Never claimed that they were doing it for "the greater good"
I just said that many men do it because they have nowhere else to go
Hell, even the ones who do do it because they wanna serve their country wouldn't take it up if they weren't being paid
Not you, I'm saying
they believe they're doing it for the greater good. Not every single one, obviously, but in general. Everyone sees themselves as the protagonists in history.
Having nowhere else to go is not an excuse. I don't know why you keep saying that, as if it justifies anything. It explains why they did it, but it doesn't make it OK. If the Los Zetas cartel rolled up and said they were recruiting soldiers, paid you a $5000 bonus, up front, in cash, taking their offer would be still be fucked up, no matter how bad you have it. It functions the same way. You have some guy in charge of your squad ordering you to kill whoever they say is the enemy. They give you weapons and equipment, a place to stay, and pay you a salary. Just be a good soldier and follow orders.
You could use any tyrant as an example, but it wouldn't really matter since they wouldn't represent the people on the field who are actually dying.
What is this trying to rebut exactly?
I guarantee you that many Nazi soldier's had nothing against the jews and were just there because it was their job.
Just doing my job. Just following orders.
You're not helping your case here, if you're trying to argue for soldiering as a noble (respectable) profession.
If you're enlisted, and if you're on the battlefield, I highly doubt that you would have much of a choice whether or not you should shoot, it's literally your life or theirs.
I don't care how innocent the family is or looks, if they show any sign of endangering you and your life you have the right to defend yourself and your friends, because it could easily be taken away by one child soldier carrying a bomb.
If you're the invading aggressor, you're the bad guy who is in the wrong, by default. You're literally trespassing onto somebody else's land, fully armed. And if you knew that killing Hajis and Towelheads was what you were signing on for, then I can't find any sympathy for you when a roadside IED in the shape of a teddy bear blows off half your left arm when you're patrolling in the Humvee.
Tough shit soldier. Good luck at the VA office.
War isn't black and white, there isn't a side that's good or evil, people make decisions that they regret, and the soldiers who enlist know exactly what they're getting into when they sign up (or atleast should).
No, sometimes it's very black and white, and invaders are rarely the good guys. And no, they definitely have no idea what they're signing on for (most of them anyway). They hardly know up from down, let alone the horrors of war. The human psyche is just not built to withstand the stresses of war. Too often soldiers build strong emotional bonds with their squadmates and then can't cope with the reality of their best friend's guts hanging out of him, screaming for his God and his mommy, moments before he blacks out and dies. But there's literally no time to process any of that as you're being yelled at to fall back as insurgents close in on you from the ambush on your convoy.
They don't show those parts in the recruiting pamphlets.
I agree, soldier's shouldn't have to fight, but in some cases (like I've said before) there are men who have no other option. This doesn't make them criminals, this doesn't make them cucks, and it certainly doesn't make them cowards. They're overseas doing things that they don't enjoy so that they can have a better life when they come back home, and there's nothing wrong with that.
When the endeavor you undertake is morally questionable, then yes, there is, in fact, something wrong with that. I can understand it, but I can't excuse it.
What do you even call good person doing an evil job (invading people's countries, killing their local populace, stealing their resources, and telling them how to run their country)? Misguided? Brainwashed?
People in the US don't have to enlist if they don't want to, but the people that do know exactly what they're getting into, and you should respect them for being brave enough to do so, I'm certainly not brave enough to sign up, and I'm sure you're not either.
As I said, most of them have no fucking idea what they're getting into. Signing on to fight for (what you believe to be) your country is not about bravery (JFL @ that tiresome platitude). Refusing to serve is about principles and beliefs. I don't need soldiers "defending my freedoms" in foreign soil when those same freedoms are being eroded on home soil. In fact I don't need them defending me in any capacity. Maybe they're needed to defend Jim, Bob and Sally, but only from an invading force, or BLM rioters (KEK).
If you want to believe that soldiers and mercenaries are one in the same that's fine, I guess I can understand, but I just can't respect the fact that you hate them specifically for choosing that job.
Haven't you been paying attention? I don't hate soldiers, I hate their job. I know I said I dislike soldiers, but I meant I don't respect them for soldiering. I don't respect the profession.
I mean really, are you seriously going to go and shame some old man from vietnam because he chose to enlist?, that's just down-right disrespectful.
Yes, it is disrespectful. That's the idea. To answer your question, no, I wouldn't shame him. It's none of my business, and it wouldn't be productive or helpful to anyone.
But it is funny that you should mention Vietnam. I know a veteran from that war. He wasn't drafted, he volunteered. I respect the man greatly, but he knows I'll never respect him in his decision for choosing to fight in that war, despite the fact that we both agree that the war shouldn't have been fought.