ADK_Forever
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2008
- Messages
- 3,706
- Reaction score
- 1,001
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
People who come back from the battlefield ****ed up, had problems before they went. Combat only brought it to the surface. Just more actual experience.
I'm willing to bet that if I go to my grandfather or any of his old war buddies that served and said "you didn't fight for your country or any of that bull****, right? just cause you wanted to kill people, right?" that they would take offense to that entire notion.
I'm willing to bet that if John Kerry said during the 2004 campaign that he didn't sign up "for love of country or any of that bull****" that all the people in this thread would still be talking about how big of an ass he had made of himself.
I understand everything you said, and alot of it makes sense, you have to ingrain some of this into people to get them to be as they need to be in order to deal with combat. It's not pretty, I'm sure, but required.
But, if someone tells me that he signed up just to blow **** up and kill people, and it had nothing to do with love of country, wanting to protect his fellow Americans, etc. it makes me start to wonder if what he/she did was really all that noble in the first place simply cause of motive, which I don't even like admitting just cause of the sound of it, but I'm just being honest.
But in the end, I still don't believe that blowing stuff up and killing people is anywhere near the top of the list for most people that sign up.
Well, the army must be a helluva lot different than the Marines, because I know plenty of soldiers who don't want to go to Afghanistan and who don't want to kill a "terrorist" (or anybody else
They know what their job entails, and they're willing to do what they have to do, but it's not like they're chomping at the bit for a damn deployment.
So, in your world you're saying that the military has been signing up more head cases than ever before to correlate with the highest suicide and domestic violence incidents in history?
And oh yeah, what "actual experience" are you yapping about?
Are you going to post any evidence to this silly claim?
You have no right to pretend that you speak for every marine. Like any group of people, everyone in the Marines have their own reasons for what they do. You expose your hypocrisy for committing the same sin you denounce others for.
Obviously, since the conditions that soldiers are exposed to in combat, it will tend to bring deeper problems to the surface. That's just common sense.
BTW, what unit were you in? You post your primer and I'll post mine. Cool?
Obviously, since the conditions that soldiers are exposed to in combat, it will tend to bring deeper problems to the surface. That's just common sense.
BTW, what unit were you in? You post your primer and I'll post mine. Cool?
You have the wife of a soldier (Spiker) and the mother of another (me) telling you that you're not right.
If every US service member joined for the sole reason of wanting to be deployed so they can kill insurgents, why do so many choose non-combat MOS's?
Actually, non military opinions should matter more. Some have said that they went into the military to blow this up, to shoot things and to kill people. Basically, little boys' dreams of being GI Joe. Those folks are the ones whose opinions should matter the least! Their heads aren't on political issues, only tactical issues, and keeping their heads, which have nothing to do with decisions like "should we or shouldn't we get out of this war?" That is why it doesn't matter what the guys in the field fighting have to say in any poll.
Don't get me wrong. They deserve our undying gratitude and support. They just should not control the big issues. They are too close to them to be objective.
Also, any person who joins just to kill people wear the patriot hat only as a secondary reason for being there. They didn't join to defend their country. They joined to kill. It is a subtle difference but, it is a difference.
IF they have deeper problems it might bring them to the surface :shrug: Believe it or not - a lot of people are quite balanced.
I agree with this..... I will also say first of all, thank your husband for me. If it wasn't for people like him, I'd probably be dead or in a world of hurt by now.... Lets just say after I got out of the military, the first thing that saved me was getting a job as a PMC.... After that what saved me, was a guy like your husband....
These people are angels sans the wings. :thumbs:
IF they have deeper problems it might bring them to the surface :shrug: Believe it or not - a lot of people are quite balanced.
It is easy to opine on what combat soldiers go through when you yourself were not a combat soldier. Seeing the realities of war, up close and personal like, whom do you think is better suited to decide to send others sons into harms way?
The mechanic or the warrior?
In this case... the mechanic, definitely. It would NEVER be the warrior. Ever.
Please, I'd much prefer follow the warrior into battle, than the mechanic.
As is your MO, you intentionally spun your own question... again. :doh It's once again obvious how it is almost impossible for you to participate in an honest conversation.
The actual question you asked, that I replied to was, "whom do you think is better suited to decide to send others sons into harms way?".
The question wasn't who to "follow", it was who should "send others sons into harms way?". It's a subtle difference I don't expect you to pick up on.
Decisions of war are not dependant on soldiers opinions just as a business is not run based on opinions of the assembly line.
However, if I were going into battle I would rather follow someone who is trained and experienced in battle, not how to operate a radio. :roll:
After seeing this happening on this forum a couple of times I’m just going to speak my mind…
Several thousand men and women have died in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past 9 years. **** sucks. May they rest in peace, and my condolences go out to their families. But what pisses me off about the whole thing (other than terrorist killing my fellow Americans) is how their deaths are used to justify ending a war.
Being a active duty Marine who is hoping to be able to hop on an upcoming afgan deployment, it’s nothing but a kick in the balls when I hear some little punk bitch collage kid crying about how we are sending marines and soldiers to their death. Shut up. Every Marine I know is wishing they were in Afghanistan getting shot at so they could kill a terrorist. Not for country or any of that bull****… But because they joined to see combat and they want to experience it. You go to an infantry barracks back at Lejeune and I want you to ask everyone there if they want to kill a terrorist. The answer will be yes. I want you to find me a Marine who doesn’t want to see a 500lb JDAM level an insurgent’s position. Or witness a couple LAVs firing their 25mm’s bringing death and destruction to the enemies of this nation. I’m coming up on 3 years now and I haven’t found one.
The fact of the matter is people who join, especially the infantry, want to see combat. For all of the marines that have died do you think they would be insulted to hear that some liberal punk, who doesn’t even know them, used there their death as a tool to somehow get others to feel sympathy for him and his buddies in the name of peace and harmony? F@#$ NO! Stop using the death of marines and soldiers to end a war.
There are reasons to stay and reasons to pullout. It’s debated all over the news, internet, and this very forum. But don’t throw around the deaths of Marines and Soldiers to better your argument of why we should leave Iraq and Afghanistan. If you truly respect those who have lost their lives, don’t do it…
As is your MO, you intentionally spun your own question... again. :doh It's once again obvious how it is almost impossible for you to participate in an honest conversation.
The actual question you asked, that I replied to was, "whom do you think is better suited to decide to send others sons into harms way?".
The question wasn't who to "follow", it was who should "send others sons into harms way?". It's a subtle difference I don't expect you to pick up on.
Decisions of war are not dependant on soldiers opinions just as a business is not run based on opinions of the assembly line.
However, if I were going into battle I would rather follow someone who is trained and experienced in battle, not how to operate a radio. :roll:
Many choose non combat type jobs because... wait for it. They don't want to see.... combat and good for them. that said, you can't compare the warrior mindest to the support folk.
Wow. so is this where I am supposed to whine like you do about personal attacks?
You prove my point.actually I think its pretty much the same.
Annnd again... you prove my point. :dohYou would think though that a manager who has spent time on the assembly line might have a better insight into plant operations than one hired who has not spent time on the line...
lie? You are so used to calling anybody who disagrees with you a liar you don't even know what it means anymore. :lamoexposing your blatant ignorance in an attempt to lie once again about my service.
We expect no more.I'll make it real simple for you...
Are you going to do some one arm push ups now? :lol:I was a ROMAD an ETAC for most of my career. , look it up and stop being so damn ignorant.
This is rich coming from you. :2rofll:now if you have any honor, you would do the right thing and apologize.
Do you think Obama is qualified?
President Obama was legally elected. That MAKES him qualified. Having served in the military is not a prerequisite for being president. It might help you to look the qualifications to be president up in the Constitution. They are spelled out in very simple language.
Only a very insecure person would confuse an observation of fact for a personal attack. ll:
You prove my point.
Annnd again... you prove my point. :dh
lie? You are so used to calling anybody who disagrees with you a liar you don't even know what it means anymore. :
We expect no more.
Are you going to do some one arm push ups now? :lol:
This is rich coming from you. :2rofll:
President Obama was legally elected. That MAKES him qualified. Having served in the military is not a prerequisite for being president. It might help you to look the qualifications to be president up in the Constitution. They are spelled out in very simple language.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?