0
   

What the diserters (weak of heart) don't understand.

 
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 07:18 pm
old europe wrote:
See, Baldimo: whenever you have structures where members think of themselves as soldiers, and maybe a chain of command, McG's statement would be true.

Or wouldn't it?


I guess it would depend on the training and the organization in which you are. Soldiers should be a term referred to Armies for countries and not some rogue militant group.

I would still like to hear how this pertains to OBL and military personal refusing to uphold their agreements with the military.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 07:28 pm
Was an example, but of course there are better analogies, right:

Germany was, after WWI, allowed to have an army of no more than 100,000 men, with an additional 15,000 men in the navy.

Years later, 18,2 million men had been conscripted in the Wehrmacht, they had been sent to invade numerous European countries, and 5.3 million had died.

Now take McG's statement:

Quote:
It's not a soldiers job to decide if what he is doing is "right" or not. A soldier is not an individual. A soldier is part of a team and every team member has to be able to rely on every other team member.


You'd have to admit that the German soldiers did nothing wrong. Right?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 07:44 pm
old europe wrote:
Was an example, but of course there are better analogies, right:

Germany was, after WWI, allowed to have an army of no more than 100,000 men, with an additional 15,000 men in the navy.

Years later, 18,2 million men had been conscripted in the Wehrmacht, they had been sent to invade numerous European countries, and 5.3 million had died.

Now take McG's statement:

Quote:
It's not a soldiers job to decide if what he is doing is "right" or not. A soldier is not an individual. A soldier is part of a team and every team member has to be able to rely on every other team member.


You'd have to admit that the German soldiers did nothing wrong. Right?


Didn't they enter men into their reserves and then get them out of active duty after training, this way they wouldn't be breaking the 100,000 mark? If this is so, then that wouldn't be the fault of the men, because they wouldn't know they were breaking an agreement. The world didn't even know how many they had in their service because of the way in which they worked their recruitment process. I wouldn't blame the soldiers in the least, but the country. They were unaware of what they were doing in the beginning of the war, but as the war continued, they should have been aware of what they were doing.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 07:46 pm
See, Baldimo? Exactly my point!
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 08:07 pm
old europe wrote:
See, Baldimo? Exactly my point!


To answer your statement, I don't see your point. Those were different times with different way of releasing information. Govt was so closed at the time that no one and I mean no one but the people in the inner circle knew what was going on. Here in the US we have a much better method of getting information. Remember, Hitler and his people controlled the press so nothing went out that they didn't want out. We have a free press that doesn't have that control over them. Sure the govt can chose to release information if it so chooses, but people in the govt always figure out how to leak things anyways. So you can't compare Germany post WWI and the current day US. Even though many of you would like to, with the whole Nazi comparison going on.

What I would like to know is why no one has commented on the fact that a brave gentleman gave his life protecting his solders and made the ultimate sacrifice and we have people here on this website who are protecting the chickens with everything they have.

It is quite telling isn't!
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 08:15 pm
Funny, Baldimo... I always thought Hitler's "Mein Kampf" was published years before Germany actually started the war described there, and before Jews were killed like written there, and I always thought it had been mandatory for all party members to read the book....

I must admit I don't know a lot about what is going on in the 'inner circle' of the White House, but I'm glad to hear from you that you do know.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 08:32 pm
old europe wrote:
Funny, Baldimo... I always thought Hitler's "Mein Kampf" was published years before Germany actually started the war described there, and before Jews were killed like written there, and I always thought it had been mandatory for all Germans to read the book....

I must admit I don't know a lot about what is going on in the 'inner circle' of the White House, but I'm glad to hear from you that you do know.


We know more now adays then the Germans did back then. If you don't see that then you must not have access to a TV, newspaper, radio or even the intenet.

Did you know what was going on in Clintons "inner circle"? No of course you didn't, but yousure as hell know if there are meetings going on with other leaders and for the most part what type of policies are made.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 08:44 pm
Right, we probably have more access to a wider range of media nowadays. Nevertheless, most people would probably choose to not know. Take yourself. What are you reading/listening to/watching on average? Totally unbiased? Everything you can get hold of?

And if, say, a soldier would do this, and come to the conclusion that his country is fighting an unjust war: would he be a chicken whatsoever the circumstances?

I'm not talking about your country, your war and your soldiers now, mind you.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 09:57 pm
old europe wrote:
Right, we probably have more access to a wider range of media nowadays. Nevertheless, most people would probably choose to not know. Take yourself. What are you reading/listening to/watching on average? Totally unbiased? Everything you can get hold of?

And if, say, a soldier would do this, and come to the conclusion that his country is fighting an unjust war: would he be a chicken whatsoever the circumstances?

I'm not talking about your country, your war and your soldiers now, mind you.


What you ask hits close to home. I am a soldier serving in the US Army so it is my Army it is my country and it is a soldier in my military. I have made the same commitment he was supposed to abide by and he failed to do so.

I honestly don't think it had anything to do with his thinking about the morality of the war, I think he was all hot for battle when he joined and then when it came to put his money where his mouth was, he got scared. It's one thing to be scared about war, I know I am, but it is another thing to leave and run. If your not a little scared about war, then you scare me. I would have much more respect for someone that admitted they weren't ready then to leave. That is at least honorable.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 10:06 pm
I understand what you're saying. I wouldn't know, of course, but I guess I would feel the way you do.
It's amazing how a different perspective can change a lot.

When did you join the Army, Baldimo?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 10:37 pm
I joined the military about 2 years ago. I'm 31 and felt it was time. I signed paper work on April 24th 2003. So I know how that other guy felt when he joined, I did it for the same reasons, I've already been told that my unit should be going to Afghanistan begening of next year.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 10:51 pm
Interesting indeed!

Are you relieved it's Afghanistan and not Iraq? Have you been to the region, or to any other country yet, or would that be the first time?

And did you really join because of 9/11? That would be an .... impressive thing to do!
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 11:22 pm
old europe wrote:
Interesting indeed!

Are you relieved it's Afghanistan and not Iraq?


It wouldn't make a difference to me really. I had the chance to go to Iraq in January, but I was turned down because my head quaters unit was looking for paper pushers and I work with Chinooks.

Quote:
Have you been to the region, or to any other country yet, or would that be the first time?


It will be the first time I have been in the ME. As I said, I am a little scared but I am also looking forward to using my training.

Quote:
And did you really join because of 9/11? That would be an .... impressive thing to do!


9/11 got me thinking about joining, and the war in Iraq sealed my decision.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Mar, 2005 11:42 pm
You're a hero in my book Baldimo.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 12:09 am
Foxfyre wrote:
You're a hero in my book Baldimo.


Didn't do it to be a hero, I did mainly so that those people serving could come home to their families. Someone had to take their places, plus I see as a good way of putting my money where my mouth was. I didn't join when was younger because I didn't like who was in charge of the military.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 09:47 am
Baldimo writes
Quote:
Didn't do it to be a hero, I did mainly so that those people serving could come home to their families. Someone had to take their places, plus I see as a good way of putting my money where my mouth was. I didn't join when was younger because I didn't like who was in charge of the military.


Few real heroes intended to be one I think. Smile
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 09:55 am
Foxy, you once posted of Doctors from Arizona volunteering to relieve the Army doctors. Like Baldimo, it shows an unselfishness that is to be commended.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 10:21 am
I did? I don't remember that. But I agree, there is much nobility of purpose that goes unheralded and unrewarded. And it is good to give it credit when we see it.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 05:52 pm
Baldimo wrote:
old europe wrote:
Right, we probably have more access to a wider range of media nowadays. Nevertheless, most people would probably choose to not know. Take yourself. What are you reading/listening to/watching on average? Totally unbiased? Everything you can get hold of?

And if, say, a soldier would do this, and come to the conclusion that his country is fighting an unjust war: would he be a chicken whatsoever the circumstances?

I'm not talking about your country, your war and your soldiers now, mind you.


What you ask hits close to home. I am a soldier serving in the US Army so it is my Army it is my country and it is a soldier in my military. I have made the same commitment he was supposed to abide by and he failed to do so.

I honestly don't think it had anything to do with his thinking about the morality of the war, I think he was all hot for battle when he joined and then when it came to put his money where his mouth was, he got scared. It's one thing to be scared about war, I know I am, but it is another thing to leave and run. If your not a little scared about war, then you scare me. I would have much more respect for someone that admitted they weren't ready then to leave. That is at least honorable.


First of all Baldimo,let me tell you to keep your head and your ass down.
I served in both Afghanistan AND Iraq with the marines.
I was a navy corpsman (medic),and I was wounded in Iraq and medically retired after 25 years.

First off,I was scared to death the whole time I was in Iraq and afghanistan.
Its human nature to be scared,and anyone that isnt is a danger to his whole unit.
I think that the men that have deserted were scared.They joined for the "glory",and found out that there is no glory in warfare.Its fear,sweat,blood,death,panic,confusion,and revulsion.
Those men couldnt admit to themselves that they were scared.

They might have opposed the war in Iraq,but once they raised their right hand and took the oath,they were committed.
If I had my way,every one of them would face a firing squad for desertion.
They have let down their country,they let down the service,and worst of all,they let down their buddies in their units.
IMHO,that is unforgiveable.
You dont ever want to let your buddies down,thats why so many men go "above and beyond" when it comes to saving their friends and protecting their buddies.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Apr, 2005 06:44 pm
mysteryman wrote:
Baldimo wrote:
old europe wrote:
Right, we probably have more access to a wider range of media nowadays. Nevertheless, most people would probably choose to not know. Take yourself. What are you reading/listening to/watching on average? Totally unbiased? Everything you can get hold of?

And if, say, a soldier would do this, and come to the conclusion that his country is fighting an unjust war: would he be a chicken whatsoever the circumstances?

I'm not talking about your country, your war and your soldiers now, mind you.


What you ask hits close to home. I am a soldier serving in the US Army so it is my Army it is my country and it is a soldier in my military. I have made the same commitment he was supposed to abide by and he failed to do so.

I honestly don't think it had anything to do with his thinking about the morality of the war, I think he was all hot for battle when he joined and then when it came to put his money where his mouth was, he got scared. It's one thing to be scared about war, I know I am, but it is another thing to leave and run. If your not a little scared about war, then you scare me. I would have much more respect for someone that admitted they weren't ready then to leave. That is at least honorable.


First of all Baldimo,let me tell you to keep your head and your ass down.
I served in both Afghanistan AND Iraq with the marines.
I was a navy corpsman (medic),and I was wounded in Iraq and medically retired after 25 years.

First off,I was scared to death the whole time I was in Iraq and afghanistan.
Its human nature to be scared,and anyone that isnt is a danger to his whole unit.
I think that the men that have deserted were scared.They joined for the "glory",and found out that there is no glory in warfare.Its fear,sweat,blood,death,panic,confusion,and revulsion.
Those men couldnt admit to themselves that they were scared.

They might have opposed the war in Iraq,but once they raised their right hand and took the oath,they were committed.
If I had my way,every one of them would face a firing squad for desertion.
They have let down their country,they let down the service,and worst of all,they let down their buddies in their units.
IMHO,that is unforgiveable.
You dont ever want to let your buddies down,thats why so many men go "above and beyond" when it comes to saving their friends and protecting their buddies.


That is the whole point of this thread and just about everyone missed it.

No one commented on the guy whose wife will be receiving her husband's award for service beyond. They were more concerned with defending the indefensible and praising their bravery when they have showed none. It doesn't take bravery to walk away from war, it takes a yellow streak down the middle of your back, walking away is the easy part.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 01:34:47