyond' I mean it) A hero makes a huge impact. One soldier does not. A hero is someone like MLK jr. Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, and possibly John Paul II. I can't think of any soldiers who could be considered a hero at the moment (Although I know that there are some.) Possibly Eisenhower or Audy(sp?) Murphy.

A hero is one in a million, a soldier is a dime a dozen. Only an individual can be a hero, an entire subgroup of people cannot, and it doesn't make sense to believe that they are.

Once again, I would like to reiterate the fact that I mean no disrespect to soldiers, even though it probably sounds disrespectful. However, intent and content are different things.


EDIT: I also would like to mention that I don't like the title of this thread. I don't think we should be against war heros. We should simply be against war. I think the title of this thread is disrespectful and misleading.

I guess the whole thing depends on your definition of a hero. I see a hero a someone who goes out of his or her way to improve other peoples' lives.

Quote:

---

the duty though is not extra-ordinary. to be extraordinary it has to be rare. it's not there a few hundred million soldiers in the world to proof that.

---

Anytime someone puts their life on the line, or enters a situation where there's a chance it will be on the line, for their country, they're doing something extraordinary--it doesn't matter if there's a billion other people doing it.

Quote:

---

Also, the only reason the whole "hero" and "support our troops" thing even exists is to gain support for the war.

---

You'd be surprised how many of us horrible conservatives have always supported the military....

Quote:

---

Anyway, it doesn't matter if a soldier is an F-16 pilot patrolling the skies, an army private sitting in a foxhole, or an airman at home with a desk job. The sacrifice is still the same - to serve, above all else.

---

Moreover, experience has proved again and again that just because you don't go all-out bullet-stopper infantry grunt doesn't mean you won't see combat. My drill sergeant, when I was in, told me that one of the best soldiers he ever fought beside was admin--the guy did paperwork, when folks weren't shooting at him.

Quote:

---

If you were in a uniform in Seattle, Washington. It's like your the enemy, you get spit on...

---

That's a load of crap. I've never seen that happen and I LIVE in Seattle, thank you very much. Generally if someone does anything, it's shy away from them because they might be a recruiter (especially if they're on a school campus, then you KNOW that's what they're there for).

And frankly I think this entire thread is more than a little offensive. While I might not agree with the war I think the actions of the military should be taken on a case by case basis and a thread like this is highly insulting to many of the soldiers we have on this forum, the expectations of a soldier are generally beyond what most of us face, and I do not believe any of us have the right to say something like this to any of them.

Well as someone said it depends on your definitions.

Hero- How do you define it? You do something few others can, is how I see it. And that would mean it would have to be rare. Depends on your view.

Extraodinary(out of the ordinary I believe is the dictionary def.)- I personally don't think it is overly extraondinary to be a soldier.. though it may be lightly so since you need many skills. But extraodinary to me is someone with an IQ or 190 plus, who can really show their intellegence, to me High intellegence is extraodinary(most people in my area are average, so that is probably why, not to mention my IQ is not 190, and I doubt I could ever attain such a score.. if I did I would have that test reevaluated, rechecked, and rinse and repeat till the score comes out right) Oh yes a very good(lets say state champ) female wrestler that I knew would register as extraodinary to me.

Here is the dictionary listings:
Beyond what is ordinary or usual
Highly exceptional; remarkable
Employed or used for a special service, function, or occasion

Seems like you must be out of the ordinary to qualify as extraordinary.

Oh yes lets define hero while we are at it.
Hero:
A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life:
A person noted for special achievement in a particular field

these two definitions(which are the ones relevant to our discusion I think) fall into two categories. First can qualify many, many people such as firemen, cops, soldiers, etc. So there we could say that one is a hero. However, nobility of purpose is questionable in some eyes so that may tarnish the first definition.

Second "noted for special acheivement", this is how I think it is commonly took when dealing with the military, and in general.

From the above I can thus conclude that the average soldier is not extraordinary, nor a hero. Some soldiers are both, some are one or the other, some are neither.

Please do not take this as bashing, I mean it to be a reasonable discusion.

P.S. my early *guessed* definitions weren't too far off, YIPEE.

An ordinary person does not give up liberty, luxury, and life to defend his or her country. A soldier does. By pure and simple definition, this makes any soldier "extra-ordinary" - more than ordinary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Behold the Void

And frankly I think this entire thread is more than a little offensive. While I might not agree with the war I think the actions of the military should be taken on a case by case basis and a thread like this is highly insulting to many of the soldiers we have on this forum, the expectations of a soldier are generally beyond what most of us face, and I do not believe any of us have the right to say something like this to any of them.

---

Thank you very much. I'm glad someone has their head on straight here.

I do not think it is really all that acceptional. Many people will give up liberties, luxury, and/or life for what they believe in and sometimes in what they don't.

Whenever one marries they give up some liberties, marriage is a series of compromises.

Luxury is oftentimes also willing given up for many reasons.

Life is definately the rarest of this to be given up. But I am not sure that many people join the army thinking they will die. They don't think it can happen to them. that it will strike others. or that is how I have percieved many that I know went into the military thought.



Personally I am taking this more as an impersonal debate then anything. discussing exactly what a soldier does and what it qualifies as is not truely bashing, rahter it may help broaden the views of some, or to help refine our overall definitions.

P.S. I need to take a shower so I didn't bother listing everything people do that limit liberties, and/or luxury, etc.. I am certian if you think about it you can find them.

Oh yes one last thing, most people I know go to the military for money, and college stuff... thus they aren't giving it up for thier country, rather for the benefits THEY can gain. They openly admit it to me.. they would not go to the military if the benefits weren't there. only if American soil was attacked would they be willing to fight.(about 6-7 people that I know have joined the military since afghanistan.. and the reason they went was for the education money.. they were hard up on cash.. and they figured this would be a good way to get it. Defending the country may have helped but the benifits is what hooked them)

The thing is, we never asked to be called heroes. We believe in selfless service, support is a wonderful thing but it's not manditory. Being thanked for my service means alot to me and I appreciate it, but I didn't sign up for titles.

I think it's great that people can look up to soldiers as heroes and can respect the profession. Unfortunately not everyone feels that way, but we'll drive on.

Quote:

---

You'd be surprised how many of us horrible conservatives have always supported the military....

---

You tend to do so every time there is a war. There is nothing wrong with supporting the troops. However, when it turns into "support the troops" bumper stickers, and refrigerator magnets, and stupid yellow ribbons it crosses the border from support, to absurdity. I must ask, how does having a bumper sticker that says "support the troops" do anything to support the troops? It does nothing. The troops that need support can't even see it. All it does is rally support on the homefront and thats what it was designed for. It's a way of saying "support the war" but you can't disagree without looking like a horrible bastard. Personally, I think it's somewhat disrespectful to soldiers to use them in that manner.

Well I'm against war, and those who participate in it. Period. That's all I'll say though because if I say any more someone might decide to ban me again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocFrance

I guess the whole thing depends on your definition of a hero. I see a hero a someone who goes out of his or her way to improve other peoples' lives.

---

My problem with that, is that the improvement on one person's life will, whenever a soldier is concerned, always come at the expense of another person's life.

this thread was not meant to be offensive for a start . to say that i don't worship the ground every soldier walks on is not offensive.

being a soldier is not what it was in the second world war. it's a career. it's not something which is done in the same way it was against fascism. the international brigades is spain are the closest you can get to heroes. men who gave up everything to fight in a war without support from the military or government backing in order to fight against something they did not believe in. that in my view is one of the greatest things ever done in that time period.

career soldiers decided to join the armed forces and get alot out of it. they were at my school enough times telling me about scholarships and sports and good pensions and all this other stuff. it was not advertised as "be a hero". it was advertised as a career with alot of perks.

not all soldiers are shot at and not all will show bravery under fire. not all will risk their life and limb for a comrade or civiliian. yes there are soldiers who are heros and deserve every respect for what they did. and most soliders should be respected for what they do in the same way i respect a man with any career.

this thread wasn't meant to be offensive but a discussion on soldiers as not all needing to be classed as heros and better than everyone else for their job.

Cloud, how much experience do you have being a soldier, if any at all? Or are you just throwing out wild assumptions based on your personal beliefs?

I don't care if you don't "worship the ground every soldier walks on." But saying that giving up life and liberty for others is nothing more than ordinary is an insult to me.

why do i need experience of being soldier to claim that he is human?

soldiers do not give up their life and liberty on some little selfless path they have. it is a career choice they made for alot of reasons in the same way doctors, lawyers and engineers make the same decision at the same time. all may do something amazing in their time but not all are superior beings based purely on their job.

Quote:

---

You'd be surprised how many of us horrible conservatives have always supported the military....

---

You'd be suprised how many of us hippie liberal pacifists also support the military.

i support the military. this is not an anti-war or anti-militarty thread. it is an anti-everyoneinthemilitaryisahero thread.

Quote:

---

You tend to do so every time there is a war. There is nothing wrong with supporting the troops. However, when it turns into "support the troops" bumper stickers, and refrigerator magnets, and stupid yellow ribbons it crosses the border from support, to absurdity. I must ask, how does having a bumper sticker that says "support the troops" do anything to support the troops? It does nothing. The troops that need support can't even see it. All it does is rally support on the homefront and thats what it was designed for. It's a way of saying "support the war" but you can't disagree without looking like a horrible bastard. Personally, I think it's somewhat disrespectful to soldiers to use them in that manner.

---

Well I like seeing the bumper stickers/magnets, and it comforts me to see people care about the military. Me coming from a military family, and am in the Army and all. See if you ever came to Bremerton, Wa practically everyone has one on their car almost, because this is a navy town, some families have family/relatives currently serving in Iraq.

It's self preference I guess, if you dont like them you dont like them, if you like them you like them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocFrance

Cloud, how much experience do you have being a soldier, if any at all? Or are you just throwing out wild assumptions based on your personal beliefs?

I don't care if you don't "worship the ground every soldier walks on." But saying that giving up life and liberty for others is nothing more than ordinary is an insult to me.

---

I pretty much agree there.

Anyone who puts on that uniform, and is prepared to defend the country, is the only reason that u can say what ur saying. Without soldiers some country with soldiers, would walk in and enslave us. That is why every soldier should be honored for their commitment and sacrifice for people they dont even know.

Quote:

---

Anyone who puts on that uniform, and is prepared to defend the country, is the only reason that u can say what ur saying. Without soldiers some country with soldiers, would walk in and enslave us. That is why every soldier should be honored for their commitment and sacrifice for people they dont even know.

---

Oh please... That argument is baseless. Yes it is true that without soldiers we would be conquered, but when was the last time they actually "fought for our freedom"? They haven't done it often, and they haven't done it for a loooong time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane

Without soldiers some country with soldiers, would walk in and enslave us. That is why every soldier should be honored for their commitment and sacrifice for people they dont even know.

---

And who thanks the soldiers of the opposite country enslaving the country without soldiers?

My question is, are soldiers defending the interests of the people or the interests of the goverment? As far as I know, the first thing they defend is the interests of the goverment. If the interests of the goverment are the same as the interests of the people- and they should be, in a correct goverment- it depends on the occasion. Some people say this war represents the interests of both the American and Iraqui people. Some say it represents the interests of multinationals. Some say both. In the end, it's a matter of your vision of the situation, but I wouldn't jump to say soldiers always defend the people or that soldiers defend private interests.

Because tell me, in the Spanish Civil War, who defended the people? The Nationals or the Republicans? In the Cuban revolution? The pro Batista or the anti-Batista? In Vietnam, the South or the North? In the Napoleonic wars, the French or the local armies? In the liberation of Greece, the rebels or the Ottoman soldiers? In the current iraqui war, the alliance troops or the resistance troops?

In the end it's all a matter of your views on the whole thing. Sometimes it's one, sometimes the other, sometimes none.

I better put in my input before this thread goes bonkers.

Anyways, Im not saying Im going to support people like that one female soldier who did those photo shoots of the Iraqi prisoners back in Jan 03 I believe. And just because someone puts on a uniform doesnt mean that they arnt going to sacrifice my selfish ass either. I want to know what the bastards are thinking who put people up in the frontlines. We are all human, and ignorance is bliss. Thats all im saying

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane

Without soldiers some country with soldiers, would walk in and enslave us.

---

Well I sure don't know 'bout your area but I know in my area the people here would fight like wildcats for the defense if we were being invaded. Goodness gracias it isn't too far of a strech to say that farmers would try and make tanks out of thier combines, we have many LARGE, and sometimes NASTY, HUMAN BITING dogs here as well. Not to mention we have a nuclear plant withing 20-40 miles(if I recall correctly) that is still active enough we could use it as bomb.

Trust me, if someone invaded the US there would be plenty willing to fight and sacrifice alot.

Fighting for money/benifits which is why most people I know go into the military, I believe Redneck addressed that once to(that military is a source of money).

Make it so any job just supplies basic neccesity and see what people pick. I am certian there would be far, far fewer soldiers. I know I would either review books or go into computers, which fortunately is what I am good at and will be able to do(Majoring in computers in college... I already fix many people's computers. Usually for free, though if they insist I will accept payment, since it helps the family as whole).

Anyways I am wondering.

Well, at first (i.e. before today) I would disagree with you. I would have said that every person who joins the military, and goes out and fights in a war like this, is a hero in their own way. They all deserve our utmost respect, praise, the whole deal.

But just today, my school had a man come and talk to us, who's registered as a conscientious objector to the war, and he talked about his experiences---mainly how OUR soldiers treated the Iraqu civilians, and prisoners of war. I am DISGUSTED. Now, I am well aware that there are plenty of soldiers who are good people, and stay that way when they go to Iraq, but now I know ther's many who aren't. I was showed pictures of soldiers who were mutilating Iraqi bodiees after they were dead, shooting prisoners of war for throwing sticks and stones at them, breaking their legs and carring them out around the 25 degree weather like it's some sort of game. Keeping civilians in prison for 6 months to a year for doing nothing, and then treating them like crap. THESE are not heros, in my opinion. So I'll go along and say that the average soldier isn't a hero. Sure, he'll give up his life for his country, and I can respect and admire that, but if he's participated in the above acts, no way. That's just doing too much evil for me.


:D

Unfortunately while that may not be the norm it does happen. Something when you are in a situation like that can put you "over the edge". You may do things you would otherwise not do. A couple teachers spent a while talking about it and what can psychologically lead to it, but that was a while ago and I did not follow it well.

Soldiers for the most part are like any other population group. There are bad soldiers, good soldiers, great soldiers, and average soldiers. Average don't really deserve any more respect then any one else who works to help.

I know several people in the local animal rescue group and they give up alot of time, money(transferable to luxuries), and even thier health in some instances to help fix the wrongs that our kind has done. I help them when I can, but I don't actually do much with the animals. I help with fund raisers, I take care of the building's lawn and maintance, etc.

Also these people don't stop there, they do many hospital/nursing homes/etc visits with the dogs. You know TDI(Therapy dog international). It is amazing how much this sick, many times elder, people respond to the dogs, particually when you compare to how they normally act. I also help with TDI, My dog is actually quite popular. She is medium sized(easy to get up to thier height to pet) but not too heavy, so they can hold her. And she is soft and silky.. I like to just sit there and run my hands through her hair, and so do they. Also I taught her to walk on her hind legs, and I dress her up in a bonnet, so she looks adorable. The older ones love this. We call my dog the little ol' lady sometimes. I just wish I had glasses I could get to stay on her head.

Enough ranting, those people at the animal rescue who also donate time and money for hospital visits and such, as well as run drives when 9/11 happened are all in one club, that I participate in, though I prefer behind the scenes work, cept in therapy(though those visits can be emotionally straining at times, my dog is good at it though.. but TDI won't pass her, she needs ok'ed at each place before hand). But This isn't the only such club that spends time, money, health to help people and animals, these clubs are countrywide. And there are several of them in my area alone. On some of those visits I see people visiting wiht animals that I have never seen before. And the club is growing, rather then shrinking.

Quote:

---

You tend to do so every time there is a war. There is nothing wrong with supporting the troops.

---

We also tend to do so when there isn't a war.

Quote:

---

However, when it turns into "support the troops" bumper stickers, and refrigerator magnets, and stupid yellow ribbons it crosses the border from support, to absurdity. I must ask, how does having a bumper sticker that says "support the troops" do anything to support the troops? It does nothing. The troops that need support can't even see it. All it does is rally support on the homefront and thats what it was designed for.

---

And how does wearing a pink ribbon "support" fighting breast cancer? Or a red ribbon support fighting AIDS, or a white ribbon support fighting Leukemia, or a blue ribbon support porn, or whatever other colors might mean (I'm sure there are more--but yellow, pink, red, white, and blue are the only ones I can think of offhand)? Or a black ribbon mean support of Clinton? (Hey, I wore one when he was re-elected...) To assume that Americans voicing their opinion amounts to a conspiracy to trick you into supporting war is... well, I don't understand where you're coming from on this one.

And actually, the troops that need support can see it. TV, pictures, internet, all that good stuff--and quite a few of them have made note of that fact that it means a lot to them to have support at home.

Quote:

---

My problem with that, is that the improvement on one person's life will, whenever a soldier is concerned, always come at the expense of another person's life.

---

Actually, our soldiers spend a lot more time doing everything from digging ditches to shuffling paperwork than we do walking around shooting people. Keep in mind that when the tsunami hit the first folks coming around were US Navy ships--carrying goods and purifying water.

Quote:

---

You'd be suprised how many of us hippie liberal pacifists also support the military.

---

What I've seen so far about how much support the military gets from that quarter hasn't surprised me a bit.

Quote:

---

But just today, my school had a man come and talk to us, who's registered as a conscientious objector to the war, and he talked about his experiences---mainly how OUR soldiers treated the Iraqu civilians, and prisoners of war. I am DISGUSTED.

---

And what kind of evidence did this... fellow have for these claims?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

Actually, our soldiers spend a lot more time doing everything from digging ditches to shuffling paperwork than we do walking around shooting people. Keep in mind that when the tsunami hit the first folks coming around were US Navy ships--carrying goods and purifying water.

---

that is true enough, the army isn't all about killing.

As for the support our troops. I would probably have ribbons and such as: wishing safety, a safe return, etc..

Supporting, in my mind, implies that I aggree with why they are there. A bit odd maybe, but It is how I take. But I do have nothing wrong with people showing thier support.. I just do it my way.



Btw I didn't put this in my last post, but I don't think of the animal rescue people as heros or extraordinary just good people, so in my mind you must at least surpass that. I actually consider them mostly normal. I am a selfish kid, and I can recognize it, I do give time and money, but not as much as I could, I still look out for number 1 first, then maybe if I feel like I will do what I can for them.

Which is why I don't veiw this as bashing, I ain't trying to put them beneth my lvl, many are likely above my lvl, they just aren't at the level of hero or extraordinary in my mind.

Quote:

---

I want to know what the bastards are thinking who put people up in the frontlines.

---

$$$$

Quote:

---

And how does wearing a pink ribbon "support" fighting breast cancer? Or a red ribbon support fighting AIDS, or a white ribbon support fighting Leukemia, or a blue ribbon support porn, or whatever other colors might mean (I'm sure there are more--but yellow, pink, red, white, and blue are the only ones I can think of offhand)? Or a black ribbon mean support of Clinton? (Hey, I wore one when he was re-elected...) To assume that Americans voicing their opinion amounts to a conspiracy to trick you into supporting war is... well, I don't understand where you're coming from on this one.

---

Ribbons don't support anything. They are simply just ways for people to pretend like they are helping. The average individual doesn't really care about any of that stuff.

Also, I don't necessarily mean it is a conspiracy, but the outcome of those ribbons, and stickers, etc. is exactly how I described it.

Quote:

---

And what kind of evidence did this... fellow have for these claims?

---

Oh come on... Do you somehow believe that America is exempt from being the "bad guy"? I don't even need specific instances to know that this stuff happens. You will always have bad guys in this world. Give a bad guy a gun, and well... Thats what happens.

redneck proof of us soldiers treating civilians badly can be seen in both the US and UK scandals regarding human rights abuses in iraq.

but staying on topic. what do i give to these people for supposedly sving my freedom? my taxes which pay for their lving quarters, food, holidays, trips abroad, training, health care, their child's school, the gun in their hand and the plane flying over head, the clubs and sports facilities, water, electricity, gas and a very very nice pension scheme.

above is also why people join the army not to become a hero or save lives. most will never see active duty in iraq. many will spent a year or two in cyprus or malta and never have a bullet go past their ear. they perform thier job as ordered in the same way i do everyday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

And what kind of evidence did this... fellow have for these claims?

---

Oh come on... Do you somehow believe that America is exempt from being the "bad guy"? I don't even need specific instances to know that this stuff happens. You will always have bad guys in this world. Give a bad guy a gun, and well... Thats what happens.

---

I can personally tell you this guy's full of it. You don't think you need specific instances because those "specific instances" never occurred.

Just because we disagree with this doesn't mean we somehow believe that America is "exempt from being the 'bad guy'". Why do some people believe that America is always the "bad guy"?

Quote:

---

I can personally tell you this guy's full of it. You don't think you need specific instances because those "specific instances" never occurred.

---

Uh, Iraqi prisoner abuse doesnt ring a bell?

Quote:

---

Without soldiers some country with soldiers, would walk in and enslave us.

---

I would love to see someone trying to invade the US. When you consider the number of gun owners in this country, the military would be the least of their worries. :D

abuses of power for which soldiers deserve no respect are well documented for a very long time.

as far back in british history as richard the lionheart, in the boer war and that invention of concentration camps, american POW camps in germany during the second world war, abu gahrib, british treatment of civillians, camp x-ray and so forth. to say prisoner abuses by the military have never happened is either great ignorance or an out-right lie.

the point is that a good man is a good man no matter what job he does. a bad man is still a ban man in the military but now he has a gun and greater power. an exceptional military man is an exceptional man. but being in the armed forces does not rise them up above the rest of us.

Quote:

---

I can personally tell you this guy's full of it. You don't think you need specific instances because those "specific instances" never occurred.

---

And you know this becuase??
Every army has trigger happy idiots. It isn't something that is preventable. You are going to get bastards in the army, and those bastards are going to be bastards when given the chance.

Quote:

---

Why do some people believe that America is always the "bad guy"?

---

Because they can't think past thier anger.

Quote:

---

Actually, our soldiers spend a lot more time doing everything from digging ditches to shuffling paperwork than we do walking around shooting people. Keep in mind that when the tsunami hit the first folks coming around were US Navy ships--carrying goods and purifying water.

---

If the armed forces were just about humanitarian missions, the I'd be first on the list to join. However, the primary goal of the military is not to serve humanitarian purposes. It's to operate in hostile situations, and serve the interests of its government in such hostile situations. I do not trust the judgment of any government to be invariably right when it comes to the deployment of forces in such hostile situations, but the nature of the military requires you to do just that.

It is a result of the above, that although I can support the troops from a humane perspective, I cannot support them idealogically.

And my empathy for them only extends so far. They joined the military in full knowledge that they could be placed in an impossible situation by an incompetant government, and so all I really have to say to them is: hope you make it back alive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

Anyone who puts on that uniform, and is prepared to defend the country, is the only reason that u can say what ur saying. Without soldiers some country with soldiers, would walk in and enslave us. That is why every soldier should be honored for their commitment and sacrifice for people they dont even know.

---

Oh please... That argument is baseless. Yes it is true that without soldiers we would be conquered, but when was the last time they actually "fought for our freedom"? They haven't done it often, and they haven't done it for a loooong time.

---

Now take a look at ur post, that is a baseless arguement. See the comparison...

Their EXISTENCE is the reason why u are not conquered and enslaved sir. The fact that not only would any attacking country be defeated, but horribly massaquered is reason why freedom of speech still exists. People sign up to serve and defend freedom, even though they dont even know u. And here we r in a crowd belittling their sacrifice. Their are soldiers out there right now hunting down Osama Bin Laden to bring him to justice, not just to prevent it from happening again, but also for the memories of all those innocent who died because of his actions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara

I would love to see someone trying to invade the US. When you consider the number of gun owners in this country, the military would be the least of their worries.

---

And what if they said "For every one of our soldiers killed, we'll take 500 innocent out into the street and murder them.". I think the violence would slow down pretty quick. The military is here as a preventative against invasion, or forgein attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

abuses of power for which soldiers deserve no respect are well documented for a very long time.

---

Ok, Cloud i understand that there are bad people in the world, and yes some of them put on U.S. Armed Forces Uniforms, and go to work everyday, but its totally riddiculous to point to the few and far between instances of abuse and say that it was everyone, or to suggest every1 behaves as such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

they perform thier job as ordered in the same way i do everyday.

---

Yep and pray they do it well, becauase the military needs to be a well oiled machine, we have to be the best army in the world, with the best equipment and the best training, or else China might think about stepping in, we r her last bit of competition left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

What I've seen so far about how much support the military gets from that quarter hasn't surprised me a bit.

---

Well just know im one that supports our troops sacrifice, hell Aug. 30 im in training to be one, because they need my help and ill be damned if im gonna let someone else protect the freedoms of my family and country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

Trust me, if someone invaded the US there would be plenty willing to fight and sacrifice alot.

---

We have plenty willing to fight and sacrifice alot, they are the US Armed Forces, and they go out every day, for little... very little pay(considering) knowing that everyday they could be called upon to pick up an M16 and possibly die, or worse for their family, friends, loved ones, and most amazingly people they dont even know. Even in the Air Force, there are soldiers that were pulled out of their jobs and are being sent to man the 50 caliber rifles on convoys in Iraq, because the Army and Marines need us there. So every1 knows if something horrible happened like a China/North Korea attack, every in the service could be called upon to fight.

Quote:

---

Their EXISTENCE is the reason why u are not conquered and enslaved sir. The fact that not only would any attacking country be defeated, but horribly massaquered is reason why freedom of speech still exists. People sign up to serve and defend freedom, even though they dont even know u. And here we r in a crowd belittling their sacrifice. Their are soldiers out there right now hunting down Osama Bin Laden to bring him to justice, not just to prevent it from happening again, but also for the memories of all those innocent who died because of his actions.

---

First of all, he agreed with you in the first part of your statement. Second of all, you seemed to ignore the fact that actual times im which American Soldiers fought for our freedom is not often, and most wars or conflicts fought by American troops are done by political motives, not necessarily for the total intrest of the American people. I care a lot about people who sign up to the servies to protect my rights, but if you are here to support such conflicts such as Vietnam and such, I hardly consider that a fight to protect my freedom as you describe it. I'm not going to bash the soldiers who went to that war, because a friend I have went there, but just because we go to war for a reason does not justify it as freedom for us. As for Bin Laden, I would like to hand it to the Bush Administration of the fine job he is tracking down the bastard. Not only did he get away from the Clinton Administration, who were very concerned of the freedom of the American people, and choose to ignore Bin Laden after the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, but he also got away from the Bush Administration, and I'm not too convinced that Bush even cares about finding him or not.

CloudSquallandZidane I took it that people would get that I was talking about people not in the military.

I know many many people in this area alone that while they would never join the military, and some would even evade the draft, if an attack came to our soil they would be up and want a piece of the enemy.

When a battle is brought to home soil many that usually wouldn't fight, will then fight. I myself tend not to like fighting, but mess with my freinds, family, or heck just about anyone in my yard and I'll kick your ass or at least attempt to.

The only real problem with such a civilian army in America would be lack of leadership and centralization.

No back to topic though. You must know far radically different people then I know, cause most people I know when they join the military does it for the benefits and they DO NOT think they will be one to die. Psychologically humans have a habit of thinking things will not hit home, that it CAN'T happen to them. I am certian you have seen such behavior, and that is how the soldiers I have seen act. Now they are good people, but overall they are fairly ordinary. And thus don't actually deserve to be thought of as "Extraordinary".

Disclaimer: keep in mind I am demanding of "Higher" definitions of people . Anyone can be good, but to be "extraordinary"/great requires alot more then just ordinary. And I do not think the majority of soldiers fit that. Many may, just not the majority.

Oh yes I have spoken to family who has served in wars in the past, and you know what.. they never truely believed they would be the "next" to fall.

Quote:

---

Uh, Iraqi prisoner abuse doesnt ring a bell?

---

The Iraqi prisoner abuse is some nasty stuff, but there's two difference involved.

One is that while stripping a guy naked and making him wear a leash is a cruel (and stupid) thing to do to a prisoner, it is not an act equal to the claims these guys were making--mutilating bodies, shooting people for throwing rocks (oh, and next time you hear about prisoners or palestinians throwing rocks at soldiers, look at the film clips--these guys ain't lobbing dirt-clods; they're trying to maim or kill somebody, and if someone's trying to kill me with a rock while I'm carrying a gun, I'm not gonna put down the gun and pick up some rocks, I'm gonna use the gun. People have been killing each other with sticks and stones for thousands of years before the first gun was invented.), or breaking legs and leaving them out in 25-degree weather.

The other is that when people do these things, they're punished. The idiots leashing people in Abu Ghraib are being run through military trials (and military justice--both trials and punishment--is considerably harsher than its civilian counterpart) and are being quite rightly denounced by all sides--even the people who care nothing for the prisoners realize that this is a public relations disaster. Likewise the guy who shot a wounded terrorist in a mosque was run through the grinder--fortunately, he was aquitted, but just the chance that he had killed an innocent was enough to run him through the mill. To claim that the US Armed forces stand for abuses because a few soldiers commit them and are punished it like saying that every nation of the world stands for murder because it happens everywhere.

Quote:

---

And what if they said "For every one of our soldiers killed, we'll take 500 innocent out into the street and murder them.". I think the violence would slow down pretty quick. The military is here as a preventative against invasion, or forgein attack.

---

Herein I disagree. Ever heard of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising? The Jews confined in the Warsaw Ghetto found out what was really happening to the people rounded up and sent to "labor camps", and with something like ten guns, clubs and spears made out of table legs, and rocks, they managed to hold off the assembled might of the Nazi military for more than a month--hell, that's better than France did (Then again, we saved France from the Nazis in about the same manner that Sir Galahad was rescued from Castle Anthrax.). Anybody who tried to invade America would find themselves facing a lot of fairly well-armed civilians. And while many of those would be "average Joes", there would also be a huge number who grew up using guns and stalking game, and a lot of ex-soldiers who would know exactly what they're doing.

Quote:

---

what do i give to these people for supposedly sving my freedom? my taxes which pay for their lving quarters, food, holidays, trips abroad, training, health care, their child's school, the gun in their hand and the plane flying over head, the clubs and sports facilities, water, electricity, gas and a very very nice pension scheme.

---

Have you ever lived in Army barracks, ate Army food, or had Army health-care applied to you? I have, both abroad and in the US, and they're nothing to write home about unless home life really sucks. If you can pay taxes to fund studies on whether long-tailed newts are more sexually agressive or how fast ketchup flows; or to fund such "art" as a crucifix in a jar of urine, drawings of men with bullwhips in their rectums, or a painting of the virgin Mary with elephant crap smeared on her breasts; or to buy some welfare-queen's beer, then surely you could spare a little to pay for the people defending your country--especially since the pay is nothing to do backflips over either. Since the "trips abroad" usually mean "you get to live in even crappier conditions for a year or a year and a half--say goodbye to your wife and hope she's willing to wait for you", I don't count them as evidence of pampering either. Clubs and sports facilities are nice, but in the US at least your taxes don't pay for that--the military tells a couple companies that if they build this stuff they won't have to pay taxes on the money they make, and they raise the rates for it because they can.

Quote:

---

Oh yes I have spoken to family who has served in wars in the past, and you know what.. they never truely believed they would be the "next" to fall.

---

A lot of dead people never thought they would be the "next" to fall. Likewise, a lot of permanently crippled people can tell you that they never thought it would happen to them. Just because they didn't spend their entire tour of duty hidden in a corner certain that the first time they stepped outside they'd get their head shot off doesn't mean that their lives weren't at risk.

More what I meant for that is to try and show that to many people the military is just another job with some good perks. Many many jobs have high to large risk factors. from Cops, Firemen, etc to Animal rescue, Dog wardens. I am ceritan you can think of other high risk jobs.

Keep in mind the reason why I mention many animal services is cause I have the most experience with them and know they don't come without risk.

Yes soldiers risk life, but they don't go in expecting to give up Luxuries, liberty and life. The first two most, that I know do, realize they will give up some things in those two areas. But other people with other jobs/servicies do the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

Quote:

---

Uh, Iraqi prisoner abuse doesnt ring a bell?

---

The Iraqi prisoner abuse is some nasty stuff, but there's two difference involved.

One is that while stripping a guy naked and making him wear a leash is a cruel (and stupid) thing to do to a prisoner, it is not an act equal to the claims these guys were making--mutilating bodies, shooting people for throwing rocks (oh, and next time you hear about prisoners or palestinians throwing rocks at soldiers, look at the film clips--these guys ain't lobbing dirt-clods; they're trying to maim or kill somebody, and if someone's trying to kill me with a rock while I'm carrying a gun, I'm not gonna put down the gun and pick up some rocks, I'm gonna use the gun. People have been killing each other with sticks and stones for thousands of years before the first gun was invented.), or breaking legs and leaving them out in 25-degree weather.

The other is that when people do these things, they're punished. The idiots leashing people in Abu Ghraib are being run through military trials (and military justice--both trials and punishment--is considerably harsher than its civilian counterpart) and are being quite rightly denounced by all sides--even the people who care nothing for the prisoners realize that this is a public relations disaster. Likewise the guy who shot a wounded terrorist in a mosque was run through the grinder--fortunately, he was aquitted, but just the chance that he had killed an innocent was enough to run him through the mill. To claim that the US Armed forces stand for abuses because a few soldiers commit them and are punished it like saying that every nation of the world stands for murder because it happens everywhere.

Quote:

---

And what if they said "For every one of our soldiers killed, we'll take 500 innocent out into the street and murder them.". I think the violence would slow down pretty quick. The military is here as a preventative against invasion, or forgein attack.

---

Herein I disagree. Ever heard of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising? The Jews confined in the Warsaw Ghetto found out what was really happening to the people rounded up and sent to "labor camps", and with something like ten guns, clubs and spears made out of table legs, and rocks, they managed to hold off the assembled might of the Nazi military for more than a month--hell, that's better than France did (Then again, we saved France from the Nazis in about the same manner that Sir Galahad was rescued from Castle Anthrax.). Anybody who tried to invade America would find themselves facing a lot of fairly well-armed civilians. And while many of those would be "average Joes", there would also be a huge number who grew up using guns and stalking game, and a lot of ex-soldiers who would know exactly what they're doing.

Quote:

---

what do i give to these people for supposedly sving my freedom? my taxes which pay for their lving quarters, food, holidays, trips abroad, training, health care, their child's school, the gun in their hand and the plane flying over head, the clubs and sports facilities, water, electricity, gas and a very very nice pension scheme.

---

Have you ever lived in Army barracks, ate Army food, or had Army health-care applied to you? I have, both abroad and in the US, and they're nothing to write home about unless home life really sucks. If you can pay taxes to fund studies on whether long-tailed newts are more sexually agressive or how fast ketchup flows; or to fund such "art" as a crucifix in a jar of urine, drawings of men with bullwhips in their rectums, or a painting of the virgin Mary with elephant crap smeared on her breasts; or to buy some welfare-queen's beer, then surely you could spare a little to pay for the people defending your country--especially since the pay is nothing to do backflips over either. Since the "trips abroad" usually mean "you get to live in even crappier conditions for a year or a year and a half--say goodbye to your wife and hope she's willing to wait for you", I don't count them as evidence of pampering either. Clubs and sports facilities are nice, but in the US at least your taxes don't pay for that--the military tells a couple companies that if they build this stuff they won't have to pay taxes on the money they make, and they raise the rates for it because they can.

Quote:

---

Oh yes I have spoken to family who has served in wars in the past, and you know what.. they never truely believed they would be the "next" to fall.

---

A lot of dead people never thought they would be the "next" to fall. Likewise, a lot of permanently crippled people can tell you that they never thought it would happen to them. Just because they didn't spend their entire tour of duty hidden in a corner certain that the first time they stepped outside they'd get their head shot off doesn't mean that their lives weren't at risk.

---

I'll have to agree with redneck.Anyone who served or serves in the military has my respect.They live in crappy conditions.They actually have to pay for there calls back home when they're overseas.(which international calls are freaking expensive.And the fact that her ein america cell phone companies are doing that anywhere any minutes hting were its free if you call people who are "in".They can do that for the military service men and women I think.You have to have chest hair male or female to be in the military plain and simple.And for someone to complain aobutit (redneck's quotes) i dunno who it is but reall yhtats dumb.So what you paid for my schooling because my dad was in Gulf war and you paid for his "traveling abroad".

Yeah sure shint here are alot of high risk jobs but you can't understand unless you have someone related to you that has been in military service and during war.They'll tell youwhat its like to get shot at.To kill.To see the person next to you get there brain splattered on the bloodsoaked ground and you not get killed.Of course all veterans think they will be the next.Why not your life has no meaning in the battlefield except for the fact that your a number helping the army advance further in the war.Movies don't show war that well.you'll have to experience it for yourself to know.You'll have to see death smell rotten flesh.Heck WW1 whent here was trench battles.IT was horrible gas attacks.People who wer elucky like Hitler who survived a gas attack.I mean killing is killing nad war is horrible.I think they deserve the persk because they barely get crap in the first place.When veterans get back they get a tax cut but they get crappy health care,crappy everything.When the WW1 vets. came back form WW1 they were promised pay fo rhtere service.Why?WW1 was horrible you try living in a flea and tick invested trench were if a gas attack happens you have 2 seconds to put on your gas mask or your dead.Then the artillery shells and all that fun stuff..Then they crossing no-man's land and see your allies cut off one by one thenonce oyu get to the nemies trench you had to face brutal hand to hand combat.Thats WW1 babah and wars int eh 20th century were worse.In my opinoon the 20th century is one of the most violent centuries in human history.But besides teh point WW1 vetts. never got there pay.Vets. still get screwed over today.

Quote:

---

Yes soldiers risk life, but they don't go in expecting to give up Luxuries, liberty and life. The first two most, that I know do, realize they will give up some things in those two areas. But other people with other jobs/servicies do the same thing.

---

People don't become cops, firemen, or dog-catchers expecting to die either--having a death-wish isn't heroism, it's just nuts.

But you do give up a lot of "luxuries", and even more liberty in the armed forces, and unless your recruiter is worse than the average you know it going in. The Army decides where you live ("Adequate" is the best possible description for the living conditions, and rarely do they meet that standard), what you do for a living, what you wear, and even what you say (including off-duty. One time I was threatened with a court-martial because I had an anti-Clinton bumper sticker on my truck (my personal vehicle; not an Army truck), and another I was made to remove my beard even though I was on leave--not exactly torturous, but it goes to show just how far your life is controlled). You do what they tell you, you act how they tell you, you live how they tell you, you talk how they tell you, and you even look how they tell you. You don't get many liberties in the Army--nor are you supposed to.

The introduction myself and my fellow recruits got upon first entering Basic Training was typical, and rather descriptive....

"Hello--I'm Staff Sergeant ------, and this is Sergeant -----. We're going to be your drill sergeants throughout basic training and on behalf of the United States Army we'd like to welcome you to Fort Campbell.

NOW YOU GOT TEN SECONDS TO GET THE **** OFF MY BUS AND EIGHT OF 'EM ARE ALREADY GONE!!"

Quote:

---

They actually have to pay for there calls back home when they're overseas.(which international calls are freaking expensive

---

When I was in Korea, it was six bucks a minute for the first minute and something like a buck fifty a minute after that. On top of the fact that if I wanted to reach anybody in the 'States when they were awake I had to call at about 2 in the morning.

Quote:

---

So what you paid for my schooling because my dad was in Gulf war and you paid for his "traveling abroad".

---

Unless you went to a private school, the taxpayer would be paying for your schooling anyway.

Quote:

---

Now take a look at ur post, that is a baseless arguement. See the comparison...

Their EXISTENCE is the reason why u are not conquered and enslaved sir. The fact that not only would any attacking country be defeated, but horribly massaquered is reason why freedom of speech still exists. People sign up to serve and defend freedom, even though they dont even know u. And here we r in a crowd belittling their sacrifice. Their are soldiers out there right now hunting down Osama Bin Laden to bring him to justice, not just to prevent it from happening again, but also for the memories of all those innocent who died because of his actions.

---

First of all, let's pretend the United States gets rid of EVERY SINGLE soldier. I still do not believe that anyone in thier right mind would invade the United States of America.
Why? Well, let me tell you. We have an intercontinental missle system and a boatload of nukes. Invade America, get destroyed. Period. (And soldiers aren't doing the destroying.)

Also, your argument that the simple existance of soldiers is the root of my freedom is, well, extreme, and hardly applicable to any real life argument. So, I will counter your argument with an equally absurd argument that has no real merit in the real world. It goes a little something like this: If there were no soldiers at all, nobody would have the ability to invade us.

Also, do NOT get me started on the whole Osama thing.

Quote:

---

Ok, Cloud i understand that there are bad people in the world, and yes some of them put on U.S. Armed Forces Uniforms, and go to work everyday, but its totally riddiculous to point to the few and far between instances of abuse and say that it was everyone, or to suggest every1 behaves as such.

---

Did he suggest that everyone behaves as such? No. Quit twisting his words.

Quote:

---

To claim that the US Armed forces stand for abuses because a few soldiers commit them and are punished it like saying that every nation of the world stands for murder because it happens everywhere.

---

I don't recall anybody making such claims.

The existence of soldiers is needed.Why?imperialism and all that good stuff i think.Why use your missile system when we can get them with our intelegence then send a squad in to do a few missions.Warfare has changed dramatically.WE fight wars unfairly.Unconvientional warfare is the war to go now days.The use of soldiers is still needed why?Humanitary aid and lots of other sutff.Like in some parts of africa thats plague with civil wars.MArines usually guad the Ambassy's there when things get rough and americans flee there for safety and they are indeed safe because the presence of the marines will scare off the poorly trained enemy.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

To claim that the US Armed forces stand for abuses because a few soldiers commit them and are punished it like saying that every nation of the world stands for murder because it happens everywhere.

---

I don't recall anybody making such claims.

---

Quote:

---

I was showed pictures of soldiers who were mutilating Iraqi bodiees after they were dead, shooting prisoners of war for throwing sticks and stones at them, breaking their legs and carring them out around the 25 degree weather like it's some sort of game. Keeping civilians in prison for 6 months to a year for doing nothing, and then treating them like crap. THESE are not heros, in my opinion. So I'll go along and say that the average soldier isn't a hero. Sure, he'll give up his life for his country, and I can respect and admire that, but if he's participated in the above acts, no way.

---

Note that Mr. Kikimm refers to soldiers who've participated in the above acts as "the average soldier".

Quote:

---

Also, your argument that the simple existance of soldiers is the root of my freedom is, well, extreme, and hardly applicable to any real life argument. So, I will counter your argument with an equally absurd argument that has no real merit in the real world. It goes a little something like this: If there were no soldiers at all, nobody would have the ability to invade us.

---

Because we don't ever have to worry about riots, or terrorism, or anybody trying to pull uprisings, or any of that fun stuff.

Quote:

---

The existence of soldiers is needed.Why?imperialism and all that good stuff i think.Why use your missile system when we can get them with our intelegence then send a squad in to do a few missions.

---

While my beliefs regarding the"imperialism" argument are, I believe, well-known, I believe you're trying to say, more or less, that we don't need to use a sledgehammer to kill a fly. And since in the case of nuclear weapons our "sledgehammer" will kill millions of people, they're our ultimate last resort--to make them our only resort would be murderously stupid.

I wasn't trying to imply that they become cops/firemen expecting death but rather that cops/firemen also risk life. *shrug* I am semi-clear some of the time the rest I hit outside. meh.

Well if you want to know my mom's technique of solving problems(and what she thinks we should adopt) is: If you suspect they wronged or are going to wrong you, nuke them until nothing stands.. then nuke them some more. And my mother isn't the only one I see that thinks that way. They are many times Violent beyond believe. Oh yeah that is what they were saying we should have done in Afghanistan, Veitnam and Iraq... not too educated in the effects but if they got ahold of one and felt you were threatening.. well that can be quite effective at killing.These people beleive in torture.. And I mean TORTURE.. you know like skinning people and that sort of stuff.. not this so called white noise torture.

Anyways My personaly believe is to have a type of national guard for National defense, that doesn't go out looking for fights. Osama asked for us, he attacked us and was a threat. Iraq was not a *true* threat.


We are off-topic, somewhat. The common soldier, from those I have talked to, don't do anything completely out of the ordinary. Btw The Rednecks example was far more extreme then anything else I have heard even from the guys I have talked to back on leave. So I have no clue what is more common. But I personally do what I want to when I want to, I could care less what law/tradition/rules say. Unless of course they have, to me, highly reasonable reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkey3

First of all, he agreed with you in the first part of your statement. Second of all, you seemed to ignore the fact that actual times im which American Soldiers fought for our freedom is not often, and most wars or conflicts fought by American troops are done by political motives, not necessarily for the total intrest of the American people. ...

I'm not too convinced that Bush even cares about finding him or not.

---

U seem to ignore that like i said, them being soldiers is a deterant(*mai speeling r t3h suxors*) against military action, by other countries against us. I agree we havent fought a nesecary war for a long time, yet, we havent been attacked in longer. Also i dont like the Bush Admin. i dont feel like they are concerned enough with Bin Laden, anymore, but the soldiers have nothing to do with the B. Admin. the Admin. hands down the orders soldiers follow them. Thats it, the soldiers cant help it if they r being abused for political gain, they swore to serve the office of the Presidency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

CloudSquallandZidane I took it that people would get that I was talking about people not in the military.

---

plz, im not an idiot, in fact im technically a genius. I knew u werent talking about soldiers, what i was saying we have soldiers, so people who arent soldiers dont have to fight. So that they arent having their neighborhoods mortered, or bombed. The military is doing right, when the fight isnt at home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

You must know far radically different people then I know, cause most people I know when they join the military does it for the benefits and they DO NOT think they will be one to die.

---

Well i dont think im going to die in the service, i dont think that i am going to be called upon to fight ground combat. But anyone in the Armed Forces, not an officer, who doesnt beileve that if push comes to shove they COULD be called upon, no matter what their Specialty is, to fight on the ground has been tragically misinformed by their recruiter, because it can happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

Disclaimer: keep in mind I am demanding of "Higher" definitions of people . Anyone can be good, but to be "extraordinary"/great requires alot more then just ordinary. And I do not think the majority of soldiers fit that. Many may, just not the majority.

---

I did mistake that earlier, i apologize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

Herein I disagree. Ever heard of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising? The Jews confined in the Warsaw Ghetto found out what was really happening to the people rounded up and sent to "labor camps", and with something like ten guns, clubs and spears made out of table legs, and rocks, they managed to hold off the assembled might of the Nazi military for more than a month--hell, that's better than France did (Then again, we saved France from the Nazis in about the same manner that Sir Galahad was rescued from Castle Anthrax.). Anybody who tried to invade America would find themselves facing a lot of fairly well-armed civilians. And while many of those would be "average Joes", there would also be a huge number who grew up using guns and stalking game, and a lot of ex-soldiers who would know exactly what they're doing.

---

I hadnt ever heard of that example, but i just dont think that the large of people would be willing to fight though, many would, just not the majority. Plus in the example i provided i think that not only would it take the victory out of any casualities inflicted on the enemy, but it would also have a stolkholm syndrome like effect, in which those close to someone killed by the invasion force, would blame the resistance for the death of that person, instead of blaming those who pull the trigger.

Quote:

---

You don't get many liberties in the Army--nor are you supposed to.

---

To add onto what Redneck is saying, u also have a whole new set of laws and regulations to abide by, not just the civilian laws that regularly apply. Like the example of he provided of the Anti-Clinton bumper sticker, its true, they will expect u to 100% be behind the White House, regardless of who u voted for, some might say u give up alittle freedom of speech to protect it, it all comes with the uniform.

and Cops/fireman gt the respect also.WEll in the cop's case int eh ghetto they dont get much respect.But still yeah they pu tthere butt on the line everyday also.But very few cops/fireman has never had Matyr fire at them.

Quote:

---

Note that Mr. Kikimm refers to soldiers who've participated in the above acts as "the average soldier".

---

No, she did not refer to those soldiers as "the average soldier". She simple said that she no longer considers the average soldier to be a hero, and they do not deserve respect if they have participated in those actions. I don't know her personally, but from what I have seen around these message boards, I know Kikimm is FAR too intelligent to actually believe that "the average soldier" comits atrocities. Her statement was kind of worded badly though, so I can understand where you got that idea from.

Quote:

---

While my beliefs regarding the"imperialism" argument are, I believe, well-known, I believe you're trying to say, more or less, that we don't need to use a sledgehammer to kill a fly. And since in the case of nuclear weapons our "sledgehammer" will kill millions of people, they're our ultimate last resort--to make them our only resort would be murderously stupid.

---

What I think he is trying to say is more along the lines of "Without soldiers we can't occupy a country and steal thier resources."

Quote:

---

plz, im not an idiot, in fact im technically a genius. I knew u werent talking about soldiers, what i was saying we have soldiers, so people who arent soldiers dont have to fight. So that they arent having their neighborhoods mortered, or bombed. The military is doing right, when the fight isnt at home.

---

What? I don't understand your point. Was the military doing right in Vietnam? Is the military doing right now? I don't even see how that comment relates to the rest of that part of your post. Please clarify, because that doesn't make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

plz, im not an idiot, in fact im technically a genius. I knew u werent talking about soldiers, what i was saying we have soldiers, so people who arent soldiers dont have to fight. So that they arent having their neighborhoods mortered, or bombed. The military is doing right, when the fight isnt at home.

---

What? I don't understand your point. Was the military doing right in Vietnam? Is the military doing right now? I don't even see how that comment relates to the rest of that part of your post. Please clarify, because that doesn't make sense.

---

Well if u happen to refer to the quote i was quoting when u pulled this away from its original context, u'll see ShunNakamura was commenting on something else i had quoted of his and commented on which was

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

Trust me, if someone invaded the US there would be plenty willing to fight and sacrifice alot.

---

And i was clarifying my response to that statement by saying that the mass of people dont have to do anything, which is GREAT! We have a military to prevent those who would take advantage of the worlds largest economic power. So civilians dont have to sacrifice a thing, the soldiers do.

And about the Vietnam, and the question about is the military doing right, now? It seems to me u have a problem with the leadership, not the soldiers, and should address it as such. The Generals dont even say who to fight, the Administration in office does, and the soldiers follow orders like they are suppose to. They fight whoever the elected representative of the masses tells them to fight, they dont get to say, well... i dont think we are fighting for the right reasons, so im not gonna fight, because they swore that they would fight, whoever is percieved as a threat by the White House.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Did he suggest that everyone behaves as such? No. Quit twisting his words.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

redneck proof of us soldiers treating civilians badly can be seen in both the US and UK scandals regarding human rights abuses in iraq.

---

Well to parade around the Iraqi Prisoner abuse as a defense IS to suggest that the soldiers are bad and out of control, if he wasnt suggesting that he should have pointed them out as a few bad apples. I dont think thats twisting his statements at all. If its just a few people, AND they are being dealt with properly, then i dont see how that is relevant, unless ur saying that the soldiers in general are bad and out of control.

No no no... It suggests nothing, and there is no need to have to point out the fact that they are just a few bad apples becuase that is the obvious truth. There is no reason to take the time to point out the obvious. I believe you said earlier in this thread that "You are not stupid" and I agree. And because you are not stupid, we don't need to treat you as such. We aren't going to take the time to point out what doesn't need to be said.

You are just twisting his words to advance your position in this debate.

actually i do know what army standards of living are like. i come from a very strong military family. my mothers father liberated bergen belsen as part of the cameronians and was a guard in nuremburg. my father's father was part of the team that put the oil pipeline across the channel after d-day. he then served in malta, cyprus, burma, egypt west germany and many places in england. my father's brother served in ireland (where he was nearly killed), libya, belize, germany. my great grandfathers one served in the tank regiment at india, dunkirk and africa where he was taken prisoner. my other grandfather fought and was gassed in the first world war trenches.

my father lived until he was 18 with his mother and father in these places in army quarters and was part of the cadets. and hs recalled many of the places that he lived in and said it was a very good quality of live for his entire family.

Quote:

---

And while many of those would be "average Joes", there would also be a huge number who grew up using guns and stalking game, and a lot of ex-soldiers who would know exactly what they're doing.

---

I can't beleive we actually agree on something. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadow Nexus

And who thanks the soldiers of the opposite country enslaving the country without soldiers?

---

Good question (that no one seems to want to answer...hmm).

I am an Israeli soldier, performing a duty I can say nothing of. Here is what I've got to say to the American (and also non-American) soldiers on this board, regarding those who speak ill of the US and its troopers...

First - suck it up! You are soldiers, doing your duty (whatever that is), so that the ideals upon which the United States are established live on, and so that American citizens are not harmed. One of these values is the democratic value of Freedom of Speech - meaning, every bastard can say whatever he wants, even if it's extremely offensive. You will live, work and die so that that ignorant, oblivious and hateful American can say whatever he wants, without fear. You are a soldier, because had that citizen lived in Saudi Arabia, Syria or China, he wouldn't have been able to say such things, or he would be executed\imprisoned for saying them.

I hope I've got that point through. You have to take the sweet (and there is much sweetness to be found, if you but look for it, with the love and appreciation of many American citizens), along with the bitter. You cannot pick what you want.

Here, this problem isn't as predominant as it is the US. Soldiers here are nearly revered for the sacrifices they make... people here have lost family and friends to the enemy (and there is a lot more than just one, or even a hundred), and should the hounour of those that died for noble causes, or those that live to protect, be harmed... they'd take it personally. Very, very personally.

Few are still ignorant or deluded enough to speak ill of the troops... but they are not many, and not as vocal as they are in other places. Most here know the price of freedom and security - which are the blood, tears and sweat of many a soldier, doctors, cops, and everyone else who serves the public.

As for those who are devilish enough to disgrace those who sacrifice - shut up, really. I'd like to see you stand in-front of someone who has lost a loved one, and tell them it's alright they died, or perhaps that they deserved it. Can you do that? If not, good. If yes - I hope you can look at yourself in the mirror, 'cause those horns don't look too nice. It's one thing to criticise the goverment (which Americans do way too much, seemingly forgetting they elected that goverment, not taking any responsibility) or some of the actions of some of the soldiers (and yes, some troops forget why they are what they are, and lean towards the side of evil, doing dis-honourable things, disgracing the name of others), than to say hateful, pointless things about values you know nothing of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

As for those who are devilish enough to disgrace those who sacrifice - shut up, really. I'd like to see you stand in-front of someone who has lost a loved one, and tell them it's alright they died, or perhaps that they deserved it. Can you do that? If not, good. If yes - I hope you can look at yourself in the mirror, 'cause those horns don't look too nice. It's one thing to criticise the goverment (which Americans do way too much, seemingly forgetting they elected that goverment, not taking any responsibility) or some of the actions of some of the soldiers (and yes, some troops forget why they are what they are, and lean towards the side of evil, doing dis-honourable things, disgracing the name of others), than to say hateful, pointless things about values you know nothing of.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

As for those who are devilish enough to disgrace those who sacrifice - shut up, really. I'd like to see you stand in-front of someone who has lost a loved one, and tell them it's alright they died, or perhaps that they deserved it. Can you do that? If not, good. If yes - I hope you can look at yourself in the mirror, 'cause those horns don't look too nice.

---

I don't understand...if you're the soldier, you're the one doing the killing of the loved ones, are you not? Why is it ok so long as it's not the people you know/live next to dying?

Quote:

---

Why is it ok so long as it's not the people you know/live next to dying?

---

I kill (or assist those who kill), so that the enemy cannot perform his own plans on killing us. Of-course my own loved ones are more important to me than my enemy's! I would not think twice before killing one of the enemy's men, to save my own. That's just how human nature is - we protect what is ours, what we care for and love. I don't really see the point in your question.

I don't see anywhere in this thread where anyone has said it is alright for a soldier to die, or that they deserved it. Just saying the average soldier is not a hero/extraordinary. They may be good people and most likely are, but that doesn't make them extraordinary.. I know many good people and a few great people, but I've yet to make an acquantance of an extraordinary person.

Quote:

---

Just saying the average soldier is not a hero/extraordinary.

---

The average soldier is just that - average. However, there is nothing average about risking your life, or performing a duty that will save lives. Non-combat soldiers who dedicate their lives are to be praised, too... though, it is not quite as risking life and limb (literally) for a greater cause, or simply to save your friends, who are risking their own life for you, the nation and the people living in it.

A fireman is a hero. A doctor is a hero. ANYONE who does their job\duty, and their job has a direct effect on people's lives (and the risk of losing them), is a hero in my eyes. The sheer and absolute responsibility for life, death and everything in between... that's like being a God on Earth, almost.

war angel a man until his last paragraph there i disagreed with has made a few points. but i'll point out a few i believe false.

you say that the non-combat soldiers are not as great as combat soldiers. but surely there are just as important. they provide you with intel that could save your life, maintain the equipment you fight with, transport you, cook your meals etc.

but again these men are doing what they signed up for. what the job entails and what they agreed to. and this isn't a job which is selfless it's a two way thing. like any job if you do a job which is required enough it is paid highly and not only that comes with alot of perks. the very healthy pension and scholarships being two. i on the other hand perform a job which is not as required as a soldier nor as dangerous (save ripping a few ligaments on a bouncy castle) and i have a job with less perks. once i've been ro uni gained a degree and have a better job which is more required (i'm studying software engineering just for detail) then i bloody well hope i am paid more and have a better life for that. if the enemy was a totally selfless job and everyone in it was heros then i will throw up a question. if the army was toally voluntary without pay or pension how many people here would still have enlisted for the "sake of queen and country" or would you have chosen another job and career like i would if i was told i wouldn't be paid for a job i had though of doing?

of course there are people who do something purely out of pure goodness without pay the RNLI being by far the most obvious. these people risk their life everyday for no wage at all same with the international brigades in spain. i must say i hold these men in higher regard than i do soldiers.

this is not to say i don't respect soldiers for what they do. i do. this is not what this thread was about. i respect them as much as any other man and i respect an exceptional or courageous soldier the same way i respect a man who has done great things outside the military.

this thread was closer to "a man is a man no matter he does to earn his money and deserves equal respect" than anything else and i believe it has been twisted a great deal.

war angel as much as i diagree with the war in the middle east and israeli actions and orders you may have been given i do not think lowly of any soldier though i will think of any crimes he commits. so i do respect you for what you have done and that goes for any other soldier who has reads and/or has been offended by thsi thread. it was not meant in the terms many took it.

also i am not american so never elected their government and so shoudl be free to critisice them. and i did not elect my own government as i will not be permitted to vote in the general election until i am 21 forcing me to live under them and critisice them as much as i want until then.

Quote:

---

A fireman is a hero. A doctor is a hero. ANYONE who does their job\duty, and their job has a direct effect on people's lives (and the risk of losing them), is a hero in my eyes.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

As for those who are devilish enough to disgrace those who sacrifice - shut up, really. I'd like to see you stand in-front of someone who has lost a loved one, and tell them it's alright they died, or perhaps that they deserved it.

---

You are bringing something up that can be found nowhere in this thread. Nobody has said anything about it being okay for someone to have died, or that they deserved it. I don't know where you get these dumb ideas from.

Also, I refuse to "shut up" just because you don't like what I'm saying.

Quote:

---

to say hateful, pointless things about values you know nothing of.

---

Nobody is saying hateful things. We simply said soldiers arent heros by default. This, of course, pissed you off, because you are a soldier. Nobody is saying hateful things about soldiers. Sorry, but they aren't.

Quote:

---

A fireman is a hero. A doctor is a hero. ANYONE who does their job\duty, and their job has a direct effect on people's lives (and the risk of losing them), is a hero in my eyes.

---

I disagree. A fireman is a fireman, and a doctor is a doctor. A fireman who goes beyond what is required of his job and puts something he values at risk to help another is a hero. Same with a doctor, same with a soldier.

First of all, nobody becomes a soldier for the money. The money, college assistance, whatever might help, but anybody who thinks "I'm gonna enlist in the military and get rich!" is incredibly ignorant.

Secondly, when every job requires its employees to spend months in training, get put through physical, mental, and emotional abuse, leave their families and friends for months or years at a time, learn completely new skills that wouldn't be useful to 99% of the civilian population, spend countless hours without food or sleep in the harshest of natural conditions, and be located in places surrounded by people with the means and motive to kill you with a wide variety of weapons...when everybody's job entails that, then, and only then, can you say that soldiers are no more heroic than anybody else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

A fireman who goes beyond what is required of his job and puts something he values at risk to help another is a hero.

---

That IS a soldier's job. That's what they sign up for, that's what they know they'll do. And that's why they do it.

War Angel -- Frankly, don't expect those who have never been soldiers to understand it. Just as we didn't understand as much before we became soldiers, those who have never been, and will never be, soldiers will never understand it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

Non-combat soldiers who dedicate their lives are to be praised, too... though, it is not quite as risking life and limb (literally) for a greater cause, or simply to save your friends, who are risking their own life for you, the nation and the people living in it.

---

hmm... i think anyone who signs the contract, shouldnt be called a NON-combat soldier, i mean i dont know how it is in Israel, but here there is no such thing. Even if ur scrubbing toliets u can be called upon to battle. In the Air Force we have a few mechanics who were called upon, to supplement the Army by defending convoys in Iraq, on the ground.

"A professional soldier knows that war means killing people, war means maiming people, war means families left without fathers and mothers. All you have to do is hold your first dying soldier in your arms, and have that terribly futile feeling that his life is flowing out and you can't do anything about it. Then you understand the horror of war. Any soldier worth his salt should be anti-war. And still there are things worth fighting for."
--General H. Norman Schwarzkopf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

I am an Israeli soldier, performing a duty I can say nothing of. Here is what I've got to say to the American (and also non-American) soldiers on this board, regarding those who speak ill of the US and its troopers...

First - suck it up! You are soldiers, doing your duty (whatever that is), so that the ideals upon which the United States are established live on, and so that American citizens are not harmed. One of these values is the democratic value of Freedom of Speech - meaning, every bastard can say whatever he wants, even if it's extremely offensive. You will live, work and die so that that ignorant, oblivious and hateful American can say whatever he wants, without fear. You are a soldier, because had that citizen lived in Saudi Arabia, Syria or China, he wouldn't have been able to say such things, or he would be executed\imprisoned for saying them.

I hope I've got that point through. You have to take the sweet (and there is much sweetness to be found, if you but look for it, with the love and appreciation of many American citizens), along with the bitter. You cannot pick what you want.

Here, this problem isn't as predominant as it is the US. Soldiers here are nearly revered for the sacrifices they make... people here have lost family and friends to the enemy (and there is a lot more than just one, or even a hundred), and should the hounour of those that died for noble causes, or those that live to protect, be harmed... they'd take it personally. Very, very personally.

Few are still ignorant or deluded enough to speak ill of the troops... but they are not many, and not as vocal as they are in other places. Most here know the price of freedom and security - which are the blood, tears and sweat of many a soldier, doctors, cops, and everyone else who serves the public.

As for those who are devilish enough to disgrace those who sacrifice - shut up, really. I'd like to see you stand in-front of someone who has lost a loved one, and tell them it's alright they died, or perhaps that they deserved it. Can you do that? If not, good. If yes - I hope you can look at yourself in the mirror, 'cause those horns don't look too nice. It's one thing to criticise the goverment (which Americans do way too much, seemingly forgetting they elected that goverment, not taking any responsibility) or some of the actions of some of the soldiers (and yes, some troops forget why they are what they are, and lean towards the side of evil, doing dis-honourable things, disgracing the name of others), than to say hateful, pointless things about values you know nothing of.

---

nicely said.Thats what I've been trying to say but hey I'm not even in the military so its tough to be that direct.Its something my dad would've said what you said that is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

As for those who are devilish enough to disgrace those who sacrifice - shut up, really. I'd like to see you stand in-front of someone who has lost a loved one, and tell them it's alright they died, or perhaps that they deserved it.

---

You are bringing something up that can be found nowhere in this thread. Nobody has said anything about it being okay for someone to have died, or that they deserved it. I don't know where you get these dumb ideas from.

Also, I refuse to "shut up" just because you don't like what I'm saying.

Quote:

---

to say hateful, pointless things about values you know nothing of.

---

Nobody is saying hateful things. We simply said soldiers arent heros by default. This, of course, pissed you off, because you are a soldier. Nobody is saying hateful things about soldiers. Sorry, but they aren't.

Quote:

---

A fireman is a hero. A doctor is a hero. ANYONE who does their job\duty, and their job has a direct effect on people's lives (and the risk of losing them), is a hero in my eyes.

---

I disagree. A fireman is a fireman, and a doctor is a doctor. A fireman who goes beyond what is required of his job and puts something he values at risk to help another is a hero. Same with a doctor, same with a soldier.

---

nik0tine your arguement is futile.One thing is.Doctors,Fireman,Police officers,and soldiers,and other jobs.All contribute.They are heroes by default when they go out there and do there jobs no questions asked.
Have you seen the forest fires in California.Its like a 200 feet tall wall of fire and fireman jsut rush and run right into it.That takes guts because from weere i was standing the heat blistered my skin.

When i saw these two undercover cops make a bust on a drug lord.They tried there best to make sure civilians were cleared out the area jsut in case the guy had a gun and the guy did have a ugna nd he did use it.That police officer died.Have you seen someone killed right in your face.You wouldn't understand if you never experienced it.

Soldiers are fighting for your right to say what your saying.They're dying for those reason and you have the nerve to lower there meaning in life.I mean they have a right to have opposition of what you are saying and you have a right to say what you are saying.What defines us is what we say and how we say it.

Please don't double post. --foa

It is the Soldier, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press
It is the Soldier, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech
It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,

who serves beneath the flag,
and who's coffin is draped by the flag,
who allows the protester to burn the flag.
-- Father Dennis Edward O'Brien

I am fairly certian this thread will die out soon, mainly cause just about everything has been discussed.

Simply put it seems that we just can't aggree what exactly is a hero/extraordinary, we each percieve those words differently. For me those two words carry a lot of wieght and thus I don't give such praise easily. I may admire someone without thinking they are extraordinary or a hero.

The soldiers do do stuff that I would not want or could not do, and for that they deserve respect, which people, imo, should have for oneanother(to varing degrees). But that still does not make them extraordinary, or even a better a person. Just that they have a different meem of what is acceptable to give up. To take injury or to lose some liberties(I won't say life since we aggree no one tends to think "oh I will die") I can do under many circumstances.. and I am far from extraordinary. The only thing is I have certian things that I won't give up/can't give up cause they are such an intricate part. And one of them is free-thought/action. This partially stems from that in feilds I am adjusted to many times I am right, even if someone with more experience says I am not (recently happened too).

If neccesarily I could try and describe what exactly is constituted as extraordinary but for me to do so would require a heck of a lot of writing and explaining of my personal "grading" system.

Quote:

---

nik0tine your arguement is futile.One thing is.Doctors,Fireman,Police officers,and soldiers,and other jobs.All contribute.They are heroes by default when they go out there and do there jobs no questions asked.
Have you seen the forest fires in California.Its like a 200 feet tall wall of fire and fireman jsut rush and run right into it.That takes guts because from weere i was standing the heat blistered my skin.

---

My argument is not futile. YOUR argument is illogical. (At least, when you post it is. Others have been able to hold up your end of the argument rather nicely, but you keep posting irrelevant nonsense.) First of all, Hero's by default? Don't make me laugh. In your mind they may all be hero's. However, what goes through your mind isn't necessarily right, but it IS most definetly subjective. There is no way for either of us to truly win this argument because neither of us will concede. We have our own logic that the both of us (rather unintelligently I might add) think is infallible.

Also, things become less valuable as they become more and more common. If every soldier, doctor, fireman and police officer is a hero, than being a hero doesn't mean very much. When massive amounts of people are considered a hero, than the value of heroism decreases. Lets say you have a nice red sports car, and NO ONE else in town has a car similar to it. All of a sudden, everybody has a nice red sports car. Is your sports car still novel, or special in any way? No, it's just common. Being a hero is anything but common.

Quote:

---

Have you seen someone killed right in your face.You wouldn't understand if you never experienced it.

---

Oh please... This is just simply a way for you to try and counter my arguments without the need for validity behind your own beliefs. My argument stands.

Quote:

---

Soldiers are fighting for your right to say what your saying.They're dying for those reason and you have the nerve to lower there meaning in life.I mean they have a right to have opposition of what you are saying and you have a right to say what you are saying.What defines us is what we say and how we say it.

---

Oh really? Im unaware of this situation... Where in the world are out soldiers fighting for my right to say what I please?
Also, I am not 'lowering thier meaning in life'. I just simply am not deifying millions of people that I do not know, most of which have never done anything. I would, however, like you to attempt to explain your way through this argument you are trying to make. Just how am I 'lowering thier meaning in life'? Good luck, my friend. You're going to need it.

Quote:

---

It is the Soldier, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press
It is the Soldier, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech
It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,

who serves beneath the flag,
and who's coffin is draped by the flag,
who allows the protester to burn the flag.
-- Father Dennis Edward O'Brien

---

Although I will agree that in the past this has been the case, it is hardly the case today. Can you explain to me how soldiers, when fighting the wars of today, are securing my rights? Oh, and don't even bother using the "They exist, therefore we don't get invaded' argument. Nobody protest the existance of soldiers. They protest the war that the soldiers are participating in at that point in time.

Quote:

---

Can you explain to me how soldiers, when fighting the wars of today, are securing my rights?

---

Taking down madmen with aims on the USA, for a start? If osama, or one of the other islamic nutcases Sodom was helping out, actually gained what they wanted and turned the US into a muslim nation like Iraq or Afghanistan used to be--which, by the way, is one of osama's stated goals--you would see not only rights but the very concept of rights go out the window. Al-Zarqawi, Al-qaeda's "prince" in Iraq, has been very clear that they see democracy as an evil that they must defeat.

Quote:

---

Oh, and don't even bother using the "They exist, therefore we don't get invaded' argument. Nobody protest the existance of soldiers.

---

You'd be surprised...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

nik0tine your arguement is futile.One thing is.Doctors,Fireman,Police officers,and soldiers,and other jobs.All contribute.They are heroes by default when they go out there and do there jobs no questions asked.
Have you seen the forest fires in California.Its like a 200 feet tall wall of fire and fireman jsut rush and run right into it.That takes guts because from weere i was standing the heat blistered my skin.

---

My argument is not futile. YOUR argument is illogical. (At least, when you post it is. Others have been able to hold up your end of the argument rather nicely, but you keep posting irrelevant nonsense.) First of all, Hero's by default? Don't make me laugh. In your mind they may all be hero's. However, what goes through your mind isn't necessarily right, but it IS most definetly subjective. There is no way for either of us to truly win this argument because neither of us will concede. We have our own logic that the both of us (rather unintelligently I might add) think is infallible.

Also, things become less valuable as they become more and more common. If every soldier, doctor, fireman and police officer is a hero, than being a hero doesn't mean very much. When massive amounts of people are considered a hero, than the value of heroism decreases. Lets say you have a nice red sports car, and NO ONE else in town has a car similar to it. All of a sudden, everybody has a nice red sports car. Is your sports car still novel, or special in any way? No, it's just common. Being a hero is anything but common.

---

Not by default, but because of the nature of the job. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand this. The nature of a soldier is that he joins with the understanding that at any moment he could lose his life. He joins anyway. He works to help people that quite frankly hate him. He fights for them anyway. This is why a soldier is special, it isn't like other jobs where "hardship" means that you have to work an hour late because you need to make a deadline. It's isn't like other jobs where you can show up on time and half-ass your way through the day while planning your weekend BBQ. The job of a soldier (or a cop for that matter) is unique because it is a full time thing requiring 100% dedication.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Have you seen someone killed right in your face.You wouldn't understand if you never experienced it.

---

Oh please... This is just simply a way for you to try and counter my arguments without the need for validity behind your own beliefs. My argument stands.

---

No it isn't. It's a way to get at the heart of the matter. Being a soldier requires a sacrifice. The nature of being a soldier is that at any moment, a soldier might see someone killed or be killed himself. That's what the job requires. This isn't the typical 9-5 thing.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Soldiers are fighting for your right to say what your saying.They're dying for those reason and you have the nerve to lower there meaning in life.I mean they have a right to have opposition of what you are saying and you have a right to say what you are saying.What defines us is what we say and how we say it.

---

Oh really? Im unaware of this situation... Where in the world are out soldiers fighting for my right to say what I please?
Also, I am not 'lowering thier meaning in life'. I just simply am not deifying millions of people that I do not know, most of which have never done anything. I would, however, like you to attempt to explain your way through this argument you are trying to make. Just how am I 'lowering thier meaning in life'? Good luck, my friend. You're going to need it.

---

Actually it does lower it. You seem to be trying to take the work a soldier does and turn it into something no more significant than the graveyard shift at Steak & Shake. Very few people go to work willing to sacrifice their lives for their jobs.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It is the Soldier, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press
It is the Soldier, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech
It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,

who serves beneath the flag,
and who's coffin is draped by the flag,
who allows the protester to burn the flag.
-- Father Dennis Edward O'Brien

---

Although I will agree that in the past this has been the case, it is hardly the case today. Can you explain to me how soldiers, when fighting the wars of today, are securing my rights? Oh, and don't even bother using the "They exist, therefore we don't get invaded' argument. Nobody protest the existance of soldiers. They protest the war that the soldiers are participating in at that point in time.

---

I'll have to agree with redneck here. Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other places. You simply must deal with threats before they come here.

Quote:

---

Taking down madmen with aims on the USA, for a start? If osama, or one of the other islamic nutcases Sodom was helping out, actually gained what they wanted and turned the US into a muslim nation like Iraq or Afghanistan used to be--which, by the way, is one of osama's stated goals--you would see not only rights but the very concept of rights go out the window. Al-Zarqawi, Al-qaeda's "prince" in Iraq, has been very clear that they see democracy as an evil that they must defeat.

---

It's absurd to think that they pose any real threat to our rights. When it comes to rights, the only person we should be worried about is the president.

Quote:

---

Not by default, but because of the nature of the job. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand this.

---

I understand the argument just fine. That doesn't mean I buy into it.

Quote:

---

The job of a soldier (or a cop for that matter) is unique because it is a full time thing requiring 100% dedication.

---

Anybody and everybodys job is a full time thing (at least when they are at work) that requires 100% dedication. That doesn't mean that 100% is what people put out. It's the same with soldiers. Not all soldiers give 100%, just like people in every other job. I know of some military police who would play nintendo while they were on gaurd duty. That certainly doesn't sound like 100% to me...

Quote:

---

No it isn't. It's a way to get at the heart of the matter. Being a soldier requires a sacrifice. The nature of being a soldier is that at any moment, a soldier might see someone killed or be killed himself. That's what the job requires. This isn't the typical 9-5 thing.

---

All that is true, but it doesn't have anything to do with what was said by whatshisname. He said I couldn't understand if I hadn't seen someone killed in front of my face (And therefore, if I cannot understand, my argument doesn't work). This just simply isn't the case. As I said earlier, my argument stands.

Quote:

---

Actually it does lower it. You seem to be trying to take the work a soldier does and turn it into something no more significant than the graveyard shift at Steak & Shake. Very few people go to work willing to sacrifice their lives for their jobs.

---

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, and deciding the meaning behind my words for me.

Quote:

---

I'll have to agree with redneck here. Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other places. You simply must deal with threats before they come here.

---

If only they were threats...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

nik0tine your arguement is futile.One thing is.Doctors,Fireman,Police officers,and soldiers,and other jobs.All contribute.They are heroes by default when they go out there and do there jobs no questions asked.
Have you seen the forest fires in California.Its like a 200 feet tall wall of fire and fireman jsut rush and run right into it.That takes guts because from weere i was standing the heat blistered my skin.

---

My argument is not futile. YOUR argument is illogical. (At least, when you post it is. Others have been able to hold up your end of the argument rather nicely, but you keep posting irrelevant nonsense.) First of all, Hero's by default? Don't make me laugh. In your mind they may all be hero's. However, what goes through your mind isn't necessarily right, but it IS most definetly subjective. There is no way for either of us to truly win this argument because neither of us will concede. We have our own logic that the both of us (rather unintelligently I might add) think is infallible.

Also, things become less valuable as they become more and more common. If every soldier, doctor, fireman and police officer is a hero, than being a hero doesn't mean very much. When massive amounts of people are considered a hero, than the value of heroism decreases. Lets say you have a nice red sports car, and NO ONE else in town has a car similar to it. All of a sudden, everybody has a nice red sports car. Is your sports car still novel, or special in any way? No, it's just common. Being a hero is anything but common.

Quote:

---

Have you seen someone killed right in your face.You wouldn't understand if you never experienced it.

---

Oh please... This is just simply a way for you to try and counter my arguments without the need for validity behind your own beliefs. My argument stands.

Quote:

---

Soldiers are fighting for your right to say what your saying.They're dying for those reason and you have the nerve to lower there meaning in life.I mean they have a right to have opposition of what you are saying and you have a right to say what you are saying.What defines us is what we say and how we say it.

---

Oh really? Im unaware of this situation... Where in the world are out soldiers fighting for my right to say what I please?
Also, I am not 'lowering thier meaning in life'. I just simply am not deifying millions of people that I do not know, most of which have never done anything. I would, however, like you to attempt to explain your way through this argument you are trying to make. Just how am I 'lowering thier meaning in life'? Good luck, my friend. You're going to need it.

Quote:

---

It is the Soldier, not the reporter who has given us freedom of press
It is the Soldier, not the poet who has given us freedom of speech
It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer who gives us freedom to demonstrate
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,

who serves beneath the flag,
and who's coffin is draped by the flag,
who allows the protester to burn the flag.
-- Father Dennis Edward O'Brien

---

Although I will agree that in the past this has been the case, it is hardly the case today. Can you explain to me how soldiers, when fighting the wars of today, are securing my rights? Oh, and don't even bother using the "They exist, therefore we don't get invaded' argument. Nobody protest the existance of soldiers. They protest the war that the soldiers are participating in at that point in time.

---

ok nik what kind of logic am I suppose to be saying? Yeah so what saying a soldier's job shouldn't be considered ordinary so what i said they get shot at a lot get killed.So what they go through months of training and then shippd out to war.So what theres mothers out there crying and praying for their son's and daughter's safe return.So what parents cry and mourn and are literally hurt stiff when they heard there kid dies in battle.Being a soldier is just an ordinary job.I ugess we shouldn't thank them or say they are heroes because they really are.But your saying the job is ordinary and that soldiers has no purpose and it is a slap in the face with spit on your hands because a lot of people who post here are soldiers.And your telling them that "Hey your job is just as ordinary and safe as being a garbage man." I mean it is a slap in the face. and your "logic" I mean you don't need logic for a debate like this.This is freaking common sense! No one is saying anyone has to be a patriot and support the troops.But a little respect is needed for them,and couldn't hurt.War is war and war is horrible.Do you think a soldier is let in on the political purposes.Heck there are a lot of soldiers who hate bush but when they were sent into Iraq.They have to go.They have to shoot they have to kill they have to get killed.They aren't thinking of the politics because there job requires them to stay alive. I mean if you think this is an ordinary job and should get the respect a janitor gets then really something is wrong iwth society.But hey they are fighting and dying for you to say that.

BTW firemans are true heroes they get paided next to nothing.A lot of them die each year.Doctor's they do there jobs and they do cure a lot of ill people who could've died if it wasn't for our medical technology and the doctors knowledge of illnesses.
Same with police officers.These guys do a lot I mean a lot.Yeah some are bastards but hey there job isn't ordinary.

BTW ALFGANISTAN was were Osama and the taliban was at.You know the people who did the whole 9/11 thing.YEAh nik think think think.You can oppose war but to say these soldiers suck and all of that really isn't logical.

Quote:

---

ok nik what kind of logic am I suppose to be saying? Yeah so what saying a soldier's job shouldn't be considered ordinary so what i said they get shot at a lot get killed.So what they go through months of training and then shippd out to war.So what theres mothers out there crying and praying for their son's and daughter's safe return.So what parents cry and mourn and are literally hurt stiff when they heard there kid dies in battle.Being a soldier is just an ordinary job.I ugess we shouldn't thank them or say they are heroes because they really are.But your saying the job is ordinary and that soldiers has no purpose and it is a slap in the face with spit on your hands because a lot of people who post here are soldiers.

---

Oh really? Sorry, I must have been abusing drugs when I said this, because I don't remember. When did I say that a soldiers job is ordinary, or that they have no purpose? I would like a direct quote please.

Quote:

---

And your telling them that "Hey your job is just as ordinary and safe as being a garbage man."

---

And I said this... when?

Quote:

---

and your "logic" I mean you don't need logic for a debate like this.This is freaking common sense! No one is saying anyone has to be a patriot and support the troops.But a little respect is needed for them,and couldn't hurt.War is war and war is horrible.Do

---

We don't need logic for this debate huh? Well then, I guess I can just prove my point by saying that I am right and everyone else is wrong, because that's the way it is!
And as for respect... I respect the average soldier for being a part of the human race. I can't really extend my respect much farther than that for someone I don't know and hasn't really done anything earth shattering.

Quote:

---

But hey they are fighting and dying for you to say that.

---

Ive said this before, but I disagree. The soldiers currently fighting around the globe are not fighting for my personal interests. To believe that is well... It's just plain stupid.
EDIT: Not necessary. What possible end does saying that serve? Keep those kinds of comments to yourself. -Murder

Quote:

---

BTW firemans are true heroes they get paided next to nothing.A lot of them die each year.Doctor's they do there jobs and they do cure a lot of ill people who could've died if it wasn't for our medical technology and the doctors knowledge of illnesses.
Same with police officers.These guys do a lot I mean a lot.Yeah some are bastards but hey there job isn't ordinary.

---

Okay... so you're saying "If your job requires you to do good, you become a hero"? Again, I disagree. The average person, no matter what his occupation, cannot be a hero in my books. You have to be great. The average person usually cannot become more than average. (If it is even possible at all) For me, it takes more than a job to be a hero.

Quote:

---

BTW ALFGANISTAN was were Osama and the taliban was at.You know the people who did the whole 9/11 thing.YEAh nik think think think.You can oppose war but to say these soldiers suck and all of that really isn't logical.

---

Right. However, they posed no threat to democracy and freedom. They simply don't have the power to overthrow a first world nation, let alone the united states of america. Also, Iraq is exempt from the argument you made. In regards to Osama, well, my feelings on that will open up a whole new can of worms. (In fact, maybe it deserves a thread of it's own.)

One last thing, I did not say that soldiers "sucked". I said they weren't "Hero's by default". How you derive "suck" out of that is beyond me. Im pretty sure my words were clear, but I'll say it again. I mean no disrespect to soldiers. Sorry if you find it offensive that I don't deify them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

I kill (or assist those who kill), so that the enemy cannot perform his own plans on killing us. Of-course my own loved ones are more important to me than my enemy's! I would not think twice before killing one of the enemy's men, to save my own. That's just how human nature is - we protect what is ours, what we care for and love. I don't really see the point in your question.

---

Sorry, but saying "that's just how human nature is" is another way of saying "I'd rather not think about it and come up with a real answer because the fact is it'd make me a hypocrite". I find it quite offensive when people say stuff like that, because by saying something like that is human nature, people are saying I'm the same way (being the fact that I'm a human), and I'm not (proving that it isn't human nature).

And still, you're basically saying exactly my point - when you're killing, you're some honorable soldier person, but when someone's killing people you know and care about, they're a horrible cold dirty murderer terrorist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

Taking down madmen with aims on the USA, for a start? If osama, or one of the other islamic nutcases Sodom was helping out, actually gained what they wanted and turned the US into a muslim nation like Iraq or Afghanistan used to be--which, by the way, is one of osama's stated goals--you would see not only rights but the very concept of rights go out the window. Al-Zarqawi, Al-qaeda's "prince" in Iraq, has been very clear that they see democracy as an evil that they must defeat.

---

It's absurd to think that they pose any real threat to our rights. When it comes to rights, the only person we should be worried about is the president.

---

Well, Al-qaida did attack us. This cannot be rationally denied. And as such terrorists and any state giving them support are a threat. very simple really. Afghanistan was too cowardly to send an army after us, so the fund al-qaida, give them land and weapons, and turn them loose on us. It's exactly the same as them attacking us with a remote control device. Just because they don't jump up and down and say "we're behind it and we destroyed the towers" does not mean that the Taliban is innocent. If that's the case, we should have never arrested John Gotti.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Not by default, but because of the nature of the job. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand this.

---

I understand the argument just fine. That doesn't mean I buy into it.

Quote:

---

The job of a soldier (or a cop for that matter) is unique because it is a full time thing requiring 100% dedication.

---

Anybody and everybodys job is a full time thing (at least when they are at work) that requires 100% dedication. That doesn't mean that 100% is what people put out. It's the same with soldiers. Not all soldiers give 100%, just like people in every other job. I know of some military police who would play nintendo while they were on gaurd duty. That certainly doesn't sound like 100% to me...

---

Ok so the nature of the job is once again that you do the job knowing full well that the next step you take could very easily end with a loud bang, you in a body bag, and some army guy showing up at your home to tell your wife and kids that you've just been blown up. Yeah that's bloody ordinary. That daily life for a soldier in a war zone.

That isn't true for any job except cop or firefighter. No Accountant goes off to work wonding if this will be their last spreadsheet. No janitor expects to be gunned down whilst cleaning the lipstick off the bathroom mirrors. And no waiter/waitress expects to be shot at either. Being a soldier takes a special individual.

As for your nintendo playing guards, they were probably guarding the front lines in Alabama or something. I'm talking about a war zone.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

No it isn't. It's a way to get at the heart of the matter. Being a soldier requires a sacrifice. The nature of being a soldier is that at any moment, a soldier might see someone killed or be killed himself. That's what the job requires. This isn't the typical 9-5 thing.

---

All that is true, but it doesn't have anything to do with what was said by whatshisname. He said I couldn't understand if I hadn't seen someone killed in front of my face (And therefore, if I cannot understand, my argument doesn't work). This just simply isn't the case. As I said earlier, my argument stands.

---

Well, I don't think you can understand. You've never been in that kind of danger. I haven't either. The closest I've ever been is that a friend of mine lost her husband in Iraq to a car bomb.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Actually it does lower it. You seem to be trying to take the work a soldier does and turn it into something no more significant than the graveyard shift at Steak & Shake. Very few people go to work willing to sacrifice their lives for their jobs.

---

Thanks for putting words in my mouth, and deciding the meaning behind my words for me.

---

Right. Because you spend all your time argueing that a soldier's job is exactly the same thing as any other job. It means nothing to you, or at least nothing more than any other job a person might take.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikotene

the duty though is not extra-ordinary. to be extraordinary it has to be rare. it's not there a few hundred million soldiers in the world to proof that. to do something extra-ordinary while doing that duty needs tob recognised. but being a soldier does not. it isn't a grat feat of courage and bravery to sign up and go through training. to take a bullet for someone else. to throw back a live grenade is or in the case of the latest vc awardee to drive a take which is on fire through an ambush and take horrific injuries only to go back on duty and perform another feat of human courage is. to merely follow orders is not.

---

That's your own words.

Quote:

---

I'll have to agree with redneck here. Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other places. You simply must deal with threats before they come here.

---

If only they were threats...[/QUOTE]

Well, they are real threats. Especially in Afghanistan. Al-qaida wants you dead. You have to deal with that and right now it seems as if the millitary is the only way to do it.

Quote:

---

Ok so the nature of the job is once again that you do the job knowing full well that the next step you take could very easily end with a loud bang, you in a body bag, and some army guy showing up at your home to tell your wife and kids that you've just been blown up. Yeah that's bloody ordinary.

---

Did I say it was ordinary? Nope.

Quote:

---

That isn't true for any job except cop or firefighter. No Accountant goes off to work wonding if this will be their last spreadsheet. No janitor expects to be gunned down whilst cleaning the lipstick off the bathroom mirrors. And no waiter/waitress expects to be shot at either. Being a soldier takes a special individual.

---

While all this is true, that still doesn't make them a hero. (And that is what this argument is about)

Quote:

---

As for your nintendo playing guards, they were probably guarding the front lines in Alabama or something. I'm talking about a war zone.

---

It was not a warzone. I hope nobody would be stupid enough to play Nintendo in a warzone. This took place in Peurto Rico. In Vieques (sp?) I believe...

Quote:

---

Well, I don't think you can understand. You've never been in that kind of danger. I haven't either. The closest I've ever been is that a friend of mine lost her husband in Iraq to a car bomb.

---

I will admit that I do not understand what it is like to have a friend killed in front of me. However, just because you have a friend killed in the line of duty doesn't make you a hero. This debate is not about whether or not being a soldier is an average job, it's about whether or not soldiers are hero's. I seriously don't understand why I have to keep emphasizing this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Me...Apparently

the duty though is not extra-ordinary. to be extraordinary it has to be rare. it's not there a few hundred million soldiers in the world to proof that. to do something extra-ordinary while doing that duty needs tob recognised. but being a soldier does not. it isn't a grat feat of courage and bravery to sign up and go through training. to take a bullet for someone else. to throw back a live grenade is or in the case of the latest vc awardee to drive a take which is on fire through an ambush and take horrific injuries only to go back on duty and perform another feat of human courage is. to merely follow orders is not.

---

What the hell!? I never said that! What page is it on, and what post number? If I said that, something is wrong, because I seriously have NO recollection of that at all. (Plus, my spelling is not that bad) I think you just wrote that yourself and put quote tags around it.


EDIT: I would just like to point out that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CLOUD SMURFING 9!!!!

the duty though is not extra-ordinary. to be extraordinary it has to be rare. it's not there a few hundred million soldiers in the world to proof that. to do something extra-ordinary while doing that duty needs tob recognised. but being a soldier does not. it isn't a grat feat of courage and bravery to sign up and go through training. to take a bullet for someone else. to throw back a live grenade is or in the case of the latest vc awardee to drive a take which is on fire through an ambush and take horrific injuries only to go back on duty and perform another feat of human courage is. to merely follow orders is not.

---

Cloud smurfing 9?! now that ain't exactly nice :P. lol, anyways I will try and explain how I take this.. perhaps this way will be easier for all to understand my point.

In this world there are spectrums, ranges if you will, of which I have used two of in this debate. The first is the spectrum of respect particular jobs "deserve". The other is what falls under the category of the "ordinary" person.

The first spectrum is fairly irrelevent. How it works is that at one end are the jobs that get less respect then others, and at the other are the higher respect deserving jobs. At the high end are jobs such as Animal rescue, Soldiering, Policeman, fireman, etc... So yes a soldier deserves respect but that does not constitute them as being extraordinary.

*Disclaimer for the above- all jobs and people deserve some respect. It is the kind that differs. High and Low I use as overall averages. In fact my spectrum works much like the color spectrum. As one kind of respect goes up, the other goes down and vice versa.

To be extraordinary one must not fall into the spectrum of ordinary, quite obvious I think. My spectrum is wide, very wide. At one end we have ordinary men that aren't really all that great(poor(not as in money but personality)) and the other end we have the amazing ordinary man, which is as close to extraordinary most will get.

The Spectrum of the Ordinary Man

Poor_________Average Joe_______Good______Excellent_____Amazing
|-----------------|---------------|-------------|-------------|

Quote:

---

It's absurd to think that they pose any real threat to our rights. When it comes to rights, the only person we should be worried about is the president.

---

Not now, they don't. You can thank Bush when you get around to it. On the other hand, a well-organized and supplied al-quaeda--with the same goals, as stated by their leaders--was able to cause some serious damage to our rights; starting with the right to life for about 3,000 people.

Dig up one of Osama's statements sometime and see what he's been reading on-air to us. He's made it very clear that he's going to continue murdering Americans until, among other things, we quit supporting Israel and let them kill Jews, run out (or kill) anybody islam deems "immoral", and institue Shar'iah law (with such charming notations as "Mohammed married a nine-year-old, so obviously a girl that age is old enough to consent" and "stone women for being rape").

Considering the islamofascists' approach to religion, the environment (remember the 700 burning oil-wells and the pipeline pumping crude into the Gulf in Desert Storm? Or the draining of the southern marshes?), women's rights, homosexual advocacy, voting, and just about every other facet of life; if liberals were truly serious about the goals they espouse they would hate these guys more than conservatives could if they tried (hell, at least they aren't calling us the "Taliban right wing" any more).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

Considering the islamofascists' approach to religion, the environment (remember the 700 burning oil-wells and the pipeline pumping crude into the Gulf in Desert Storm? Or the draining of the southern marshes?), women's rights, homosexual advocacy, voting, and just about every other facet of life; if liberals were truly serious about the goals they espouse they would hate these guys more than conservatives could if they tried (hell, at least they aren't calling us the "Taliban right wing" any more).

---

Wow...you obvously have no clue what liberal means.

Quote:

---

Wow...you obvously have no clue what liberal means.

---

I think it's become rather clear that I know more about it than yourself--but just because sometimes I'm masochistic like that, i'll bite: could you clarify that somewhat?

Quote:

---

Sorry, but saying "that's just how human nature is" is another way of saying "I'd rather not think about it and come up with a real answer because the fact is it'd make me a hypocrite". I find it quite offensive when people say stuff like that, because by saying something like that is human nature, people are saying I'm the same way (being the fact that I'm a human), and I'm not (proving that it isn't human nature).

---

ok, i think i dont get what you mean. let me give you a hypothetical situation: a guy busts in your house, and your mom is in there. he has a gun. he gives you a gun, and then sais "if you dont kill me right now, im gonna blow your moms brains out." so, what do you do? are you saying that you were wrong to kill him even though you were protecting your loved ones because he has a family and they would be sad? i dont get it. im not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that, i just really dont get what you mean.

Quote:

---

When it comes to rights, the only person we should be worried about is the president.

---

Once more, the American way of tossing responsibility. I see this too much, and it bothers me. Who is this 'president'? Is he a tyrant? Was he not elected by the people, and does he not do what is considered good by the majority of the people?

If you're so democratic, stop blaming everything on the goverment you helped electing. The goverment is you (or at least, it represents the majority of the population), and should do what is good in your eyes. If it does not, you can rightfully kick its arse out of the Congress and White House.

YOU are the one affecting your way of life, your past current and future situation and conditions, and it's up to you to determine who will be in power. If it weren't for soldiers, by the way, the only thing you'll be able to choose is the manner of your execution (and sometimes, even not that).

The soldiers serve you first, and the goverment second. A soldier will die for his loved ones and comrades, not the president. The president job changes men every few years - the people stay. Your mother will still be your mother 40 years from now, your friends will stay for a long time, and most chances are Joe that runs the local grocery store will stay in seat longer than 5 or so presidents. A soldier serves those - not the president, goverment, or any form of authority. He follows commands given to him by a higher authority, which works for your mother, friends, and Joe from the grocery store.

again one of my threads goes of topic when i don't post in it for a few days. pfft.

the summary of what this entire thread was intended to say is.

to be a hero you have to do something herioc. you choice of career is not heroism but what you do inside that career can be counted as heroism.

no man is a hero by default doubtless of his career same as no man is evil until he does something evil no matter what job he is in. your job does not place you on a higher plain than the rest of us earthly beings.

that is all.

Quote:

---

your job does not place you on a higher plain than the rest of us earthly beings.

---

And this is where we disagree. I think a soldier that joins a combat unit, and serves in it for little or no pay at all, knowing full well he might be killed and does it anyway for his people\country\loved ones, is a hero, for that choice alone.

now you see this is what irks me a little. the whole soliders live on bread and water alone thing.

from what i know in this country living in army quarters provides you with. food, water, gas, electrcitiy, health care, deantal care, optical care, prescriptions, and on top of that a salary. and on top of that the best pension scheme you can get in this country.

and are we truly saying lindy england is a hero? the ss and wermacht (not necessarily the holocaust)? is the chinese army full of heroes? the menw who shoot ayt you on a daily basis, heroes or not? if signing up to a job that will get you killed means that all your enemies are heroes too. war angel this should ring particularly true for you. suicide bombers are 99% lilely to die. that's greater odds than any solider are they heroes for this? was 9-11 an act of heroism? and for that was certainly no pension scheme. what about acts commited by soliders? halabja? guernica? dresden? dunkirk? is all this heroism? can all soldiers really be counted as heros no matter what they do? does just the fact that you may killed make you a hero?

Cloud 9 makes a good point, but he goes a little far with the suicide bombings and terrorism stuff.

However, I am going to reiterate his point. Were the Iraqi soldiers heros? What about the soldiers who fought for the taliban? Were they heros? And then, the soldiers of nazi germany, soviet russia, and now China? Are they heros? I assume you will think twice before labeling THEM as heros.

my point regarding suidice bombers was in return to the idea that to be willing to die makes you a hero.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

now you see this is what irks me a little. the whole soliders live on bread and water alone thing.

from what i know in this country living in army quarters provides you with. food, water, gas, electrcitiy, health care, deantal care, optical care, prescriptions, and on top of that a salary. and on top of that the best pension scheme you can get in this country.

and are we truly saying lindy england is a hero? the ss and wermacht (not necessarily the holocaust)? is the chinese army full of heroes? the menw who shoot ayt you on a daily basis, heroes or not? if signing up to a job that will get you killed means that all your enemies are heroes too. war angel this should ring particularly true for you. suicide bombers are 99% lilely to die. that's greater odds than any solider are they heroes for this? was 9-11 an act of heroism? and for that was certainly no pension scheme. what about acts commited by soliders? halabja? guernica? dresden? dunkirk? is all this heroism? can all soldiers really be counted as heros no matter what they do? does just the fact that you may killed make you a hero?

---

Cloud no.9 it isn't a a country club only in the USA airforce do thy get the best of everything since they are considered the brains of the military.

and suicide bombbers were raised and told and brainwashed into thinking if thye kill themselves they'll goto heaven.IF you study Yahweh based religions.Killing yourself is a sin.
This is how this thread is pointless.your asking the same questions and it just becomes

"I'm smarter than you so you better not argue what I say because I can make sound more intellegent than if you were to object towards what I was saying."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordblazer

This is how this thread is pointless.your asking the same questions and it just becomes

"I'm smarter than you so you better not argue what I say because I can make sound more intellegent than if you were to object towards what I was saying."

---

Well lordblazer both sides can see it the way you just expressed it, just so you know.

Simply put it appears that some of us actually put some true weight to the word extraordinary.

Alright you dont have to put your 28 in my face just because i made a 26.

All I'm saying is that this arguement is idiotic.WE'll get to no conclusion simply because no one will come to a agreement.And this type of topic is a horrible topic.Its a topic you really can't have a intellgent debate over it.This topic has too much passion in it.How can you back up your facts do some crappy 30 minute internet research of blogs?Then post it on here.That won't work.Your saying a soldier's job is just like any other ordinary job you can half do and still get by.And Shun you posted your ACT scores which in my opinion shows arrogance.Simply put the people arguing and sayng that being a soldier is just like any ordinary thing. Really hasn't lived their lives outside their books.

Quote:

---

All I'm saying is that this arguement is idiotic.WE'll get to no conclusion simply because no one will come to a agreement

---

Has anybody ever reached an agreement in EoTW? :p

Quote:

---

And this type of topic is a horrible topic.Its a topic you really can't have a intellgent debate over it.

---

Maybe you should go back, and re-read some of my posts.

Quote:

---

How can you back up your facts do some crappy 30 minute internet research of blogs?

---

We don't need very many facts for this debate.

Quote:

---

Your saying a soldier's job is just like any other ordinary job you can half do and still get by.

---

Quite frankly, you're making up. You keep bringing up this point over and over again, and every single time it gets shot out of the water because NOBODY HAS SAID ANYTHING LIKE THIS!!! Everyone will agree that being a soldier is not an ordinary, every day job. However, we are simply saying that just because you are a soldier doesn't mean you are a hero. You don't like that opinion, so instead of debating, you try to twist my side of the argument into something it isn't. (And it isn't even REMOTELY close to it)

Quote:

---

Simply put the people arguing and sayng that being a soldier is just like any ordinary thing. Really hasn't lived their lives outside their books.

---

Once again, for the 800th time, nobody is making this argument. I expect you to reply to this! I also expect you to either A) admit that what you have said is false (because it is) or B) attempt to somehow prove that you are right (Without quoting someone else and pretending it was me who said it)

Lordblazer... first and foremost if you happen to recall correctly.. other then my [blank] reading score I am ASHAMED for the most part for my scores. I used them because they were the best [blank] example I could come up with to show what I was trying to say. If it works it works.. doesn't matter if I gotta go out of the smurfing box.

As for your comment above I was just pointing out it was highly biased.. since both sides feel they are in the right and that the other side is blind, common sense if you ask me.

Btw perhaps with the scores I should have used hypothetical scores? I don't know but that isn't generaly the way I think. The best example is the one that actually happened, and I didn't have anyone else's ACT scores.

of course the starter of this thread did not concider people who have lost relitives in war....
My father died in the first Gulf war, and I do concider him a hero.

he didnt go in for politics
he didnt go in for personal gain
in fact he hated George Bush (Sr) and what the war was about.
but he went in, he felt he still had a mission to do, and when he died at the hands of the enemy he went down in the grace of glory...

to call my father anything other then hero is nonsense, he died to protect his fellow soldiers and his nation.

This is where we disagree, Sunny. In my opinion, A hero makes a greater impact on the world than just 'dying to protect his country'. Lots of soldiers die to protect thier country. The individual soldier who fights and dies has no effect on the world. If it wasn't your father, it would have been somebody else. In my books a hero has to make a huge impact. They have to turn the tide of a battle, change the way people think, inspire people on mass to action.

Edit: I am not trying to deprive your father of the respect he deserves, but I am not going to deify the man either.

So your saying that my fathers death was worthless?
then smeg off in that case!
he went in and sacrrificed his life to save others
just because his service didnt effect the entire world doesnt mean his service was in vain.

look I am sorry for swearing out like that, but my fathers death has really effected me. It took me years to get over a lot of the pain I went through

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

Lordblazer... first and foremost if you happen to recall correctly.. other then my [blank] reading score I am ASHAMED for the most part for my scores. I used them because they were the best [blank] example I could come up with to show what I was trying to say. If it works it works.. doesn't matter if I gotta go out of the smurfing box.

As for your comment above I was just pointing out it was highly biased.. since both sides feel they are in the right and that the other side is blind, common sense if you ask me.

Btw perhaps with the scores I should have used hypothetical scores? I don't know but that isn't generaly the way I think. The best example is the one that actually happened, and I didn't have anyone else's ACT scores.

---

ashamed you should be glad and oyu should jsut take it again and make better instead of dwelling over it.

anyway MY father served in hte gulf war my grandfather was forced into vietnam.My great great grandfather was a buffalo soldier during the american-spanish war.on my dad's side that is.

On my mom's side my grandfather was in the airforce. My great great grandfather was a buffalo soldier.MY great great great grandfather served in the civil war.and my great great great great grandfather fought against the US in the first and second seminole war.

YEah.lol....people die all the time in war and not directed at the person i quoted but at nik0.You can't tell me that these men and women who die everyday is just ordinary and that they didn't put in any effort because simply put they did.I mean they wouldn't have died if they didn't put in that effort would they? Do you think people become soldiers because they want to fight in wars? No no treally.In america people join the military because they live and grew up in places were the economy was hit hard.Were the only job available is the military.They don't join the military to become a war hero because they don't want to goto war.They hate war,but they have no choice but to fight in it.

Quote:

---

nik0.You can't tell me that these men and women who die everyday is just ordinary and that they didn't put in any effort because simply put they did

---

For the five millionth time, I have never said that. NOT EVEN ONCE! Quite ignoring me when I tell you that. Do you just not read my posts? Next time you post, can you please respond to this post? I have never said any of the things that you accuse me of, and it's high time you got that through your head.

Also, I expect you to present me with some amount of evidence behind your baseless accusations. (Either that, or just concede that you're accusations were bull to begin with, which they were) This debate has just turned into me presenting my point of view, and you making stuff up. (And then I have to try and counter it, and then you ignore me and say the same thing again.) I ask that you stop. Please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

now you see this is what irks me a little. the whole soliders live on bread and water alone thing.

from what i know in this country living in army quarters provides you with. food, water, gas, electrcitiy, health care, deantal care, optical care, prescriptions, and on top of that a salary. and on top of that the best pension scheme you can get in this country.

and are we truly saying lindy england is a hero? the ss and wermacht (not necessarily the holocaust)? is the chinese army full of heroes? the menw who shoot ayt you on a daily basis, heroes or not? if signing up to a job that will get you killed means that all your enemies are heroes too. war angel this should ring particularly true for you. suicide bombers are 99% lilely to die. that's greater odds than any solider are they heroes for this? was 9-11 an act of heroism? and for that was certainly no pension scheme. what about acts commited by soliders? halabja? guernica? dresden? dunkirk? is all this heroism? can all soldiers really be counted as heros no matter what they do? does just the fact that you may killed make you a hero?

---

You presented some bad examples.9/11 was done by extremist.Most soldiers aren't extremist.They were told that if they killed themselves with millions of others that they would goto heaven.

Since your british cloud i wouldn't expect you to understand how things work in the USA concerning the military.First of all.Most people who sign up for the military really have no other option.Some are poor as dirt and really its either military or starve.Really if you've seen most of the towns in the USA the only option for people to get a job is military.And really the people who get into combat units are heroes.Simply put they could've just gotten a desk job in the airforce not having to worry about getting killed.In wars do you know how many soldier's die?lose limbs?Get paralysed for life?Get war sickness?

and nik0 im sorry i meant to address those statements at cloud no.9

Main Entry: he·ro
Pronunciation: 'hir-(")O, 'hE-(")rO
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural heroes
Etymology: Latin heros, from Greek hErOs
1 a : a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b : an illustrious warrior c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d : one that shows great courage
2 a : the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work b : the central figure in an event, period, or movement
3 plural usually heros : SUBMARINE 2
4 : an object of extreme admiration and devotion : IDOL

Main Entry: 1sol·dier
Pronunciation: 'sOl-j&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English soudier, from Middle French, from soulde pay, from Late Latin solidus solidus
1 a : one engaged in military service and especially in the army b : an enlisted man or woman c : a skilled warrior
2 : a militant leader, follower, or worker
3 a : one of a caste of wingless sterile termites usually differing from workers in larger size and head and long jaws b : one of a type of worker ants distinguished by exceptionally large head and jaws
4 /'sO-j&r, 'sOl-/ : one who shirks work
- sol·dier·ly /-lE/ adjective or adverb
- sol·dier·ship /-"ship/ noun


In the end, wether soldiers are heros or not depends on your admiration for that person. Some people think Pol Pot was a hero. Was he? Yes, of course, he was a hero for the people who supported him! Hitler is also a hero for the nazis.

I do not admire soldiers a priori. Someone who kills and dies for a cause does not necesarily appear to me as admirable. Certainly I wouldn't call Pol Pot and his soldiers "heroes". Maybe I do admire some soldiers in particular occasions. The International Brigades in 1936 Spain, for example. They were not there defending the interests of men in suits, they didn't even represent a whole state. They were just a group of independent people that fought against the rise of fascism in Spain. USA didn't give a smurf about the Spanish civil war, neither did England, and France didn't support us all that much. Yet, the Abraham Lincon brigades came all the way from North America to fight Franco. How can't I admire them? I don't care if they lived or died, I don't care if they changed something big or something small, I don't even care we lost the civil war, this people for me are heroes. Not for Franco. Not even for the US goverment, who later prosecuted them accusing them of being communists.

So in the end, this conversation is pointless. I can't think of objetive values to determine if this person is a hero or not. I just don't like people attempting to introduce "hero-ness" crap down my throat, because well, I may not share his principles. If we were to accept all this people as heroes, there would be too many people I should adore. And in the end, most relevant people can be defended as heroes by determinate points of view. I can even play the devil's advocate with myself and defend Franco as a hero.

The disgorging of Soviet archives after it's Reagan-induced collapse proves that the Lincoln brigade was part of a rigidly controlled Soviet operation.

This doesn't change much--these guys still put their butts on the line to stop fasism, after all--but they weren't a bunch of folks who had had enough and got up to fight; they were following orders. Likewise, the US government was exactly correct in its estimation of them.

well alot of people who fought in the international brigades were of "dubious" political linkage. many liked communism, socialism, anarchism some like george orwell just didn't like the idea of a nazi puppet government. germany backed franco and the fascists. russia backed anyone else going.

but people died for what they believed in without pay or pension. orwell took a bullet in the neck and was never going to receive a war pension.

but does this topic all come back to "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter" are hero's only hero's if they fight for what you believe in?

suicide bombers like soldiers die for what they believe in. not all belive in martyrdom some do it for liberation and freedom. it's not a case of "the best way to get into heaven is martyrdom so today i'll blow myself up to go to heaven. no real other reason but i like the idea of heaven i do" there is underpinning reason why suicide bombers do what they do. in palestine and chechnya it is for a state not martyrdom that drives these people.

but what they do is surely as unheroic as what happened in abu gahrib. so to say that war criminals and terrorists are both not heros is reasonable is it not?.

you cannot stamp every man that dies for a cause as a hero.

i personally belive heroship needs to be earned in battle (if you are a solider). not given to you when you are given your uniform.

the army works in the same way here as it does america with the people who join. most tend to be very unqualified and those who are qualified normally serve as officers. but your post actually brings up an interesting point that i will take to address now.

in another thread regarding minimum wage someone said that poor people are poor because of their own failings and things they have done (getting knocked up or being a junkie were the examples) i think your point regarding soldiers joining because of poverty surely disqaualifies the idea that poor people are poor because they deserve it.

back on topic. i know two ta members (both plan to join the regular army) and say they are not fighting for any particular cause or belief. i work with them both so aren't desperate un-employed. they are joining because they see it as a good career they are qualified for. and they want to be combat soliders (one wants to be in the paras). people are given the choice to become desk people but turn it down or aren't qualified or there isn't infinite space. some though just don't like the idea of that kind of job and want to be combat soldiers and not for belief reasons or out of desperation but because that is what they want to do.

one of them is an abosolute ass and is an arrogant, lying, ass who can't do his job probably right now let alone in the army. i would not consider him now, on the day he collects his uniform, on the day he fires his first shot. i'll consider him a hero if and when he proves himself to be one by doing somthing heroic.

same for any other soldier.

again this thread is not meant to belittle anyone or thier loss. this a thread on what counts as herodom.

also this thread is a discussion on that and is not useless or pointless as it is intended as a discussion. which it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

The disgorging of Soviet archives after it's Reagan-induced collapse proves that the Lincoln brigade was part of a rigidly controlled Soviet operation.

---

Rigidly controlled? I seriously doubt everyone there was involved with the soviets. It's true Russia did help us back then, but I can't see why International brigades were necesarily following the detailed orders of the Soviets, more considering the fact many of the brigadists were anti-Soviet. And if they were, I doubt they even knew.

the soviets did not control or direct actions in spain the same way germany did for the fascists. there was no soviet guernica. and no real orders issued.

but they happily supplied "advisors" and weapons and stuff like that. but there was no real russian military contribution in the same way there was from germany.

Quote:

---

the army works in the same way here as it does america with the people who join. most tend to be very unqualified and those who are qualified normally serve as officers.

---

Those who are qualified normally serve as officers? :D Now I know you don't know much about the Army....

Quote:

---

in another thread regarding minimum wage someone said that poor people are poor because of their own failings and things they have done (getting knocked up or being a junkie were the examples) i think your point regarding soldiers joining because of poverty surely disqaualifies the idea that poor people are poor because they deserve it.

---

well tell that person that its not everyones fault that they are oor.Its not there fault that they were born poor with nothing.And they grew up in a depressing enviroment and this is were the classes clash with each other.Middle class people jsut can't seem to understand what it's like to be poor.What its like to live in a project.Wer eits depressing.Were people have parents who grew up itn eprojects which was all they knew.The chain of poverty.Most middle class and higher people don't think of it unless they were in that situation.And when your poor nad oyu had parents who didn't goto college.Well you really don't know much on how to get into college because good grades aren't the only things that get you into college.Theres information people need to know.And when you grow up without knowing it and being poor really the only escape from it all is the Military

No, not all soldiers are heroes, but an overwhelming majority of those who serve in a combat zone are.

Let's start from the beginning...

Quote:

---

you are still the same person in iraq that you were at home.

---

No, being in a warzone in an orginazation like the Army brings about changes in your personality.

Quote:

---

The duty itself is extraordinary. Duh.

---

If served in a combat zone, yes.

Quote:

---

the duty though is not extra-ordinary.

---

While serving in combat it is.

Quote:

---

it isn't a grat feat of courage and bravery to sign up and go through training. to take a bullet for someone else. to throw back a live grenade

---

Yes, it does take a lot of courage and heart to go through training and become a soldier. If you take a bullet for someone that would make you a hero. I won't even comment about the grenade.

Quote:

---

if you suddenly say that all soldiers are heroes then you must say the same about your enemy and all your enemies of past. and this is not true.

---

If they served in combat, than yes, they are heroes too.

Quote:

---

being a soldier does not change a man.

---

Being a soldier in war does change a man.

Quote:

---

most will not recieve a brave for heroic duties or bravery because they did not perform as such

---

Every American soldier who serves in war comes home with a medal on their chest.

Quote:

---

I agree with this, although most likely in a different way than you do. A soldiers job is not to "protect people" it's to protect the interests of people. (In other words, political interests. To believe otherwise is foolish.)

---

The reasons for the orders don't have much to dowith individual heroism.

Quote:

---

I don't think the term "hero" should be thrown around so lightly though. A hero must go above and beyond what they are required to do. (And when I say 'above and beyond' I mean it)

---

If your going to judge "above and beyond" then do it at a universal level and not at a higher standard for soldiers. How often do McDonalds employees get shot at? How often do bankers have to worry about getting blown up driving down a highway? How often do farmers wake up in the middle of the night to their house shaking from a mortar that just blew up?

Quote:

---

Anytime someone puts their life on the line, or enters a situation where there's a chance it will be on the line, for their country, they're doing something extraordinary--it doesn't matter if there's a billion other people doing it.

---

YAY!

Quote:

---

Moreover, experience has proved again and again that just because you don't go all-out bullet-stopper infantry grunt doesn't mean you won't see combat.

---

I'm a smurfing bulldozer operator and people still shoot at me/ try to blow me up with an IED while driving down the highway/ attack my camp with mortars.

Quote:

---

Extraodinary(out of the ordinary I believe is the dictionary def.)- I personally don't think it is overly extraondinary to be a soldier..

---

It must most certainly be ordinary to live thousands of miles away from home, not see your friends or familiy for a year at a time, and always have someone who wants to kill you.

Quote:

---

Here is the dictionary listings:
Beyond what is ordinary or usual
Highly exceptional; remarkable
Employed or used for a special service, function, or occasion

---

Soldiers in combat meet 1 and 3.

Quote:

---

Oh yes lets define hero while we are at it.
Hero:
A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life:
A person noted for special achievement in a particular field

---

Soldiers in combat risk and sometimes sacrifice their lives every day.

Quote:

---

Many people will give up liberties, luxury, and/or life for what they believe in

---

Who says they're not heroes?

Quote:

---

But I am not sure that many people join the army thinking they will die. They don't think it can happen to them.

---

All soldiers who join the Army know it's a possibility they will be sent to war and could die.

Quote:

---

being a soldier is not what it was in the second world war. it's a career.

---

I didn't join the Army for a "career". We don't have a true enemy but people can still join the Army for the same reasons.

Quote:

---

Oh yes one last thing, most people I know go to the military for money, and college stuff... thus they aren't giving it up for thier country, rather for the benefits THEY can gain.

---

Thats original intent. Don't confuse it with later actions. A soldier who joined the Army purely for money can still sacrifice his life just as easily as someone who joined the Army simply to be in the Army, like I did.

Quote:

---

The thing is, we never asked to be called heroes. We believe in selfless service, support is a wonderful thing but it's not manditory. Being thanked for my service means alot to me and I appreciate it, but I didn't sign up for titles.

I think it's great that people can look up to soldiers as heroes and can respect the profession. Unfortunately not everyone feels that way, but we'll drive on.

---

YAY! :) Don't be fooled by my username. I registered with it here a year before I ever joined the Army.

Quote:

---

when it turns into "support the troops" bumper stickers, and refrigerator magnets, and stupid yellow ribbons it crosses the border from support, to absurdity. I must ask, how does having a bumper sticker that says "support the troops" do anything to support the troops? It does nothing. The troops that need support can't even see it.

---

I personally think the ribbons and stuff are retarded, but they still bring a sense of comfort. I might not be able to see them directly but I still know that they are there.

Quote:

---

soldiers do not give up their life and liberty on some little selfless path they have. it is a career choice they made for alot of reasons in the same way doctors, lawyers and engineers make the same decision at the same time.

---

Again, not all soldiers join the Army for a career. Many do join for those reasons.

Quote:

---

Well I sure don't know 'bout your area but I know in my area the people here would fight like wildcats for the defense if we were being invaded. Goodness gracias it isn't too far of a strech to say that farmers would try and make tanks out of thier combines, we have many LARGE, and sometimes NASTY, HUMAN BITING dogs here as well. Not to mention we have a nuclear plant withing 20-40 miles(if I recall correctly) that is still active enough we could use it as bomb.

---

How well would a "town mob" stand up to highly trained and supplies troops? I don't even want to think about causing a Nuclear Meltdown. Your just killing yourself there.

Quote:

---

Fighting for money/benifits which is why most people I know go into the military

---

You can't base the whole Army joining for money based on the people you know.

Quote:

---

I was showed pictures of soldiers who were mutilating Iraqi bodiees after they were dead, shooting prisoners of war for throwing sticks and stones at them, breaking their legs and carring them out around the 25 degree weather like it's some sort of game. Keeping civilians in prison for 6 months to a year for doing nothing, and then treating them like crap.

---

How do you know what was really happening in those pictures? Anyone can make a believe able story to say whatever they want by manipulating what they show in pictures.

Quote:

---

Actually, our soldiers spend a lot more time doing everything from digging ditches to shuffling paperwork than we do walking around shooting people.

---

If only they knew how much manual work is involved. The media doesn't show that. They just show the killings and bad things.

Quote:

---

Give a bad guy a gun, and well... Thats what happens.

---

And then UCMJ kicks in, but the average civillian doesn't see any of that or the super strict rules we are required to follow.

Quote:

---

most will never see active duty in iraq. many will spent a year or two in cyprus or malta and never have a bullet go past their ear

---

LIKE HELL! That's striaght up, BS.

Quote:

---

I would love to see someone trying to invade the US. When you consider the number of gun owners in this country, the military would be the least of their worries.

---

Yes, because a man in a flannel shirt with a shotgun is much more scarey than a sniper, or whatever.

Quote:

---

And you know this becuase??
Every army has trigger happy idiots. It isn't something that is preventable. You are going to get bastards in the army, and those bastards are going to be bastards when given the chance.

---

Yes, and then they go to jail, just like the civvy world.

Quote:

---

Second of all, you seemed to ignore the fact that actual times im which American Soldiers fought for our freedom is not often, and most wars or conflicts fought by American troops are done by political motives, not necessarily for the total intrest of the American people.

---

The overall point he made that people seem to miss is that because we have the Army their are very little times we have to fight for our own freedom. The Army is what keeps them at bay.

Quote:

---

Have you ever lived in Army barracks, ate Army food, or had Army health-care applied to you? I have, both abroad and in the US, and they're nothing to write home about unless home life really sucks.

---

YEE-HAA! I loves T-rats and cold showers :)

Quote:

---

WE fight wars unfairly.Unconvientional warfare is the war to go now days.

---

Air superiority is highly important.

Quote:

---

Anyways My personaly believe is to have a type of national guard for National defense, that doesn't go out looking for fights.

---

We have one.

Quote:

---

"Hello--I'm Staff Sergeant ------, and this is Sergeant -----. We're going to be your drill sergeants throughout basic training and on behalf of the United States Army we'd like to welcome you to Fort Campbell.

NOW YOU GOT TEN SECONDS TO GET THE **** OFF MY BUS AND EIGHT OF 'EM ARE ALREADY GONE!!"

---

You missed all the F-words said :)

Quote:

---

On top of the fact that if I wanted to reach anybody in the 'States when they were awake I had to call at about 2 in the morning.

---

Korea was hard to call home from, but Iraq is much harder, and more expensive.

Quote:

---

I still do not believe that anyone in thier right mind would invade the United States of America. Why? Well, let me tell you. We have an intercontinental missle system and a boatload of nukes. Invade America, get destroyed. Period. (And soldiers aren't doing the destroying.)

---

And those systems are ran by high ranking soldiers.

Quote:

---

actually i do know what army standards of living are like. i come from a very strong military family.

---

I heard Army stories growing up a lot too. They don'y come close to the real life Army experience.

Quote:

---

You will live, work and die so that that ignorant, oblivious and hateful American can say whatever he wants

---

Are you stereotyping Americans or just pointing out the few like that?

Quote:

---

First - suck it up! You are soldiers, doing your duty (whatever that is), so that the ideals upon which the United States are established live on, and so that American citizens are not harmed.

---

I haven't seen a soldier yet whining about not being called a hero, just simply debating if they should be or not.

Quote:

---

(and yes, some troops forget why they are what they are, and lean towards the side of evil, doing dis-honourable things, disgracing the name of others)

---

Sadly true :(

Quote:

---

I don't understand...if you're the soldier, you're the one doing the killing of the loved ones, are you not? Why is it ok so long as it's not the people you know/live next to dying?

---

To understand that you have to understand the difference in going out because you want to kill people or killing people in defense of your family at what not. Also, as I said earlier, people in enemy Armies can be heroes too.

Quote:

---

A fireman who goes beyond what is required of his job and puts something he values at risk to help another is a hero.

---

Firemen put something they value, their life, at risk every time they go into a fire.

Quote:

---

Being a hero is anything but common.

---

Being a soldier is anything but common. Again, all throughout this thread people have been judging soldiers as heroes to a higher standard, instead of everyone the same. If the average citizin risked people shooting at him to run in somewhere and save a something important he would be considered a hero, but soldiers who do it every day in Iraq are not heroes because that's there job?

Holy freaking crap that is the longest post I have ever seen!

Quote:

---

If your going to judge "above and beyond" then do it at a universal level and not at a higher standard for soldiers. How often do McDonalds employees get shot at? How often do bankers have to worry about getting blown up driving down a highway? How often do farmers wake up in the middle of the night to their house shaking from a mortar that just blew up?

---

I DO do it at a universal level. You're point doesn't seem to make much sense. McDonalds employee's arent heros by default, in the same way that soldiers arent heros by default.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Many people will give up liberties, luxury, and/or life for what they believe in

---

Who says they're not heroes?

---

I do.

Quote:

---

The overall point he made that people seem to miss is that because we have the Army their are very little times we have to fight for our own freedom. The Army is what keeps them at bay.

---

And how does that justify the meaningless wars that they do fight? (Like Iraq, for example) Nobody is arguing that the existance of soldiers is wrong. However, you can still have an army and not invade people for reasons based solely on power.

Quote:

---

Quote:
Anyways My personaly believe is to have a type of national guard for National defense, that doesn't go out looking for fights.

We have one.

---

his point is that we should have one of those, and not use the regular army to kill people for nothing.

Quote:

---

Quote:
I still do not believe that anyone in thier right mind would invade the United States of America. Why? Well, let me tell you. We have an intercontinental missle system and a boatload of nukes. Invade America, get destroyed. Period. (And soldiers aren't doing the destroying.)

And those systems are ran by high ranking soldiers.

---

Point being?

Quote:

---

To understand that you have to understand the difference in going out because you want to kill people or killing people in defense of your family at what not. Also, as I said earlier, people in enemy Armies can be heroes too.

---

But then again, how can any soldier of today understand that? They aren't protecting thier families, because there is no threat to thier families. I can understand protecting your fellow soldiers, but the family argument just doesn't hold up. (At least not in this day and age)

Quote:

---

Being a soldier is anything but common. Again, all throughout this thread people have been judging soldiers as heroes to a higher standard, instead of everyone the same. If the average citizin risked people shooting at him to run in somewhere and save a something important he would be considered a hero, but soldiers who do it every day in Iraq are not heroes because that's there job?

---

Depends on what he was doing, and how he went about it. A soldier CAN be a hero, but that doesn't mean he WILL be a hero.

Quote:

---

I DO do it at a universal level. You're point doesn't seem to make much sense. McDonalds employee's arent heros by default, in the same way that soldiers arent heros by default.

---

It wasn't meant as a default. My point was that soldiers volunteer for a job that involves dangerous things such as the ones pointed out, and then people seem to blow it off by saying soldiers are just doing there job. It's the nature of the job that makes them more easily qualified as heroes. The nature of McDonalds employees, bankers, or farmers aren't near as dangerous. Saying it's just their job isn't a valid argument. I'm not saying it automatically qualifies all of them, but goes a long way in in the argument of weather they are heroes or not.

Quote:

---

Who says they're not heroes?

Quote:

---

I do.

---

---

Which is understandable, but others might see it like they are.

Quote:

---

And how does that justify the meaningless wars that they do fight? (Like Iraq, for example) Nobody is arguing that the existance of soldiers is wrong. However, you can still have an army and not invade people for reasons based solely on power.

---

How the government deploys it's soldiers isn't an issue in this topic. I never mentioned having an Army being wrong or using it for invasion. The context of that thread was that if the US didn't have an Army, other countries would not be intimidated by our civillians so they would try to invade. The Army is what keeps other countries from invading the US.

Quote:

---

his point is that we should have one of those, and not use the regular army to kill people for nothing.

---

After thinking about it more I think he meant having only a national gaurd to defend the US, and not a main Army used to fight in other countries.

Quote:

---

I still do not believe that anyone in thier right mind would invade the United States of America. Why? Well, let me tell you. We have an intercontinental missle system and a boatload of nukes. Invade America, get destroyed. Period. (And soldiers aren't doing the destroying.)

Quote:

---

And those systems are ran by high ranking soldiers.
Point being?

---

---

What was being talked about when that was an original response was not needing an Army at all, because those systems would take other Armies out. I was saying that those systems were run by the Army, so without an Army those systems would be useless.

Quote:

---

Depends on what he was doing, and how he went about it. A soldier CAN be a hero, but that doesn't mean he WILL be a hero.

---

That was meant as a general example and not something specific. The intention was that while a civillian can do something good outside of the ordinary actions of a civillian, that would consider them a hero, a soldier who does something very similar shouldn't be considered a hero because it was part of their job desricption? I see a double standard.

Quote:

---

It wasn't meant as a default. My point was that soldiers volunteer for a job that involves dangerous things such as the ones pointed out, and then people seem to blow it off by saying soldiers are just doing there job. It's the nature of the job that makes them more easily qualified as heroes. The nature of McDonalds employees, bankers, or farmers aren't near as dangerous. Saying it's just their job isn't a valid argument. I'm not saying it automatically qualifies all of them, but goes a long way in in the argument of weather they are heroes or not.

---

I will agree that a soldiers job is more dangerous than most other jobs, and it takes more balls than working at mcdonalds. However, I don't think an average person, no matter what thier job is, can become a hero. I feel that one has to be truly special to become a hero, and that is where we find our differences.

Quote:

---

After thinking about it more I think he meant having only a national gaurd to defend the US, and not a main Army used to fight in other countries.

---

That is what he meant.

Quote:

---

That was meant as a general example and not something specific. The intention was that while a civillian can do something good outside of the ordinary actions of a civillian, that would consider them a hero, a soldier who does something very similar shouldn't be considered a hero because it was part of their job desricption? I see a double standard.

---

If a civilian did something heroic, and a soldier did something heroic, they would be heroes.

However, I think it takes more than just being in the line of fire to be a hero.

Also, I would like to thank theundeadhero for brining some amount of sense and intelligence to the opposite side of this debate. At least I don't have to argue with pure nonsense anymore.

Quote:

---

Have you seen the forest fires in California.Its like a 200 feet tall wall of fire and fireman jsut rush and run right into it.That takes guts because from weere i was standing the heat blistered my skin.

---

I remember that. I was so grateful that they were willing to do their jobs, because I lived very close to the fires, and several family members almost lost their homes.

yes the National Guard comment was for a national guard only.. though it would be a tad different then what it now is(since it would have to be the sole defender I think that is obvious).

Well I hope that was me that was being quoted... I recall saying something similar anyways. :P

*cough* as I said earlier it really comes down to how much weight you put on the words. I made an extensive post above somewhere, that I think showed that I am really demanding on those two words.

I can very well say that most people who go into the army are likely good people(one step above average in my mind) and many are probably excellent to amazing human beings.. particually after being in combat a few times. For me though that still does not go up to extraordinary...and for me a Hero must perform a extraordinary act.

Oh yes.. the whole reason I kept saying it was people I know.. is cause that is all I got to go off.. and I knew 'forehand that it could be slighlty off so I made sure to mention it. And a good freind of mine(a wrestling mate) who joined the military, so that he could get money for college, I would have asked him whether or not it is still for the benifits, but he did not make it back. He was a good, a very good, guy for sure, but I would not dub him a hero. :cry:

so are people here honestly saying all combat soliders are heros?

lindy england? war criminals? human rights abusers? genocidists?

if you mow down civillians are you still the same hero you were when you first put on that uniform? if you rounded up jews on trains for auschwitz are you a hero? were the shootings in uzbekistan heroic? was bloody sunday heroic? geurnica? dunkirk? were the japanese heroic when the captured soliders and sent them to certain death?

attrocitrities performed by so called "heroes". is that what a hero is to you? can you really say all soliders including these are heroes just because they are combat soliders.

Quote:

---

can you really say all soliders including these are heroes just because they are combat soliders.

---

Good point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

so are people here honestly saying all combat soliders are heros?

lindy england? war criminals? human rights abusers? genocidists?

if you mow down civillians are you still the same hero you were when you first put on that uniform? if you rounded up jews on trains for auschwitz are you a hero? were the shootings in uzbekistan heroic? was bloody sunday heroic? geurnica? dunkirk? were the japanese heroic when the captured soliders and sent them to certain death?

attrocitrities performed by so called "heroes". is that what a hero is to you? can you really say all soliders including these are heroes just because they are combat soliders.

---

Why the frickin' nazi obsession? This is a very small number, and of course being a war criminal negates the heroism of being a soldier, but other than the actual nazis or the japanese imperial army, you speak of probably less than 1/1 million soldiers.

This doesn't change the fact that soldiers are quite frankly 10x as brave and heroic as you could ever hope to be. You can't lump a few bad eggs in with all the good ones. I think you only do that because it makes the rest of the soldiers look bad. But somehow, I have a suspicion that you want to make them look bad.

Quote:

---

This doesn't change the fact that soldiers are quite frankly 10x as brave and heroic as you could ever hope to be.

---

And just how the hell do you know this?

They get court marshalled if they run back during combat.Which jail time may seem bad but it is an easy way out from having to get killed.

In combat though yeah they are scared hell its pure adrenaline rush for them.You can still be scared stiff and still be brave.They have the courage to go out there.They have the courage to walk around in baghdad in uniform and risk being picked off by a sniper.

But that's all because they don't have a choice. Im not saying it doesn't take guts, 'cos it does, but it's either go to prison or do your duty. Picking the lesser of two evils doesn't seem very heroic to me.

Quote:

---

But that's all because they don't have a choice. Im not saying it doesn't take guts, 'cos it does, but it's either go to prison or do your duty. Picking the lesser of two evils doesn't seem very heroic to me.

---

Actually, they do have a choice....

First and most obvious, they don't have to join the Army if they're not willing to get shot at. The Nazis, the Iraqis, and a lot of other countries had conscripted troops (wherein they point a gun at your head and say "You're in the Army now"), but the US (and most other nations) has a volunteer army.

Second, there are ways to be a conscientuous objector (there was one fellow like that--seventh-day adventist, who just wouldn't shoot at anybody. He told them he still wanted to help, so they made him a medic. During one battle he was helping someone and a bullet broke his arm. He splinted it with a busted rifle-stock and as they were carrying him back to the unit he saw someone else wounded--so he crawled off the stretcher while the others were ducking gunfire and saved that guy's butt too.), to gain medical discharges, mental health (obvious enough--you don't want to walk around with some nutcase carrying a gun right behind you...), dispensation for emergencies back home--there's a variety of ways someone in the US Army can get out of combat if they wish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

This doesn't change the fact that soldiers are quite frankly 10x as brave and heroic as you could ever hope to be.

---

And just how the hell do you know this?

---

Because you hide behind you internet account and tell soldiers in the army that they are similar to nazis. If you were brave at all, you would at least have the courage to say that in person to an actual combat veteran. See what he has to say to a punk kid who tries to put him in the same camp as people sending jews to auschwitz.

And I'm pretty sure that your life has never been in any danger either. The closest most people on these boards have *ever* been to combat is sitting in an easy chair playing Metal of Honor and pretending that we have any idea what combat is like. There are a few exceptions (Redneck (i think), Susquatch, and War Angel). Other than that, we have no room to talk about what being a soldier is like. I have no business talking about what it is like to be an inner city school teacher. This is because I've never been inside an inner city school, I've never taught a day in my life, and thus I can't slander them and compare them to nazi propagandists, or tell them that what they do is exactly the same as someone else who sits around in an office working on reports and spreadsheets.

A Soldier is 10x braver than I am too, but the difference is that I at least respect them enough not to try to link them to war crimes and genocide for the purposes of winning an internet debate.

i never comapred soldiers to nazis. i compared the wermacht and ss to soldiers. which they were.........

and i compared war criminals to people who aren't heroes. and if you eally belive war criminals are heroes then your morals are fully slipped.

so yeah that argument is void. i'll explain really simply.

i said not all soldiers are heros. i said that one of the reasons that some soldiers are not heros is because they might have slaughtered civiliians. i don't think this is a totally bad thing to say. ir do you want to salute the deaths head squadron in charge of auschwitz purely because they were solides go ahead.

but i for one are not with you on that salute. i will salute heroes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

i never comapred soldiers to nazis. i compared the wermacht and ss to soldiers. which they were.........

and i compared war criminals to people who aren't heroes. and if you eally belive war criminals are heroes then your morals are fully slipped.

so yeah that argument is void. i'll explain really simply.

i said not all soldiers are heros. i said that one of the reasons that some soldiers are not heros is because they might have slaughtered civiliians. i don't think this is a totally bad thing to say. ir do you want to salute the deaths head squadron in charge of auschwitz purely because they were solides go ahead.

but i for one are not with you on that salute. i will salute heroes.

---

LOok you can try to twist your own words to make it sound better, but your basic argument is :

Quote:

---

No soldiers are heros because some soldiers are nazis, and some have committed war crimes.

---

That's your whole argument. I never said that nazis are war heros, I said that these war criminals that you bring up are A VERY VERY SMALL NUMBER OF ACTUAL SOLIERS. Out of 100,000 abu graib was done by what 10 people, maybe? The war criminals aren't war heros. No sherlock. But you can't use that argument to say that soldiers in general should not be considered heros. That's a stupid argument. It's like saying that accountants aren't good people and then when asked why pointing to enron accountants. Yes crap happens, and the criminals are caught and brought to justice.

Nobody celebrates war crimes. But I'm gonna have to object if you try to say that those who fight should somehow be ashamed because of a few bad apples, most of whom are caught and punished for dishonoring their fellow soldiers by acting like barbarians.

Or should you be ashamed to be Scottish because William Wallace and his men may have at one point committed a war crime?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gnostic Yevon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

This doesn't change the fact that soldiers are quite frankly 10x as brave and heroic as you could ever hope to be.

---

And just how the hell do you know this?

---

Because you hide behind you internet account and tell soldiers in the army that they are similar to nazis. If you were brave at all, you would at least have the courage to say that in person to an actual combat veteran. See what he has to say to a punk kid who tries to put him in the same camp as people sending jews to auschwitz.

And I'm pretty sure that your life has never been in any danger either. The closest most people on these boards have *ever* been to combat is sitting in an easy chair playing Metal of Honor and pretending that we have any idea what combat is like. There are a few exceptions (Redneck (i think), Susquatch, and War Angel). Other than that, we have no room to talk about what being a soldier is like. I have no business talking about what it is like to be an inner city school teacher. This is because I've never been inside an inner city school, I've never taught a day in my life, and thus I can't slander them and compare them to nazi propagandists, or tell them that what they do is exactly the same as someone else who sits around in an office working on reports and spreadsheets.

A Soldier is 10x braver than I am too, but the difference is that I at least respect them enough not to try to link them to war crimes and genocide for the purposes of winning an internet debate.

---

One actually one day when i was in the park wiht my little cousins two rival gangs jsut started a fire fight and one of my cousins died in the cross fire.And I got a shell which is still in there today on my lower back just a few inches from my kidney.But other than that yeah i agree with you lol.

no gnostic yevon you are missing the point.

i am saying that you cannot rubber stamp every single soldier as a hero no matter what actions he has performed. the war criminals are proof of this. you cannoy rubber stamp them heros. so you cannot rubber stamp all soldiers as heros regardless of the actions they perform. good or bad.

which brings us back to the start and the raison detre for this argument. it is against the rubber stamping of all soldiers as heros purely for being soldiers. it is against the declaration and praising of all soliders whether good or bad. it is against the idea that a man can be regarded asa hero no matter what he does. it is against awarding heroship with the uniform.

a soldier can be a hero if he proves himself to be one. not if he wears the uniform and is allowed to do what he sees fit. that is not heroship. and that is why not every soldier can be counted as a hero and that particular title needs to be earned.

and while i'm at it. i'm not a nationalist in any shape or form. so scottish history means very little to me. and i am neither ashamed or proud of being scottish.

Quote:

---

Because you hide behind you internet account and tell soldiers in the army that they are similar to nazis. If you were brave at all, you would at least have the courage to say that in person to an actual combat veteran. See what he has to say to a punk kid who tries to put him in the same camp as people sending jews to auschwitz.

---

Nobody has said this. Read this statement again, and tell me if you can see the vast amount of unintelligence oozing from the post. Please don't say stupid stuff like that again.

Quote:

---

I can't slander them and compare them to nazi propagandists, or tell them that what they do is exactly the same as someone else who sits around in an office working on reports and spreadsheets.

---

My friend, the only person who is being slanderous is you.

Quote:

---

A Soldier is 10x braver than I am too, but the difference is that I at least respect them enough not to try to link them to war crimes and genocide for the purposes of winning an internet debate.

---

You are the only one who has linked them to that stuff. (By misenterpreting what was said by Cloud 9)

Quote:

---

That's your whole argument. I never said that nazis are war heros, I said that these war criminals that you bring up are A VERY VERY SMALL NUMBER OF ACTUAL SOLIERS. Out of 100,000 abu graib was done by what 10 people, maybe? The war criminals aren't war heros. No sherlock. But you can't use that argument to say that soldiers in general should not be considered heros. That's a stupid argument. It's like saying that accountants aren't good people and then when asked why pointing to enron accountants. Yes crap happens, and the criminals are caught and brought to justice.

Nobody celebrates war crimes. But I'm gonna have to object if you try to say that those who fight should somehow be ashamed because of a few bad apples, most of whom are caught and punished for dishonoring their fellow soldiers by acting like barbarians.

Or should you be ashamed to be Scottish because William Wallace and his men may have at one point committed a war crime?

---

If you want to further your position in this debate, you might as well stop posting, and leave the talking to Redneck, Sasquatch, and the crew. You don't even understand his argument in the least bit. He said something you disagreed with, so you got mad and took it way out of context. His argument was that "Not all soldiers are heroes" and one of the reasons for this is that some soldiers have done bad things. That isn;t twisting his words to make them sound better, it's simply putting them BACK into context. And who took them out of context in the first place? Oh yeah, it was you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

Because you hide behind you internet account and tell soldiers in the army that they are similar to nazis. If you were brave at all, you would at least have the courage to say that in person to an actual combat veteran. See what he has to say to a punk kid who tries to put him in the same camp as people sending jews to auschwitz.

---

Nobody has said this. Read this statement again, and tell me if you can see the vast amount of unintelligence oozing from the post. Please don't say stupid stuff like that again.

Quote:

---

I can't slander them and compare them to nazi propagandists, or tell them that what they do is exactly the same as someone else who sits around in an office working on reports and spreadsheets.

---

My friend, the only person who is being slanderous is you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cloud9

so are people here honestly saying all combat soliders are heros?

lindy england? war criminals? human rights abusers? genocidists?

---

Here ya go.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

A Soldier is 10x braver than I am too, but the difference is that I at least respect them enough not to try to link them to war crimes and genocide for the purposes of winning an internet debate.

---

You are the only one who has linked them to that stuff. (By misenterpreting what was said by Cloud 9)

---

I link them? Cloud's ENTIRE argument is "some soldiers have done bad things, so no soldier can possibly be a hero" and in her argument she is clearly linking the entire soldier proffesion to Nazis, War Criminals and Genocidists. And I stand by my words, she's saying what she's saying to win an internet debate. I'm refuting her half assed argument that the existence of Nazis makes the proffession something less than it is.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

That's your whole argument. I never said that nazis are war heros, I said that these war criminals that you bring up are A VERY VERY SMALL NUMBER OF ACTUAL SOLIERS. Out of 100,000 abu graib was done by what 10 people, maybe? The war criminals aren't war heros. No sherlock. But you can't use that argument to say that soldiers in general should not be considered heros. That's a stupid argument. It's like saying that accountants aren't good people and then when asked why pointing to enron accountants. Yes crap happens, and the criminals are caught and brought to justice.

Nobody celebrates war crimes. But I'm gonna have to object if you try to say that those who fight should somehow be ashamed because of a few bad apples, most of whom are caught and punished for dishonoring their fellow soldiers by acting like barbarians.

Or should you be ashamed to be Scottish because William Wallace and his men may have at one point committed a war crime?

---

If you want to further your position in this debate, you might as well stop posting, and leave the talking to Redneck, Sasquatch, and the crew. You don't even understand his argument in the least bit. He said something you disagreed with, so you got mad and took it way out of context. His argument was that "Not all soldiers are heroes" and one of the reasons for this is that some soldiers have done bad things. That isn;t twisting his words to make them sound better, it's simply putting them BACK into context. And who took them out of context in the first place? Oh yeah, it was you.

---

Again I'm going to post cloud's actual words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cloud9

so are people here honestly saying all combat soliders are heros?

lindy england? war criminals? human rights abusers? genocidists?

---

That's what she said. She thinks the existence of war criminals makes a soldiers job less heroic. She's entitled to her opinion, but it's wrong. It's as wrong as saying I should be ashamed of being German because there were some bad Germans or that I should be ashamed of being a CS person because the first computers were used in war. It's irrelevant to the issue.

The job itself is done to protect citizens from danger and it means that if you go into a war zone, you stand a reasonable chance of being shot. That at the very least makes the job noble and honorable, and provided that you don't do something illegal, that qualifies as heroic. Fine war criminals are not heros. That doesn't make the job of a soldier any less noble.

she? she? bloody she? thank you very much but i am male.

and i never said that a few bad grapes ruin the bunch. i said a few bad grapes means that you cannot say that all grapes are 100% great and should be praised from here to kingdom come without first checking seeing if in fact a. they are not bad grapes b. if they are extra-ordinary grapes and not just normal grapes.

now if we continue this lovely metaphor. grapes may be a lovely fruit a great fruit. got lots of good stuf in them and better for you than avacado. there are other types of great fruits out there. you don't have to be a grape to be a great fruit. apples can be good. but like grapes you get bad ones too. not all apples are bad because there are bad apples but not all apples are great either just for being apples. rotten apples cause tummy upsets. not as much as grapes. sour grapes are evil.

yeah that's enough of the metaphor.

so if you would read what i say. quote in context.

i'll quote what you quoted twice in your post and run through it for you.

"so are people here honestly saying all combat soliders are heros? lindy england? war criminals? human rights abusers? genocidists?"

okay so that so called evil part. what's wrong with it? it clearly ststes i believe not all solders are heroes. some are guilty of very evil crimes against humanity. but at no point does it say that all soldiers are bad for these soldiers. it merely says you cannot judge all soldiers as the same because some are guilty of horrible crimes. others are not.

oh and if you want an offensive quote

"This doesn't change the fact that soldiers are quite frankly 10x as brave and heroic as you could ever hope to be."

never ever judge me or anything i have done or been through. you have no idea about my life or anything i have been through. you never even knew what sex i was so if you are incapable of judging my sex do not judge my life and any courage or lack thereof.

Quote:

---

"This doesn't change the fact that soldiers are quite frankly 10x as brave and heroic as you could ever hope to be."

---

I'm sorry but it's true. And if you'd bother to read what I said, I told you that almost every one of us is in that boat. A soldier is braver than you or me because a soldier volenteered to protect strangers at risk of his own life. Unless you can show me where you've done that as a cop, firefighter, or a soldier, you are less brave then they are. I'm willing to bet that you've never been closer to combat than reading about it in the newspapers or playing metal of honor. I'm in the same boat as you are here. Nobody who has never been in combat has any right to compare what a soldier does to ordinary work. It's just that simple. We have a life of luxury compared to them.

Quote:

---

I link them? Cloud's ENTIRE argument is "some soldiers have done bad things, so no soldier can possibly be a hero" and in her argument she is clearly linking the entire soldier proffesion to Nazis, War Criminals and Genocidists. And I stand by my words, she's saying what she's saying to win an internet debate. I'm refuting her half assed argument that the existence of Nazis makes the proffession something less than it is.

---

Where do you come up with like this? Her argument is this: Not all soldiers are heroes. Proof of this is that some soldiers have commited attrocities. Therefore, not all soldiers are heroes.

The argument is NOT "Some soldiers have commited attrocities, therefore all soldiers are not heroes". I am WELL aware of what has been said, as are you. However, unlike you, I am well aware of the obvious meaning behind those words. You need to drop this point, because it's blatantly false. Continuing with it is a waste of time, because you are wrong. (And there can be no debate on that)

Quote:

---

That's what she said. She thinks the existence of war criminals makes a soldiers job less heroic. She's entitled to her opinion, but it's wrong. It's as wrong as saying I should be ashamed of being German because there were some bad Germans or that I should be ashamed of being a CS person because the first computers were used in war. It's irrelevant to the issue.

---

Again, there is no truth behind anything you have said.

bloody well stop calling me a girl!!!!

combat bravery is not the only type of bravery in this world and neither is it the greatest. you can be the bravest man in the world without ever seeing or holding a gun.

and to say that i have never experienced it means that i can not judge it is not true. unless of course you want to take back what you said aboiut my lack of bravery for not signing up. because if i can't judge a soldier you have no right to judge me. i will judge every person based on his merits not by his title, uniform, rank, social status or career.

nik she did say since there are a few bad apple soldiers that all soldiers aren't heroes I read all her post every single post that cloud no.9 has posted.Well I'm done here.

Cloud No.9, what I get out of your argument is that since some soldiers do bad things then not all combat soldiers can be considered heroes, even the ones that don't commit something bad. We all agree that those soldiers should not be called heroes. The thing is, why should every combat soldiers reputation have to suffer because of those bad grape actions. Is it not possible that every combat soldier could be considered a hero except those that commit war crimes and loose the right to be called a hero. The combat soldiers reputation shouldn't have to suffer because of some bad grapes. Those bad grapes cold have been considered a hero too before doing bad things in a wartime situation and therefor loosing the hero status.

Quote:

---

if you rounded up jews on trains for auschwitz are you a hero? were the shootings in uzbekistan heroic? was bloody sunday heroic? geurnica? dunkirk? were the japanese heroic when the captured soliders and sent them to certain death?

---

To us, no they are not heroes, but to the countries/ideals they served, those people did consider them a hero. All through this thread we've shown that hero is a point of view. I'm sure your Englishman who earned the vc(?) medal isn't considered a hero by the Iraqi insurgants.

"nik she did say since there are a few bad apple soldiers that all soldiers aren't heroes I read all her post every single post that cloud no.9 has posted.Well I'm done here."

right that's it. i am really bloody shonked of now. i am not a girl and frankly having posted twice already on that fact i am left with no option but just to either count you as ignorant, stupid or just plain rude. take your pick.

undeadhero is getting close to my point. surely heroship needs to be earned? based on the merit of a great action or actions.

if i was to sign up today would you count me as a hero tomorrow?

Quote:

---

(there was one fellow like that--seventh-day adventist, who just wouldn't shoot at anybody. He told them he still wanted to help, so they made him a medic. During one battle he was helping someone and a bullet broke his arm. He splinted it with a busted rifle-stock and as they were carrying him back to the unit he saw someone else wounded--so he crawled off the stretcher while the others were ducking gunfire and saved that guy's butt too.)

---

Now, see, that is a hero.

Quote:

---

if i was to sign up today would you count me as a hero tomorrow?

---

Exactly. Being called a hero is something you earn. There are alot of heros in the military, and a lot of jerks. (war criminals being a prime example). If you say everyone is a hero regardless of their actions, then you devalue the true heros.

Quote:

---

if i was to sign up today would you count me as a hero tomorrow?

---

No, because you wouldn't of served in combat yet.

Quote:

---

suicide bombers like soldiers die for what they believe in. not all belive in martyrdom some do it for liberation and freedom. it's not a case of "the best way to get into heaven is martyrdom so today i'll blow myself up to go to heaven. no real other reason but i like the idea of heaven i do" there is underpinning reason why suicide bombers do what they do. in palestine and chechnya it is for a state not martyrdom that drives these people.

---

You dont see U.S. soldiers walking around blow themselves up killing 100s of innocents including women and children.

Quote:

---

but what they do is surely as unheroic as what happened in abu gahrib. so to say that war criminals and terrorists are both not heros is reasonable is it not?.

---

A muslim extremist may think that the 9/11 suicide hi-jackers were heroes for crashing a air plane into the twin towers. Suicide bombers/Kamikazes, their "heroic" logic of thinking is backwards, and is preventing the progression of the Iraqi society.

Quote:

---

the army works in the same way here as it does america with the people who join. most tend to be very unqualified and those who are qualified normally serve as officers. but your post actually brings up an interesting point that i will take to address now.

back on topic. i know two ta members (both plan to join the regular army) and say they are not fighting for any particular cause or belief. i work with them both so aren't desperate un-employed. they are joining because they see it as a good career they are qualified for. and they want to be combat soliders (one wants to be in the paras). people are given the choice to become desk people but turn it down or aren't qualified or there isn't infinite space. some though just don't like the idea of that kind of job and want to be combat soldiers and not for belief reasons or out of desperation but because that is what they want to do.

---

Well that's just 2 people. Many people join for different reasons. Here is another person, I joined the Army National Guard because I wanted to stay in my hometown, and be assigned with the 1-303rd armor division here in Bremerton. I want to goto college at the same time, with financial assistance from the G.I. Bill Kicker from the Army. At the same time I joined because I love this country, and I like are current commander in chief. And the cool thing about it is you can go to active duty regular army anytime you want, but you will have to wait during a 3-6 month process for them to process it through.

Quote:

---

Main Entry: he·ro
Pronunciation: 'hir-(")O, 'hE-(")rO
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural heroes
Etymology: Latin heros, from Greek hErOs
1 a : a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b : an illustrious warrior c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d : one that shows great courage
2 a : the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work b : the central figure in an event, period, or movement
3 plural usually heros : SUBMARINE 2
4 : an object of extreme admiration and devotion : IDOL

Main Entry: 1sol·dier
Pronunciation: 'sOl-j&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English soudier, from Middle French, from soulde pay, from Late Latin solidus solidus
1 a : one engaged in military service and especially in the army b : an enlisted man or woman c : a skilled warrior
2 : a militant leader, follower, or worker
3 a : one of a caste of wingless sterile termites usually differing from workers in larger size and head and long jaws b : one of a type of worker ants distinguished by exceptionally large head and jaws
4 /'sO-j&r, 'sOl-/ : one who shirks work
- sol·dier·ly /-lE/ adjective or adverb
- sol·dier·ship /-"ship/ noun

---

I would just like to point out that a hero doesnt have to be that of a IDOL.

1 a : a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b : an illustrious warrior c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d : one that shows great courage

It could be a Soldier who puts on a uniform, by living these Army Values,
Loyalty
Duty
Respect
Selfless - Service
Honor
Integrity
Personal Courage

You can become a Hero...

A good example would be SFC SMITH, PAUL R of the United States Army. For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty:Sergeant First Class Paul R. Smith distinguished himself by acts of gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty in action with an armed enemy near Baghdad International Airport, Baghdad, Iraq on 4 April 2003. On that day, Sergeant First Class Smith was engaged in the construction of a prisoner of war holding area when his Task Force was violently attacked by a company-sized enemy force. Realizing the vulnerability of over 100 fellow soldiers, Sergeant First Class Smith quickly organized a hasty defense consisting of two platoons of soldiers, one Bradley Fighting Vehicle and three armored personnel carriers. As the fight developed, Sergeant First Class Smith braved hostile enemy fire to personally engage the enemy with hand grenades and anti-tank weapons, and organized the evacuation of three wounded soldiers from an armored personnel carrier struck by a rocket propelled grenade and a 60mm mortar round. Fearing the enemy would overrun their defenses, Sergeant First Class Smith moved under withering enemy fire to man a .50 caliber machine gun mounted on a damaged armored personnel carrier. In total disregard for his own life, he maintained his exposed position in order to engage the attacking enemy force. During this action, he was mortally wounded. His courageous actions helped defeat the enemy attack, and resulted in as many as 50 enemy soldiers killed, while allowing the safe withdrawal of numerous wounded soldiers. Sergeant First Class Smith’s extraordinary heroism and uncommon valor are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon himself, the Third Infantry Division “Rock of the Marne,” and the United States Army.

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/mohiraq.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gnostic Yevon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

i never comapred soldiers to nazis. i compared the wermacht and ss to soldiers. which they were.........

and i compared war criminals to people who aren't heroes. and if you eally belive war criminals are heroes then your morals are fully slipped.

so yeah that argument is void. i'll explain really simply.

i said not all soldiers are heros. i said that one of the reasons that some soldiers are not heros is because they might have slaughtered civiliians. i don't think this is a totally bad thing to say. ir do you want to salute the deaths head squadron in charge of auschwitz purely because they were solides go ahead.

but i for one are not with you on that salute. i will salute heroes.

---

LOok you can try to twist your own words to make it sound better, but your basic argument is :

Quote:

---

No soldiers are heros because some soldiers are nazis, and some have committed war crimes.

---

That's your whole argument. I never said that nazis are war heros, I said that these war criminals that you bring up are A VERY VERY SMALL NUMBER OF ACTUAL SOLIERS. Out of 100,000 abu graib was done by what 10 people, maybe? The war criminals aren't war heros. No sherlock. But you can't use that argument to say that soldiers in general should not be considered heros. That's a stupid argument. It's like saying that accountants aren't good people and then when asked why pointing to enron accountants. Yes crap happens, and the criminals are caught and brought to justice.

Nobody celebrates war crimes. But I'm gonna have to object if you try to say that those who fight should somehow be ashamed because of a few bad apples, most of whom are caught and punished for dishonoring their fellow soldiers by acting like barbarians.

Or should you be ashamed to be Scottish because William Wallace and his men may have at one point committed a war crime?

---

I concure.

This debate really is useless because everyone has their own idealogy on what makes a soldier a hero. Or what makes a person a hero. It's sort of baseless...

Quote:

---

nik she did say since there are a few bad apple soldiers that all soldiers aren't heroes I read all her post every single post that cloud no.9 has posted.Well I'm done here.

---

I would like a quote from cloud 9, 'cos I really don't believe you.

Quote:

---

Is it not possible that every combat soldier could be considered a hero except those that commit war crimes and loose the right to be called a hero.

---

No, it is not possible. (At least, not in my mind) It takes more than being a soldier to be a hero.

Quote:

---

I would just like to point out that a hero doesnt have to be that of a IDOL.

---

Not a mythological idol, no. But they have to be worth idolizing in order to be a hero. A group of people can never achieve that status. Only an individual can.

Also, noname... I agree that that man can be considered a hero. However, that still doesn't mute my point that not all soldiers are heroes (And most of them never will be) It something much more than being a soldier (something like what this man did) He can be honored as a soldier, most people however, soldier or not, cannot be considered a hero.

this sentance bugs me though.

Quote:

---

His courageous actions helped defeat the enemy attack, and resulted in as many as 50 enemy soldiers killed

---

So being a hero is measured by how many enemies you kill? I don't believe the amount of enemies one kills is criteria for heroism. If it IS, than whoever came up with that criteria is morally bankrupt.

Quote:

---

This debate really is useless because everyone has their own idealogy on what makes a soldier a hero. Or what makes a person a hero. It's sort of baseless...

---

I agree that this debate is useless, but for different reasons than you. I feel that this debate COULD have had some redeeming value, if people would post with some degree of intelligence. Unfortunately, most people have posted nothing but nonsense, and thier arguments were based on anger, and it was backed up by the twisting of other peoples words. (I am not directly accusing anyone. You should know who you are by now. [there are alot of you])

Quote:

---

So being a hero is measured by how many enemies you kill? I don't believe the amount of enemies one kills is criteria for heroism. If it IS, than whoever came up with that criteria is morally bankrupt.

---

Yea, but the actions of this guy who was rewarded the medal of honor. SFC Smith, Paul R. He killed those 50 enemy insurgents and there was around 100, and that helped make them retreat. If he didnt take at that post with the .50 caliber machine gun, alot of his comrades would be dead.

Quote:

---

Yea, but the actions of this guy who was rewarded the medal of honor. SFC Smith, Paul R. He killed those 50 enemy insurgents and there was around 100, and that helped make them retreat. If he didnt take at that post with the .50 caliber machine gun, alot of his comrades would be dead.

---

I realize that, but the reason he is a hero is because he took action, went above and beyond, and got the enemy to retreat, which saved the lives of his comrades. NOT because he killed 50 people. I don't understand why that sentance needs to be in there, but that's just me.

Quote:

---

The closest most people on these boards have *ever* been to combat is sitting in an easy chair playing Metal of Honor and pretending that we have any idea what combat is like. There are a few exceptions (Redneck (i think), Susquatch, and War Angel).

---

I'd like to take the credit here, but I haven't seen combat. That's not to say my time in Korea was exactly calm--during the year I was there we found another tunnel ("we" as in the Army, not as in "myself and others"), the North Koreans crashed a sub that was supposedly the result of a training accident and used it to send a platoon of soldiers into Korea, and they managed to get a plane over Seoul somehow (not only the capital of Korea, but Yongsan is located in Seoul, so a strike there would take out the head of both Korean and American resistance.)--but I spent my time in the Army fixing trucks, not shooting at anybody. I actually could join VFW, because the Korean War is technically not over but at a 50-year cease-fire--but to do so would be a slap in the face to every veteran who did serve his or her country in war.

Quote:

---

So being a hero is measured by how many enemies you kill? I don't believe the amount of enemies one kills is criteria for heroism. If it IS, than whoever came up with that criteria is morally bankrupt.

---

That's war. An army's objective in war is to kill people and break things--there are a lot of nice ways to describe it, and there are a lot of reasons why sometimes it's necessary, but that's the ghist of it--you either kill people and break things, or you support the people who kill people and break things.

Moreover, those 50 people were part of a force with the exact same goal--kill us and break our things. Assuming the "company-sized force" was 250 people, killing 50 people means that he single-handedly destroyed 20% of the enemy's capability to harm his unit. Since he had about 100 troops, that in turn means he saved about 20 American lives by that act alone. If, as noname suggests, the "company-sized force" was made up of 100 attackers, then he saved about 50 American lives.

On top of that, the unit citation tends to add in all the details they can--if he'd shouted something cool like "all your allah are belong to us!" while he was at it, they'd probably have added that in too.

"Quote:
if i was to sign up today would you count me as a hero tomorrow?

No, because you wouldn't of served in combat yet."

so when i step foot on baghdad i'm suddenly trasnformed into a hero? at what point there has my merits good or bad changed?

no this point isn't pointless because people see it from different points of view that is the point of an argument. if we want subjects were people only agree we can talk very blandly about everything with no opinion.

Actually, imo, the objective of a military operation is to *neutralize* the enemy. If you can do it without killing good, if not.. well then you can't.

Of course the good and bad has to be weighed.. you don't through hundreds of innocents/soldiers away to just take one bunker without killing.. keep it in perspective in other words.

As for the comment on the number of people I must say redneck hit it pretty well... taking out 20-50% of an attacking force to save one's commrades isn't the most usual deed.... that is something that would not have been easy to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

Actually, imo, the objective of a military operation is to *neutralize* the enemy. If you can do it without killing good, if not.. well then you can't.

Of course the good and bad has to be weighed.. you don't through hundreds of innocents/soldiers away to just take one bunker without killing.. keep it in perspective in other words.

As for the comment on the number of people I must say redneck hit it pretty well... taking out 20-50% of an attacking force to save one's commrades isn't the most usual deed.... that is something that would not have been easy to do.

---

you dont know much of the military.

There are tons of operations from humanitarian aid to recon missions.To firefight were you take them out.To espionage missions.Also missions were if they can capture some enemy soldiers.

There are also air raids,dog fights...Naval combat is rare in this day and age since the last battleship was used in the GUlf War.Now its a muesem lol.

Quote:

---

There are tons of operations from humanitarian aid to recon missions.To firefight were you take them out.To espionage missions.Also missions were if they can capture some enemy soldiers.

---

I think I get the general idea of this post, but it doesn't really make any sense at all, could you please re phrase that or something?

Nope Lordblazer doesn't re-phrase for anyone.My policy lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordblazer

There are tons of operations from humanitarian aid to recon missions.To firefight were you take them out.To espionage missions.Also missions were if they can capture some enemy soldiers.

---

I understand they do those missions as well.. but in a very subjective terminology they are still *nuetralizing* the enemy. Also I was replying to the redneck saying that the goal of the military op was to kill or break things. And there are possibly(certianly) situations where that can be avoided.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordblazer

There are also air raids,dog fights...Naval combat is rare in this day and age since the last battleship was used in the GUlf War.Now its a muesem lol.

---

hmm... disarming a plane without death would be a problem.. I imagine.

But overall I think you get my gist... I am just of the view that we should try to keep casulties on both sides low (particuallly considering whom we seem to be fighting these days).

WEll keepin casualties on both sieds low is what people stride for in war.To get it over with fast enough so that many young men wont die.But that isn''t how war works.War is a dirty business.Sometimes it must be done.Sometimes its for a corrupt cause.But htose soldiers in uniform understand that.They understood that when they signed up.They understood that there business means that they might lose there lives.
That is true selflessness.And theres nothing wrong with wanting to have a military career.

Nobody said there was anything wrong with wanting to have a military career. I think it's safe to assume that if we aren't in the military ourselves, someone we love is.

Quote:

---

the army works in the same way here as it does america with the people who join. most tend to be very unqualified and those who are qualified normally serve as officers

---

I didn't see this earlier. If the only people who were qualified for their work were officers than nothing would get done. One officer can't do a whole platoons worth of work. I would love to see my LT operate a bulldozer to get something done. Guess what, he can't do it because he doesn't know how. Officers make the plans. It's the soldiers who do the work. If were so underqualified than how can we get anything done?

Quote:

---

this sentance bugs me though.
Quote:

Quote:

---

His courageous actions helped defeat the enemy attack, and resulted in as many as 50 enemy soldiers killed

---

So being a hero is measured by how many enemies you kill? I don't believe the amount of enemies one kills is criteria for heroism. If it IS, than whoever came up with that criteria is morally bankrupt.

---

That's just fancy talk said in an official tone by the officer authorizing the award. It's meant to make what he did sounds so much more drastic and amazing. It's not what they base heroism on.

Quote:

---

so when i step foot on baghdad i'm suddenly trasnformed into a hero? at what point there has my merits good or bad changed?

---

It changes after being in situations where you've been shot at, had multiple trips outside the camp gates where you could have been blown up by an IED, or many other things. Pretty much after you've experienced what war is really like.

I remember when I was in Korea I was stationed up by the DMZ. Whenever I would take a trip down South to Souel or somewhere with my buddies we would kind of make fun of the soldiers down there. They have have an easy going, laid back, easy atmosphere going on and it was a major visible difference from what we experienced. We would salue officers with "second to none" (second infantry division) and they would give us a strange look and be like, "where you from?" Up North by the DMZ, sir". Their eyes would get kind of wide and get these look on their face like we were suddenly much more hardcore. It was funny.

i'll explain the officer thing here. i talk merwly from what i've been told by those annoying guys that come around the schools trying to get people to sign up. so it might be a touch biased. but we were told that with a designated degree (a degree without honours) you could apply for entrance as an officer . same with the police force too. but meh i tell what i'm told.

They don't tell you that someone with a degree in playing music could be an Infantry officer or a degree in sociology could be a tanker. All that matters to the Army is how many college credit hours, not what classes you take.

However, it may be different for cloud, because if memory serves me, he lives in the United Kingdom.

i"if memory serves" dammit we know were he lives which is why i dont get why he is arguing and even debaing over osmething that he know is a horrible debate topic we said it million times and i jsut think this is some kind of ego booster for him now and im tired of it.

Quote:

---

i"if memory serves" dammit we know were he lives which is why i dont get why he is arguing and even debaing over osmething that he know is a horrible debate topic we said it million times and i jsut think this is some kind of ego booster for him now and im tired of it.

---

If only this post was relevant to... well... anything at all...

Indeed. I haven't been following this thread, so I don't have a complete handle on what's going on...

To everyone:
But if you're debating an issue like this, please do so in a respectful and restrained manner, avoiding any personal comments or insinuations.

Thank you.
:)

Quote:

---

To everyone:
But if you're debating an issue like this, please do so in a respectful and restrained manner, avoiding any personal comments or insinuations.

---

:p If only that comment had been made a few pages ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

i"if memory serves" dammit we know were he lives which is why i dont get why he is arguing and even debaing over osmething that he know is a horrible debate topic we said it million times and i jsut think this is some kind of ego booster for him now and im tired of it.

---

If only this post was relevant to... well... anything at all...

---

oh wow you told me oh you put me in my place oh wow.See what I mean this thread is crap its just a bunch of people like yourself saying "I'm smarter than you so hahahahahah let me embarrass you guys." The thing is i dont care...But another thing is Everything has basicly been covered over this topic and it is too much passion.The people who are against youa nd cloud basicly have that passion.So do oyu and cloud but the only difference is.You act like you dont have the passion and your
making sound intellectual but it really isn't.Its just a bunch of BS.

And Cloud join the military join the infantry division on active duty then try to say what you said in this thread with your previous post.

*sigh*