For all the flack vets/servicemen get, it's not their war. Policymakers such as Bush determined what servicemen would do. Servicemembers can save lives in Katrina, and they may be ordered to carry out bombing missions--a lot of people were commissioned/enlisted during 9/11 after being moved by the collapse of the twin towers: it is a case of bait and switch, when we were sold the falsehoods of the "War on Terror."
What the military does is not a binary answer. The public chooses the commander in chief and the policy (Congress). It's a system that has endured for the last three centuries. You have the power to change it, and if you don't like it and don't speak up, remember V for Vendetta: "If you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror."
I sometimes remember the story of my girlfriend's grandpa: He was a Japanese soldier drafted in the Second World War. Around the same time, my maternal grandmother was serving as a provincial administrator of the Republic of China version of the IRS as one of the first college educated female accountants. She had to dress up as a man, cut her hair short to avoid being summarily raped and shot in Nanjing, then-capital of China. So now you know I'm of Chinese ethnicity dating a Japanese girl. My girlfriend's grandpa on a China mission was ordered by his commander to shoot one of the prisoners. If he refused, he would most likely be shot (most militaries allow this; the UCMJ allows this in combat). It was a choice between his life or somebody else's. If you watched Dark Knight, you know it's never a black or white answer. It's always a cruel decision to make. Just ask any Vietnam vet who saw combat. If my girlfriend's grandpa didn't shoot the man, my girlfriend might not exist. If he did, he would be a conscientious objector at the expense of his life, and I would not meet my girlfriend. All the while it's awful 40 million Chinese people lost their lives to the Japanese. There are your obvious offenders, the ones that do enjoy raping and killing people, but they are not normal and are present even in civilian society. A lot of them are likely decent people, and would secretly free Chinese prisoners if they had the opportunity.
I wish we could all be pacifists, but should we eliminate the military? I'm sure that's a resounding no, and I realize my sentiment may not be the most popular on HN, but we would be looking at anarchy without the men manning the silos too.
War is awful and thankfully the Internet seems to be eliminating 99.9% of armed conflicts. There is no point in senseless loss of life. But we still need a good defense--maybe not as much power as we have now, bur nonetheless something to protect the border.
How many did the Chinese communist party get killed with hunger in the sixties and during the culture revolution?
>>War is awful and thankfully the Internet seems to be eliminating 99.9% of armed conflicts.
I think that is more of the democratic peace theory -- democracies don't fight wars with each others (-: not even USA :-). In the rest of the world, we really hope that China stays stable and go democratic...
What the military does is not a binary answer. The public chooses the commander in chief and the policy (Congress). It's a system that has endured for the last three centuries. You have the power to change it, and if you don't like it and don't speak up, remember V for Vendetta: "If you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror."
I sometimes remember the story of my girlfriend's grandpa: He was a Japanese soldier drafted in the Second World War. Around the same time, my maternal grandmother was serving as a provincial administrator of the Republic of China version of the IRS as one of the first college educated female accountants. She had to dress up as a man, cut her hair short to avoid being summarily raped and shot in Nanjing, then-capital of China. So now you know I'm of Chinese ethnicity dating a Japanese girl. My girlfriend's grandpa on a China mission was ordered by his commander to shoot one of the prisoners. If he refused, he would most likely be shot (most militaries allow this; the UCMJ allows this in combat). It was a choice between his life or somebody else's. If you watched Dark Knight, you know it's never a black or white answer. It's always a cruel decision to make. Just ask any Vietnam vet who saw combat. If my girlfriend's grandpa didn't shoot the man, my girlfriend might not exist. If he did, he would be a conscientious objector at the expense of his life, and I would not meet my girlfriend. All the while it's awful 40 million Chinese people lost their lives to the Japanese. There are your obvious offenders, the ones that do enjoy raping and killing people, but they are not normal and are present even in civilian society. A lot of them are likely decent people, and would secretly free Chinese prisoners if they had the opportunity.
I wish we could all be pacifists, but should we eliminate the military? I'm sure that's a resounding no, and I realize my sentiment may not be the most popular on HN, but we would be looking at anarchy without the men manning the silos too.
War is awful and thankfully the Internet seems to be eliminating 99.9% of armed conflicts. There is no point in senseless loss of life. But we still need a good defense--maybe not as much power as we have now, bur nonetheless something to protect the border.