<p>My mistake, applicannot, but you, ma’am, still retain my award.</p>
<p>applicannot: Wow, I’m slow. I just realized how you got your name. It’s funny :D</p>
<p>07PETKO: Have you been to the Politics section of CC? She does not deserve the award (although she is ignorant).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>:rolleyes:</p>
<p>^Makes me wonder why they get so excited about stuff in HSL.</p>
<p>TCBH. I have a severe dislike of Mr Payne (or is that thehammer? I have a feeling they may be very close to one another…). You know this very well lol.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Definitely true. However, the military is responsible for executing government actions. It’s still a government-run body.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it’s not all about warfare. The Comfort is in Haiti right now, and I’ll agree the military does a lot of rebuilding and rescuing. However, it is mostly about warfare. You can’t tell me the vast majority of the budget and of the work done in the military isn’t targeted toward “security” and “anti-terror” or whatever it’s being called now. I disagree with that the military does, including much of what it does in non-warfare settings.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought I was ignorant. I think they were cut a little (certainly not a lot) this year, but we’ve been pretty much encased in warfare campaigns since before 1920 - the military funds have only increased.</p>
<p>[The</a> Federal Pie Chart](<a href=“http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm]The”>The Federal Pie Chart)
[Military</a> budget of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States]Military”>Military budget of the United States - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I should have said personally. I personally find other posts worse than those about the military (or generally even about politics at all). However, he and all the rest of us better get used to being belittled. I am sure I will be forever belittled by choosing to work for a non-profit, and my sister will be forever belittled for choosing to work in a chocolate shop. There will always be someone who disagrees with what you are doing. I vehemently disagree with 80% of what the military and its affiliated bodies stand for. Anyone who only thinks the military is out there shooting other people hasn’t seen the news in a very long time, I’ll give you that - but anyone who thinks that isn’t among the primary purposes of the military is also severely confused.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, then, I’m glad to hear it. If you never come across anything worse in your life than someone who vehemently disagrees with what the military is doing, you will be a very, very lucky person.</p>
<p>I just love how all these men and women are dying in the middle east so people like this ^ can keep on living in their free country. Thanks for your gratitude.</p>
<p>
What is it that you think the military stands for? </p>
<p>
Yes, the military does have to kill people. But that’s not among it’s PRIMARY purpose. Are you saying, the military is out there thinking “Okay, our job is to kill these people, and then tomorrow kill those people”</p>
<p>NO. The primary purpose of the military is to DEFEND our nation. If to do that, we have to kill, then so be it, what else can we do to fix the ugliness.</p>
<p>Think about it, in many conflicts, both sides each have a certain goal. They both believe that the way to achieve that goal is to fight. That’s where the military comes in, to fight in order to reach that certain goal, ideally to benefit the people they are fighting for. Can anyone change that? Can anyone change the fact that people feel the need to fight or kill in order to achieve something? Can anyone make it so that we don’t need to fight in order to achieve a goal, but instead, be able to reach a compromise in a civil manner?</p>
<p>Anyway, the point is that the military is there to serve and protect. Perhaps you do not agree with what the government feels they need to do in order to benefit the country and then sending the military off to do just that, but you saying that joining the military is a waste of talent is highly uncalled for.</p>
<p>Talents can be used to help this nation in any way. Maybe you can use your talents to become a productive member of society, and then the military can use talented people to protect those individuals.</p>
<p>By the way, just because people can be belittled, that does not mean we have to take it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And the worst part is that it doesn’t make any difference. Saddam Hussein was never going to impinge on my freedom of speech. :/</p>
<p>There’s nothing stupid about hating on the military. Albert Einstein hated on the military and especially nationalism. People are dying for their “country” which is really just a meaningless political construct.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
And then I think around here is where it gets a little muddy. Yes, ideally the military is meant to protect and serve the nation.</p>
<p>However, in the past however many years, the US has taken on some kind of “international police force” role. And then the government puts the military up to it to carry out that role.</p>
<p>ChoklitRain, I think you may be taking that quote out of context. I believe that nationalism, in that quote means pride. The same pride that drove nations to take over smaller countries.</p>
<p>However, there’s pride or nationalism, and then there’s the sense of duty to the nation that calls upon many people in service.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I love this. I think there’s an extremely important set of fine lines between patriotism, nationalism, and ethnocentrism. I am patriotic. I am both happy and thankful to be an America. Here, I live below the “poverty line” and yet I am in the richest (or second richest) quintile in the world. I have the FREEDOM to openly and outwardly state that I disagree with the government and (gasp!) the military. I am patriotic, and therefore I not only have rights, but have the responsibility to use them. If I disagree with the direction the country is taking, have have the right to dissent, petition, assemble, and change. But, I am not a nationalist. I don’t think that the U.S. is the most important country in the world. This is part of the reason why I disagree with the military - its size, its purposes, its actions, etc. And ethnocentrism? Even if it’s not a part of the military ideal, the government is using the military - and since the military IS a government body - for ethnocentric purposes (and not just in recent years. That disgusts me. I refuse to agree with that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m saying it’s definitely one of the primary purposes.</p>
<p>U.S. Navy mission statement:
</p>
<p>(P.S., I love that we “maintain the freedom of the seas” by becoming the dominant force in them. That’s a nationalistic ideal I simply disagree with.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you want to resign that these conflicts can only be fixed by war, then so be it. I’m not saying that the military doesn’t serve a purpose, or that it’s possible to live in a conflict-free world. That’s not the case, and I’m not even that naive. But, there’s a lot of blowing each other up without any kind of diplomacy. Take, for example, Al-Qaeda. They’re terrorists. Yes, they’re unreasonable, and it’s not to say that one way to take care of them isn’t to get rid of them. But we’re not considering the underlying problem. Why do they hate us? What have we done to cause that hatred, and what is out of our control? The ethnocentrism we exert - insisting that Middle Eastern countries mirror our system of government and ideals - only increases their hatred toward the American body. And that’s just one example.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here we will have to disagree. I don’t agree with a whole lot of what the Evangelical Christians do, for example, so yes, I would consider it a waste of talent for a particularly talented person to become an evangelical minister. My friend is a natural teacher. She’s a people person, she’s easy going, she handles stress incredibly, and she gives crystal clear explanations. I’d consider it a waste of talent if she became that office guy that never sees anything but spreadsheets. If someone like Einstein has a gift for science but decides to become a garbage man, I’d consider it a waste of talent. Similarly, if someone who is so intellectually gifted decides to join the air force, I’d consider it a waste of talent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, and that’s something we all need to learn: how to not take being belittled.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A huge portion of the very core of my argument.</p>
<p>
[/quote]
The same pride that drove nations to take over smaller countries.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is basically the definition of nationalism (would you say the U.S. is not now or has not in the past practiced this?).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is patriotism, NOT nationalism.</p>
<p>Applicannot:
Do you believe that the military serves a defensive role (at least in addition to an offensive role)?</p>
<p>Furthermore, do you believe it is possible to maintain world order and stability without one (or a few) dominating countries?</p>
<p>i wouldn’t enlist unless i ****ed up really bad in high school or college, and i think a lot of people are with me in seeing the military as a “second chance”</p>
<p>becoming an officer is totally different and is probably harder than most college->job possibilities</p>
<p>also it’s an interesting double standard that it’s socially acceptable to disagree with the wars we’re fighting, but not to disagree with the people who signed up to fight them</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I see, “deterring aggression and maintaining freedom of the seas”, which to me sounds more like “protect against hostile forces” than becoming the “dominant force” in the seas.</p>
<p>The Al-Qaeda thing is a little big to get into. However, also note that Al-Qaeda have also attacked other nations, not just the US. Then again, I can see what you are saying. See from what I understand, the US got involved in the politics of the Middle East and now here’s a group reacting against that. (Am I right? I really am not very sure, I’m sorry)</p>
<p>In that case, I can see why you disagree with the US military. If the military did not act upon its sense of “international policing” then we probably would not have that come out of it.</p>
<p>the government and media use “al-Qaeda” to describe pretty much any Muslim terrorist even though the links between various Muslim terrorist groups are weak if they even exist.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>multiple groups, probably hundreds of little groups. i think some people still think that capturing/killing bin Laden will end the war on terror, they are completely wrong, it’s impossible to win a war against a noun.</p>
<p>back on topic if you disagree with what the military does then just don’t join it? there are also conscientious objector forms if you disagree with the draft as well.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This made me lol xD</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well the thing is, I am interested in joining the military. I genuinely want to serve and protect this country. I am not interested in going out there and shooting guns. No, I really want to be a part of an institution that wants to do whats best for the people of its nation. The point was that I found it very offensive that applicannot posted. Getting into West Point is an accomplishment to be proud of and there applicannot disregards her peer’s achievements and denounces it as a waste of talent.</p>
<p>Sure you may disagree with what some things the military does. However, realize that the military does not mean to create these bad outcomes. Primarily, the military wants to do what is best for the people. Now I am not saying the military is perfect, but I respect that the military tries to keep the nation’s best interest in mind.</p>
<p>The military is a very honorable and respectable institution that I will very happily join.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^Actually squashing terror has been done before, but it requires out-terrorizing the terrorists… something that blatantly does not hold up with American ideals.</p>