Question for the Warmongers

[jmarshburn]

Oleena… I think you would be surprised that many Soldiers join out of a desire to serve their country… especially Infantrymen. I know and understand what you are relating about what Soldiers talk about when they are asked about why they joined, and you are right, those are the “stock” answers.

It’s almost conditioning. So many out there can’t understand the simple concept of, “I want to serve and protect my way of life.” This is mainly because we all take our way of life for granted. Also, in today’s America is isn’t “cool” to talk about things like honor and respect… in fact we too often equate honor and respect with movie stars and sports figures.

I joined to serve my country first and foremost. The college money and job security was a benefit. I have made the most out of it rising from an enlisted soldier to an officer… all of this in combat arms, Special Forces as an enlisted soldier, and currently an Infantry officer.

I’m not bashing what you were saying, just relating that there are a very large percentage of Soldiers that joined out of a sense of patriotism, but are scared it doesn’t sound cool to admit that.

[jmarshburn]

To everyone else… (especially the OP)

Yes, disturbing images can change the way America perceives our efforts here in Afghanistan or in Iraq. The American people can be very short-sighted and fickle. This is one of the reasons that most T.V. stations won’t pay footage of 9/11 anymore aside from a stock image of the burning towers… remember the pictures and video of people jumping from the buildings?

War sucks. Any soldier who says different is either (1) full of shit - see bravado, (2) didn’t really do anything while deployed or (3) borderline psychopath.

I have had friends get killed right in front of me, and ones that I hadn’t seen in years… we were always talking about hitting bike week in Daytona Beach… Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really.

Most guys that are deploying these days do it because we are the only ones who are willing to do so. To group all soldiers as brainless knuckle scraping thugs is absolutely ridiculous, just like branding those of us who lift as roid freaks or anything like that.

Personally, I continue to do what I do not because I agree with any government policy, but because I am good at it and I have survived some of the most heinous conditions and combat operations that anyone could imagine. It is my task now to ensure that the generation of soldiers after me survives as well.

This may sound cliche, but it is our actions that allow everyone else to sit around and comment on the internet about how stupid the politics and how mindless those who fight wars actually are. If it weren’t for those of us willing to stick our necks out (voluntarily as a poster earlier stated) there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that… witness this in any country in Africa.

Go ahead… flame on…!

JM

[CappedAndPlanIt]

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:

This may sound cliche, but it is our actions that allow everyone else to sit around and comment on the internet about how stupid the politics and how mindless those who fight wars actually are. If it weren’t for those of us willing to stick our necks out (voluntarily as a poster earlier stated) there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that… witness this in any country in Africa.

Go ahead… flame on…!

JM[/quote]

First, I’d consider really looking into the history of Africa before making a claim that its you, the soldier, who keeps America from being in turmoil like “any country in Africa”.

Secondly, it’s reverse logic to say that “Soldiers protect our freedoms, therefore whatever a soldier does protects our freedoms.”

IF there is a threat to our freedoms, then, yes, the military would be used to combat it. This does not mean that everything the military does protects our freedoms. I have not seen convincing evidence that Iraq or Afghanistan posed any legitmate threat to American freedoms (no, the possibility of Americans dying is not a threat to American freedoms).

Yet I’ve seen many soldiers decry that we MUST support them because they protect us.

[Oleena]

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:
To everyone else… (especially the OP)

Yes, disturbing images can change the way America perceives our efforts here in Afghanistan or in Iraq. The American people can be very short-sighted and fickle. This is one of the reasons that most T.V. stations won’t pay footage of 9/11 anymore aside from a stock image of the burning towers… remember the pictures and video of people jumping from the buildings?

War sucks. Any soldier who says different is either (1) full of shit - see bravado, (2) didn’t really do anything while deployed or (3) borderline psychopath.

I have had friends get killed right in front of me, and ones that I hadn’t seen in years… we were always talking about hitting bike week in Daytona Beach… Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really.

Most guys that are deploying these days do it because we are the only ones who are willing to do so. To group all soldiers as brainless knuckle scraping thugs is absolutely ridiculous, just like branding those of us who lift as roid freaks or anything like that.

Personally, I continue to do what I do not because I agree with any government policy, but because I am good at it and I have survived some of the most heinous conditions and combat operations that anyone could imagine. It is my task now to ensure that the generation of soldiers after me survives as well.

This may sound cliche, but it is our actions that allow everyone else to sit around and comment on the internet about how stupid the politics and how mindless those who fight wars actually are. If it weren’t for those of us willing to stick our necks out (voluntarily as a poster earlier stated) there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that… witness this in any country in Africa.

Go ahead… flame on…!

JM[/quote]

You sound like an extremely honorable and I’d say, even sweet, guy, but some parts of your post don’t make logical sense. For instance, in explaining why you are at war, you state:

“Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really”

You then state your real reason for being over there “Personally, I continue to do what I do not because I agree with any government policy, but because I am good at it and I have survived some of the most heinous conditions and combat operations that anyone could imagine. It is my task now to ensure that the generation of soldiers after me survives as well.”

Wait a second. If it wasn’t for the government policy, none of the soldiers you just stated as being your main reason for being over there, would in fact be over there. The government policy is what sent them. So you saying that you don’t support the government policy- you only support the soldiers- is like saying that you don’t support mass farming practices, you only buy meat that comes from it, so as to support the animals.

Then you concluded with “This may sound cliche, but it is our actions that allow everyone else to sit around and comment on the internet about how stupid the politics and how mindless those who fight wars actually are. If it weren’t for those of us willing to stick our necks out (voluntarily as a poster earlier stated) there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that… witness this in any country in Africa.” This does sound like you do support our government’s policy. Is that what you meant?

[Oleena]

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:

It’s almost conditioning. So many out there can’t understand the simple concept of, “I want to serve and protect my way of life.” This is mainly because we all take our way of life for granted. Also, in today’s America is isn’t “cool” to talk about things like honor and respect… in fact we too often equate honor and respect with movie stars and sports figures.

[/quote]

With all due respect, this is BS. American soldiers are given their own holiday; public speakers often start their talks with having everyone stand and clap for those who have served in the military, and friends of mine who’ve gone to serve commented that they were shocked by the difference in respect they received when they were in uniform (people opening doors, stepping aside for them, etc). This is all given because the general public DOES think all soldiers have done with they did to serve and protect their way of life. Being a soldier in our society automatically earns you a reception of respect from all and awe from most, especially other men. Those who don’t fall into line with this are given disrespect themselves and viewed as highly ignorant. Unless the war is highly unpopular.

I’m actually the minority regarding my thinking that many soldiers joined for other primary reasons than to serve and protect, and as a result, I never really discuss this with others in real life.

[olympiclifter42]

Interesting conversation here.

[SexMachine]

[quote]Oleena wrote:
in explaining why you are at war, you state:

“Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really”

You then state your real reason for being over there “Personally, I continue to do what I do not because I agree with any government policy, but because I am good at it…”[/quote]

That’s one of the marks of a professional soldier Olee. They are supposed to be apolitical. US military has a long tradition of being apolitical. He did not say he agreed or disagreed with the government’s foreign policy. He just said that’s not why he does what he does.

[squating_bear]

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:

This may sound cliche, but it is our actions that allow everyone else to sit around and comment on the internet about how stupid the politics and how mindless those who fight wars actually are. If it weren’t for those of us willing to stick our necks out (voluntarily as a poster earlier stated) there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that … witness this in any country in Africa.

[/quote]

Could you elaborate on that above, at first glance it doesn’t seem to line up with that below.

Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really.

But besides that, I’d also just like to hear more about the part I put in italics if you don’t mind / have the time.

Thanks

[Oleena]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:
in explaining why you are at war, you state:

“Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really”

You then state your real reason for being over there “Personally, I continue to do what I do not because I agree with any government policy, but because I am good at it…”[/quote]

That’s one of the marks of a professional soldier Olee. They are supposed to be apolitical. US military has a long tradition of being apolitical. He did not say he agreed or disagreed with the government’s foreign policy. He just said that’s not why he does what he does.[/quote]

You didn’t read my whole post, did you?

[jmarshburn]

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

First, I’d consider really looking into the history of Africa before making a claim that its you, the soldier, who keeps America from being in turmoil like “any country in Africa”.

Secondly, it’s reverse logic to say that “Soldiers protect our freedoms, therefore whatever a soldier does protects our freedoms.”

IF there is a threat to our freedoms, then, yes, the military would be used to combat it. This does not mean that everything the military does protects our freedoms. I have not seen convincing evidence that Iraq or Afghanistan posed any legitmate threat to American freedoms (no, the possibility of Americans dying is not a threat to American freedoms).

Yet I’ve seen many soldiers decry that we MUST support them because they protect us.

[/quote]

Good points… however if what I wrote came across that soldiers are the line that stands between our system and turmoil, that was not my intent.

A strong military (in the American sense) is merely a deterrent to armed violence and it aids in political stability, as long as the military doesn’t become a political animal, which is always a danger. Also, I never said that because a soldier protects our freedoms, everything a soldier does protects our freedoms, that statement by itself defies logic, however, back to the deterrent concept, much of what we do is posturing for the world to view effectiveness of our military.

As to the history of Africa, I speak to their recent history in places like Somalia and the Ivory Coast. Although, I suppose the argument to that is that it is in fact a government controlled military that enabled the political upheaval.

[jmarshburn]

[quote]Oleena wrote:
You sound like an extremely honorable and I’d say, even sweet, guy, but some parts of your post don’t make logical sense. For instance, in explaining why you are at war, you state:

“Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really”

You then state your real reason for being over there “Personally, I continue to do what I do not because I agree with any government policy, but because I am good at it and I have survived some of the most heinous conditions and combat operations that anyone could imagine. It is my task now to ensure that the generation of soldiers after me survives as well.”

Wait a second. If it wasn’t for the government policy, none of the soldiers you just stated as being your main reason for being over there, would in fact be over there. The government policy is what sent them. So you saying that you don’t support the government policy- you only support the soldiers- is like saying that you don’t support mass farming practices, you only buy meat that comes from it, so as to support the animals.

Then you concluded with “This may sound cliche, but it is our actions that allow everyone else to sit around and comment on the internet about how stupid the politics and how mindless those who fight wars actually are. If it weren’t for those of us willing to stick our necks out (voluntarily as a poster earlier stated) there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that… witness this in any country in Africa.” This does sound like you do support our government’s policy. Is that what you meant?[/quote]

Oleena, thanks for the response…

I was never commenting on whether or not I agree or disagree with our foreign policy, that is for a completely different debate. What I was getting at was that regardless of my feelings as to the decision makers sending us into conflict, many of us continue to serve because we are the ones with the institutional knowledge to continue to fight and hopefully go down in the history books as victors in an increasingly unpopular military action / war. It is almost a sense of not wanting to dump this conflict on anyone else’s shoulders.

You are absolutely right, without the policies being what they are, I wouldn’t be posting this from Afghanistan right now and the friends I speak of would be debating topics like whether or not LSU should play Alabama in the BCS championship. My loyalty is primarily to the men and women that I lead and serve with, I love soldiers, they are a unique and special person.

The policies of our government are outside the purview of my “legal and moral” bounds to reject as a commissioned officer… simply stated it doesn’t matter whether I agree with any of this or not, it is my legal duty to execute, “the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me…” (quote from the oath that every soldier takes).

So, the last question you asked is about the seeming dichotomy of saying that one one hand I serve not because of the policies of our government while saying that I am a loyal servant of the government. Welcome to my life, I protect the government that I at times fear and loathe! While this may be splitting hairs, I like to think of my service in terms of protecting my way of life as an American.

JM

[jmarshburn]

[quote]Oleena wrote:
With all due respect, this is BS. American soldiers are given their own holiday; public speakers often start their talks with having everyone stand and clap for those who have served in the military, and friends of mine who’ve gone to serve commented that they were shocked by the difference in respect they received when they were in uniform (people opening doors, stepping aside for them, etc). This is all given because the general public DOES think all soldiers have done with they did to serve and protect their way of life. Being a soldier in our society automatically earns you a reception of respect from all and awe from most, especially other men. Those who don’t fall into line with this are given disrespect themselves and viewed as highly ignorant. Unless the war is highly unpopular.

I’m actually the minority regarding my thinking that many soldiers joined for other primary reasons than to serve and protect, and as a result, I never really discuss this with others in real life.[/quote]

Oleena, again… you are not incorrect here. Please allow me to elaborate some.

The general public does honor us in ways that still can bring me to tears. There is no emotion that can describe getting off a plane and having regular citizens who have taken time from their busy and hectic lives there just to clap for us and hug us as we deplane from a deployment, the first time back on American soil in many months.

And, yes we do have Veteran’s Day, honoring the brave souls who have gone before us in defense of an idea, and at times defending our very homeland.

As a country, we have made great strides in separating the soldier from the conflict. In Vietnam, there was not that crucial separation, and as a result soldiers were forced to bear the brunt of their countrymen (and women) who were extremely unhappy with the policies of the government.

I can never fully express my gratitude for the continual outpouring of emotion from the American people. Here we are ten years into this mess of Iraq and Afghanistan and we still receive so many anonymous care packages that we often don’t know what to do with the bounty.

What I meant in talking about why many soldiers serve is at their core. We use terms like “Selfless Service” and “Quiet Professionals”. For many (myself included) those take deep root in our way of thinking. While the general public praises us, it is not in many of our personalities to accept that praise and basque(sp?) in the glow of praise. Not because we are not grateful, but we look to our left and right and see our friends and buddies and believe that the praise is for them. Am I making any sense here?

So when asked why we joined, it is easier to give the superficial answer as opposed to exploring the depth of our commitment. Many soldiers on their first term of enlistment might very well be there for college money and job skills, that may be who you are talking to, that doesn’t make them wrong, it is just where they are in their time.

Admittedly, most of the soldiers that I interact with are more senior and our beliefs have been formed over an entire adulthood of service. By that very nature, there is a strong bias in the manner in which I approach questions like this, I can not nor will not deny that.

I do, however, personally believe that by the time a soldier is on their second or so enlistment or term, there is a stronger sense of service than initially existed. Just serving for college money or job skills is very shallow, and can only sustain someone for so long before they are fed up and leave the service.

JM

[jmarshburn]

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:

there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that
[/quote]

But besides that, I’d also just like to hear more about the part I put in italics if you don’t mind / have the time.

Thanks[/quote]

Squatting Bear - I feel that the military that we have developed over time is one of deterrence. We have been so successful with the all volunteer force that much of what we do is an example for others armed forces to emulate. Like it or not, the United States has taken on a role of world police… granted there can be made an argument that we help some countries and ignore others – topic for another debate. Unlike some other countries our military has done a pretty decent job, I believe, in staying apolitical. We support whoever is in the White House and we are extremely limited on what we can actually do within the continental United States.

My point in saying what you italicized was that for better or worse, our role on the world stage has enabled a period of relative stability when it comes to a foreign power setting their sights on us for “hostile takeover”.

Our political and economic turmoil today is just that… political and economic. While some will argue that the U.S. has used the military for advancement of our political and economic agenda overseas, I don’t see a time when the OWS/Tea Party crowd takes control over the US Armed Forces to advance their agenda.

Not sure if all this makes sense (by that I mean outlining my thinking, not that my thinking is supposed to sway anyone’s opinion on the subject)… hopefully it does!

[Oleena]

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:
You sound like an extremely honorable and I’d say, even sweet, guy, but some parts of your post don’t make logical sense. For instance, in explaining why you are at war, you state:

“Do I continue to deploy and fight for an ideal that Iraq or the Taliban pose an imminent threat to the mainland U.S., or our interests overseas? Not really”

You then state your real reason for being over there “Personally, I continue to do what I do not because I agree with any government policy, but because I am good at it and I have survived some of the most heinous conditions and combat operations that anyone could imagine. It is my task now to ensure that the generation of soldiers after me survives as well.”

Wait a second. If it wasn’t for the government policy, none of the soldiers you just stated as being your main reason for being over there, would in fact be over there. The government policy is what sent them. So you saying that you don’t support the government policy- you only support the soldiers- is like saying that you don’t support mass farming practices, you only buy meat that comes from it, so as to support the animals.

Then you concluded with “This may sound cliche, but it is our actions that allow everyone else to sit around and comment on the internet about how stupid the politics and how mindless those who fight wars actually are. If it weren’t for those of us willing to stick our necks out (voluntarily as a poster earlier stated) there would be a revolving door of global political structure that would never be settled down. We live in turmoil today, but nothing would compare to that… witness this in any country in Africa.” This does sound like you do support our government’s policy. Is that what you meant?[/quote]

Oleena, thanks for the response…

I was never commenting on whether or not I agree or disagree with our foreign policy, that is for a completely different debate. What I was getting at was that regardless of my feelings as to the decision makers sending us into conflict, many of us continue to serve because we are the ones with the institutional knowledge to continue to fight and hopefully go down in the history books as victors in an increasingly unpopular military action / war. It is almost a sense of not wanting to dump this conflict on anyone else’s shoulders.

You are absolutely right, without the policies being what they are, I wouldn’t be posting this from Afghanistan right now and the friends I speak of would be debating topics like whether or not LSU should play Alabama in the BCS championship. My loyalty is primarily to the men and women that I lead and serve with, I love soldiers, they are a unique and special person.

The policies of our government are outside the purview of my “legal and moral” bounds to reject as a commissioned officer… simply stated it doesn’t matter whether I agree with any of this or not, it is my legal duty to execute, “the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me…” (quote from the oath that every soldier takes).

So, the last question you asked is about the seeming dichotomy of saying that one one hand I serve not because of the policies of our government while saying that I am a loyal servant of the government. Welcome to my life, I protect the government that I at times fear and loathe! While this may be splitting hairs, I like to think of my service in terms of protecting my way of life as an American.

JM
[/quote]

Does it bother you that someone else controls your hand? I mean, that someone else can tell you to kill another person and you have to do it whether you regardless of your moral opinion about the situation?

[Oleena]

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:
With all due respect, this is BS. American soldiers are given their own holiday; public speakers often start their talks with having everyone stand and clap for those who have served in the military, and friends of mine who’ve gone to serve commented that they were shocked by the difference in respect they received when they were in uniform (people opening doors, stepping aside for them, etc). This is all given because the general public DOES think all soldiers have done with they did to serve and protect their way of life. Being a soldier in our society automatically earns you a reception of respect from all and awe from most, especially other men. Those who don’t fall into line with this are given disrespect themselves and viewed as highly ignorant. Unless the war is highly unpopular.

I’m actually the minority regarding my thinking that many soldiers joined for other primary reasons than to serve and protect, and as a result, I never really discuss this with others in real life.[/quote]

Oleena, again… you are not incorrect here. Please allow me to elaborate some.

The general public does honor us in ways that still can bring me to tears. There is no emotion that can describe getting off a plane and having regular citizens who have taken time from their busy and hectic lives there just to clap for us and hug us as we deplane from a deployment, the first time back on American soil in many months.

And, yes we do have Veteran’s Day, honoring the brave souls who have gone before us in defense of an idea, and at times defending our very homeland.

As a country, we have made great strides in separating the soldier from the conflict. In Vietnam, there was not that crucial separation, and as a result soldiers were forced to bear the brunt of their countrymen (and women) who were extremely unhappy with the policies of the government.

I can never fully express my gratitude for the continual outpouring of emotion from the American people. Here we are ten years into this mess of Iraq and Afghanistan and we still receive so many anonymous care packages that we often don’t know what to do with the bounty.

What I meant in talking about why many soldiers serve is at their core. We use terms like “Selfless Service” and “Quiet Professionals”. For many (myself included) those take deep root in our way of thinking. While the general public praises us, it is not in many of our personalities to accept that praise and basque(sp?) in the glow of praise. Not because we are not grateful, but we look to our left and right and see our friends and buddies and believe that the praise is for them. Am I making any sense here?

So when asked why we joined, it is easier to give the superficial answer as opposed to exploring the depth of our commitment. Many soldiers on their first term of enlistment might very well be there for college money and job skills, that may be who you are talking to, that doesn’t make them wrong, it is just where they are in their time.

Admittedly, most of the soldiers that I interact with are more senior and our beliefs have been formed over an entire adulthood of service. By that very nature, there is a strong bias in the manner in which I approach questions like this, I can not nor will not deny that.

I do, however, personally believe that by the time a soldier is on their second or so enlistment or term, there is a stronger sense of service than initially existed. Just serving for college money or job skills is very shallow, and can only sustain someone for so long before they are fed up and leave the service.

JM
[/quote]

Thanks for the response. I completely agree that most all soldiers reasons for serving changes once they’re in and a few already had those reasons to begin with. Your post reflects the attitude of the soldiers I’ve know who’ve served overseas.

[jmarshburn]

[quote]Oleena wrote:
Does it bother you that someone else controls your hand? I mean, that someone else can tell you to kill another person and you have to do it whether you regardless of your moral opinion about the situation?[/quote]

I hope that you are asking this in the true nature and spirit of the conversation… it is tough to discern emotion through the internet…

No it does not bother me. No one tells me to kill anyone or controls my hand. We have a whole list of Use of Force and Rules of Engagement that cover how and when we can utilize deadly force. Please understand that it is rare and almost non-existant that an Army soldier (legally) fires his weapon without first being engaged by the enemy.

I have participated in every phase of this current conflict, from the initial move into Afghanistan to Iraq before the surge to where we are currently which is a lot more low intensity (most of the time), and I can honestly say that I have never indiscriminately killed anyone just because some unseen order told me to. Every time I have used deadly force it was absolutely in the inherent protection of myself and my soldiers. This question might be more appropriate for an Air Force pilot who is dropping a bomb.

Perhaps the more appropriate question to ask a professional soldier is, “Does it bother you that there is the potential that you are using deadly force to affect an end that may not have any true tie to our national security?”

Now that is a much more difficult question to answer both in my heart and within the confines of my oath. If history bears out that our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had little to no bearing on our national security, and the powers-that-be knew that prior to our deployment, then I will look back at this time with a bitter taste in my mouth. However, that is for the writers of history to determine.

Perhaps I am too optimistic, but having met both President Bush and President Obama, I would find it extremely hard to believe that in their heart (especially Bush, since this all happened on his watch) that they didn’t believe that deployment of US Forces into combat was not in the best interest of our national security. Admittedly that may be a naieve statement and perhaps it is a crutch that guys like me use to continue to drive through these days… only time will tell.

[Oleena]

[quote]jmarshburn wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:
Does it bother you that someone else controls your hand? I mean, that someone else can tell you to kill another person and you have to do it whether you regardless of your moral opinion about the situation?[/quote]

I hope that you are asking this in the true nature and spirit of the conversation… it is tough to discern emotion through the internet…

No it does not bother me. No one tells me to kill anyone or controls my hand. We have a whole list of Use of Force and Rules of Engagement that cover how and when we can utilize deadly force. Please understand that it is rare and almost non-existant that an Army soldier (legally) fires his weapon without first being engaged by the enemy.

I have participated in every phase of this current conflict, from the initial move into Afghanistan to Iraq before the surge to where we are currently which is a lot more low intensity (most of the time), and I can honestly say that I have never indiscriminately killed anyone just because some unseen order told me to. Every time I have used deadly force it was absolutely in the inherent protection of myself and my soldiers. This question might be more appropriate for an Air Force pilot who is dropping a bomb.

Perhaps the more appropriate question to ask a professional soldier is, “Does it bother you that there is the potential that you are using deadly force to affect an end that may not have any true tie to our national security?”

Now that is a much more difficult question to answer both in my heart and within the confines of my oath. If history bears out that our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had little to no bearing on our national security, and the powers-that-be knew that prior to our deployment, then I will look back at this time with a bitter taste in my mouth. However, that is for the writers of history to determine.

Perhaps I am too optimistic, but having met both President Bush and President Obama, I would find it extremely hard to believe that in their heart (especially Bush, since this all happened on his watch) that they didn’t believe that deployment of US Forces into combat was not in the best interest of our national security. Admittedly that may be a naieve statement and perhaps it is a crutch that guys like me use to continue to drive through these days… only time will tell.[/quote]

You’re right about the question being the wrong one. I’ve asked similar questions of everyone I’ve known in the conflict and the answer has always been the same as your’s.

I hope, for you and them, that you’re right. I’ve heard that even a soldier’s chances of experiencing and healing from PTSD are affected by whether or not they feel in the long run that what they did was justified. For me, that’s really scary to think about. I don’t like that the government can mess up a generation of wonderful men with a bad decision.

[jmarshburn]

[quote]Oleena wrote:
I don’t like that the government can mess up a generation of wonderful men with a bad decision. [/quote]

On this statement, you will find no argument or disagreement!

[squating_bear]

Hey man thanks for the reply

You are a hero

I don’t like these wars going on…

But YOU seem to be an actual hero