[JonathanNorth]

(Original post by AspiringGenius)
The soldiers at the moment fight for the political aims of America, not this country. And I can't help but notice that all the people I know in the army feel entitled to a label of "hero" just because they are part of the military services, even if they haven't been to Afghanistan or wherever.

In the past, veterans did fight for this country and when I go to help the elderly, I have immense respect for both the men who went out on the front line, and the women who strived to support them back home.

Now, going back to the people who i know (quite a substantial few as i live near a Marine barracks), most of them go into the army because they want to be able to demand respect from people. Also, it's worth noting that most of them that I know, refer to people from the middle east as "rag-heads" so they are racially motivated.

I just can't help thinking at the people who join the army today do so for the wrong reasons. for these reasons, I don't give my outright respect to the armed forces any more than I would Doctors, Nurses, Paramedics, policemen, firemen etc. who arguably do more to help this country and it's people.

This.

One opinion I can agree with 100% throughout this thread.

[LaEstrella]

Everyone has different views on this topic. I have obviously never been through what you have been through, having parents who lived in countries which fought against each other. However, there is always going to be war, that is one thing that we cannot get away from, whether it be due to oil, religion, territory etc, it is always going to be in our lives and if we didn't have soldiers fighting to try and retain the peace, many more innocent citizens would die than they do now.
I have to say, everyone that I know in the army, navy, royal air force or marines don't want the label of hero, they see their friends who they fight for as the heroes, because after all, when they are out in the war zones, they are fighting for themselves, their friends and the nation.
I find it absolutely disgusting that you would like to 'spit' in the face of veterans, you're entitled to your opinion, as is everyone else, but that truly is low.

[Subology]

With the Jubilee just gone, I've heard a lot of people saying that the royal family are: 'apolitical' or 'above politics'. There's a lot of truth to that, except when it comes to the military; they are essential a propaganda tool for the military. I'm not saying the Royal family are the reason we glorify the military, but rather the fact that solider glorification is so embedded into the cultural mindset that a very pro-military stance taken by the monarch can be seen as 'apolitical'.

Glorifying soldiers is surely systematic of how we glorify the military at large. The latest MORI poll shows the UK is pretty evenly split on whether nuclear weapons are necessary. 40 percent of the population in favour, is this not jingoistic? It's estimated we will spend between £25-100 Billion on replacing trident (off course we aren't allowed to know how much of our money is spent on it for security reasons) and yet it never surfaces as a major political debate. Yet why? Does Ireland need submarines with nuclear weapon capability? Portugal? Holland? Spain? Hungary? I see absolutely no justification that the UK needs one either. The deterrent argument doesn't fit the story. How can they justify it on a purely economic basis?

Many who froth at the mouth at how large the public sector is, and how much of it is unproductive and needs to be cut actually support increasing the military budget (take UKIP for example). This all stems, it seems to me, from how ingrained military glorification is: 'help for heroes', 'military wives', etc, etc. The less of it the better, in my opinion.

[Labqueen]

I have not read every post in this thread as it would likely just seriously **** me off.

But for every single person who has expressed an opinion you have that freedom of speech to be able to do that because of the men and women who fought and sacrificed themselves to give you that right.

It is not the military who decide where to wage war or when to wage to war, it is the politicians. I know of no person in the military who want to go to war, who want to spend months on end away from their families and fighting other men, they do it because they go where they are sent and they do their job. I also know of no single person who views themselves as a hero for doing that job, it is something which they do because it may be part of what they signed on for.

Help for Heroes, SAAFA, Military Wives, RBL, St Dunstans, Combat Stress etc are there to assist the member of the armed forces as well as their families. There is a very limited amount of hep available when someone is injured. We have Selly Oak and Hedley Court rehabilitation as specific for them, but the NHS is not able to cope with the specific needs of many of the injuries sustained nor the support of the families.

The military does a hell of a lot more than go to war. They are called upon to assist the public in severe flooding, when public sector workers go on strike (such as firemen, bin men etc), they assist in emergency situations when the government failed to prepare for the severe winter weather a couple of years ago, they assist in numerous search and rescue operations, they provide additional security such as at the olympics.

I don't support the wars but I will always support the military.

[cid]

(Original post by Polygoof)

They murdered each other for some reason. And that reason is so important that these trained murderers are glorified as heroes.

What reasons can be so important not only to justify murder, but to actually award and celebrate those who murder?



But apart from that, could it be that soldiers are awarded simply for the fact of being effective murderers and masters of warfare, of doing their "job" well?

Murder is a human concept defined as homicide committed against the law, so your description of soldiers as murderers is plain and simple misrepresentation...


Peter Sutcliffe should probably sue you for that...

[ufo2012]

I guess it depends what exactly the purpose of the war is.

I mean, look at how Vietnam turned out for the veterans just after that war finished...
they were hated. People despised them.

Fast-forward 20 years and more and they are now respected for the duty that they did.

[Sheep]

lol I was arguing about this before

I don't particularly dislike soldiers but I don't think they deserve any more respect than anyone else

I'm convinced this whole idea of "soldiers are dying for our freedom" nonsense is just some media / political conditioning that all the sheep follow along with

I mean I wonder how many soldiers really give a **** about that sort of stuff, rather they're just there because they are hot headed guys who want some action and probably have no chance of getting any other kind of job because they dropped out of school

they don't deserve any special treatment at all

[Harolinho]

As the late great Carlin once said: If there were no soldiers there would be no war. It might not be a nice logic, nor totally agreeable, but without a military war would be unfeasible.



I ain't got no quarrel with no Viet Kong!

(incoming negstorm)

[Pitt1988]

I think the glorification of soldiers has been somewhat extended beyond the boundaries of heroism. I mean if you go back to WW1 and WWII, where normal young lads were being conscripted to go and fight against a nation that was both committing acts of genocide and invading and conquering sovereign states then I think they should be glorified.

Nowadays however, while there are true acts of heroism in war, being branded as a hero for merely going and doing your job, in a war that has little if nothing in comparison to the previous wars is a bit over the top.

[Scumbaggio]

OP is basically scum, please do not spit in anyone's face or vandalise any stalls.

I would never join the Army/Navy/Air Force because I'm far too lazy but I do have respect for people who were willing and able to do so.

It is not 'murder' if one combatant kills another.

I hate the idea that wearing a poppy is a statement about supporting warfare, I wear a poppy and observe the two minute silence not to glorify war but to pay a little bit of respect for all the people who died for what they thought was a noble cause.

When I'm observing the silence I take the time to think about all the men, women and children and animals (of all nations) who died in terrible conditions fighting a horrific war.

[Nick100]

(Original post by Polygoof)
For some random reason in history, these two countries start a war, and for some reason the young people who are in the military of either country are proud to serve their country and die fighting in this war.

Has it occurred to you that maybe the reason is not random, and that one country is at fault? What were we supposed to do, for example, when Germany invaded Poland?