JFL Niggers are attacking asians and the rest of society gets a lecture about it.

[based_meme]

Fair enough, but I still don't see why that warrants hate.

I could understand a certain amount of discontent, but hating them doesn't really make any sense.

At some point, you have to look past doubts of nationalistic and patriotic brainwashing and say that they made a conscious choice to sign up and fight. A job where the average person knows has a track record for acting aggressively like a bully towards nations that did nothing to it is not a noble one. As I said, the only noble fight is the one where you defend your home, not attack somebody else's (inb4 9/11 defending your home by bombing goat herders in Afghanistan).

It's not hating the soldier, btw. Hate is a pretty strong emotion.

In what way is what their doing not okay?, they're just trying to survive like anyone else, if a man's life is going nowhere you shouldn't shame him for enlisting, he's just doing what he thinks is the best option for him to have a future.

"Just trying to survive" is not a morally justifiable argument for signing up to be an imperialist foot soldier. You can apply that logic to gangbanging and selling smack too. You can apply it to virtually anything really, since we're all just out here trying to survive.

Here we go again with comparing soldiers to gang members, I don't think that you really understand the concept of context. When you're a gang member you have to get your ass beaten in order to join, you have to smuggle and sell drugs, get tattoo's in order to represent your gang, get arrested for doing crimes which can easily put you in for years on end, on top of that people EXPECT you to not snitch on them, no matter how much they disrespect you. The military isn't a good environment either, don't get me wrong, but at least there you'll be able to get tactical training to defend yourself, you won't have to get any tattoo's, and if you're stationed overseas you'll be able to play your hand at locationmaxxing.

I'm not comparing the inner workings of each group and saying they're the same. No shit, they're different. But when the rubber hits the road and you're called up to do your job you're just another asshole holding a gun waiting on orders. Your arm patch, your missions, and your organizational mandates are different, but you're still doing what you're told, and most of the time that's going to be shooting others, or employing the threat of violence at the very least.

My point is, soldiers see a lot of shit, and they deserve respect for all of the shit they have to go through, some watch their friends get blown up, some get crippled, and others end up homeless themselves.

NO, they don't. Where does this stupid idea come from? You're not entitled to respect from a person by default for having experienced some horror that the same person hasn't experienced. That doesn't make them or what they went through "respectable" or admirable. WTF is that shit? You've really gotten drunk on the Kool-Aid and gotten your gluttonous fill of the "soldiers are heroes" propaganda.

They don't just wake up and say "yeah, I'm ready to go and kill people" most just wanna get their paycheck and go home.

If you're still adamant on this notion of "there for the money" and fail to see anything mercenarial about that and still believe the job to be noble, then I don't know what to say to you.

They're not an invading aggressor by choice, that hate should be focused by the people in charge who turn them into one.

When you knowingly sign a contract and take an oath with the knowledge that you'll very likely be committing injustices against other people on executive orders to deploy you in foreign lands and you won't have a say in it, then that makes it MUCH worse than the naive simpleton who signs up thinking they're defending their papa's ranch in Wyoming by killing some sand niggers thousands of miles away.

I highly doubt that a high percentage of them actually want to go to war and kill people, I'm pretty sure that most of them would prefer to not see any combat whatsoever.

Then don't sign up to be a cog in the corporate, globalist war machine, because (surprise motherfucker) they will cash in their training investment into you and reap their profits when you're sent overseas and get put on patrol to defend an oil pipeline. Don't expect me to call you a hero when insurgents blow half of your limbs off when an RPG explodes too close for comfort, because ZOG bosses want to ensure their ROIs.

I'll feel sorry for you and hope you find peace in your current state, but I won't hate you, nor respect you for your decision that led you to that point.

So why do you hate soldiers specifically so much?, shouldn't you be hating on the people who actually start these wars?, as I've said before the soldiers on the ground have nothing to do with such planning, as far as they're aware everyone who isn't american is a potential enemy.

Disrespect is not synonymous with hate. You have no idea how much hate I have for those who start wars, but I do respect them for their cunning in deceiving an entire nation to give them support in for-profit wars.

When you want to blame someone for a warcrime you don't look at the people on the ground, risking their lives, you look at the people above, who put them in those situations when they could easily be back home.

What fucking world are you living in? You're clearly naive and starry-eyed when it comes to soldiers, and are blind to the realities of war that break people and push them to commit atrocities, or have strong prejudices and decide to kill civilians because they can. If a soldier gets killed in an ambush, the rest of the squad wants blood for the death of their brother. Some of them commit atrocities with all of that testosterone and adrenaline flooding them. The next time they're out on a raid to capture/kill militants hiding in some village, they'll decide to kill the village elder and his sons for payback for housing the militants responsible for killing one of their own. There's a bunch of war crimes that happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, and those are the ones the public knows about. Trump himself recently pardoned one of them. A SEAL, I think it was.

I'm starting to think you're idea of soldiers and soldiering might be informed predominantly by Call of Duty games.

Do you think people blamed soldiers for starting the Vietnam war?, or do you think they blamed Nixon and Johnson?

I don't know, I wasn't alive in the 1960s. If I had to guess, I'd say they blamed Nixon and Johnson for starting the war and blamed the soldiers for fighting it, discounting those forcibly drafted.

You wouldn't be saying that if the us became a war zone, if it did you would be begging the military to save your sorry ass

No, I wouldn't. Stop presuming such things. I'd probably join a defensive militia tbh. But that's besides the point, because I already said how defending your home against an aggressor is always going to be justified. I'll also add that it's justified in rare cases that can invoke casus belli, like WW2.

Not much of a difference IMO, a soldier is defined by his profession, just as much as the president is defined by his.

Doesn't mean you should respect all soldiers, some of them don't deserve any respect whatsoever, but you should at least assume they deserve respect given the context of their position.

I already covered this. The profession is tainted and not deserving of respect by virtue of itself.

Wasn't his fault that the war happened, he was just brainwashed into thinking that what he was doing was a good thing, but he probably never anticipated that there would be so many deaths.

I didn't say it was, nor did I blame him for going. I just think his decision to go was fundamentally wrong on principle. But how the fuck do you not anticipate that there would be so many deaths when you GO TO WAR?

JFL

 

[Blackpill Rage]

Hopefully this will increase the resentment towards niggers.

 

[zangano1]

N

 

[DonezoTheClown]

https://www.newswars.com/new-york-a...ationalism-even-though-the-culprit-was-black/

No these fucking Gooks are protesting against white nationalism despite a nigger doing this shit, it's a clown world, all fucking non-whites back to their own shithole.

 

[PPEcel]

A lot of soldiers risk their lives and come back home to get cheated on just so that you can cope, don't take it for granted.

 

[Deleted member 20790]

https://www.newswars.com/new-york-a...ationalism-even-though-the-culprit-was-black/

No these fucking Gooks are protesting against white nationalism despite a nigger doing this shit, it's a clown world, all fucking non-whites back to their own shithole.

The white obsession is laughable at this point. Every Asian foid who was there protesting "white nationalism" takes white cock, absolutely no doubt about it.

 

[Capable_Onion]

At some point, you have to look past doubts of nationalistic and patriotic brainwashing and say that they made a conscious choice to sign up and fight. A job where the average person knows has a track record for acting aggressively like a bully towards nations that did nothing to it is not a noble one. As I said, the only noble fight is the one where you defend your home, not attack somebody else's (inb4 9/11 defending your home by bombing goat herders in Afghanistan).

But as I keep saying, they aren't the ones who choose to start these wars, they're just put in the middle of them. If you actually asked these people whether or not they wanted these wars to happen and continue, most would probably vehemently disagree.

It's not hating the soldier, btw. Hate is a pretty strong emotion.

Well then I don't understand what problem you have with them.

"Just trying to survive" is not a morally justifiable argument for signing up to be an imperialist foot soldier. You can apply that logic to gangbanging and selling smack too. You can apply it to virtually anything really, since we're all just out here trying to survive

I know that america isn't the best place in the world, there's a lot of shit I hate about it too, but you're obviously blowing the comparison's out of proportion.

I'm not comparing the inner workings of each group and saying they're the same. No shit, they're different. But when the rubber hits the road and you're called up to do your job you're just another asshole holding a gun waiting on orders. Your arm patch, your missions, and your organizational mandates are different, but you're still doing what you're told, and most of the time that's going to be shooting others, or employing the threat of violence at the very least.

It's not a job that a lot of people would take up, that's for sure, there are a lot of things they're forced to do that they never wanted to happen in the first place. I still don't blame them though, when a country goes to war, someone has to do the dirty work, and if you don't have those people your country is defenseless.

NO, they don't. Where does this stupid idea come from? You're not entitled to respect from a person by default for having experienced some horror that the same person hasn't experienced. That doesn't make them or what they went through "respectable" or admirable. WTF is that shit? You've really gotten drunk on the Kool-Aid and gotten your gluttonous fill of the "soldiers are heroes" propaganda.

If I met a random guy on the street who said "I watched a gang member kill my entire family infront of me" it would warrent the same respect as a person who says "I was in the military and I saw all of my friends get blown up"

When people go through things like that, you just have to treat them a certain amount of respect, otherwise your not even human, your just another animal

If you're still adamant on this notion of "there for the money" and fail to see anything mercenarial about that and still believe the job to be noble, then I don't know what to say to you.

Like I said before, if you wanna believe that they're like mercenaries that's fine, but even I would have a certain amount of respect for mercenaries as long as they were protecting the right kind of people.

When you knowingly sign a contract and take an oath with the knowledge that you'll very likely be committing injustices against other people on executive orders to deploy you in foreign lands and you won't have a say in it, then that makes it MUCH worse than the naive simpleton who signs up thinking they're defending their papa's ranch in Wyoming by killing some sand niggers thousands of miles away.

Again, it's not like as if it's a morally perfect job, if a war broke out between the US and Russia, I'm sure that they would be forced to do some things that they'd rather not. But it doesn't make it their fault, they're literally doing a job that no else will take, and in that degree I have to give them a certain amount of respect just for that alone.

I sit in my room playing video games and eating chips all day while some guy is in Afghanistan risking his life to get back home, it's not fair, but the least I can do is respect the people who come back alive.

Then don't sign up to be a cog in the corporate, globalist war machine, because (surprise motherfucker) they will cash in their training investment into you and reap their profits when you're sent overseas and get put on patrol to defend an oil pipeline. Don't expect me to call you a hero when insurgents blow half of your limbs off when an RPG explodes too close for comfort, because ZOG bosses want to ensure their ROIs.

Most of them aren't even aware of all of the inner workings when it comes to that, as far as they're aware they're signing up to protect people back home. And like I've said a million times before, some men don't have any other option but to enlist, so I can't really blame them for it in the first place.

What fucking world are you living in? You're clearly naive and starry-eyed when it comes to soldiers, and are blind to the realities of war that break people and push them to commit atrocities, or have strong prejudices and decide to kill civilians because they can. If a soldier gets killed in an ambush, the rest of the squad wants blood for the death of their brother. Some of them commit atrocities with all of that testosterone and adrenaline flooding them. The next time they're out on a raid to capture/kill militants hiding in some village, they'll decide to kill the village elder and his sons for payback for housing the militants responsible for killing one of their own. There's a bunch of war crimes that happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, and those are the ones the public knows about. Trump himself recently pardoned one of them. A SEAL, I think it was.

I've said this before, not all soldiers even deserve your respect, but I would say that the vast majority who're just doing their job actually do since they aren't doing things like this intentionally.

I'm sure that things like this happen, but If you wanna make an outlier like this and say that every guy who goes over there is looking for blood, by killing children and elders then I don't really know what to say to you.

I'm starting to think you're idea of soldiers and soldiering might be informed predominantly by Call of Duty games.

Halo is cool, but I hate Call of Duty

I don't know, I wasn't alive in the 1960s. If I had to guess, I'd say they blamed Nixon and Johnson for starting the war and blamed the soldiers for fighting it, discounting those forcibly drafted.

No one ever blamed the soldiers for starting that war, the entire purpose of the movement was to pull them out

No, I wouldn't. Stop presuming such things. I'd probably join a defensive militia tbh. But that's besides the point, because I already said how defending your home against an aggressor is always going to be justified. I'll also add that it's justified in rare cases that can invoke casus belli, like WW2.

A defensive militia against an invading country?

Good luck with that, won't be crying for you when they blow you to smithereens

I already covered this. The profession is tainted and not deserving of respect by virtue of itself.

I like how you try to avoid the point I made there

A person is defined by their profession, if you say that you hate what soldier's stand for then you're not just going to disrespect the person's profession, but you're also going to be disrespecting the person themselves, because they're one in the same.

I didn't say it was, nor did I blame him for going. I just think his decision to go was fundamentally wrong on principle. But how the fuck do you not anticipate that there would be so many deaths when you GO TO WAR?

There's a very big difference between the wars going on right now and the vietnam war that happened then

If any of those soldier's knew what they were getting into, they would be protesting with everyone else (not like as if they had a choice at the time)

 

[Emba]

My friend was enlisted in the military, and the girl he was dating cucked him by getting impregnated by another man, ontop of that he was also homeless. He was literally rock bottom, so the only place left for him to go was the military.

That's a harsh reality for many men who enlist, they're pushed against the wall and have nowhere else to go, so they choose the last option available.

I fucking hate people who talk shit about people they know nothing about, or experiences they've never gone through.

A lot of soldiers risk their lives and come back home to get cheated on just so that you can cope, don't take it for granted.

"It's the ONLY job in town."

 

[Deleted member 32725]

I thought we were talking about Gooks vs Spooks?

 

[based_meme]

But as I keep saying, they aren't the ones who choose to start these wars, they're just put in the middle of them. If you actually asked these people whether or not they wanted these wars to happen and continue, most would probably vehemently disagree.

Then why the fuck are you there?
>Sign up to join the military.
>Get sent to a war and be put in extremely difficult life and moral situations.

They know the score. "But it wasn't my call to go there" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card. If you don't agree with something, you don't put your life at risk for it. That's just fucking retarded. It's not even a sensible cop-out.

Well then I don't understand what problem you have with them.

Then I suggest you reread what I've been saying, brocel.

I know that america isn't the best place in the world, there's a lot of shit I hate about it too, but you're obviously blowing the comparison's out of proportion.

No, that's literally the reasoning. I'll reiterate: Self-preservation isn't a justification for knowingly putting yourself in morally dubious situations. The job is literally to use force and kill people. Compared to, say, the police - as bad as they are - whose job is to maintain order and only use lethal force as a last resort (KEK), a soldier's job is to kill.

It's not a job that a lot of people would take up, that's for sure, there are a lot of things they're forced to do that they never wanted to happen in the first place. I still don't blame them though, when a country goes to war, someone has to do the dirty work, and if you don't have those people your country is defenseless.

You obviously haven't been properly reading what I've been saying and probably just skimmed it. I've been saying that wars of self defense are all morally justified. If you have an army that doesn't invade other countries and only defends itself, that's perfectly fine.

If I met a random guy on the street who said "I watched a gang member kill my entire family infront of me" it would warrent the same respect as a person who says "I was in the military and I saw all of my friends get blown up"

When people go through things like that, you just have to treat them a certain amount of respect, otherwise your not even human, your just another animal

This is where your values and mine are at a crossroad, and is probably the reason why some of my points aren't getting through. In your value system, people are worthy of respect merely by virtue of having lived through some harrowing experience. In my value system, all respect is earned, regardless of who you are and what your role in society is.

Like I said before, if you wanna believe that they're like mercenaries that's fine, but even I would have a certain amount of respect for mercenaries as long as they were protecting the right kind of people.

"As long as they were protecting the right kind of people"? Dafuq? You don't see the problem there? Mercenaries are fine as long as you agree with their mission? Seriously?

This is no different than, "our soldiers are the good guys, your soldiers are the bad guys."

Again, it's not like as if it's a morally perfect job, if a war broke out between the US and Russia, I'm sure that they would be forced to do some things that they'd rather not. But it doesn't make it their fault, they're literally doing a job that no else will take, and in that degree I have to give them a certain amount of respect just for that alone.

Like what? What would they be "forced" to do? Why do you think they're doing a job that nobody will take? And why isn't anybody taking those jobs?

I sit in my room playing video games and eating chips all day while some guy is in Afghanistan risking his life to get back home, it's not fair, but the least I can do is respect the people who come back alive.

Value difference. You freely give them respect and venerate them because they do a job that puts their life at risk, whereas I don't dole out respect simply for being in a particular profession. Do you venerate firemen and police officers the same way? And equally?

Most of them aren't even aware of all of the inner workings when it comes to that, as far as they're aware they're signing up to protect people back home. And like I've said a million times before, some men don't have any other option but to enlist, so I can't really blame them for it in the first place.

I can. They should know better. We're going in circles at this point.

I've said this before, not all soldiers even deserve your respect, but I would say that the vast majority who're just doing their job actually do since they aren't doing things like this intentionally.

I'm sure that things like this happen, but If you wanna make an outlier like this and say that every guy who goes over there is looking for blood, by killing children and elders then I don't really know what to say to you.

You're literally trained to kill, among other things related to your specific trade. Intentional or not, they're willingly putting themselves in that situation by the choice they made (for whatever personal reasons).

Halo is cool, but I hate Call of Duty

Well, there it is then. The soldier hero worship had to come from somewhere.

No one ever blamed the soldiers for starting that war, the entire purpose of the movement was to pull them out

What "movement"? We're not talking about any "movement" bro. Soldiers were mostly shit on by the people when they returned.

A defensive militia against an invading country?

No doubt we'd be at a big disadvantage without AT/AA weapons and air support, but asymmetrical warfare is definitely a thing. Ask the military strategists at West Point how goat fuckers living in mountains gave the US infantry a terribly difficult time with their attrition tactics and skirmishes.

Good luck with that, won't be crying for you when they blow you to smithereens

Thanks for the luck, but I don't need your tears. I just need you to not get in the way if an invasion does happen. But if you do, make sure to block the bullet going for my head.

I like how you try to avoid the point I made there

What point is that? That people are deserving of your respect by virtue of their choice in profession? Like I said, I already talked about that (earlier in the same post).

A person is defined by their profession, if you say that you hate what soldier's stand for then you're not just going to disrespect the person's profession, but you're also going to be disrespecting the person themselves, because they're one in the same.

So this is how you see the world. And this is why you can't seem to fundamentally separate disdain you can have for a person from the disdain you can have for their professional choice.

Interesting.

There's a very big difference between the wars going on right now and the vietnam war that happened then

If any of those soldier's knew what they were getting into, they would be protesting with everyone else (not like as if they had a choice at the time)

You don't need a crystal ball to know what you're getting into. All you need to do is a bit of research on your own about the line of work and realities surrounding it. Just spend a day at the VA office and talk to veterans about their experiences with war and their opinions of it. That'll teach you more than Google ever will.

 

[Capable_Onion]

Then why the fuck are you there?
>Sign up to join the military.
>Get sent to a war and be put in extremely difficult life and moral situations.

Again, you have this preconceived notion that everyone who signs up just wants to go and kill people, when in reality people just sign up because they want to serve their country or because they have no other future in their lives.

And in that sense I can't blame them, infact if I was low inhib enough, I would probably sign up myself, since my life isn't going anywhere either.

They know the score. "But it wasn't my call to go there" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card. If you don't agree with something, you don't put your life at risk for it. That's just fucking retarded. It's not even a sensible cop-out.

How many times do I have to say this, as far as they're aware they're just signing up to protect their country, and within that context alone there's nothing really wrong with that decision, because in a certain way they are.

No one can anticipate when the next big war will happen, but when it does I'm sure there's gonna be a lot of selfless guys who'll sacrifice their lives just so that I can NEET all day.

Then I suggest you reread what I've been saying, brocel.

I've been trying to understand your side for the past day and a half now, and I still don't get why you hate them so much.

If anything you just come across as some guy who want's to hate them because you wanna go against the grain by looking edgy, just like 80% of the rest of the people here.

No, that's literally the reasoning. I'll reiterate: Self-preservation isn't a justification for knowingly putting yourself in morally dubious situations. The job is literally to use force and kill people. Compared to, say, the police - as bad as they are - whose job is to maintain order and only use lethal force as a last resort (KEK), a soldier's job is to kill.

They put themselves in those situations so that you can have the luxury of sitting down and commenting on .co, if that doesn't warrant respect then I don't know what does.

I can understand why you wouldn't respect a soldier who killed some random kid because his father blew up his friend, but most soldier's aren't put in situations like that, most of them are usually fighting against terrorist organizations who are involved in bad shit regardless.

You obviously haven't been properly reading what I've been saying and probably just skimmed it. I've been saying that wars of self defense are all morally justified. If you have an army that doesn't invade other countries and only defends itself, that's perfectly fine.

I've said this before, and I don't know why I should say it again, but I agree, the US shouldn't be involved in anyone else's wars except one that involves their own country.

This is where your values and mine are at a crossroad, and is probably the reason why some of my points aren't getting through. In your value system, people are worthy of respect merely by virtue of having lived through some harrowing experience. In my value system, all respect is earned, regardless of who you are and what your role in society is.

Fair enough, there are some people that I respect on the spot simply due to their situation in life, it's only after I learn about them that I determine whether they deserve to keep it or not.

You seem more of a person where respect is an uphill battle, where you have to constantly prove yourself in order to earn it.

"As long as they were protecting the right kind of people"? Dafuq? You don't see the problem there? Mercenaries are fine as long as you agree with their mission? Seriously?

Context matters, mercenaries are in it for the money, sure, but I'm also pretty confident that not all of them are terrible people.

They choose who hires them, and they're in full control over who they work for, and as long as they're protecting the right people I have no problem with them.

This is no different than, "our soldier are the good guys, your soldiers are the bad guys."

Never said that there was a clear line of good or bad, infact, one of my first statements was that war isn't black or white

What would they be "forced" to do?

Killing is something that nobody really wants to be apart of, but if you're in a warzone and it's you or them, well you don't really have any other option but to fight.

Why do you think they're doing a job that nobody will take?

Being selfless for one, it takes a lot of bravery to sign up and go to another country while everyone else stays at home with their families

And why isn't anybody taking those jobs?

People (myself included) are too pussy to actually go through with something like that, putting yourself out there within itself is one of the most ballsy things you can do, and that within itself warrants my respect.

Value difference. You freely give them respect and venerate them because they do a job that puts their life at risk, whereas I don't dole out respect simply for being in a particular profession. Do you venerate firemen and police officers the same way?

Well yeah, I do, sure, I may not respect them all, but I definitely treat them with respect for doing things that I'd never have the balls to do myself.

What "movement"? We're not talking about any "movement" bro. Soldiers were mostly shit on by the people when they returned.

You really are ignorant

All of those protests about peace in the 70s?, they were dedicated to stopping the war and bringing vietnam veterans back home

No doubt we'd be at a big disadvantage without AT/AA weapons and air support, but asymmetrical warfare is definitely a thing. Ask the military strategists at West Point how goat fuckers living in mountains gave the US infantry a terribly difficult time with their attrition tactics and skirmishes

All it would take for another country to defeat us would be a nuke

Bye copes, bye internet, bye .co, bye bye everything

Thanks for the luck, but I don't need your tears. I just need you to not get in the way if an invasion does happen. But if you do, make sure to block the bullet going for my head.

You're clearly delusional

So this is how you see the world. And this is why you can't seem to fundamentally separate disdain you can have for a person from the disdain you can have for their professional choice.

Interesting.

Ignoring the point I made by making commentary out of it, nice avoidance tactic

You don't need a crystal ball to know what you're getting into. All you need to do is a bit of research on your own about the line of work and realities surrounding it. Just spend a day at the VA office and talk to veterans about their experiences with war and their opinions of it. That'll teach you more than Google ever will.

A lot of guys just wanna make a difference, if they wanna risk their life for us then let them, that's their choice, and I'm glad that they exist, and it keeps me safe at night.

But I'll never understand the reasoning behind shaming them for choosing that life path, it's just another job like any other.

 

[based_meme]

Again, you have this preconceived notion that everyone who signs up just wants to go and kill people, when in reality people just sign up because they want to serve their country or because they have no other future in their lives.

And in that sense I can't blame them, infact if I was low inhib enough, I would probably sign up myself, since my life isn't going anywhere either.

You're strawmanning the fuck out of me. I didn't say they want to go and kill people. I said they're signing up for a job that is about killing, knowing full well that they're likely to be a position to have to do just that: kill the enemy i.e., their job. It doesn't matter what your occupation ultimately is, even the cooks go through basic and run a marksmanship course, which means they're expected to fight if shit gets really bad.

You want to serve your country, become a paramedic or part of a search and rescue team. At least there you're directly serving the people. Shit, there's a fuck ton of other ways you can "serve your country" that don't involve being a warfighter.

How many times do I have to say this, as far as they're aware they're just signing up to protect their country, and within that context alone there's nothing really wrong with that decision, because in a certain way they are.

No one can anticipate when the next big war will happen, but when it does I'm sure there's gonna be a lot of selfless guys who'll sacrifice their lives just so that I can NEET all day.

"As far as they're aware." Nigga, even cab drivers in fucking Waziristan know that that's bullshit. As if their gullibility excuses them.

I've been trying to understand your side for the past day and a half now, and I still don't get why you hate them so much.

If anything you just come across as some guy who want's to hate them because you wanna go against the grain by looking edgy, just like 80% of the rest of the people here.

The fact that you say this unironically demonstrates that you haven't understood a thing I've been saying and probably never will, despite my multiple attempts at outlining it very clearly that it isn't hating them. But you obviously have some mental block that's preventing you from seeing that.

They put themselves in those situations so that you can have the luxury of sitting down and commenting on .co, if that doesn't warrant respect then I don't know what does.

I can understand why you wouldn't respect a soldier who killed some random kid because his father blew up his friend, but most soldier's aren't put in situations like that, most of them are usually fighting against terrorist organizations who are involved in bad shit regardless.

Miss me with that absolute garbage. You've fully drunk the Kool-Aid and actually believe the bullshit that they're "fighting for our freedom"?

JFL

Maybe they believe that, but it's not even close to the reality. Some commando team running ops on the Syria/Iraq border doesn't mean you get to play Halo in peace. Holy shit dude, do you believe everything CNN/Fox/NBC/Globohomoschlomo tells you too?

I've said this before, and I don't know why I should say it again, but I agree, the US shouldn't be involved in anyone else's wars except one that involves their own country.

Right, but you've been saying it like I'm for total abolishment of defense forces. If the US stopped sticking their dicks into other countries to try and constantly fuck them and instead focused the majority of defense efforts inside the border, we'd have a lot less international problems. We'd need to spend far less too.

Team America: World Police isn't just a funny movie and memes. That's exactly how the rest of the world perceives the US. Bullies and aggressors telling others what to do. That's because it's mostly true.

Fair enough, there are some people that I respect on the spot simply due to their situation in life, it's only after I learn about them that I determine whether they deserve to keep it or not.

You seem more of a person where respect is an uphill battle, where you have to constantly prove yourself in order to earn it.

No, that's not true. I maintain a position of neutrality when it comes to respecting a person. I see it like a hard earned currency. You can gain and lose respect. Gaining is much harder than losing, but that's usually true across the board with most people. Who and what we respect is obviously value-dependent. Cucks and simps, for example, respect Onlyfans whores, because they overvalue pussy and the (false) promise of it.

Context matters, mercenaries are in it for the money, sure, but I'm also pretty confident that not all of them are terrible people.

They choose who hires them, and they're in full control over who they work for, and as long as they're protecting the right people I have no problem with them.

Context does matter and yes, they do choose their contracts. That doesn't solve the problem, though, of you being OK with whatever they do so long as you believe that they're doing the right thing. Let's not fool ourselves. They're also killers for hire, but who they answer to changes with the end of every contract.

Never said that there was a clear line of good or bad, infact, one of my first statements was that war isn't black or white

But when you say that you're OK with some soldiers (nationals, mercenaries, whatever) doing x, then you're implicit saying that they're good because x is good.

Killing is something that nobody really wants to be apart of, but if you're in a warzone and it's you or them, well you don't really have any other option but to fight.

Don't sign the dotted line. Problem solved. No need to "force" yourself to shoot a kid because he's carrying an IED in his school back pack that he doesn't know about running towards your squad (because some insurgent asshole told him he'll get the kid an ice cream), then spending the next 5 years seeing a psychotherapist and taking meds because of your PTSD whenever your nephew of the same age as that kid you shot visits you.

Being selfless for one, it takes a lot of bravery to sign up and go to another country while everyone else stays at home with their families

Don't fool yourself even further, buddy boyo. They don't do it out of bravery. That's some more of that hero worship crap you've been charmed by. You even said yourself that they do it out of necessity.

People (myself included) are too pussy to actually go through with something like that, putting yourself out there within itself is one of the most ballsy things you can do, and that within itself warrants my respect.

Well yeah, I do, sure, I may not respect them all, but I definitely treat them with respect for doing things that I'd never have the balls to do myself.

OK, so you respect people who do something you're too afraid to do yourself. That's fine. Whatever.

You really are ignorant

All of those protests about peace in the 70s?, they were dedicated to stopping the war and bringing vietnam veterans back home

FFS, I know about the peace protests. You threw in "THE MOVEMENT", like we already talking about some thing.

All it would take for another country to defeat us would be a nuke

Bye copes, bye internet, bye .co, bye bye everything \

WTF is this? Stop injecting nonsense. WTF does getting a nuke dropped on you have to do with what you were quoting? Military, militia, private army. What difference does it make? At that point it wouldn't matter if you were Big Boss himself.

You're not really saying anything here.

You're clearly delusional

Just keep playing Halo bro, don't worry about it.

Ignoring the point I made by making commentary out of it, nice avoidance tactic

You didn't make any point. You simply opined that people are defined by their professions. That's cool, thanks for your opinion, but that's not an argument. It's just an empty assertion without any reason given. The only things I can do there are give commentary or ignore it.

A lot of guys just wanna make a difference, if they wanna risk their life for us then let them, that's their choice, and I'm glad that they exist, and it keeps me safe at night.

I AM letting them. They can do whatever the fuck they want with their lives. It's a free country (mostly). But you're also asking me to respect their choice of profession. That's no bueno.

As for safety, JFL dude. If you think some green berets operating on the Chechen-Russian border or some infantryman patrolling the streets of Karbala is actually helping make you safer in your home and in your neighborhood right fucking now, then enjoy your sweet dreams. Because that's all that is, a fantastical dream.

The reality is hilariously different. But don't let me be the one to wake you up.

But I'll never understand the reasoning behind shaming them for choosing that life path, it's just another job like any other.

And this is why our discussion has to come to a conclusion. You're just not able to see the bigger picture here. Whatever, I'm not holding that against you. Everybody needs their heroes to look up to.

 

[Capable_Onion]

You're strawmanning the fuck out of me. I didn't say they want to go and kill people. I said they're signing up for a job that is about killing, knowing full well that they're likely to be a position to have to do just that: kill the enemy i.e., their job. It doesn't matter what your occupation ultimately is, even the cooks go through basic and run a marksmanship course, which means they're expected to fight if shit gets really bad.

Yes, soldier's sign up knowing that there's a possibility that they might have to shoot a person or kill someone someday, but the whole point I'm trying to get across is the fact that they don't do so unless if they have to.

Shaming a soldier for killing some terrorist's is like shaming a dead climber for falling off of a cliff, sure he knew the risks, but he still deserved respect for doing something that most people would be afraid of.

You want to serve your country, become a paramedic or part of a search and rescue team. At least there you're directly serving the people. Shit, there's a fuck ton of other ways you can "serve your country" that don't involve being a warfighter.

But soldiers are a core requirement for a country to defend itself, you can't just expect no one to take the job, and you can't just shame the ones that do

Miss me with that absolute garbage. You've fully drunk the Kool-Aid and actually believe the bullshit that they're "fighting for our freedom"?

JFL

I don't agree with everything the military does, but soldier's are definitely required in order for the country to be stable.

If you want them gone so bad, maybe you should join the SJW's who're trying to abolish cops

Maybe they believe that, but it's not even close to the reality. Some commando team running ops on the Syria/Iraq border doesn't mean you get to play Halo in peace. Holy shit dude, do you believe everything CNN/Fox/NBC/Globohomoschlomo tells you too?

I don't watch or pay attention to the news, and as I've said before, I don't agree with them putting soldier's in wars they shouldn't be in in the first place.

Right, but you've been saying it like I'm for total abolishment of defense forces. If the US stopped sticking their dicks into other countries to try and constantly fuck them and instead focused the majority of defense efforts inside the border, we'd have a lot less international problems. We'd need to spend far less too.

But in order to do such a thing it would require soldier's within themselves, but you keep saying that you hate soldier's or the "idea" of them.

Either way, it doesn't really make any sense, since (as I've said before) the idea of a soldier and the people who represent them are both one in the same.

Team America: World Police isn't just a funny movie and memes. That's exactly how the rest of the world perceives the US. Bullies and aggressors telling others what to do. That's because it's mostly true.

And as I've said before, I completely agree, we shouldn't put our noses in people's business to begin with, but that doesn't mean that soldier's within themselves don't serve a purpose.

No, that's not true. I maintain a position of neutrality when it comes to respecting a person. I see it like a hard earned currency. You can gain and lose respect. Gaining is much harder than losing, but that's usually true across the board with most people. Who and what we respect is obviously value-dependent. Cucks and simps, for example, respect Onlyfans whores, because they overvalue pussy and the (false) promise of it.

This is exactly what an uphill battle is, for some people respect is fought and earned, and for others respect depends on the circumstances.

Context does matter and yes, they do choose their contracts. That doesn't solve the problem, though, of you being OK with whatever they do so long as you believe that they're doing the right thing. Let's not fool ourselves. They're also killers for hire, but who they answer to changes with the end of every contract.

As long as they aren't going around killing random people I don't really care, their main job should be defending the person who hired them.

But when you say that you're OK with some soldiers (nationals, mercenaries, whatever) doing x, then you're implicit saying that they're good because x is good.

I never said they were good, I said that I could have respect for them as long as they work for the right people

Respect doesn't automatically equate to good, you can respect a lion because it has the capability to cleave you in two, but that doesn't inherently make it a "good" animal

Don't sign the dotted line. Problem solved. No need to "force" yourself to shoot a kid because he's carrying an IED in his school back pack that he doesn't know about running towards your squad (because some insurgent asshole told him he'll get the kid an ice cream), then spending the next 5 years seeing a psychotherapist and taking meds because of your PTSD whenever your nephew of the same age as that kid you shot visits you.

Sounds more personal to me than logical, are you from the middle east or something?

Don't fool yourself even further, buddy boyo. They don't do it out of bravery. That's some more of that hero worship crap you've been charmed by. You even said yourself that they do it out of necessity.

Necessity and selflessness aren't inherently seperate, like I've said before, if I was selfless enough I would probably sign up myself.

FFS, I know about the peace protests. You threw in "THE MOVEMENT", like we already talking about some thing.

This is just common knowledge, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that they were outraged by how many people were lost.

WTF is this? Stop injecting nonsense. WTF does getting a nuke dropped on you have to do with what you were quoting? Military, militia, private army. What difference does it make? At that point it wouldn't matter if you were Big Boss himself.

You're not really saying anything here.

You said that the country would be able to defend itself if another nation attacked, don't get mad at me if you can't back up your arguments

You didn't make any point. You simply opined that people are defined by their professions. That's cool, thanks for your opinion, but that's not an argument. It's just an empty assertion without any reason given. The only things I can do there are give commentary or ignore it.

Sure, of course, it's not like as if what I said busted your entire argument or anything

I AM letting them. They can do whatever the fuck they want with their lives. It's a free country (mostly). But you're also asking me to respect their choice of profession. That's no bueno.

If you aren't respecting what they do then you aren't respecting the people themselves, there isn't much of a difference

As for safety, JFL dude. If you think some green berets operating on the Chechen-Russian border or some infantryman patrolling the streets of Karbala is actually helping make you safer in your home and in your neighborhood right fucking now, then enjoy your sweet dreams. Because that's all that is, a fantastical dream.

I don't see what any of those countries have to do with me, but I certainly am glad that there are at least some people guarding the borders of mexico, otherwise we would have a huge flood of gangs and unwashed migrants.

Could be better, but it's better than nothing atleast

And this is why our discussion has to come to a conclusion. You're just not able to see the bigger picture here. Whatever, I'm not holding that against you. Everybody needs their heroes to look up to.

Soldier's aren't my "heroes" nor are police or firemen, I just give them the respect that they deserve by default.

 

[Kaisercel]

I heard in NY they are holding rallies against "white nationalism" in response to these attacks carried out by blacks. LMAO fucking NPC

 

[Deleted member 30912]

I heard in NY they are holding rallies against "white nationalism" in response to these attacks carried out by blacks. LMAO fucking NPC

I'm glad you brought this up. Seems like we whites and gooks have been on good terms, pretty retarded that they blame whites when it's niggers attacking them (and niggers have been doing it to them for a while now).

 

[Deleted member 24081]

@pp183 organised this protest

 

[Deleted member 19079]

@pp183 organised this protest

 

[Deleted member 24081]

View attachment 414419

 

[ChingerChonger]

My friend was enlisted in the military, and the girl he was dating cucked him by getting impregnated by another man, ontop of that he was also homeless. He was literally rock bottom, so the only place left for him to go was the military.

That's a harsh reality for many men who enlist, they're pushed against the wall and have nowhere else to go, so they choose the last option available.

I fucking hate people who talk shit about people they know nothing about, or experiences they've never gone through.

A lot of soldiers risk their lives and come back home to get cheated on just so that you can cope, don't take it for granted.

Cry about it

 

[Dregster]

niggers need to stop acting like they are still opressed, this isn't the 1950's anymore , they are a protected class by society nowadays, @BummerDrummer

Fucking Niggers man

The U.S. born are easily the most hateable

 

[turbocuckcel_7000]

New Yorkers Protest White Nationalism After Black Slashes Old Asian Man’s Face - Daily Stormer

https://twitter.com/asdzx17/status/1363531248153559044 America is fed up with these white supremacis

dailystormer.su

 

[based_meme]

Yes, soldier's sign up knowing that there's a possibility that they might have to shoot a person or kill someone someday, but the whole point I'm trying to get across is the fact that they don't do so unless if they have to.

That's complete nonsense, because a big part of their job is training for precisely that. That's like saying a plumber's job might have the possibility of cleaning actual shit out of pipes and getting messy.

Shaming a soldier for killing some terrorist's is like shaming a dead climber for falling off of a cliff, sure he knew the risks, but he still deserved respect for doing something that most people would be afraid of.

The simple fact that you frame it like this already tells me that I'm talking with somebody wearing blinders. This goes against your notion of war not being black and white. If a soldier kills "some terrorist", then you're already framing the soldier as the "good guy" and every enemy as the "bad guy." That's as black and white as it gets.

Your climber analogy falls so flat (pun intended) that I don't know whether to rebut it or to ignore it and laugh, but I'll do you a solid and explain how that doesn't work. The point of climbing is to climb and reach the peak of your obstacle (the cliff or mountain). Falling is an accident that you want to avoid. A foot soldier's job is to complete his mission. That mission is going to involve various tasks that employ aggression and lethal force. Like the climber, the point is to remove (kill or "neutralize") all obstacles (opposing forces) between you (the soldier) and your mission objective. When a soldier aims his rifle to kill it's not accident (disregarding legitimate accidents of friendly fire etc.). When a climber climbs (and falls), is it an accident.

Soldier:killing does not map to Climber:falling.

But soldiers are a core requirement for a country to defend itself, you can't just expect no one to take the job, and you can't just shame the ones that do

And I've said n times already that you can be a defensive soldier. Joining the marines is not like joining the national guard. One invades countries and "enforces US foreign policy" (i.e., overthrow governments who aren't copacetic and "secure" their national resources), while the other defends his home soil.

I don't agree with everything the military does, but soldier's are definitely required in order for the country to be stable.

Yes, and plenty of stable countries have armies that haven't invaded any other country. You don't need an aggressive army that attacks and tries to conquer other countries to have a stable country back home. To imply that is absolutely retarded.

If you want them gone so bad, maybe you should join the SJW's who're trying to abolish cops

WTF is this? Feel free to continue saying stupid shit, but at least keep it relevant.

I don't watch or pay attention to the news, and as I've said before, I don't agree with them putting soldier's in wars they shouldn't be in in the first place.

Then don't fucking venerate them and give them higher status than they deserve. If every potential recruit didn't join because they were against wars of aggression, the expeditionary battalions of the military would be hurting for numbers and would have to eventually scale down, which would mean the country has no choice but to be less aggressive around the world.

The US military spends nearly 40% of the global total for military spending and has the highest number of military bases around the world. That's fucking insane. It's all in the name of imperialistic hegemony, but you'll never hear anybody publicly call it like it for fear of being labeled "unpatriotic."

But in order to do such a thing it would require soldier's within themselves, but you keep saying that you hate soldier's or the "idea" of them.

Either way, it doesn't really make any sense, since (as I've said before) the idea of a soldier and the people who represent them are both one in the same.

I can't tell if you're trolling at this point or just dumb bro. You know you can have highly trained soldiers that are used only for defense right? It's like training your whole life in boxing and never starting a fight. The ones who do train and start fights with people we call them assholes. If you're smart and lucky, you can go your whole life without ever having to defend yourself in a fight you never started.

I'm against the idea of soldiers being used as pawns in unjust wars and having the institution of the military exist such that a soldier cannot refuse to participate in an unjust war. It's like that virtually everywhere. I think France is the only country where a soldier has the option to opt out of engaging in offensive operations, but that option is only available to the foreign legionnaires who get deployed in the country of their origin (potential conflict of interest).

And as I've said before, I completely agree, we shouldn't put our noses in people's business to begin with, but that doesn't mean that soldier's within themselves don't serve a purpose.

I literally just talked about this, so nothing to say to this.

This is exactly what an uphill battle is, for some people respect is fought and earned, and for others respect depends on the circumstances.

OK, I understand. That's fine. Then you could say that respect in my view is an uphill battle.

As long as they aren't going around killing random people I don't really care, their main job should be defending the person who hired them.

OK, I'll concede this. Full-fledged mercenaries aren't inherently bad, but they're risky propositions all the same and should be restricted as much as possible. That's a different discussion altogether.

I never said they were good, I said that I could have respect for them as long as they work for the right people

So you go from automatically dispensing your respect based on role and profession to being selective about that respect based on the tasks WITHIN that role and profession.

Now you're being very flimsy and whimsical.

Respect doesn't automatically equate to good, you can respect a lion because it has the capability to cleave you in two, but that doesn't inherently make it a "good" animal

Pretty sure I already said this myself before.

So why do you hate soldiers specifically so much?, shouldn't you be hating on the people who actually start these wars?, as I've said before the soldiers on the ground have nothing to do with such planning, as far as they're aware everyone who isn't american is a potential enemy.

Disrespect is not synonymous with hate. You have no idea how much hate I have for those who start wars, but I do respect them for their cunning in deceiving an entire nation to give them support in for-profit wars.

That was in reply to you equating my disrespect for soldiering with hating soldiers.

Again, you're flimsy here and unsure of what the hell you're even trying to say anymore.

Sounds more personal to me than logical, are you from the middle east or something?

No. And I've already outlined my reasoning as well as can understood in plain English, but you're either disregarding it or aren't processing it.

Necessity and selflessness aren't inherently seperate, like I've said before, if I was selfless enough I would probably sign up myself.

Sure, they're separate. But you've been arguing for the justification of soldiering and using necessity as a valid excuse. And just there you added an extra variable (bravery). Now are you going to change gears and try to tell me that because they're brave, what they're doing is justified (i.e., signing up for a job that they know will yield a high chance of being ordered to ship out and invade another country)?

If so, to that I'll just say again: miss me with that garbage.

This is just common knowledge, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that they were outraged by how many people were lost.

Right, but when you're having a discussion with somebody where you need to be precise and specific, adding phrases like "the movement" needs to be clarified. That could be many things, even in context. It wouldn't help you if I just introduce a new phrase and started talking about "the incident" and expected you to just know exactly what we're talking about. Doing this puts the other side in a position of having to choose between assuming what you meant and continue responding to that, or ask for clarification (which I did) before proceeding.

Within "the movement" there were many groups. Some were hostile towards returning troops and some weren't. Since we were talking about the people placing blame and you mentioned "the movement," you needed to specify what you were you were talking about.

Opposition to United States involvement in the Vietnam War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not all of the groups in "the movement" had the same attitudes towards Vietnam vets. But this is all just a side note.

You said that the country would be able to defend itself if another nation attacked, don't get mad at me if you can't back up your arguments

BULLSHIT.

You moved the goalposts. First you assumed that I'd beg the military to save my ass in an invasion scenario. I replied and told you not make those presumptions and said that I would just join a militia and help defend the country if an invasion ever did occur, albeit at a hardware and technological disadvantage. Then you said you wouldn't cry for me if I got blown to smithereens, to which I replied that a weaker force can still employ asymmetrical warfare and stand a serious fighting chance (guerilla strikes, insurgency tactics etc.), as evidenced by the damage insurgents have done in Iraq and Afghanistan despite the US military's dominating presence.

This is the moment when you tried to pull a fast one and say "they'll just nuke you bro KEK," which completely wasn't what you were originally trying to argue in the first place: that you needed to rely solely on soldiers to defend your ass if your country got invaded, therefore we need to have the soldiers (who happen to invade other countries like a cultural past-time). Nice bait and switch, but that shit won't fly.

Sure, of course, it's not like as if what I said busted your entire argument or anything

You're unable to even comprehend that the thing you said isn't an argument and then you pretend that it was unchallenged.

JFL @ you. Ded srs.

If you aren't respecting what they do then you aren't respecting the people themselves, there isn't much of a difference

OK, but that's just like your opinion, man. We already talked about this. Your value system assigns respect based on profession and lived experience. Mine assigns it based on factors like personal experience with the individual and the merits of their personal actions and words. If some guy comes up to me and says, "I'm a medical doctor, respect me," I'll laugh at his face and tell him to have a nice day doc.

I don't see what any of those countries have to do with me, but I certainly am glad that there are at least some people guarding the borders of mexico, otherwise we would have a huge flood of gangs and unwashed migrants.

Could be better, but it's better than nothing atleast

BUT BRO, those spec ops guys doing.... whatever is it they do in countries you can't even name are doing all of that so you can play Halo and eat chips in the comfort of your own home. Don't you get it? They're doing all of that shit to FIGHT FOR YOUR FREEDOM to play Halo and eat chips.

There you go being flimsy again by mentioning the border guard. This isn't who you were talking about before literally protecting the country. No, you were trying to get me to respect the asshole who signs up knowing full well he's going to get shipped to invade some 3rd world shithole, and then on top of that try to convince me (trying to convince yourself really, let's be honest) that they're over there doing the job nobody else wants to do so you can comfortably play Halo and eat chips back home, and that's why we should respect what they do.

...OK.

Soldier's aren't my "heroes" nor are police or firemen, I just give them the respect that they deserve by default.

You could have fooled anyone with the way you were putting them on a pedestal.

Put down the controller and bag of chips, get off your fat ass, and walk right into a recruiting center. I think you really need to live through the experiences and see things for yourself to understand the bigger picture and be aware of the geopolitical realities of a US soldier's role outside of America. I believe little else can convince you otherwise.

Or keep believing the sweet lies and dream on.

@based_meme I didn't read your argument but you should know that capable_onion is extremely dense and will just keep arguing nonsense. I once had a 3 page debate with him where he claimed that Jesse Owens was the "winner of the whole event" at the 1936 Olympics meaning he officially won the whole 1936 Olympics as an individual and wouldn't accept that he only won individual events and there is no such thing as one singular winner of the Olympics. Save your braincells and just troll him.

Yes, I see that now. The problem is that people don't walk around wearing their intelligence on their forehead. You have to, unfortunately, invest the time and energy engaging with them to find out. I could go around assuming everybody is an idiot and ignore them (a surprising number of people do), but I guess that's a personal weakness: giving people too much credit in this regard.

I do think there's some value in engaging with dumb people. Dumb people can still learn. It's only a matter of how long it takes and what their conceptual ceilings are. The trick is to identify those ceilings. For some people, there is just no solution. Some concepts they just fail to grasp, no matter what you do. It's like talking to your pet. No matter how much you talk to your cat and tell him to stop licking his asshole, he'll just blankly stare at you for a moment and continue cleaning his asshole with his mouth.

 

[CursedSurrogate]

"B-b-but muh social economic status, bro."

 

[Capable_Onion]

That's complete nonsense, because a big part of their job is training for precisely that. That's like saying a plumber's job might have the possibility of cleaning actual shit out of pipes and getting messy.

A plumber cleans pipes and toilets every day he goes to work, but do soldiers kill people every day they patrol the field?

The simple fact that you frame it like this already tells me that I'm talking with somebody wearing blinders. This goes against your notion of war not being black and white. If a soldier kills "some terrorist", then you're already framing the soldier as the "good guy" and every enemy as the "bad guy." That's as black and white as it gets.

But that's exactly who they're killing 70% of the time.

Even when they kill children, the child is usually a child soldier themself, wiping away any amount of mercy that they should be given.

I don't doubt that they kill innocent's, but I do doubt that it happens on purpose for a significant portion of the time.

Your climber analogy falls so flat (pun intended) that I don't know whether to rebut it or to ignore it and laugh, but I'll do you a solid and explain how that doesn't work. The point of climbing is to climb and reach the peak of your obstacle (the cliff or mountain). Falling is an accident that you want to avoid. A foot soldier's job is to complete his mission. That mission is going to involve various tasks that employ aggression and lethal force. Like the climber, the point is to remove (kill or "neutralize") all obstacles (opposing forces) between you (the soldier) and your mission objective. When a soldier aims his rifle to kill it's not accident (disregarding legitimate accidents of friendly fire etc.). When a climber climbs (and falls), is it an accident.

Your completely missing the point here, the analogy was that you shouldn't shame someone for enlisting because it might have consequences, it's their life and their allowed to do with it what they will. No one's going to cry over some terrorist who wanted to shoot down an attack helicopter, but if they kill some innocent's then they're completely open to criticism. That's the problem though, most soldiers don't kill innocent's, hell, a lot of soldier's don't even see combat, and the ones that do usually aren't going around shooting up towns of people.

I'm sure there are a lot horrific casualties that involve innocent people, but I doubt that most of them have a case for being truly intentional.

And I've said n times already that you can be a defensive soldier. Joining the marines is not like joining the national guard. One invades countries and "enforces US foreign policy" (i.e., overthrow governments who aren't copacetic and "secure" their national resources), while the other defends his home soil.

And as I've said before, I agree, but to do that you actually need soldiers to defend, no matter how much you may hate them.

Yes, and plenty of stable countries have armies that haven't invaded any other country. You don't need an aggressive army that attacks and tries to conquer other countries to have a stable country back home. To imply that is absolutely retarded.

Again, agreed, I don't think that they should be putting their noses in other people's business unless if it's for economic value.

WTF is this? Feel free to continue saying stupid shit, but at least keep it relevant.

You obviously have a problem with soldiers, much like SJWS have a problem with cops, the comparison isn't that far off at all

Then don't fucking venerate them and give them higher status than they deserve. If every potential recruit didn't join because they were against wars of aggression, the expeditionary battalions of the military would be hurting for numbers and would have to eventually scale down, which would mean the country has no choice but to be less aggressive around the world.

What does cnn fox news, or any of that crap have to do with the military?, do you automatically think I'm some kind of normie media consoomer because I respect people who put their life on the line?.

The US military spends nearly 40% of the global total for military spending and has the highest number of military bases around the world. That's fucking insane. It's all in the name of imperialistic hegemony, but you'll never hear anybody publicly call it like it for fear of being labeled "unpatriotic."

Agreed, all of that military focus should be pulled back to the US itself, no need to get involved in something we have no business in.

I can't tell if you're trolling at this point or just dumb bro. You know you can have highly trained soldiers that are used only for defense right? It's like training your whole life in boxing and never starting a fight. The ones who do train and start fights with people we call them assholes. If you're smart and lucky, you can go your whole life without ever having to defend yourself in a fight you never started.

Yeah, that's what I've been telling you the entire time, but somehow you keep having this idea that I don't agree with a purely defensive military.

I'm against the idea of soldiers being used as pawns in unjust wars and having the institution of the military exist such that a soldier cannot refuse to participate in an unjust war. It's like that virtually everywhere. I think France is the only country where a soldier has the option to opt out of engaging in offensive operations, but that option is only available to the foreign legionnaires who get deployed in the country of their origin (potential conflict of interest).

So you agree that soldiers are required for a country to operate?, finally it seems as though were getting somewhere.

So you go from automatically dispensing your respect based on role and profession to being selective about that respect based on the tasks WITHIN that role and profession.

Now you're being very flimsy and whimsical.

Like I've said from the beginning, context matters.

You can respect a soldier, even if you don't like him

You can respect a mercenary even if you don't like him

You cannot respect a soldier who intentionally went out of his way to kill innocents

You also cannot respect a mercenary who intentionally went out of his way to kill innocents

That was in reply to you equating my disrespect for soldiering with hating soldiers.

Again, you're flimsy here and unsure of what the hell you're even trying to say anymore.

No, I'm pretty sure that's just you.

Respect can come in many different colors, but disrespect only comes in two, it either means that a person hasn't earned it, or that a person doesn't deserve it somehow.

This goes back to what you've said before, that a soldier needs to somehow prove to you that he's worthy of your respect, which is a form of disrespect.

This means that in some way you dislike soldiers, which is a form of hate, even if it's a small form of it.

No. And I've already outlined my reasoning as well as can understood in plain English, but you're either disregarding it or aren't processing it.

It's just a question, I'm just trying to figure out why you hate them (or dislike them I guess?) so much.

It just seems like you have more of a personal problem with them than anything.

Sure, they're separate. But you've been arguing for the justification of soldiering and using necessity as a valid excuse. And just there you added an extra variable (bravery). Now are you going to change gears and try to tell me that because they're brave, what they're doing is justified (i.e., signing up for a job that they know will yield a high chance of being ordered to ship out and invade another country)?

Pretty much, because in my opinion it takes a lot of guts to go across the world just to go and do something like that.

You can't just say "oh, they knew what they were getting into, might aswell label them as a contract killer" because that's not really what's going through their head when they join, most of them just want to protect people like you or me, similar to police officer's who want to clean up their city.

It isn't their fault if their thrown into some war torn country half-way across the world, that's really a fault on the president and the people making money off of warcrimes.

Right, but when you're having a discussion with somebody where you need to be precise and specific, adding phrases like "the movement" needs to be clarified. That could be many things, even in context. It wouldn't help you if I just introduce a new phrase and started talking about "the incident" and expected you to just know exactly what we're talking about. Doing this puts the other side in a position of having to choose between assuming what you meant and continue responding to that, or ask for clarification (which I did) before proceeding

I really wasn't being that vague, when you think of "The Movement's" in the vietnam war era, you automatically should equate it to the people who fought for veterans to come back home.

Besides, you were the one arguing that they somehow hated the soldiers, I'm not sure where you got that idea from, but it surely wasn't based in reality.

Not all of the groups in "the movement" had the same attitudes towards Vietnam vets. But this is all just a side note.

I'm sure there were people who were angry at veterans for participating in it, but most people just saw it as a travesty, hell, most people today still see it as a travesty, I don't think that I even need to express the amount of classic songs and films that talked about how fucking bad it was.

You moved the goalposts. First you assumed that I'd beg the military to save my ass in an invasion scenario. I replied and told you not make those presumptions and said that I would just join a militia and help defend the country if an invasion ever did occur, albeit at a hardware and technological disadvantage. Then you said you wouldn't cry for me if I got blown to smithereens, to which I replied that a weaker force can still employ asymmetrical warfare and stand a serious fighting chance (guerilla strikes, insurgency tactics etc.), as evidenced by the damage insurgents have done in Iraq and Afghanistan despite the US military's dominating presence.

Let's just assume that a country like china or russia doesn't have the capability to nuke us, do you really think that a bunch of US citizens are going to stand against their endless armies?. "Oh but what about the middle east" bullshit, they were fighting eachother way before we ever came along, and were much more prepared then your average pencil pusher, along with that they also have the environmental advantage, they literally live in a hot fucking desert. Meanwhile, people in America are too busy arguing about maintaining gender roles and safe spaces

This is the moment when you tried to pull a fast one and say "they'll just nuke you bro KEK," which completely wasn't what you were originally trying to argue in the first place: that you needed to rely solely on soldiers to defend your ass if your country got invaded, therefore we need to have the soldiers (who happen to invade other countries like a cultural past-time). Nice bait and switch, but that shit won't fly.

But that's the whole point, if we don't have a military then the entire country is defenseless, everything literally free game, no one's going to save your ass.

jfl at the idea of joining some fictional imaginary militia in fantasy land btw, the US is already divided as it is, the minute you take away the military is the moment people start cutting at each others throats.

You're unable to even comprehend that the thing you said isn't an argument and then you pretend that it was unchallenged.

JFL @ you. Ded srs.

But it's true, if you can't respect a person for what they do then by all means, you don't respect the person themselves, that's completely justifiable and reasonable.

OK, but that's just like your opinion, man. We already talked about this. Your value system assigns respect based on profession and lived experience. Mine assigns it based on factors like personal experience with the individual and the merits of their personal actions and words. If some guy comes up to me and says, "I'm a medical doctor, respect me," I'll laugh at his face and tell him to have a nice day doc.

There you go again, trying to avoid the subject by making it into a joke.

The example your submitting here doesn't even make any sense, what I'm trying to explain is that if you disrespect someone's profession then your disrespecting that person, it doesn't really matter how much you try to separate the two because they're inherently the same.

BUT BRO, those spec ops guys doing.... whatever is it they do in countries you can't even name are doing all of that so you can play Halo and eat chips in the comfort of your own home. Don't you get it? They're doing all of that shit to FIGHT FOR YOUR FREEDOM to play Halo and eat chips.

What does spec ops have to do with protecting the border? , this seems completely out of place.

There you go being flimsy again by mentioning the border guard. This isn't who you were talking about before literally protecting the country. No, you were trying to get me to respect the asshole who signs up knowing full well he's going to get shipped to invade some 3rd world shithole, and then on top of that try to convince me (trying to convince yourself really, let's be honest) that they're over there doing the job nobody else wants to do so you can comfortably play Halo and eat chips back home, and that's why we should respect what they do.

You're the one who brought up borders not me, I only corrected your analogy since you were rambling about military personnel who guard countries of which I don't even live in.

You could have fooled anyone with the way you were putting them on a pedestal.

I wouldn't say I put them on a pedestal, that implies that I somehow worship them, I just give them what's automatically expected.

Put down the controller and bag of chips, get off your fat ass, and walk right into a recruiting center. I think you really need to live through the experiences and see things for yourself to understand the bigger picture and be aware of the geopolitical realities of a US soldier's role outside of America. I believe little else can convince you otherwise.

I'm not obese, but thanks for the advice I guess

 

[Ping And Pong]

What even more absurd is that leftist are trying to spin this as hate crimes caused by white nazis. Obviously the mainstream media also chooses to avoid mentioning the race of the perpetrators.

 

[Deleted member 32197]

There needs to be a Day of the Rope for redditors.

B...but Orange Man responsible for all racism....

 

[based_meme]

A plumber cleans pipes and toilets every day he goes to work, but do soldiers kill people every day they patrol the field?


But that's exactly who they're killing 70% of the time.

Even when they kill children, the child is usually a child soldier themself, wiping away any amount of mercy that they should be given.

I don't doubt that they kill innocent's, but I do doubt that it happens on purpose for a significant portion of the time.


Your completely missing the point here, the analogy was that you shouldn't shame someone for enlisting because it might have consequences, it's their life and their allowed to do with it what they will. No one's going to cry over some terrorist who wanted to shoot down an attack helicopter, but if they kill some innocent's then they're completely open to criticism. That's the problem though, most soldiers don't kill innocent's, hell, a lot of soldier's don't even see combat, and the ones that do usually aren't going around shooting up towns of people.

I'm sure there are a lot horrific casualties that involve innocent people, but I doubt that most of them have a case for being truly intentional.


And as I've said before, I agree, but to do that you actually need soldiers to defend, no matter how much you may hate them.


Again, agreed, I don't think that they should be putting their noses in other people's business unless if it's for economic value.

You obviously have a problem with soldiers, much like SJWS have a problem with cops, the comparison isn't that far off at all

What does cnn fox news, or any of that crap have to do with the military?, do you automatically think I'm some kind of normie media consoomer because I respect people who put their life on the line?.


Agreed, all of that military focus should be pulled back to the US itself, no need to get involved in something we have no business in.

Yeah, that's what I've been telling you the entire time, but somehow you keep having this idea that I don't agree with a purely defensive military.

So you agree that soldiers are required for a country to operate?, finally it seems as though were getting somewhere.

Like I've said from the beginning, context matters.

You can respect a soldier, even if you don't like him

You can respect a mercenary even if you don't like him

You cannot respect a soldier who intentionally went out of his way to kill innocents

You also cannot respect a mercenary who intentionally went out of his way to kill innocents

No, I'm pretty sure that's just you.

Respect can come in many different colors, but disrespect only comes in two, it either means that a person hasn't earned it, or that a person doesn't deserve it somehow.

This goes back to what you've said before, that a soldier needs to somehow prove to you that he's worthy of your respect, which is a form of disrespect.

This means that in some way you dislike soldiers, which is a form of hate, even if it's a small form of it.


It's just a question, I'm just trying to figure out why you hate them (or dislike them I guess?) so much.

It just seems like you have more of a personal problem with them than anything.


Pretty much, because in my opinion it takes a lot of guts to go across the world just to go and do something like that.

You can't just say "oh, they knew what they were getting into, might aswell label them as a contract killer" because that's not really what's going through their head when they join, most of them just want to protect people like you or me, similar to police officer's who want to clean up their city.

It isn't their fault if their thrown into some war torn country half-way across the world, that's really a fault on the president and the people making money off of warcrimes.


I really wasn't being that vague, when you think of "The Movement's" in the vietnam war era, you automatically should equate it to the people who fought for veterans to come back home.

Besides, you were the one arguing that they somehow hated the soldiers, I'm not sure where you got that idea from, but it surely wasn't based in reality.


I'm sure there were people who were angry at veterans for participating in it, but most people just saw it as a travesty, hell, most people today still see it as a travesty, I don't think that I even need to express the amount of classic songs and films that talked about how fucking bad it was.

Let's just assume that a country like china or russia doesn't have the capability to nuke us, do you really think that a bunch of US citizens are going to stand against their endless armies?. "Oh but what about the middle east" bullshit, they were fighting eachother way before we ever came along, and were much more prepared then your average pencil pusher, along with that they also have the environmental advantage, they literally live in a hot fucking desert. Meanwhile, people in America are too busy arguing about maintaining gender roles and safe spaces


But that's the whole point, if we don't have a military then the entire country is defenseless, everything literally free game, no one's going to save your ass.

jfl at the idea of joining some fictional imaginary militia in fantasy land btw, the US is already divided as it is, the minute you take away the military is the moment people start cutting at each others throats.


But it's true, if you can't respect a person for what they do then by all means, you don't respect the person themselves, that's completely justifiable and reasonable.


There you go again, trying to avoid the subject by making it into a joke.

The example your submitting here doesn't even make any sense, what I'm trying to explain is that if you disrespect someone's profession then your disrespecting that person, it doesn't really matter how much you try to separate the two because they're inherently the same.


What does spec ops have to do with protecting the border? , this seems completely out of place.


You're the one who brought up borders not me, I only corrected your analogy since you were rambling about military personnel who guard countries of which I don't even live in.


I wouldn't say I put them on a pedestal, that implies that I somehow worship them, I just give them what's automatically expected.

I'm not obese, but thanks for the advice I guess

 

[Capable_Onion]

 

[Deleted member 31364]

Fucking Niggers man

The U.S. born are easily the most hateable

anecdotally I've been to Jamaica before and the black people there are much nicer and overall hard working people, way better than the degenerate low iq thug blacks in the USA, @BummerDrummer

 

[erenyeager]

When will incel lives matter be a thing

 

[Blackpill Rage]

When will incel lives matter be a thing

When all kikes have been gassed.

 

[Sheogorath]

Wonder when the Roof Koreans will retaliate...

based only just heard of them now