What's keeping a staunch supporter from enlisting for the war?

[s0nny80y]

What's keeping a staunch supporter from enlisting for the war?

Is it hypocrisy for a staunch non-serving, non-experienced supporter (otherwise known as an "arm chair general") of the war Iraq to not enlist themself?

Viable reasons for not enlisting themselves:

• physically handicapped
• underage
• too old
• lone guardian of an unabled body person like a child or ailing parent

Now, it would be wrong by listing any more reasons because soldiers have enlisted even with family, even with a career, even in the middle of a college education, and even with a million dollar contract deal with a major national football team.

Although some have indeed enlisted, Moore tried tackling this issue by petitioning statesmens' children to enlist.

I myself don't support it therefore I will not enlist however, I'm just curious as to what viable, non-hypocritical reason why a staunch supporter of the war wouldn't enlist themself. This question only works depending on how someone would define a "staunch" supporter.

 

[Solid Fro]

Serving in the military is a personal choice. You choose to serve in the same way you choose to support a certain war, but they do not go together. When you enlist into the military, you choose to enforce the values and freedoms of the United States of America, not because you choose to support Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Your topic question is invalid.

I would ask you why you haven't enlisted into Al Qaeda in Iraq, since this would be in your best interest if you choose ill-will to Coalition forces in Iraq, but hypocrisy would ensue.

 

[Grand Prix]

Serving in the military is a personal choice. You choose to serve in the same way you choose to support a certain war, but they do not go together. When you enlist into the military, you choose to enforce the values and freedoms of the United States of America, not because you choose to support Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Your topic question is invalid.

I would ask you why you haven't enlisted into Al Qaeda in Iraq, since this would be in your best interest if you choose ill-will to Coalition forces in Iraq, but hypocrisy would ensue.

A-hah! So he's either with the US or against it....Brilliant.
Let's invade Switzerland!

 

[Zardoz]

History of War, 101.

First lesson, first class of the course:


Wars are started by non-combatants.

 

[Danoff]

I prefer to support the military via taxes and let the folks who are willing to do it for the money serve.

If we started running out of soldiers, and the paycheck for joining the military started to go way up - you might see me sign up.

 

[Duke]

I'm not a great candidate for service - 40, overweight, and without a translatable job skill that would make me valuable to the Service. If circumstances dictated that the military had a sudden critical need for architects, that might change. The fact is I have been doing jobs for the Air Force, though of course that's not the same as putting myself on the ground in harm's way.

And if it came down to it and we were threatened directly I would fight as a regular foot soldier.

 

[Young_Warrior]

There are quite a few soldiers who would purposefuly break their leg so they wouldnt go to war. Or when there was a serious war loads of men sign up in a sudden urge of patriotism and bravery but they never thought it through properly and cant hack it. Although in this day and age if your fighting for america its pretty much a stroll in the park.

The second gulf war wasnt ven a war cause the iraqis couldnt even fight back. They just about managed to let off a couple bullets in the first gulf war. People think why are there still so many insurgents well if you look at it from their point of way it makes sense.

But yes I think that 98% of the staunch supporters are hypocrites.

 

[Kent]

Just posting this thread is an insult to me...

Acting like you can name the acceptable reasons for why a person shouldn't go to war even though they support the action.

This must be the height of arrogance!

My reasons for not entering the service are not listed but are just as important, acceptable, and viable as any of the reasons listed above.

However, I will never honor someone like you with a declaration of my reasons.

You make me sick.
Not as a moderator or a member of the gtp, but as the son of a good, noble man and ranger.

🤬

And Young Warrior, you make me so mad I'm not even going to start in on you for the sake of the AUP and TOS I attempt to up-hold.
However, be weary, be very weary.
(walk in the park and can't fight back )

And viper zero, 👍
Join al-queda.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

This thread reeks of authoritarianism...

I prefer to support the military via taxes and let the folks who are willing to do it for the money serve.

So you'd rather see your tax money go to war than to provide social services?

If we started running out of soldiers, and the paycheck for joining the military started to go way up - you might see me sign up.

Where's the enthusiasm?

 

[Zardoz]

...Although in this day and age if your fighting for america its pretty much a stroll in the park...

http://www.militarycity.com/valor/honor.html

 

[Swift]

Although in this day and age if your fighting for america its pretty much a stroll in the park.

Tell that to the 2000+ soldiers that have died over in Iraq.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

http://www.militarycity.com/valor/honor.html

and...

Tell that to the 2000+ soldiers that have died over in Iraq.

How many of the 2,270 men and women that sacrificed their lives relatives of Senators, Representatives, the President, Vice President, et al.?

 

[Young_Warrior]

Tell that to the 2000+ soldiers that have died over in Iraq.

Im not looking to upset anyone here. My own dad nearly died in the first gulf war. But compared to Iraqi casualties and other wars around the world 2000 men isnt that much.

There are countries in wich more people get murdered yearly than the yearly death toll of the 2nd gulf war.

 

[Danoff]

How many of the 2,270 men and women that sacrificed their lives relatives of Senators, Representatives, the President, Vice President, et. al.?

What difference does it make? They're over there of their own free will, serving their country in the way they choose. Don't diminish their sacrifice simply because they aren't related to someone in public office. That in no way makes their decision any less valid, nor does it invalidate the tactical decisions of the military generals and even politicians invovled.

I, for one, would not want my president (or military generals) to be distracted by the presence of his child in the line of fire. It might cloud his decision to attack a particular target.

No parent, supporter of the war or not, wants his child to be put in harm's way. Almost every parent would prefer that their child end up in a safe profession... but thankfully it isn't up to them. It's up to the adult men and women who decide to take the military as their career path.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

What difference does it make?

It doesn't make a difference and I'm not trying to argue with you. If anyone knows, I'd like to know.

They're over there of their own free will, serving their country in the way they choose.

Wonderful.

Don't diminish their sacrifice simply because they aren't related to someone in public office.

That wasn't my intention. I was just curious. Excellent job blowing a simple question way out of proportion.

That in no way makes their decision any less valid, nor does it invalidate the tactical decisions of the military generals and even politicians invovled.

I never said it did. I never even implied that.

I, for one, would not want my president (or military generals) to be distracted by the presence of his child in the line of fire. It might cloud his decision to attack a particular target.

I don't doubt that.

 

[Danoff]

Don't pretend to be ignorant of the implications implicit in your question.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

There was nothing behind the question except genuine curiousity.

 

[Danoff]

There was nothing behind the question except genuine curiousity.

Alright then, what makes you so curious?

So you'd rather see your tax money go to war than to provide social services?

A ligitimate function of government rather than an illigitimate function? 💡

 

[Young_Warrior]

What difference does it make? They're over there of their own free will, serving their country in the way they choose.

Dieing isnt fun. Most people never planned to join the army when they were back inhighschool/college but instead it rather happened do to unfor seen cirumstances.

My reasons for not entering the service are not listed but are just as important, acceptable, and viable as any of the reasons listed above.

The army is throghbly enjoyable when your not at war so why dont I join?
Well cause I might die.

I was going to join the RAF and train as an engineer with them but I chose not to because I might die and the only reason why I did want to join is so that they would train me whilst getting paided.

 

[Danoff]

Dieing isnt fun. Most people never planned to join the army when they were back inhighschool/college but instead it rather happened do to unfor seen cirumstances.

...and they CHOSE to join as a result of those unforseen circumstances. Much like my sister did.

 

[Young_Warrior]

Well either join or suck on the governmnet cheese mamarry. Id rather take the chance that I might die than recieve handouts or work in Maccie D's.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Alright then, what makes you so curious?

The title of the thread sparked the interest. I figured that since many of our leaders and representatives were such "staunch supporters" of the war effort, maybe their relatives were as well.

A ligitimate function of government rather than an illigitimate function? 💡

That's debatable.

 

[Swift]

Im not looking to upset anyone here. My own dad nearly died in the first gulf war. But compared to Iraqi casualties and other wars around the world 2000 men isnt that much.

There are countries in wich more people get murdered yearly than the yearly death toll of the 2nd gulf war.

1 casualty in any war is too much. I will not trivalize someone's sacrifice just because compared to other larger wars, "2000 men isn't that much"

It sounds like your Dad is an honorable man, but if he was part of that 2000 that died, wouldn't that be too many?

 

[Young_Warrior]

1 casualty in any war is too much. I will not trivalize someone's sacrifice just because compared to other larger wars, "2000 men isn't that much"

It sounds like your Dad is an honorable man, but if he was part of that 2000 that died, wouldn't that be too many?

You make a good argument but how can one have a war if there is no casualty. A war doesnt start untill there is one casualty.

If my dad had died Id have been pissed but I would have recognised that it was a war situation and in life people do die.

 

[Danoff]

1 casualty in any war is too much.

I disagree. It isn't "too much", it's more than desired. Nobody wants any casualties, but "too much" implies "not worth it". If it wasn't worth it, we wouldn't be there. It's worth a lot to us to secure Iraq for the Iraqis. Worth enough to sacrifice 2000+ of our military men and women.

The goal is the minimzation of casualties (on our side) - zero being the target. But to say that any is too much is to say that we can never go to war for any reason - which would end the (eroding) freedom that we all enjoy.

 

[Zardoz]

How many of the 2,270 men and women that sacrificed their lives are relatives of Senators, Representatives, the President, Vice President, et al.?

According to this story, "about half a dozen" members of the House have children serving in Iraq. I've never heard of any of them actually losing a relative:


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150275,00.html


That's out of 435 members of the House, and 100 Senators. White House staff? You've got to be kidding...

 

[Swift]

I disagree. It isn't "too much", it's more than desired. Nobody wants any casualties, but "too much" implies "not worth it". If it wasn't worth it, we wouldn't be there. It's worth a lot to us to secure Iraq for the Iraqis. Worth enough to sacrifice 2000+ of our military men and women.

The goal is the minimzation of casualties (on our side) - zero being the target. But to say that any is too much is to say that we can never go to war for any reason - which would end the (eroding) freedom that we all enjoy.

Hmm....well I still think that one casualty is an incredible sacrifice. You're right as the term "too much" isn't appropiate. I just wanted to make sure that the soldiers were not made light of.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

According to this story, "about half a dozen" members of the House have children serving in Iraq. I've never heard of any of them actually losing a relative:


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150275,00.html


That's out of 435 members of the House, and 100 Senators. White House staff? You've got to be kidding...

Thank you for the link.

 

[FoolKiller]

According to this story, "about half a dozen" members of the House have children serving in Iraq. I've never heard of any of them actually losing a relative:


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150275,00.html


That's out of 435 members of the House, and 100 Senators. White House staff? You've got to be kidding...

With 1.4 million men and women in the US armed forces ~.5% of the US population is in the military. With six children of Congress members enlisted that means that ~1.1% of the Congress members have children enlisted. I don't know how many children of Congress members there are total or I would have worked that out.


And for those interested I have mentioned why I am not enlisted before, but for those that don't know; I wanted to join the Air Force but due to a heart condition I could not.

As I also said before and as Viper Zero kind of said; This type of question is an idiotic way to try and stump war supporters. It is as stupid as me asking, why you don't join the opposing forces if you oppose the war? Then asking why government members who support/vote for the war don't encourage their children to join the military is also stupid. It is not their decision. It is soley the decision of their child. I am guessing they wanted to do something else with their lives.

A completely valid reason for not joining the military is: I want to be a (Insert job title here).

Why don't you just ask someone, you like video games so why aren't you a video game designer? Why is it that when someone supports a war that means they should be a soldier? Some people support abortion, should they perform them or have to get one? NO!

Dieing isnt fun. Most people never planned to join the army when they were back inhighschool/college but instead it rather happened do to unfor seen cirumstances.

You always pigeon hole people. So, apparently most people in the military just had a crappy life and things didn't work out? Or maybe they were just too stupid to do anything else?

Maybe they just couldn't afford college. Neither could I, but somehow I went. They are called student loans and a part-time job. Most jobs that require a college degree will pay enough to cover a student loan payment over 20 years.

I knew people all through school who wanted to join the Army. They dressed as a soldier for Halloween when they were young and then they alwasy had a pair of camouflage pants in high school. I know a guy who walked in to the Marine recruiter's office at five years old while his mom watched and said he wanted to be a Marine. The recruiter told him he had to be 18 and he had to listen to his mom until then. I can't think of a man who was more respectful of his mother. He served in both Gulf wars and is now home and out of the military because his wife asked him to stay home.

 

[Young_Warrior]

Who didnt want to be a soldier when they were young. Its called gender socialisation and if you had a strong gender socialisation your more likely to want to be say a fireman policeman soldier racedriver spaceman or somekind of tradesman. These were described as true respectable mens jobs back in the day. Just talk to your grand parents if you dont belive me.

There are people who do want to join the army but I can tell you this if the world was more balanced out in whom has the power there would be more wars with alot more casualties and alot less people actively wanting to be a soldier during peace time.