Why do people hate the army?

[Rastien]

Whilst i may not agree with where troops are being sent or the wars they fight etc etc.

I still respect the fact they have chosen to do this.

I don't read into the whole protecting my country shite, but if someones in a job that dangerous i respect them.

Just as i would hope the fact they respect me and what i do how ever irrelavant.

Tolerance swings both way people

 

[Rottweiler]

I always find it so interesting how people say 'rar they killed civilians' but when you say 'and how do you feel about the enemy, who actively hides amongst civilians and uses their deaths for propaganda purposes?' you get a whole lot of nothing.

"Well, uh...they...uh...CIVILIAN DEATHS! Most of them reported by people who have a massive bias against the military and who need every bit of propaganda they can get! But we believe them because it fits our preconceived notions!"

Having been a soldier, I maintain a great deal of respect for fellow soldiers (serving or served) and I've seen much of the ignorant hatred and contempt.

Soldiers who risk death on numerous occasions because the politicians *you* voted for told them to.

'Useless Tax sink'? How about the no-questions-asked Foreign Aid we piss away every year that basically serves to prop up dictatorships and terrorist organizations? Oh, and the UN, useless mockery of an organization that it is.

What's funny is that historically America used to more or less disarm after every conflict. We had more or less squat for a standing military before WW I. Ditto for WW II. Korea...Vietnam...

Did getting rid of the majority of the 'useless tax sinks' help in those instances? Or did we end up having to build it right back up and take massive casualties because we didn't have enough of a trained standing army when we or our allies needed one?

Truly, my epiphany about people here in America came thusly:

I was at a diner with some friends. One of them was going on at length about how having a military is useless, and how nobody needs to solve anything with violence.

Right behind her on a big-screen TV was a news report showing a large crowd of men holding AK-47's and RPG-7v launchers, with a sign (helpfully translated) saying 'DIE AMERICANS'.

Sure, we don't need a military. Tell the people with the AK-47's that. Because the place they were waving them has no US presence. We're not invading them, occupying them, or otherwise involved. Yet there they are carrying automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenade launchers and chanting 'death to Americans'.

So, say you travel in that vicinity. You get captured at gunpoint...since there's more or less nothing you can do about it. Who rescues you? Not the military, *you* didn't want a military, remember? And those same AK-47-carriers don't have to worry about retribution, either. They can do whatever they want.

Then, they say "Hey! This country here has things we want!" How do you stop them? No military = no stopping someone who *does* have a military.

Of course, we could just let all our allies twist in the breeze, right? But if *we* don't have a military, why should *they*? I mean, the logic applies universally, right? Like, say...

...Kuwait.

Imagine that scenario without a US military.

 

[crazyarms33]

I really don't get why people miss that part. They willing gave up their autonomy to run off to do the bidding of the government. And people somehow try to separate the government from them. Well they agreed to follow their orders, so how can they really not accept blame as well? If I tell some crazy guy on the street "Oh I'll do whatever you want" people wouldn't think twice
about blaming me as much as him, if not more, if I followed his orders.

The problem here for me is that the soldiers get blamed infinitely more than the politicians. Why do the soldier's get handed the shit end of the stick for someone else's decision twice? Meaning they do the actual deed and then they get blasted for doing it, as if they just did it for the hell of it. Boggles my mind. The question ultimately boils down do you blame the hands that do the work, which by the way, they are legally obligated to do; Or do you blame the decision makers and those that tell the hands what to do. At least that's true for me.

You wouldn't blame a spoon for making you fat right? It's just the means to the end. Ultimately, the decision to eat 10 pounds of cake a day for 2 years was yours, and you have to take accountability for that. Or perhaps a different example: You're working at a big company. Your boss tells you to move money from account A to account C. You do it, because that's what he pays you to do and you're in breach of contract if you don't. Turns out, it ends up being a bad decision and account C loses the money and then some. Even though you only followed your instructions from your boss, who told you to move the money, you get blamed for it. However because you like being employed, you can't say anything, and no one ever asks you why you did it, and even if they do its company policy to not discuss business decisions with non-involved parties. So people just assume you did it because you could. Oh, and this ends up on the national news with pundits blasting you based on their "expertise" of a situation they have no idea about. Meanwhile your boss gets on TV and says, "That was bad. The company will do better", taking none of the blame off you, but also not supporting you by admitting he made a bad call. You're still left out to dry.

That's what irritates me about it. The disproportionate amount of blame that soldiers receive. Sorry if this got a little ranty, I didn't mean for it to. Also please understand I'm not attacking you, just venting my frustration.

 

[Rottweiler]

Because they're overglorified killers who do the government's dirty job whether we like it or not.

*Your* Government. *Your* Job to fix it.

Tell me what *you* have done to stop this 'over-glorified killing'. Anything?

The true irony is that any military is about 80% Support and Logistical Staff and 20% of what anyone can really refer to as 'killers'.

But, it's okay to slap the above lame label on it. Rar killers. Rar every member of the Military is a Killer! Rar!

That would surprise my friend the Dentist in the Air Force. Or the guy who does Construction.

...or the hundreds of military *doctors* who treat victims of famine, natural disasters, and terrorism at risk to their own lives.

But indeed, sir- next time a plague breaks out and Military doctors go to help, stand at the airport and hold up a sign about how they're Killers.

No! Better yet...GO WITH THEM. That's right, you sign up and go to the next massive outbreak and watch them in *person*.

It's the only way to be sure.

 

[LetalisK]

People hate authority figures yet they still expect to be protected by them. It's really just hate for the sake of hating. I can see disliking them for their actions but to judge everyone in that profession is just being a bigot.

Pretty much this. Being a military man myself, I hate the circle jerking that goes on about people in the military, but on the other hand, it fries my shit when people throw out "baby killers", "serial rapists" or some other trite bullshit. They could at least pull their head out of their ass long enough to come up with some other completely retarded slur against the military.

 

[crazyarms33]

Add to that the fact that 90% of women serving in the military report sexual harassment and 30% have been raped, I just don't see why anyone would volunteer to enter such an environment and propagate attitudes that the military deserves respect.

Can you find the facts to post please? Last I saw the rape rate for deployed US female soldiers was less than, or right at, that of most American public universities...I just want to make sure that things haven't changed. If possible, the actual military reports would be ideal, seeing as how that is an area that the armed forces has very little tolerance for. Not saying the MSM don't have it right, but the raw data is always nice.

 

[Rottweiler]

Oh good. Because, as you know, in my post I wasn't refering to soldiers. No, I was refering to the non-combat personnel. Man, you always tell 'em like you seez 'em.

Sadly, I do calls 'em likes I sees 'em.

Because you see, your lil' post didn't say anything about 'non-combat personnel'. It said:

"Because they're overglorified killers who do the government's dirty job whether we like it or not."

And your post was, to all intents and purposes, responding to this question:

"Why do people hate the army?"

Nowhere in either was a distinction made about combat or non-combat personnel. So, *forgive me* for not being aware of the subtle subtext in your single-sentence post.

 

[TheAmazingHobo]

(snip)

So you think the majority of civilian deaths is made up by opposing forces as a means of propaganda ?
That foreign aid is money completly pissed away and that the UN is a useless mockery of an organization ?

Yet, you rock up here and complain about the IGNORANT hatred and contempt toward what YOU used to do for a job and how misguided and simplistic people judge what YOU used to do and how what YOU used to do turns out to be actually much more valuable than the "preconcieved notions" of people make them think ?

That´s..... just awesome.
You DO realize that you just gave the perfect example for why some people tend to dislike military and ex-military personel ?
Because they often tend to spout the exact same bullshit you just let loose, while crying about how unfairly and ignorant everyone else treats them.

 

[crazyarms33]

Soldiers don't go to war. Soldiers are sent to war. People seem to think that if we didn't have soldiers we wouldn't have wars. I am a strong opponent of war and I am a pacifist, but I still respect soldiers for the duty they are doing.

You. You, I think I will like. We may disagree about the necessity of war, but at least you and I agree that blaming soldiers only is silly. Kudos.

 

[n00beffect]

It's not about being ashamed of the army, it's about being ashamed of the whole militant mentality, the military organizations still persistanly retain, even though the world seems to slowly be moving away from it. I hate the army because it represents an older state of the world as a whole - a more barbaric, primitive state of mind which only serves to undermine everything modern civilization has been working towards, ever since the end of WWII. And when I say I hate the army, I don't mean I hate the soldiers and people who are serving in it. Quite the contrary, I respect them for their determination to wilfully risk their lives for what they believe and hold dear. However, I hate the organization that is the army. I feel that the soldiers' wilfullness and self-sacrifice is being exploted by those organizations, for personal gain.

The world does not need armies anymore. The age of 'conquering' and 'defending one's land', etc. has long passed, and today, in the world of economics, where a different kind of war is being waged in CEO offices, and Wall Street - the modern battlefields of today - the persistency of the military just seems a bit redundant.

And I am not saying, in any way, that there aren't still conflicts, and terrorists threats and such, in the world. All I am saying is that there may be a better way to deal with these issues, you know, without the inclusion of modern, extremely dangerous military equipment and such... Call me a hippie, beatnik, peaceloving tree-hugger if uou wish, but that is my opinion.

 

[Bat Vader]

It seems if you respect the army you're a patriot, and patriotism is bad because it means you hate everyone that isn't from your country. I've had a few 'debates' with escapist members about 'patriotism' every time I say I respect soldiers people rag on me and tell me that I'm a terrible person that should die in a hole.

Wouldn't that be more Nationalism than Patriotism? I respect the men and women that serve in the military. I may not agree with everything they do sometimes but I still respect them.
Yes, there have been a few bad eggs in the military but that does not mean everyone in the military is bad.

 

[getoffmycloud]

Some of the contempt is no doubt misplaced frustration. As A U.S. Citizen I disagree whole heartedly with a some of the decisions my government has made in regard to recent military actions. And some folks tend to confuse the soldier who carries out his/her orders with the politician who drafted the orders to begin with.

At least from my perspective, they're enabling said politicians. Further, they sign up to follow orders. If I give up my autonomy to someone else, why should I be considered free of blame for what they tell me to do when it was my decision to let them give me orders in the first place?

Well that is no different from any job if somebody above you tells you to do something you do it.

One thing people forget is when the shit hits the fan its the military that responds. If there is a massive earthquake or something like that the military are out there helping people while most people just watch it on the evening news.

And as for those saying that there is no need for a large military look what happened to Britain at the start of WW2. They didn't have a large enough or advanced enough army to stop the German's taking Europe yet it's air force which was much better prepared for the job prevented the Germans from invading and stopped them from being able to turn all their attention on the russians.

So it just shows it is always better to be prepared than have to panic and throw something together at the last minute.

 

[EclipseoftheDarkSun]

Well the army is just a subset of society in general, so there are great, responsible, intelligent capable soldiers but also various types of dipshit dragging their reputation down.

So, kudos to the first group, and I hope they do their best to stop the second group abusing civilians and pissing off the locals.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Add to that the fact that 90% of women serving in the military report sexual harassment and 30% have been raped, I just don't see why anyone would volunteer to enter such an environment and propagate attitudes that the military deserves respect.

Can you find the facts to post please? Last I saw the rape rate for deployed US female soldiers was less than, or right at, that of most American public universities...I just want to make sure that things haven't changed. If possible, the actual military reports would be ideal, seeing as how that is an area that the armed forces has very little tolerance for. Not saying the MSM don't have it right, but the raw data is always nice.

Admittedly, these stastics are a few years out of date. I don't know how much has changed since then, but I'm inclined to say very little.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8005198.stm

According to several studies of the US military funded by the Department of Veteran Affairs, 30% of military women are raped while serving, 71% are sexually assaulted, and 90% are sexually harassed.

The Department of Defense acknowledges the problem, estimating in its 2009 annual report on sexual assault (issued last month) that some 90% of military sexual assaults are never reported.

That was a google search I don't intend to repeat. How awful.

 

[Ziame]

Just two things: people join the army oftrn from the must position - e.g. to get their uni paid, so not exactly murderous assholes (and in Mericuh, uni is fucking expensive, hundreds of thousands and stuff, so McD wont help ya)

Also, other countries dont invade because your country is an asshole for God's sake. Wrong time period. I can bet my ass that if Mericuh said 'no more army' and disbanded it, China would invade the shit out of them, cause of oil, gold, land, etc. not because they're not nice.

 

[Rottweiler]

(snip)

So you think the majority of civilian deaths is made up by opposing forces as a means of propaganda ?
That foreign aid is money completly pissed away and that the UN is a useless mockery of an organization ?

Yet, you rock up here and complain about the IGNORANT hatred and contempt toward what YOU used to do for a job and how misguided and simplistic people judge what YOU used to do and how what YOU used to do turns out to be actually much more valuable than the "preconcieved notions" of people make them think ?


That´s..... just awesome.
You DO realize that you just gave the perfect example for why some people tend to dislike military and ex-military personel ?
Because they often tend to spout the exact same bullshit you just let loose, while crying about how unfairly and ignorant everyone else treats them.

(snip)

What's even more awesome is you took one example, have completely spun it into universal statements I *didn't* make, and now I'm a perfect example of something?

This is what I actually said:

"I always find it so interesting how people say 'rar they killed civilians' but when you say 'and how do you feel about the enemy, who actively hides amongst civilians and uses their deaths for propaganda purposes?' you get a whole lot of nothing.

"Well, uh...they...uh...CIVILIAN DEATHS! Most of them reported by people who have a massive bias against the military and who need every bit of propaganda they can get! But we believe them because it fits our preconceived notions!"

I never saw IGNORANT, could you show me where I put that in there? Or how did you put it:

"So you think the majority of civilian deaths is made up by opposing forces as a means of propaganda ?"

Did I say that in there? I completely missed that.

Now, why don't you use things I *actually* said and we can have a rational discourse.

Because *you* gave the perfect example of someone taking things to an extreme which fits your personal agenda, and ignoring that actual words and sense behind them that were actually posted.

*You*, sir, are the awesome one.


P.S. I will stand up for thinking the UN is a useless organization. Because that's what I think.