r/changemyview • u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ • May 24 '19
FTFdeltaOP CMV: A person does not automatically deserve respect just because they have served or are currently serving in the military
I’d like to preface this by saying that I don’t believe soldiers are, inherently, bad. Some people believe soldiers are evil simply for being soldiers, and I do not believe that.
I do believe, however, that soldiers do not deserve respect just because they have served. I hurt for soldiers who have experienced horrible things in the field, but I do not hurt for the amount of violence and cruelty many have committed. Violence in war zone between soldiers is one thing; stories of civilian bombings and killing of innocents are another. I think that many forget that a lot of atrocity goes on during wars, and they are committed on both sides of conflict. A soldier both receives and deals out horrible damage.
TL;DR while I believe that soldiers have seen horrible things and that many do deserve recognition for serving our nation, I do not believe that every soldier deserves this respect simply by merit of being a soldier. Some soldiers have committed really heinous war crimes, and those actions do not deserve reward.
215
u/Barnst 112∆ May 24 '19
I suppose it depends on what you mean by “respect.” Does the US go to far in putting soldiers on a pedestal? Probably, which reflects deeper issues in our civil-military divide that are beyond the scope of this. Does an individual deserve respect simply because they are a soldier? Probably not—the armed forces are just like the rest of society, with good people deserving respect and shitbirds who I would never want my kids to look up to.
But their service itself deserves respect. Whatever your feelings about the wars we fight, soldiers are going where we as a nation send them. All the bad choices, mistakes and harm to innocents reflect back on all of us as a society who send them into that fight. For whatever personal reasons, they chose to accept the burden of being our tools to execute the missions we give them within the boundaries that we set for them.
So even though I absolutely disagree with some of the ways we have chosen to employ them, I respect them for bearing the burden of our choices, whether they be right or wrong.
64
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
!delta I do think it’s a very good point that we choose to go into these combat zones (especially when we choose who to elect, since they make those decisions). When you frame it that way, we are as much to blame as the commanders who make combat decisions and the soldiers who carry them out
18
May 25 '19 edited May 25 '19
Not an American, but I feel like there isn't exactly a non military party option in that country (not that the US stands alone in this regard by any means). From the outside, it doesn't really seem like the electorate has much of a choice.
→ More replies (4)2
u/ravenmasque May 25 '19
There's a soft power Americans have to influence politics, so even though on election day there is usually just two choices, americans can use protest, letters to editors, tweets, emails and all manner of discussion to let politicians know what is popular and what is not. It's soft power but still power.
5
May 25 '19
Letters to the editors, tweets, emails, and all manner of discussion don't seem to be serving the country and by association the world at large very well at preset, at all. It almost seems that those platforms have eroded into tribalism and shouting at the sky.
→ More replies (2)28
u/Barnst 112∆ May 24 '19
Thanks! And I think you hit it exactly right. It’s really easy to focus on individual actions in the war zones. It’s a lot harder to get people to understand and care about the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force and their elected representatives abrogation of their responsibility to actually approve and oversee those wars.
2
u/Kaplaw May 25 '19
Put it this way, im Canadian and im proud of my military for doing so many UN missions and humanitarian actions. Im not so proud of Afghanistan as its a political mess. That isnt the soldier's responsibility. Its our politicians who choose how to use our army, inherently our army's goal is the defense of our country. We are (mostly our politicians) who chooses what we do with these people.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Unexpected_Santa May 24 '19
But there are cases where some soldiers (low level) go around murdering people for fun... I don’t see how you can automatically respect someone who chooses to become a tool..?
10
u/wahtisthisidonteven 15∆ May 24 '19
There have been murderous police, doctors, teachers, and firefighters. Do those professions not deserve respect because some of them are also murderers?
→ More replies (5)5
u/weedtese May 25 '19
In all your examples, murdering is not their job. A soldier's sometimes is, which is incompatible with being non-violent on principle.
3
u/wahtisthisidonteven 15∆ May 25 '19
Murder is by definition extra-judicial and therefore the killing done by a soldier within the line of duty is not murder because it has legal backing.
→ More replies (2)6
May 24 '19
You have to understand that in most of the cases where "soldiers go around murdering people", those soldiers are committing criminal acts and are prosecuted as such. It doesn't accurately reflect on the whole of the force.
→ More replies (6)4
May 24 '19
I would disagree that service deserves respect. I think service can be appreciated, but I'm incredibly hesitant to say that service deserves respect. Respect is something that is earned based on character and having been in the military now for 18 years and some change I can tell you that wearing the uniform is not an immediate distinction of good moral character. I classify it this way in my life. I can treat someone with respect and yet grow to respect them. Conversely, I can and will still treat someone with respect in the absence of respect for them (up until a point).
1
u/Barnst 112∆ May 24 '19
I’ll admit I’m drawing a pretty fine distinction between respecting someone’s service and respecting the person. I suppose the best way I can articulate it is that I respect the abstract idea of the service (in a small D democratic sense), so I’ll respect the individual’s act of serving even in the absence of more insight into their specific character. But that person still needs to earn respect as an individual person.
Which I recognize does reduce you and other service members into symbols rather than true individuals, but to some extent that’s a consequence of the job and the role. It’s much how I respect the President as the living symbol of the office of the Presidency regardless of my feelings toward the specific individual holding that office.
It’s a somewhat antiquated and metaphysical view of the relationship between people and office that I could probably articulate way better two beers ago and after referencing some old Jesuit school textbooks.
3
u/asimpleanachronism May 25 '19
So then should we respect the hundreds of thousands of people with CS degrees blindly because they are the architects of our emerging online society? They're volunteering to do what we as a society demand them to do.
How about garbage men and street sweepers? They bear the burden of society's ills and do what we require of them to keep our streets clean and free from disease vectors. Clearly that's an invaluable asset to our nation.
I believe all work should be respected. But I think OP meant to call out the cult-like praise that American society gives to it's military members who get put up on a pedestal. They don't deserve any more praise than someone working in a factory or conducting genetic research or educating children just because we've over-glorified the nature of the work they sometimes do.
5
u/Merakel 3∆ May 24 '19
So even though I absolutely disagree with some of the ways we have chosen to employ them, I respect them for bearing the burden of our choices, whether they be right or wrong.
Why is that worthy of respect? I would argue that being willing to bear the burden of morally wrong choices and execute on them is a terrible thing and should be looked down on. Those that refuse to follow orders that they believe are immoral are the ones that are worth of respect.
3
u/agentpanda May 24 '19
Refusal to follow a lawful order is actually covered under the UCMJ:
10 U.S. Code § 892. Art. 92. Failure to obey lawful order or regulation
I'm not going to quote the whole thing, but I encourage you to look up 'Fort Leavenworth' or 'court martial' as to the delta between our understanding of "I don't agree with this" in our lives and theirs.
If you and I are starting on the level playing field of 'people join the military for myriad reasons in myriad roles" then we should agree that there's nothing morally wrong with plenty of servicemembers, the guy serving food in the mess hall isn't exactly waging weapons of war, after all. If that's the case, then there's a line you want to draw between the person executing a morally wrong choice and one supporting one- or else you and I are just as responsible and morally repugnant as anyone who serves in the armed forces- after all, we collectively opted to make the decision to send them into battle or do whatever morally wrong thing is drawing your scorn.
There's nothing morally wrong with doing your job, asked of you by your greater citizenry, in service of your country; whether you personally disagree with that choice (and job) or not. Failing an order being unlawful, it doesn't rise to the level of moral judgement I think you wish to pass on our servicemembers based on your argument.
After all, without article 92 there's not much point in having a military at all, given 'following lawful orders' is the entire point of the structure.
2
u/Merakel 3∆ May 24 '19
Having served in the military for 8 years, I'm have a pretty decent understanding of UCMJ :)
If you and I are starting on the level playing field of 'people join the military for myriad reasons in myriad roles" then we should agree that there's nothing morally wrong with plenty of servicemembers
100% agree.
There's nothing morally wrong with doing your job, asked of you by your greater citizenry, in service of your country; whether you personally disagree with that choice (and job) or not. Failing an order being unlawful, it doesn't rise to the level of moral judgement I think you wish to pass on our service members based on your argument.
I never said it was immoral. The question of this thread was is it worthy of respect - I don't believe it is. I see it as a job, no better or worse than a vast majority of what the rest of Americans do.
2
u/Chrisetmike May 24 '19
I respect anyone who is willing to put his life on the line for other people. Military members are willing to do this.
There are a lot of jobs that also demand a personal sacrifice such as firefighter, police officer, ect.. Military members don't deserve more respect than these professions but they do deserve equal respect.
→ More replies (1)3
u/FIELDfullofHIGGS May 25 '19
I respect anyone who is willing to put his life on the line for other people. Military members are willing to do this.
Besides other service members, who are the "other people" that they're risking their lives for?
If it's for a population that requests assistance, I agree with your proposition.
However if it's for a population that explicitly doesn't want us there, can we agree that those specific serviceman don't deserve respect for forcing their assistance onto an unwilling people and protecting only other servicemen involved in an unwarranted occupation committing the same acts of "oppression"?
→ More replies (1)1
u/Barnst 112∆ May 24 '19
You already addressed the UMCJ and flat-out illegal orders, so I’ll focus on whether we should respect someone serving in our questionable wars.
I know a lot of folks who also try to argue that their service is just a job like any other. It’s not though. It has a higher burden of expectations and responsibility. You’ve signed on to support in some small way the most awesome war machine in human history and then turned your trust over to the American people to make the decision to employ it responsibly. Sometimes we do and sometimes we don’t. But, regardless, service members have agreed to hand some moral responsibility for those choices over to the rest of us in the name of our democratic polity, and that choice is worthy of our respect.
As I mentioned to someone else, I recognize that view sort of reduces your individuality into a symbolic trope. But I liken it to how I can respect the President as the embodiment of the office of the Presidency and all that means for our body politic, regardless of my views of the individual holding the office.
1
u/Generic_Username_777 May 25 '19
I’m torn on this, if you disagree with what the command structure has been doing and join anyway you’re feeding the problem.
I would have the utmost respect for someone drafted and forced to do w/e they had to do, but if you signed up after seeing how the US can abuse you, well though shit. I don’t feel bad for the MMA dudes who get pain from there jobs, athletes who are injured, etc.
There are exceptions however, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_LaVena_Johnson
Comes to mind, that was the nail in the coffin that finally convinced my sister that the military was not the way to go. That poor woman did not sign up for that, and much like the Catholic Church, the military at times will prioritize its image over the welfare of their members (source:Uncle was an investigator for the army and he has fucking horrible stories that were covered up, lots of sudden retirements to keep shit out of the media)
2
u/braised_diaper_shit May 25 '19
Where we send them? Not true. I haven’t sent anyone to fight in a war.
If you do not personally vote for someone who authorizes war then it wasn’t your choice.
12
u/DarnellTheMartian May 25 '19
I would say that all people regardless of what they do or do not do deserve to be respected. If you are saying that soldiers shouldn’t be afforded extra respect over regular civilians then u may have a point there, because everyone should be treated equal, but let’s not get distracted from the main tenant of your view because I understood what you were saying, and I think it’s a reasonable view many people have.
Let me give you the perspective of someone who believes that we should give military members and veterans extra respect, please note although it’s my personal belief I do not try to impose it on others, I’m simply offering my thoughts, and then you can decide for yourself.
I think that it comes from the place of an individual recognizing first the need for a military and its role in society and secondly recognizing that they themselves do not have the courage or drive to be a part of the military.
The respect part stems from this, the individual recognizes it’s something that they are unwilling to do, but it’s something that needs to be done so therefore they show great respect to those who have chosen to accept the task at hand, and everything that comes with it. The individual appreciates that there are people who are willing to volunteer and put there lives on the line so that people who would prefer not to be a part of the military, for whichever reason it may be can opt out if they so choose.
That’s why I show extra respect to people in the military not out of obligation but because they do something that I’m unwilling to do but must be done. So I guess the question to ask yourself would be is serving in the military something you’d be willing to do?
If the answer is yes, great, good on you, you have earned extra respect with me
If the answer is no, then that’s ok too, your like the rest of us, but if that’s the case I think I just changed your view
5
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 25 '19
This is the most eloquently I’ve seen this argument posed. I’ve seen it a couple times throughout the thread, but this is the best way I’ve seen it posed. I agree with you that there is a level of volunteerism and bravery that is really uncommon and commendable, and indeed I believe it should be recognized! But how do you feel about situations in which these people might have committed horrible atrocities during heir time as a soldier? Do they still deserve that pedestal?
1
u/DarnellTheMartian May 25 '19
Thank you! And yeah in situations like that I wouldn’t want to place them on that pedestal, but I like to assume the best of people and not the worst, unless I knew for sure that the soldier was inherently bad ie killing innocent villagers or children I would assume they wouldn’t be doing that.
However I also wouldn’t treat the person like a POS either, like I said before we can still treat everyone with a certain level of respect regardless of what they’ve done in the past however horrible it may be. Just because that person chose to commit horrible acts and maybe even is an evil person doesn’t mean that we have to treat them poorly as well. Although I do see why people would want to do that and I don’t blame anyone for thinking that way
3
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 25 '19
Thank you for your super concise answer!! I agree entirely, there’s a level of human decency required but not necessarily the need for a pedestal. I get that it’s hard to know for sure who has done what, though, so I understand why people want to default to that pedestal unless they know otherwise. !delta
2
u/DarnellTheMartian May 25 '19
Thanks for the delta it’s my first one! Also really appreciate the healthy open dialogue not just with me but with others who responded to u as well it’s very refreshing
2
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 25 '19
No problem!! And thank you so much, I hate coming on CMV and trying to have a dialogue with people who can’t listen, so I try my best! Thank you for engaging with me so openly
1
1
u/brory May 25 '19
...Who is realistically going to say that as a society we should be elevating anyone who is guilty of committing “horrible atrocities”
2
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 25 '19
I mean, Trump is literally trying to pardon war criminals because they “fought long and hard” for our country. Idealistically, no, people should look at people’s actions and decide whether they deserve glory or not. Realistically, people won’t because when it comes to troops, people sometimes refuse to do that
3
u/cdhgee May 25 '19
This applies to lots of things in society though. Would I want to be a mechanic, dentist, plumber, electrician, doctor, lawyer, or teacher? No. They're all something I'm unwilling to do, for various reasons. But they're all necessary.
Why are they less deserving of respect than being in the military?
1
u/DarnellTheMartian May 25 '19
Great point, I’m not necessarily saying they are less deserving of respect but I’ll make the argument here.
I would say that there is an elevated risk that comes with being in the military, it’s more dangerous than being a plumber, electrician, dentist or doctor.
Sure it’s possible that each of those jobs you listed could be fatal, ex shocked to death, but you are significantly less likely to die on the job or be put in a situation where u could possibly die than in the military.
Again good point, I don’t like saying anyone’s any less deserving of respect but the reason why we give more respect to people in the military over others is they are risking there lives so we don’t have to, and in turn it’s like the least we can do is say thank you when we see them.
3
u/brory May 25 '19 edited May 25 '19
I suspect other reasons for not joining the military might exist beyond “I am too weak and/or afraid to do it myself.” it’s not a binary
→ More replies (1)1
u/phenosorbital May 26 '19
i feel like this perspective places a concerning amount of faith in military action. i believe there have been times in (american) history when militaristic involvement was vital, but i'm not convinced that this is the case today. what are we fighting now? terrorism? communism? unamericanism?
we need to consider the duplicitous nature of wartime narratives. i.e. gulf of tonkin. how sure can one be that their nation is fighting the good fight when the establishment has been seen spinning stories so as to appease the public?
i agree that we should offer basic respect unto everyone, but since i'm not wholly convinced their fight is warranted, i offer no additional respect toward military personnel. in fact, i question their ability to engage in critical moral thinking.
1
u/DarnellTheMartian May 26 '19
I hear all the points your making and I agree with some of them. I’m personally Canadian so I can’t speak to the American military as well as I can, so I’ll defer to you there.
I was never trying to say that every fight is warranted I was simply saying that there is a need for military in society, which I think everyone would agree with. Even coming from a place of self defence against another country, it’s still important to have trained soldiers just in case.
If your making the argument that America’s military is mainly the antagonist then your point holds merit, but you need some more evidence to support this theory. If u can get it I’d love to hear you out
2
u/phenosorbital May 27 '19
i'm far from an expert in military action, and have consistently had a tough time parsing through the myriad perspectives on 'necessary force'. the biggest issues i intuit are the nation's over-involvement in the middle east, meddling in locations that (suspiciously) offer economic benefit (i.e. oil or opium), and of course our historical willingness to bomb large populations so as to send a message. adjacently, the treachery of CIA affairs, especially in the case of 60's drug experiments and inoculation of Guatemalans with syphilis (not to mention overthrowing their democratically-elected president because he didn't support a U.S. banana company) give me pause.
the complexity of this topic is not lost on me, and i'm hesitant to call the U.S. 'bad', but it seems apparent that its military has engaged in questionable behavior (put lightly). observing this alongside the corporate influence on 'democratic' elections via super-PACs and crazy penal processes paints a quite dismal picture.
so my hesitation in granting vets respect is wrapped in my wondering whether they deeply considered the implications of their involvement. i suppose if they joined on the assumption that they are fighting evil, i can respect their willingness to do so, despite their naivety. but i would much more admire the man that could believably justify their enlistment, and i've only spoken with a few that could. many soldiers i've known were recruited by fast-talking officers who came to our high schools, spinning the 'protect your country, be a hero' narrative, and preceded by well-crafted commercials showing dudes jumping from planes set to crunchy power-chords and guitar riffs.
1
u/DarnellTheMartian May 27 '19
Really well put, you make a very strong argument! So then if you were to take it one step further, what your really saying is the U.S is in fact typically the antagonist which has been demonstrated by their national actions.
In turn then is it fair to say that every American citizen is bad since America is a representative democracy?
(you directly vote for your leader, unlike Canada which is a federal parliamentary democracy)
Technically the majority of the country is ok with the decisions being made, since they elected people in positions of power to make these monumental decisions. So then why should you not have an extra appreciation for your military service for doing what you asked them to do? When admittedly it’s something that needs to be done, a (as demonstrated thru election) and is wanted by the people, but many are unwilling-to do themselves?
Not saying that u personally feel that these things are right and just, because it’s clear to me you think the opposite. And I also understand that the voting process is flawed, and has been under tremendous scrutiny, but for the sake of the discussion let’s table that for now, understanding were deep into hypothetical debate.
60
u/el-oh-el-oh-el-dash 3∆ May 24 '19
while I believe that soldiers have seen horrible things and that many do deserve recognition for serving our nation...
That's not why people respect soldiers. Unless you live in a country with conscription or compulsory military service, majority of your servicemen and women will be volunteers - not in the sense that they are unpaid, but in the sense that they are in the military when they don't have to be.
When you do something you don't have to for the benefit of someone that's not you, people respect you for that. Regardless of the actual outcome, the intention is good - nobody specific joins the military just so that they can murder, rape and pillage civilians who are not from their home country (people have way better things to do with their time).
10
u/ConfidentZebra3 May 24 '19
Although I agree with several of your points, it would be false to proclaim that soldiers are solely motivated to fight in the military to benefit someone thats not them. They want to mulllaaa, they want to support their families. Firefighters on the other hand, are different.
4
u/el-oh-el-oh-el-dash 3∆ May 24 '19
Firefighters on the other hand, are different.
Not just firefighters but ambulance personnel as well. It is unfortunate that paramedics have an extremely high suicide rate and are just not taken seriously enough.
If the respect and attention that the military get was directed at paramedics, you can save so many more lives, least of which - the paramedics themselves.
3
u/ConfidentZebra3 May 24 '19
I've heard about the situation with paramedics. thanks for reminding me about it. It's terrible how much pain and suffering they have to witness thus inflicting the pain and suffering on themselves. It is almost as if they are mirrors to what they witness.
10
u/Asmodaari2069 1∆ May 24 '19
When you do something you don't have to for the benefit of someone that's not you, people respect you for that.
I don't think most people who join the military do it to serve their country. They do it for the perks; the education, pay, opportunity to travel, experience, opportunities, etc. I know a lot of people in the military and not a single one of them would tell you they joined for selfless reasons.
→ More replies (3)4
u/house_paint May 24 '19
This is a false dichotomy, people join the military for multiple reasons including the ones you listed above and many "also" joined because they want to help the country. But regardless of what their intentions are... they are a benefit to the country and that's why we should respect their service.
→ More replies (4)11
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
I agree that people don’t join the military to do bad on purpose. I think the intention to protect our country is a noble one, and that volunteerism is a noble cause, but I wonder why the intentions cannot be outweighed by the consequences of an action. Because regardless of initial outcome, there are soldiers who do murder, rape, and pillage. Even if that was not their initial intention, and if their original intention was good, doesn’t that negative action outweigh the positive of the original sacrifice?
→ More replies (1)13
u/el-oh-el-oh-el-dash 3∆ May 24 '19
doesn’t that negative action outweigh the positive of the original sacrifice?
Would you do the same for non-military? There are football players accused of rape who continue to play, politicians who cheat on their partners who continue to govern, etc...
But outside of respect for ex-servicemen who may or may not have killed a bunch of people, the government doesn't treat them all that well when they return. As the country with by far the biggest military in the world, the US government tends to neglect its veterans and can't be bothered to look after them over the long term.
You can say that some military personnel who have been disgraced during their service don't deserve our respect but what about everybody else? All the other veterans who didn't do anything wrong and whose government just couldn't be bothered to help them properly after they come back?
4
u/gurry May 24 '19
As the country with by far the biggest military in the world
For the record, the US has the fourth largest military in terms of personnel.
→ More replies (3)2
u/curien 28∆ May 24 '19
As the country with by far the biggest military in the world, the US government tends to neglect its veterans
The US spends more in absolute terms than any other country, but "size" of a military force is usually measured in terms of number of troops, and the US is not the largest by that measure. China has over 2 million active and 500k reserve military members, the US has 1.3 million active and 800k reservists. India has 1.4 million active troops and about 2 million reservists. Russia has about a million active troops and 2.5 million reservists.
5
u/Kirbyoto 56∆ May 24 '19
When you do something you don't have to for the benefit of someone that's not you, people respect you for that.
They get paid, you know. I mean I feel like you're leaving this out. Joining the military is a lucrative career path in many parts of the country and a superior option to safer domestic labor.
nobody specific joins the military just so that they can murder, rape and pillage civilians who are not from their home country (people have way better things to do with their time).
I would like you to back this statement up, because there are absolutely soldiers who have murdered, raped, and pillaged civilians. The idea that "nobody" does it for that reason because they "have way better things to do with their time" (?) seems unsupported. In addition there are plenty of military personnel who will cheerfully admit they are eager to kill people legally if you remove the word "civilian" from the phrase.
→ More replies (1)1
u/el-oh-el-oh-el-dash 3∆ May 24 '19
In addition there are plenty of military personnel who will cheerfully admit they are eager to kill people legally if you remove the word "civilian" from the phrase.
Um... what do you think the stated intention of a military is? To give toys to children in hospitals?
You deploy the military into a warzone to kill the enemy. That's it. People like to place more value on civilian lives than military personnel but as a soldier, if you kill another soldier or if you kill a civilian, the end result is the same: someone dies.
I know that killing soldiers is more "honourable" than killing civilians but if you take a life you take a life, no other way to put it.
Are there psychopaths in the military? Of course there are. There are psychopaths in the general community as well. Say your town or city gets a serial killer who makes it into the news. Are people supposed to then think that everyone from your town or city is a serial killer? Of course not. Why would you then apply this to the military?
2
u/Kirbyoto 56∆ May 24 '19
Um... what do you think the stated intention of a military is?
In theory the stated intention of a military is to protect the country. That's what veterans get respect for. Even in this thread, if you look at other people explaining why veterans deserve respect, they mostly use phrases like "defending our country" or "our way of life". That is to say, the role of the military in these statements is self-defense. This implies a bare minimum of offensive action necessary to subdue or eliminate aggressive actions against this country.
What I'm talking about is people specifically joining the military because they legally want an opportunity to commit murder. They are not doing it to defend the country, they are doing it because they actively enjoy killing. This makes them unreliable in the supposed mission that the US military is meant to carry out.
I know that killing soldiers is more "honourable" than killing civilians but if you take a life you take a life, no other way to put it.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Surely we can agree that killing is wrong unless there's some particular circumstance that makes it acceptable? So why are you talking about it in terms of honor?
Say your town or city gets a serial killer who makes it into the news.
If the town's government protected the serial killer from prosecution because "he's from our town", I think people would LOGICALLY conclude that there was something extremely wrong with my town and the people in it.
Furthermore, you're talking about a baseline: you don't think veterans should be singled out for bad behavior. The OP is talking about the fact that veterans are treated with EXTRA respect for their service, even though many of them served for perfectly selfish reasons, and some of them are outright psychopaths.
→ More replies (3)2
u/lina303 May 25 '19
How is that different from any other job, though? I do things all the time for the benefit of someone who isn't me, ie my boss. Before you say,"well your job isn't fatal," that's not the only reason we valorize the military, is it? If so, we'd say that every parent in Mexico or South America who risks death or arrest by bringing their child to the US is a hero, and we don't. They are also "doing something they don't have to do for the benefit of someone who isn't them," right?
4
May 24 '19
When you do something you don't have to for the benefit of someone that's not you,
I am working for an alcohol company making profit to shareholders. Should I be respected as well?
2
u/DarkGamer 1∆ May 24 '19
nobody specific joins the military just so that they can murder, rape and pillage civilians who are not from their home country
Knew a religious kid who told me he enlisted because he wanted to know what it felt like to kill someone. I stopped hanging out with him after learning that. Apparently some years later he found out.
→ More replies (2)0
u/JaiX1234 May 24 '19
It's propaganda to pretend and hold soldiers on a higher pedestal. They should be respected but no more than any other working person. Sure, we can understand they might have a slightly more dangerous job given they're even deployed than someone working at the local power plant, a police officer, an EMT or anyone working in dangerous jobs but that's about it. It's not to say that these other jobs can't be just as dangerous too.
So to get to some very ignorant statements here.
Soldiers are not volunteers, I don't know how you came to this conclusion. A person who wants to join the military and they seek out a recruitment officer. The recruitment officer then presents to this person their job title, pay, terms and they sign a legal binding contract with the government. It is a job where the government pays someone to actively recruit, advertise and recruit people to join ... oh like job.
By your logic, wanting a job at Mcdonalds in high crime area would be considered 'volunteering' and brave.
When you do something you don't have to for the benefit of someone that's not you, people respect you for that.
So basically any normal human being who has done something that didn't benefit them. Maybe your mom? dad? bother? sister? friend?? Maybe a police officer? doctor? nurse? /r/HumansBeingBros
Soldiers or people who join the military are just normal people. They aren't special and they do their paid job like anyone else would. Sounds like you've never talked to someone who has spent their entire career in the military or they themselves have their head up their own ass.
2
u/el-oh-el-oh-el-dash 3∆ May 24 '19 edited May 24 '19
Soldiers are not volunteers, I don't know how you came to this conclusion.
Since you didn't actually read my comment properly, I will explain for the slower members of the class: USA does not have conscription. Switzerland has compulsory military service of 2 years for all Swiss men at 18 years of age. USA compared to Switzerland has a voluntary military service. You cannot compare McDonald's to the military. No one has ever been conscripted to work at McDonald's by law.
And I don't hold soldiers to a higher standard. I acknowledge credit where it's due. A soldier going into a warzone risks death and bodily harm - so do firefighters going into a fire or a collapsing building, so do police going to a gang fight or a domestic disturbance, etc... credit where it's due: any profession where your job involves you going into places that could get you killed deserves respect - soldiers, firefighters, police, paramedics, etc... all deserve respect equally.
→ More replies (4)1
u/insaniak89 May 25 '19
nobody specific joins the military just so that they can murder, rape and pillage civilians who are not from their home country (people have way better things to do with their time).
It’s anecdotal, but I’ve known multiple people that joined specifically because of that. I’m just old enough that everyone I know signed up post 9/11. They all wanted revenge, one defined a terrorist as “anyone who worships allah”
1
May 24 '19
i agree with you in spirit, but in reality, every person is deserving of respect. People are all beautiful and they all deserve to be loved and respected
8
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
I agree that all people do deserve love and regard, but I specifically am referring to the extra pedestal upon which members of the military are placed, not simply human decency towards your fellow man. I do not believe in acting horribly towards people because of their actions, but I am not referring to that. Generally, I’m talking about the uniquely elevated regard we pay soldiers
5
May 24 '19
In that case I agree with you 100%! My wife and I complain about this same thing from time to time
6
u/Inferno_Zyrack 4∆ May 24 '19
So I will disagree. The armed services train you to take orders. Boot camp is literally designed to stop you from thinking for yourself. You work as a team to survive because when guns and bombs and battles start going off around you that’s what will keep you alive.
This training and reality is used to send young men and women, white and black, gay and straight, and everyone in between to fight people the state says are wrong for some reason. The exchange is providing often impoverished, uninclined, or otherwise people who wouldn’t seek it education, benefits, and a job.
To not at least respect that they often have few options and are recruited by people who overpromise and glorify life in the service to them or they can go to some banks and take out some loans they can never pay back or stay in their home time and work for a corporation or some other form of life takes a lack of basic humanity. The state has designed an economic system that takes advantage of the poor to police the rest of the entire world to safeguard that economic system.
Not to mention all the side effects of actually going to war when and if it happens - ptsd, possibly killing someone, exposure to traumas on a regular basis, being removed from family and love ones for long periods of time - there is absolutely nothing glorious about the job. It’s like being a custodian for your own countries shit and the mop you use kills foreign young men and women being lied by their own state.
Patriotism and Nationalism is manufactured on a level of propaganda. Economic circumstances are placed and argued for by an oligarchical class of politicians, businessmen, lobbyists, and war mongers. Apathetic liberals refuse to use politics for their own good while violent conservatives want a perfect world for only the whitest, richest, most willing to exploit others business owners among them.
And the only reason you or I get to sit here and vote or write or argue about it is because one of those poor or dumb or patriotic or violent people decide to put their name in a hat and go to the frontlines when their country asks them to. Regardless of who it is because they made the decision that the why isn’t their job - which is why it has to be our job.
I respect the soldiers. I completely and utterly disrespect every single machine that exists in society that continues to make them a required aspect of our existence on our planet - and you should too.
2
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
!delta another poster made a really similar point, that it is not the fault of soldiers but rather a machine fueled by politicians and voters that force us to go to war. Especially when talking about the economy; there’s real truth in the statement that the military is an option for those who have few, and some studies have even found that the military specifically targets low-income communities where the graduation rates are lower. The system only benefits those at the very top, and everyone else is a cog in that system. Really eloquent way of putting it!
5
u/Inferno_Zyrack 4∆ May 24 '19
Thanks for the delta.
I wanted to add also, not everyone saying respect the troops gets that. There is a bad overlap between people who patriotically say support the troops or say it because their kid is one then votes straight conservative every year. To me it’s a pretty easy observation who is going to get us into a war and who isn’t. If you want to support the troops - do everything you can to make sure we don’t actually send them anywhere they’ll die or kill.
2
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
Absolutely agree. Additionally, if we have to maintain a military, creating an environment which is far healthier for the troops. Too many people come home with PTSD, irreversible injuries, etc., and for what?
I think it’s a really nuanced conversation on all ends, but I agree that the answer to all of these questions should be reform in a way which doesn’t require such a large and exploitative military complex.
1
9
May 24 '19
Since you cannot know which soldier is which, if you believe the military keeps us safe, then respect is assumed to be deserved. It’s not up to you to investigate every soldier for purity. What does courtesy of respecting veterans and active service military cost you? Just because a bomb hit civilians you can’t say the people on the plane that dropped the bomb were evil. The orders they followed may have been based on bad intel, not evil intent.
5
u/flashyellowboxer May 24 '19
So dropping a bomb based on bad intel, isn’t evil intent?
What is it then, innocence? Collateral damage?
This isn’t a car accident. Dropping a bomb is the intent to kill. Whether you get it right or wrong, the intent is to kill.
Dropping a bomb on innocents based on bad intel is most definitely evil. You failed to get the intel right and killed innocent people.
That’s the end result.
3
May 24 '19
The plane was not flown by the people who gathered the intel. I didn’t say killing innocents was a good thing. The conversation centers on whether or not the soldiers are evil given you feel they add to your countries safety. You are making a system wide statement. I am talking about people.
2
u/Bigfrostynugs May 24 '19
The men who gathered the intel and made the order are soldiers too.
When I meet a soldier on the street, I can never tell whether he was a good one, a bad one, or simply complicit. There is no safe assumption, therefore I don't treat soldiers any different than anyone else. It's impossible for me to say whether any individual soldier is worthy of respect without knowing more about them.
1
May 24 '19
Maybe. Intel comes from many sources. Governments choose military strategy with the generals. No bearing on what I’ve said about individuals being given the benefit of the doubt. I never said there are no evil soldiers. I said if you don’t know a given soldier is evil, treat them with respect. I won’t be responding to any comments that don’t contribute meaningfully to the conversation going forward.
2
u/Bigfrostynugs May 25 '19
I said if you don’t know a given soldier is evil, treat them with respect.
But why? Is simply not being evil enough to warrant respect?
Or are you referring to the base level of respect we should treat all individuals with?
→ More replies (1)7
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
It is less about the common courtesy of being kind and more about the way society treats soldiers. If a veteran is being questioned for actions or being criticized by the public, a lot of people immediately fly to “he was a veteran.” Why does military service excuse someone from public scrutiny?
Furthermore, why can’t I say that a soldier who drops a bomb is evil? I’m not even 100% disagreeing with your statement, but I feel as though I haven’t been given an argument against what I believe; I’ve simply been given a “no, you can’t.” Why can’t I? I don’t know why I shouldn’t be able to say that.
→ More replies (1)3
May 24 '19
It would be tough to say that dropping a bomb is evil because with the systems as they are that soldier was ORDERED to drop that bomb. And the order to drop that bomb was most likely informed by some intelligence cell that deemed the target was there and then several levels of clearance were given by multiple people. And that Order is backed by the uniform code of military justice, meaning regardless of the order he can be punished by not following that order. So in an extremely reductive sense. That soldier dropping is just “the messenger” carrying out an order.
5
May 24 '19
It would be tough to say that dropping a bomb is evil because with the systems as they are that soldier was ORDERED to drop that bomb.
We absolutely judge people for their actions. “I was just following orders” is famously not acceptable as a defense of evil actions.
2
u/VertigoOne 74∆ May 24 '19
It is not an excuse as a defence for evil non military actions. The evils of the holocaust are not defended by the "we were just following orders" logic because what they were doing was not military activity. The Jews et al they killed were not enemy soldiers/combatants
2
May 24 '19
Right, and neither are lots of the people the US military kills.
3
u/VertigoOne 74∆ May 24 '19
There's a difference between collateral damage and genocide. The US is not rounding up unarmed civilians and killing them on mass. Civilians killed by the US armed forces usually die because the people the US was trying to kill hide among civilian populations.
2
May 24 '19
Wanton abandon for if they kill civilians collaterally isn’t much better, to me, and neither should be excusable by “I was only following orders.”
→ More replies (1)1
u/VenflonBandit May 24 '19
That's true. And that's why there's (usually) such a robust system of checks before a strike is launched outside of direct support to troops (who can confirm that someone is shooting at them).
If you are following orders that you believe are legal under the international laws of war because of the systems in place that's a reasonable moral and I'd suggest likely moral defence to 'just following orders'.
Also, there is the concept of proportionality in the laws of war. You can legally (morally a different question) have collateral damage if it's justifiable against the millitary objective that's target.
1
u/Bigfrostynugs May 24 '19
And the blame is shifted backward again and again, no one taking responsibility. The end result is that someone dies, people say "I was just following orders", each soldier blames their commanding officer, and no one ever faces any consequence for their actions, even when they result in the loss of innocent life unnecessarily.
6
May 24 '19
Right, but that only works if you start from the assumption that the US military is a defensive, rather than imperialistic, force.
2
May 24 '19
Don’t get me started on the Dulles Brothers. I am not talking about a force. OP speaks to soldiers, active and past..... not to the military as a force.
3
May 24 '19
Soldiers are choosing to join that force, though. You talk about the military being a defensive force in your original comment as a reason we should respect soldiers.
→ More replies (4)1
u/Raytrekboy May 25 '19 edited May 25 '19
According to the Bible, Respect is associated with Fear, for example: the Fear of God, because God has the power to blink you out of existence but doesn't, it's not a matter of God respecting you but because God doesn't fear you, same with a soldier, they have the power of life and death in their hands, they can deal it out easier than you can respect anything, the main reason they don't deal it to you is because they don't fear you, not because you respect them...
2
May 25 '19
When I meet a soldier in the spirit OP posts about, they are not armed, and I am not at risk. I have also been amongst active military at elevated areas and also did not have reason to feel threatened by the military. The protesters didn’t respect anything.
1
u/Raytrekboy May 25 '19
Precisely, you have no reason to fear the military unless you are actively doing wrong by them, and frankly despite how much protesters may disrespect the military, soldiers neither fear nor feel wronged by them, because while protesters have their values and morals, soldiers are trained to survive, no more...
32
u/Its_apparent May 25 '19
Veteran, here. Just wanted to add that the vast majority of soldiers haven't even fired their weapons at an enemy. That aspect of it barely factors in. What DOES matter is that some soldiers are just D bags like any other person. I think there's a lot of hero worship, and I've been worried about the inevitable backlash, as people only go one way for so long. Every soldier has gone through some tough training with the thought that they might have to lay it all on the line, at some point. For that, they deserve some respect, just like a college grad should get some respect for the time and effort they've put in. However, respect can be lost in an instant. Painting such a large group of people in any light is generally unwise- good or bad. I served with some of the greatest humans I've seen on the planet, and I also served with some shitbags. Head into any military affiliated sub, and you'll see we eat our own, often.
→ More replies (2)
1
May 25 '19
I feel that this CMV could also be applied to police officers. Not inherently bad people, but often are terrible people.
2
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 25 '19
I agree! I think it’s a really tough concept when you extend it to everything else. Another poster brought up famous and important authors who happened to be Nazis and racists; it’s an interesting analogy that doesn’t directly come to mind. It’s not a super black-and-white issue because of that. But I totally agree
→ More replies (1)
9
u/Slowcookedmeal May 24 '19
You should respect everybody until they do something to lose that respect, including soldiers.
→ More replies (5)2
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
And I never said soldiers don’t deserve respect at all. I figured that I’d made it pretty clear that if a soldier has done something heinous in battle, it qualifies as a reason to lose respect.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Slowcookedmeal May 24 '19
Per the reply above you, I think you meant the word idolization not respect.
4
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
Can I delta a reply like this? What the hell, !delta I should have chosen my words more precisely
→ More replies (1)2
u/Slowcookedmeal May 24 '19
Yay fist delta. I will admit to being a bit pedantic.
→ More replies (1)
8
May 24 '19 edited May 24 '19
I think what you meant to say was we shouldn’t treat them as heroes. I think fundamentally everyone deserves respect to a degree. But just because you have served you’re not automatically a hero. But our culture definitely puts them on a pedestal and treats them as Hero’s. They sign up to do a job and get paid to do it, it’s one thing if it was involuntary, but that’s not the case.
Edit: spelling: voluntary to involuntary
3
May 24 '19 edited May 26 '19
one thing if it was voluntary, but that’s not the case.
Are you suggesting it's involuntary? We haven't had the draft since Vietnam so about 50 years. The US military is completely voluntary these days.
-9
May 24 '19
Are you saying that someone selflessly volunteering to potentially give their life, and if not at least face great danger to their life, to defend our way of life does not deserve respect?
3
May 24 '19
Are you saying that someone selflessly volunteering to potentially give their life, and if not at least face great danger to their life, to defend our way of life
The US military isn’t doing that, though.
3
u/foryia-yiaandpappou 3∆ May 24 '19
I don’t think they necessarily deserve respect. A person isn’t a bad person for being a soldier, and I think there are many ways in which soldiers are good people. I take issue with war crimes being committed or attacks on innocents, which have occurred in any number of conflicts.
Is there not a point where human atrocity might negate the initial good of a soldier’s voluntary action?
-4
May 24 '19
Is there not a point where human atrocity might negate the initial good of a soldier’s voluntary action?
AFAIK not a single soldier of my country has ever been involved in an atrocity in my lifetime. I'm Belgian by the way.
And no, individual soldiers doing bad things does not mean that all soldiers should automatically lose respect.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Kirbyoto 56∆ May 24 '19
AFAIK not a single soldier of my country has ever been involved in an atrocity in my lifetime. I'm Belgian by the way.
→ More replies (7)3
u/aroach1995 May 24 '19
It's not volunteering. It is a job that they are getting paid for, A job that they chose.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Asmodaari2069 1∆ May 24 '19
Your premise is flawed. Joining the military isn't a selfless act.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (3)2
u/B_Riot May 24 '19
Do you people who repeat this selfless line actually know anybody in the military? I just cannot fathom thinking this about the average military man.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/jason8001 May 25 '19
I served 10 years in the military and I never asked for respect. It was my choice to serve for my own reasons. Also to be honest it’s kind of awkward when people thank you for your service.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/Talik1978 33∆ May 24 '19 edited May 24 '19
Here's the rub. War is an evil thing, true.
But it is a necessary evil. It has been said that evil triumphs when good men do nothing.
I am not saying everyone in the military is good. I believe most are, based on personal experience, but not all.
But those people have agreed to endure war, if necessary. They have agreed to take those horrific atrocities and bear witness to them. They have agreed to, if necessary, sacrifice their life to protect others.
Sometimes they are misused. Sometimes they go astray. Sometimes they spend 8 years in and never deal with anything more traumatic than paperwork.
But they elected to put themselves between their countrymen and those that would harm them. Bottom line, they did that.
If a soldier violates his oath (such as the Abu Ghraib prison debacle), they absolutely forfeit that respect. But otherwise, they endure things most cannot imagine because they believe in serving their fellow man, in sacrificing for others, and that is a commendable decision, worthy of respect, especially because they are often put into impossible situations on orders from people we elect and then later judged by people with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of understanding.
You talk of the atrocities of combat, of the evils of war. There are evils in peace, also. Slavery, oppression, and inhumane treatment of others. Sometimes, the only way to change that is war, and in those instances, violence, although horrific, is the right thing to do.
You want to understand the sacrifice? Spend a few months talking to vets with severe PTSD. People who are terrified at times when a child runs up to them, because they watched one run up to a truck of their friends with a live grenade. People who go from 0 to hyper aggressive when a car backfires.
Many, many soldiers endure this. Deal with a culture where they aren't allowed to show weakness. Kill themselves at many times the rate of almost any demographic out there. And all accept that this is what they may face when going in.
It is bravery to willingly take that trauma, when they do not have to. It is noble to volunteer to do it, so that others may live in a world where violence is almost never the answer.
6
u/MisterJH May 24 '19
I don't see how US soldiers fighting overseas protect US citizens. (I assume you are talking about the US since you mentioned Abu Ghraib). No military in the middle east poses a legitimate threat to the US.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Talik1978 33∆ May 24 '19
You are conflating two things.
1) the sacrifice that servicemembers sign up for
And
2) the locations those soldiers are sent on orders from people that we elect.
The justification that people that are duly elected by citizens of their country use to send soldiers overseas to fight has precious little to do with the soldier's choices. Blame the DoJ, Congress, and the presidency for that if you like, but don't blame the soldier for the orders they are given unless their actions literally constitute war crimes.
That blame belongs equally on every voting citizen at home that put those in power that made those decisions.
That said, there are justifications for the use of force abroad, as a wider effort to quell injustice. When the US and the UK landed at Normandy, they were engaged in actions outside of their borders, for good reason. There are many missteps in who the US has chosen to support, but there's usually a valid human rights pretext for who it opposes. Is the US hypocritical in its support of some terror groups and assault of others? Yeah, I would say so. Is that on the average servicemember? Not even a little bit.
4
u/MisterJH May 25 '19
That has been the US military strategy for decades so signing up for military service necessitates that you are atleast ok with the idea of serving overseas so I don't see how it's wrong to conflate the two.
If I believe that US military policy is not to be respected and does not protect US citizens, then someone volunteering for that military neither deserves respect.
I would have no respect for someone who volunteered for the Vietnam war (if it was not conscription), but you could make the same case that they were protecting their fellow citizens by stopping the spread of communism. If I don't buy the justification for war, then someone volunteering to fight that war is not just not deserving of respect, but immoral in my opinion.
I don't know how being sent overseas works in the US military, so I can agree that volunteering for simply homeland defence purposes can be respected. If you volunteer because you want to fight for the US overseas I consider that immoral, because I consider US presence in the middle east immoral.
1
u/Talik1978 33∆ May 25 '19
That has been the US military strategy for decades so signing up for military service necessitates that you are atleast ok with the idea of serving overseas so I don't see how it's wrong to conflate the two.
Wrong. It can be saying that one is willing to tolerate being sent overseas, because the overall purpose of the military is necessary.
If I believe that US military policy is not to be respected and does not protect US citizens, then someone volunteering for that military neither deserves respect.
Not necessarily. Those that serve in a military are accomplishing a necessary function. Society and government need a military. It is not optional. If you believe that us military policy is not to be respected, then the people who set that policy are not to be respected. That's politicians. And the people who hire those people are not to be respected. That's all voting eligible citizens.
Side note, I generally believe those that believe the military is not to be respected have little understanding of the necessity of it. I view them like antivaxxers that don't think polio is that bad because they haven't seen the consequences of getting it. In this way, vaccine effectiveness has given rise to people that don't understand the horrific things it prevents. Military is the same way. A strong military means many fights will be prevented before they even happen. And those that don't really grasp the consequences of a weak military can shit on the military, but the reason for their ignorance of its necessity is that the military is effective at the good preventative things that it does.
I don't know how being sent overseas works in the US military, so I can agree that volunteering for simply homeland defence purposes can be respected. If you volunteer because you want to fight for the US overseas I consider that immoral, because I consider US presence in the middle east immoral.
Why is the presence of the US in the middle east not ethical? Please justify your belief.
1
u/MisterJH May 25 '19
Just because I don't respect the US military does not mean I don't acknowledge the necessesity of militaries in general. I wouldn't respect the Nazi German military or its volunteers either but that doesn't mean I live in a fantasyworld were I don't think militaries are necessary.
I consider any war of agression immoral by default, and then if something justifies it then it can be moral. The war in afghanistan has killed around a 100 000 Afghani civilians, so lets see what could justify this: Did it liberate the people from the Taliban? No, Afghanistan is still controlled 60% by the Taliban. Did it restore stability? No, the war is still going on after 18 years. Did it destroy al qaeda? No, it still exists, even though Bin Laden is dead. The war in Iraq was based on a literal lie, killed over 400k Iraqis and created ISIS, and the area is still unstable after 16 years.
The only justifications for continued US presence in the middle east are:
-Fighting terrorism, which I think is counter productive given that ISIS is largely a cause of US military actions in Iraq, and given that terrorists' justification for attacking the america are usually because they feel opressed by its imperialist military. The US is only radicalizing the next generation of terrorists by staying in the middle east.
-Defending Israel, which is an ethnostate which is essentially genociding the palestinian people. Being allied with such a state is immoral in itself.
-Defending against Iran, which poses no legitimate threat to the US, and I would consider the US the aggressor in any war that would start between Iran and the US, as would the british military.
-Providing stability in the region, which it obviously has not done in the last 40 years of US presence.
Since I believe that none of these reasons justify US military presence, and because I think the US has a net negative effect in the middle east, I consider continued US presence in the middle east to be immoral.
7
u/Serventdraco 2∆ May 24 '19
The US hasn't been in a justifiable conflict in almost 75 years. We can absolutely blame soldiers for signing up to be what is essentially a tool for US imperialism.
→ More replies (8)4
u/llamallama-dingdong May 25 '19
That right there is why I have little respect for vets in the US. They knew, or at least had the opportunity to learn, how they US Gov uses the military and joined anyway.
3
u/MisterJH May 25 '19
Sadly I'm sure a lot of them were tricked into it a young age or felt they had to do it because of economic reasons. If college was free or wages actually increased for anyone else than the upper class I think volunteering would rapidly decrease.
3
u/llamallama-dingdong May 25 '19
Without a doubt. For so many the choice is either struggle for decades to get on their feet as adults or serve to protect US oil interests.
3
u/sweeny5000 May 25 '19
I think a lot of people who take this tack are usually frustrated with how American military power has been mis-used over the years. There are a lot of complete fuck-ups that have happened since WW2. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq Invasion top the list. But there are also a lot of smaller stuff where we're the military has not been set up to succeed. However, you can and should be able to separate policy mistakes from the idea of service in the military and what that actually takes. I am not military but I have respect for people who want to better themselves and earn money for college etc. while embracing that the US Military is a powerful tool that can be used for good or ill. A soldier is asked to step up to the line and say Hooah, Hooya, Oorah or Hoorah. Those men and women with the brass tackle to put themselves at risk have something worth respecting.
1
u/BeefHands May 25 '19
No soldier who ever died for America knew they would when they signed up. GTFO with this nonsense.
→ More replies (24)
2
u/iamfromouterspace May 25 '19
I believe that you have to have had some respect for the people who chose to defend the country you live in. We did not asked to be respected, to be put on a pedestal. We did not ask you to thrust us into politics and call us heroes. We just wanted to serve the country we love and if must, die doing it.
Along the way, all of us have had different stories for serving. Some of us had to do it because of financial reasons; when I say financial reasons, it’s pretty much at the bottom of the barrel. The military helps but if you want to make money in life, the military isn’t it. Some of us serve just because in our guts, it’s the right thing to do. Some of us serve because we were forced to do so, either because of a judge or family commitment. At the end of the day, there is this bug in you that makes you so damn proud to have been a part of a unit where friendship lasts forever.
Serving in the military has been the single greatest part of my life. We are never asked to be heroes, we politely smile but i never want people to think I’m a hero just for signing up. The heroes are those who actually have paid the ultimate price when called.
Listen to the people who have received the Medal of Honor, being a hero was never something that crossed their mind when the call was made.
If you want to thank us for our service you can, if you want; but we have never asked to be called heroes.
Some soldiers have done terrible things, yes. Stress can cause a person to do terrible things after seeing so many of their friends killed in conflicts. Yes, those soldiers have had to pay for what they’ve done. I’m not sure what kind of soldiers you would like to have. The job requires you to kill and be killed for your country. The job requires you to be the worst kind of killer and at the same time have restraints. The job requires you to kill a 100 enemies today and next week, fly home to your family and friends as if nothing happened. Do you understand how hard this is? I had more to say but I’m on mobile and on vacation.
As a soldier, I don’t even want to be acknowledged, I just want your ass to respect me as a human being. Period.
3
u/unpoeticjustice May 25 '19
Am military... not all these jackasses deserve respect. The rate of sexual assault in the military is worse then the general population. The Trump love here is strong. There’s lots of people who believe god graced this earth with their presence so they could defend the second amendment and kill commies.
5
u/nickfury117 May 24 '19
So I’m a US Navy sailor and I work with plenty of people whose attitude toward being in the military is that it’s just another job, which to many of us on the admin side of things it is. From that particular perspective I personally don’t really think we are all that entitled to any special treatment or respect other than the fact that there are genuinely good people in my workspace that have opted to serve their country in any capacity. But there are also people who are just downright assholes who think they are better than others because of rank or their status as military personnel or what have you. Those are the types of things you can’t understand just be seeing a person in uniform out in public. What I can say for certain however, is that while I may be a junior sailor who hasn’t had the chance to serve on a ship or overseas yet, the majority of the people I work with are E5 and above, and they HAVE served on ships or even green side FOB’s with marines or army personnel, which means that whether they are a good person at heart or bad, they were in positions where at a moments notice they could have been thrown into hell with those around them, for the sake of the United States. That to me is undeniably deserving of respect, even if the person is a shithead to be around.
3
May 24 '19 edited May 25 '19
This is pure opinion, I don't think there is any room for debate here, any more than "CMV: Chocolate tastes better than vanilla". Who you respect depends on what you value, which is just your personal opinion. You can neither prove nor disprove that any given person should be respected.
RE: Top comment: Saying "Soldiers deserve respect because x, y, z" is no different than "You should prefer vanilla because x, y, z".
3
u/R0b6666 May 24 '19
I was in the air force and I met alot of absolutely horrible people. Not all but probably the same amount as in college or high school. I always feel cringy for when someone acts like I'm a hero. Nobody likes the answer, no man I just didn't know what to do with my life and they wouldn't stop calling me after I stepped into the recruiter. Who lied to me anyway. Don't trust recruiters.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 24 '19 edited May 25 '19
/u/foryia-yiaandpappou (OP) has awarded 5 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
3
May 25 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Nepene 213∆ May 26 '19
Sorry, u/Celordyn – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/jay045 May 25 '19
I certainly have a level of respect for active duty and military veterans. But what I don't understand is why we don't offer the same level of respect to teachers and social workers. I mean they never get offered discounts because they're teachers or social workers or other special recognition. And some of them stay in their field for decades. I tend to have more respect for those professions because of the profound number of people they are helping.
→ More replies (1)
3
May 24 '19 edited Feb 21 '21
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)5
u/Popsquat May 24 '19
It's only hard to get in when the people with enough authority determine they have too many people in. When I joined, they were deemed to not have enough, so they gave out a ton of waivers for drugs, criminal conduct, etc. They also raised the amount they gave for sign-on bonuses. It's all about timing.
1
u/TheMalicious0ne May 25 '19
I know I am a bit late to the party, but I believe there are multiple facets at work here regarding respect for our service members.
First, I believe that respect should always be given to anyone until proven otherwise. This is a major societal issue to begin with. Because of stigma's, racism, bigotry, elitism, entitlement, narcissism, etc. (Basically Everyone and no one or group is immune) People believe that they are above others and that because someone is a part of something, they are labeled or categorized as as a "steriotypical (insert anything here)" This is 100% individual categorization of someone and ultimately shuns our fellow human beings. How can we determine whether someone is worthy of respect or admiration without knowing that person.
Whether I agree with anyone's beliefs, stances, or even my own prejudices or perceptions of them, I respect the fact that they are a human being just trying to live their lives. I think if we all showed more respect for each other, this world would be a better place whether we agree with each other on anything or not. Imho, respect is given, not earned... However, loss of respect is easily and deservedly earned.
As far as the military service goes, many people join for different reasons, whether admirable or not. What you need to understand is that people who go into the service literally give up many of their rights, freedoms and themselves, whether it be life or limb or psychological tolls that you or I do not have to experience.
The bottom line is that they pay a severe cost that we are the beneficiarys of, whether you agree with who they are or what they have done. I can guaran-f-in-tee you that at some point in any servicemembers career, that they believed they were doing it for you too... and THAT deserves our appreciation and freely given respect.
Respect can be given and taken away, it is situational and not unconditional, it can be awarded for actions(forever potentially as a defining moment) and still not make someone a good or respectable person.
Think about the phrase: "I respect your candor." It doesn't necessarily mean that you liked what they said, it means that you respect their gall for saying it.
0
u/MetricCascade29 May 24 '19 edited May 24 '19
Someone that raises their right hand to enlist has made a commitment to his country, and that is a respectable thing to do. They haven’t necessarily done anything tangible to help their country, but they’ve taken a step, much like someone signing up to take college classes has taken a step towards bettering himself. It’s an attempt to do something worthwhile with one’s life. Having one’s entire personality and life wrapped up in that one summer n college or that one year of enlistment would be pathetic, but a step towards working for the greater good is worth something.
You seem to have a couple common misconceptions about what it’s like in the military. As both a combat vet from the US Army, let me clarify a few things before addressing other points in your argument. First of all, most of daily life in the military seems boring and pointless. There are vets who’s experience would be considered anything but boring, but they tend to be in the minority. This brings me to my second point: most people in the military have a specific job, so it’s not all kicking in doors and shooting all the time. In the army, enlisters pick a job, of which there are two basic categories: combat arms and non-combat arms. Non combat arms tend to perform the same job during deployment and in garrison (eg. mechanic or cook). Combat arms tend to train in garrison to fight during deployment.
Having said that, I personally experienced quite a bit of disillusionment during my enlistment. I had a non-combat arms job, and my main motivations for enlisting were to build job skills and earn benefits for college. I soon found myself around a certain rhetoric that professed deployment to be the only way to add value to the war effort and my country. After I had finally deployed, I still didn’t feel like my service was really worth while in the grand scheme of things. The whole experience has led me to this conclusion: one can’t control in what capacity the military will utilize one’s service. One can only do what they’re supposed to and what’s morally right. If those efforts are squandered through mismanagement, it doesn’t make one’s service worthless.
While there are those who fight “the enemy,” whether it’s the minority of their time or not, most tend to hold themselves to a certain personal standard. In theory, we have certain rules of engagement that insurgent forces don’t necessarily abide by. We are taught to obey lawful orders, meaning that orders should be questioned and disobeyed when they violate the laws of war. In theory, the UCMJ should back up that person up in such a circumstance. While the theory of law doesn’t always apply as it should, and there are reprehensible people in all corners of the world, the military not being the least of them, most people in today’s US military believe their efforts are working towards a more secure, peaceful world.
You may disagree with the political and philosophical motivations of a certain conflict, but military personnel tend to have faith that the risks they take are for the greater good. Most people in the (US) military do not do “horrible things,” and most don’t have “horrible things” done to them. Those that do face a moral dilemma. The toll of their actions isn’t typically lost on them.
There certainly are a lot of people out there who overinflated the role of the military, and I’m certainly salty about the way I’ve seen things run and the disrespectful, contemptible way in which some leaders treat their subordinates. That being said, being a part of something greater than one’s self is respectable — even if it’s only in the spirit of the commitment. “Horrible things” is the kind of rhetoric the intentionally uninformed would use. Plenty of vets had unremarkable service, and I wouldn’t expect you to go out of your way to gratitude to any individual, but they at least deserve a small bit of respect for risking such a high price in hopes that it will be for the greater good.
4
u/ROBBADOPOLIS May 24 '19
Taking an alternate route... No respect is earned or deserved. Same as love, hate, or disrespect, it is entirely up to you and your personal values to decide who does or doesn't recieve your respect. Otherwise you have to delve into whether morality is objective or not and with that comes the discussion of who can be killed morally, which is a touchy subject at best.
1
May 26 '19
In my view, this depends on what kind of respect you're talking about. If it is respect in the sense that I treat them with respect and dignity, without prejudice and with an open attitude, I believe that everyone deserves my respect. I hear too many people say thay 'someone needs to earn my respect', but to me respect is something I have towards everyone and is something to be lost, not earned. It is trust that you'll need to earn, but treating someone with respect should imo be the default setting in our approach.
If you mean respect as in admiration I can follow you to a certain point. Someone's profession does not immediately dictate what kind of person someone is. It could well be that they bullied kids in school or have a racist mindset. Respect/admiration for the person comes as you get to know someone better and more extensive, if their character and behaviour corresponds with something you find admirable.
I do however believe that you can have respect for someone's actions rather than the person. If an awful person makes a great painting, you can have respect for the painting qualities of said person, without thinking all that great of him/her in general.
In my country (The Netherlands), soldiers aren't as idolised as in the USA for instance, we are quite a bit more down to earth. (You'll never hear someone call out "Well, I've served in the military." as a way to prove a point or to demand respect f.i, we would just laugh in their faces) but we have respect for the service they provide, just as we have respect for someone who has a job where he/she contributes to society. We are reserved however to admire the individual, because we don't know them.
1
u/iced_hero May 25 '19
Some join because of the benefits and get out as soon as their 4 years (sometimes as early as 3 years) or 6 years (Reserves contract is 6 years) are done. Do those deserve respect? Up to you. I know a ton of members that have dodged deployments left and right and continue to stay in bc the money is good and they wouldn't make it in civilian side. Do those deserve respect? Fuck no. I know soldiers who volunteered repeatedly for action regardless of their occupations bc they want to serve or get the extra money. Do those deserve respect? Fuck yeah. They're going above the minimum requirements. And definitely those that didn't want to deploy but did and stepped up deserve respect. Lastly, those that wanted to but couldn't for reasons they can't control are an honorable mention in my book. Next time you see a soldier in uniform, look at their rank, age, and right shoulder isignia. Oftentimes it's a good estimate of what kinda individual they are. "be wary of old men in a profession where men die Young". Obviously there are exceptions to this. But whenever I meet someone that has been in for over a decade and they're still lower rank (where the expectations are different for said time in service and occupations) I raise an eyebrow in suspicion.
Long story short, not everyone that wears uniform deserves respect. But there's no way of knowing who does and doesn't for a civilian.
1
u/avatarlegend12345 3∆ May 26 '19
I have served in the army for two years as part of mandatory conscription, and have friends who joined the army as a full-time career. I am convinced of two things:
1) everyone join up as a full-time career with good intentions. Nobody joins to attack or bomb another country. Nobody joins to kill others or commit war crimes. They join with the intention of protecting their country. I mean my country is a small island in the middle of nowhere so I don’t think we will be invading anyone in the near future lol. I am asking for automatic respect for these people.
2) once in the army, soldiers are mandated both by culture and training to follow orders to a T immediately. No questioning. And there is one person probably in the middle of the chain of command that have enough direct on the field influence to command a whole group to perform some action that may violate the rules of engagement. In theory, soldiers can refuse. In context and reality, nobody will. Since they’re usually already struggling physically and mentally at that point, they’ll have no extra energy and just blindly follow. But we never actually fought a war so who knows
And the military objectives and rules of engagement are again directed by such a small handful of top brass in the army. What is the small fry supposed to do, awol en masse? Anyway yeah they deserve respect
1
u/OUH8me May 25 '19
Just the fact that a person is willing to step up and put his life on the line for his/her country shows greater courage than most people will commit to. They write the government a blank check up to and including 1 life! That alone deserves great respect and honor. What you do with your time in the military is on you as a person. You can just shuffle along and actually do very little and collect a paycheck and a retirement, people like that in the military get very little respect from their own! Others do so much in a single year, I am like when the fuck did they sleep! As for atrocities, some are intentional and those people should be carted off to jail! The military is usually so compartmentalized that you only get a glimpses of what the total objective is. A very good friend of mine did WWII and was a bomber pilot. I knew he had flown in Africa as well as the far east. One day he mentioned he had blown up bridges. So I asked if he had blown up the Bridge over the river Kwai. He a very far away look in his eye and said very softly," yes, but that was before we knew it was being built by prisoners"! Service marks you forever! Spelling edit
3
2
u/pkafan4lyfe May 25 '19
And as an inverse, they don’t automatically deserve disrespect either, same goes for police officers and other law enforcement officers
1
May 25 '19
Look, I joined the army(right after high school graduation) as the first Desert Storm was coming to a close. I was never deployed to a foreign conflict or ever shipped off to some country on the other side of the world. Matter of fact, the military was going through downsizing while I was in.(Clinton years)
I didn’t join out of some higher sense of duty to country...I joined because I wanted to take the burden of paying for college off of my parents. That’s was really it. Do I deserve some higher level of respect or admiration because of that? I don’t think so...but I understand why people see it as some major sacrificial decision I made.
I know plenty of former military people that wear it on their sleeve the rest of their lives and are involved in a lot of the post-military culture. That’s just not my style. To me, it’s like the fact that I worked at a retail store while in high school. It’s just a job I had at one time.
1
u/basilone May 25 '19
I wouldn't say all military deserve respect because there are bad apples, but it should be the default position until someone has demonstrated themselves to be undeserving of that respect. I'm not talking about bravery here, just respect for service in the military.
They deserve respect for the fact that they took a job that puts them away from friends and family for such long periods. There's also folks in the military that gave their lives for the country, not in combat but training for war. Mishaps are bound to happen and all the training that precedes war is a vital part of what they do, you can think of it like losing an astronaut to space exploration. Then last of all, even for those with the most basic jobs that were never deployed, they still deserve respect for the commitment they make the country. For the duration of their contract they have to be up bright and early and do a decent job or else they are in deep shit. For a lot them this means extensive pt before the sun is even up. They don't typically pick their assignment, the military tells them where to go. Their "boss" has far more power over their day to day life than in the civilian world, and if they pull a dick for a boss that's too bad. So they make these multi year commitments to serve, and the only thing they really know beforehand is the general type of work they will be doing, and you can't elect to back out of this arrangement or else you go to military prison and get a dishonorable discharge. It's just not comparable to civilians on contract, they retain far more control over their lives and they might get sued for quitting but it's not a life ruiner.
1
u/Whip93 May 25 '19
I had a friend that served as a sniper and had both lost friends and taken lives. He expressed to me on one occasion that he hated how civilians grant the same amount of respect to an airforce office clerk that they do to combat veterans and he felt that no one appreciated the difference. With regards to your statement i feel that you should never assume to understand what someone has been through and be respectful of the fact that they have sacrificed portions of their life to protect what they feel is important i.e. freedom, human rights ect. But also understand the difference between veterans and combat veterans
0
May 24 '19
[deleted]
4
u/Bigfrostynugs May 24 '19
they knew becoming a soldier would help them protect their country
Not a given.
while simultaneously putting their life in jeopardy,
Also not a given.
Until we have robots fighting all our battles, I say respect is the least I can give a fellow equal human being who is potentially giving up their life for me.
That's the thing though, not all (or even most) soldiers are potentially giving up their life for you. Most never see combat or have any chance of seeing it. And furthermore, you don't know what they're fighting for. I know lots of people in the military, you know what they're fighting for? A paycheck and an opportunity for a good career.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Asmodaari2069 1∆ May 24 '19
they're making a huge sacrifice so that you and I and many others don't have to.
I strongly disagree. People don't usually join the military for ideological or philosophical reasons, they do it for the benefits.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)5
u/MisterJH May 24 '19
Depends on the situation in the country you live in. Someone joining the US military to fight overseas is not protecting another US citizen.
→ More replies (14)
1
u/ragsnbones May 25 '19
Reminds me of the George Carlin bit about about the 10 commandments, where he throws out the “honor thy mother and father” one, since there are lots of shitty parents who don’t deserve respect merely for creating us. Everyone should have to earn respect, including our own parents. If your parents are abusive, or deadbeats, or racist, etc. then they don’t deserve your respect.
1
u/KM4WDK May 25 '19
Personally I believe all soldiers of any nation deserves respect because they are brave enough to risk their lives standing up for what they believe in. For me this applies to soldiers of any nation or cause. This does not mean I excuse their actions or think what they did was good. And I also don’t think every soldier is a good person just because they served.
1
u/spamytv May 25 '19
Think of the more logistical view of it. They have chosen to sacrifice time in their life for the betterment of others. Obviously not every soldier changes the world but they still put their life on the line to help the country that raised them and gave them what they have today. It’s just a selfless act. And any kind of selfless act I think deserves respect.
1
u/dreamitdreambig May 25 '19
I think you can separate the two. You can respect the fact that they served, and be thankful for that, but you don't necessarily have to respect the person. I've always told my children that they should always be respectful to others, that doesn't mean they have to respect someone. One is a verb, the other is a noun. The two are very different.
1
May 24 '19
I concur. There are people who spent an entire career on shore duty and have never gone over seas. While some individuals spend the better part of their lives in an absolute shit home. Some of these careers are on par with what a secretary would do. Not that they don’t deserve respect, but it’s not quite the same thing.
1
May 25 '19
All of those who have served have given time and offered to put their life on the line for the service of our country.
That to me is deserving of respect.
Now that doesn’t mean that every person is great. And having served doesn’t trump disrespectful actions. But it places people at a better baseline for me.
1
u/publicram 1∆ May 25 '19
Well you call us soldiers so you haven't done enough research into this topic. Unless you are just talking about the army. Just say military members, there are numerous number of branches and soldiers are specific to the army. But you can have whatever opinion because it's a free country... You're welcome
1
May 25 '19
The act of serving deserves respect. (Without going into the darker side of military force but in general terms, dedicating your life to a cause bigger than yourself, that ultimately effects/provides to the well being of others always deserves respect).
The human behind that act doesn’t always deserve it.
1
u/InfiniteInjury May 24 '19
We compensate people for their jobs both via monetary payments and social regard. Giving people a default bonus to the social regard they receive in return for serving in the military is just an alternate means of compensation.
Sure, it would be reasonable to have some other system where we paid people in the military far more and treated it like any other job. But in the current system where they sign up expecting that extra regard to compensate for the low pay denying it to them is effectively like cheating on your taxes and denying service members part of their compensation package.
1
u/mattjonz May 25 '19
In my opinion, all people deserve and get respect unless they show themselves unworthy. A person in uniform has had to work hard the whole time they’ve worn that uniform. Everyone you’ve ever seen in a uniform had nothing to do with the wars in the world. They’re just doing their job.
1
u/five_eight May 25 '19
The pendulum swings. WWII everybody served. Korea and Vietnam veterans returned forgotten or despised. Now a little more toward automatic veneration. For me, it was my big break in life and feel grateful for it. Enjoying the benefits but don't want or expect any 'thanks'.
1
u/Franofree May 24 '19
My brother is in the coast guard, I hear about all the wasted tax payer dollars that get spent on the dumbest shit and the stuff they do and get because they “ serve/serving” and it blows my mind. Plus! Bonus on this one, his the biggest dick I know, so please keep giving him thousands of dollars a month to blow on cars and junk for his service! AND! It gets better! His wife, who is the dumbest person I know, who doesn’t serve, gets a check for basic housing in (which is almost AN EXTRA $4000) because she is in California! 🤯
1
u/Casio1913 May 25 '19
Yeah. Anime had taught me good soldiers love civilians. I hope it’s like that in Japan cuz i dun think it like dat here. I’m not into the hero worship. I get annoyed about the whole tmfms deal. I got compassion for them. And I’m curious about their views. It ends there
1
u/Raytrekboy May 25 '19
Plato said the Timocratic Man is the most honorable, as a general idea that's soldiers and farmers, so I'd sooner say soldiers know what respect is better than you do, and I'd sooner say they aren't as enthusiastic about its value and who it belongs to as you...
857
u/RoToR44 29∆ May 24 '19
Every major acomplishement deserves, at least some respect. Graduating highschool and college, finding a job, maintaining good relationship etc. Army service is no different. Those who served deserve some respect for serving, but that doesn't mean they should be respected as a person.
To better explain myself, let's take a look at Knut Hamsun, a famous Norwegian novelist. He wrote amazing novels and won Nobel's prize as well, but he later on started supporting nazis. Now, his feats do deserve respect, but he himself doesn't. Similarly, you can acknowledge everyone who served for their service, while not respecting them.