Conquer Club

Pedronicus wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Brainwashes? More severe? Please elaborate. I have some friends and relatives in the US military and they have not reported any brainwashing to me.

Your country is brainwashed, not just those who enter the military.

colton24 (from 9/11 thread earlier in the month..This idiot is still at school) wrote:This thread made me cry for the fourth time today. Damnit.........A moment of silence.*Military Funeral Horn Plays* Damn.....I wish I could go over now and bomb the terrorists in a B-52.

I would guess that the majority of people who voluntarily join a countries armed forces aren't the sharpest tool in the box in the first place.
I've lost count how many times the words Patriot & Liberty are thrown about by Americans on the internet.
I love my country and my country offers me freedom. But I don't bang on about it.

QFT indeed.

I don't know about brainwashing per se. There is a culture in America that glorifies the armed forces, sure, but brainwashing implies that there is some overarching entity whose intent is to achieve that end. In my experience, this culture seems to have spawned itself, and joining it is a choice made by your own volition, and many people are ok with making that decision. Sure there is a dehumanizing of the enemy in any armed force, and that might be necessary to maintain the sanity of the combatants, but I don't think that, again, it should be called brainwashing. I think it's easy to resort to the term because there isn't really a better one (groupthink might be closer?), but it seems a bit harsher than it needs to be. It has an actively negative connotation that those affected are weak in some manner, which is different case by case.

None of this justifies the lack of remorse for killing innocents. If I shoot someone who is making threatening actions at me, and they turn out to be innocent, I'm going to perhaps feel I made the right decision to protect myself based on the limited information I had at the time, but I'm still going to feel remorse for the death I caused. You know, I'm human and all that.

Neoteny wrote:I don't know about brainwashing per se. There is a culture in America that glorifies the armed forces, sure, but brainwashing implies that there is some overarching entity whose intent is to achieve that end. In my experience, this culture seems to have spawned itself, and joining it is a choice made by your own volition, and many people are ok with making that decision. Sure there is a dehumanizing of the enemy in any armed force, and that might be necessary to maintain the sanity of the combatants, but I don't think that, again, it should be called brainwashing. I think it's easy to resort to the term because there isn't really a better one (groupthink might be closer?), but it seems a bit harsher than it needs to be. It has an actively negative connotation that those affected are weak in some manner, which is different case by case.

Yeah I suppose. I didn't want to imply the soldiers are weak-willed or don't join up for good reasons or aren't for the most part decent people. "Groupthink" might be a better term, but that implies it is merely the group itself falling into such a thinking pattern without outside influence.

People who volunteer for the military are like everyone else. They want a job, an education, to not be a burden on their family, health care, friends, etc.; just like the rest of us, only their options are often more limited.

mpjh wrote:People who volunteer for the military are like everyone else. They want a job, an education, to not be a burden on their family, health care, friends, etc.; just like the rest of us, only their options are often more limited.

That's certainly not the case for most soldiers here and I'd say a lot in the US. I mean, sure those can be circumstances but people also believe in a higher cause and the thrill of the military.

Believing in a higher cause does not distinguish them from the rest of the population, their cause may be military related, but that certainly is not the only "higher cause" available or pursued by the general population. Quite to the contrary, I know many who are altruistic and dedicated to things beyond themselves that are not in the military.

Indeed. and there is also the factor that one is agreeing, not only to risk one's own life, but to kill if ordered to.
That makes the military different from most jobs.
I'm not mocking or belittling the military here, just pointing out that it's a factor in deciding on this career path.

mpjh wrote:Believing in a higher cause does not distinguish them from the rest of the population, their cause may be military related, but that certainly is not the only "higher cause" available or pursued by the general population. Quite to the contrary, I know many who are altruistic and dedicated to things beyond themselves that are not in the military.

Ok point taken. I was just saying that they don't just join the military for the decent paying job.

jonesthecurl wrote:Indeed. and there is also the factor that one is agreeing, not only to risk one's own life, but to kill if ordered to.
That makes the military different from most jobs.
I'm not mocking or belittling the military here, just pointing out that it's a factor in deciding on this career path.

Killing for your job is common in the insurance industry. Over 1/3 of claims for health care are denied in this country. So I guess you could say that the military and the health insurance industry have that in common.

mpjh wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:Indeed. and there is also the factor that one is agreeing, not only to risk one's own life, but to kill if ordered to.
That makes the military different from most jobs.
I'm not mocking or belittling the military here, just pointing out that it's a factor in deciding on this career path.

Killing for your job is common in the insurance industry. Over 1/3 of claims for health care are denied in this country. So I guess you could say that the military and the health insurance industry have that in common.

Strangely enough killing for profit is somehow seen as less evil.

Ever heard of Blackwater (now called Xe)? They have made killing for profit an art form.

Campaignforliberty.org

Snorri1234 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Solidiers are always going to be more arrogant and "macho" than your average person. It tends to come with the job.

Seriously though, the way the American military brainwashes it's troops fucking scares me. It is far more severe than that of other countries.

Have I often come across to you as brainwashed, Snorri? We've disagreed on issues, to be sure...but brainwashed? My 23 years in the American military and recent retirement (thus being fairly current to any potential "brainwashing") says your assumptions on this one are full of crap.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWqT8Rljt_8
When I read things like this:

I would have absolutely no qualms about splattering someone all over the sidewalk if I thought he was endangering me or any of my fellow soldiers. If it turns out that that person was innocent, oh well. He should know better than to speed towards my checkpoint, or throw down his backpack near me.

I feel a little bit sick. I know the guy isn't even in the military, but I also know that opinions offered by several soldiers closely echo those sentiments.

Now obviously any military that actually wants to function needs some brainwashing. You can't very well expect your soldiers to shoot people they have never met without some serious propaganda. But the USA has gone of it's rocker in that direction and paints every soldier as The Best Person Ever and the enemy as nothing more than 2-dimensional batman villains. This tactic of dehumanizing the enemy (and anyone who vaguely looks like the enemy) has led directly to the torture of prisoners and the backwards justification for it. The cases of rape and torture of prisoners, killing of civilians and other crimes are not just a few bad apples spoiling it for everyone else, it's systematic indoctrination from the highest spots.

Of course, that isn't the fault of the soldiers. Plenty of them aren't even affected that much by it, but it is cause for concern.

Wow...you've got a couple of isolated incidents and that causes you to paint the entire group...not very...liberal of you, was it? <smile> Certainly, there are the "less than stable" in the military...unfortunately, that's a given for a VERY FEW of the specific jobs needed (infantry comes immediately to mind), and it may even be a preferred status in those few regards. But I would state that's a TREMENDOUS minority, rather than the "vice versa" you appear to be claiming.

As well, you don't seem to have addressed my question to you at all. Were you going to?

Oh, and by the way...to whomever it was that stated that those not in the military cannot possibly understand what it means to serve in the military...that's an utter load of crap. Have a little self-respect, please!

Woodruff wrote:
Wow...you've got a couple of isolated incidents and that causes you to paint the entire group...not very...liberal of you, was it? <smile> Certainly, there are the "less than stable" in the military...unfortunately, that's a given for a VERY FEW of the specific jobs needed (infantry comes immediately to mind), and it may even be a preferred status in those few regards. But I would state that's a TREMENDOUS minority, rather than the "vice versa" you appear to be claiming.

As well, you don't seem to have addressed my question to you at all. Were you going to?

What question? About you coming of as brainwashed?

Also, I am totally not understanding the rest of your response. Are you saying that the crazy people who torture and rape prisoners are a very small minority? Well whoohoo for you, I already said they were. Try responding to what I actually said.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:
Wow...you've got a couple of isolated incidents and that causes you to paint the entire group...not very...liberal of you, was it? <smile> Certainly, there are the "less than stable" in the military...unfortunately, that's a given for a VERY FEW of the specific jobs needed (infantry comes immediately to mind), and it may even be a preferred status in those few regards. But I would state that's a TREMENDOUS minority, rather than the "vice versa" you appear to be claiming.

As well, you don't seem to have addressed my question to you at all. Were you going to?

What question? About you coming of as brainwashed?

Yes...given that I've only one post in the thread and that's the only question I've asked you or anyone else in that post...

Snorri1234 wrote:Also, I am totally not understanding the rest of your response. Are you saying that the crazy people who torture and rape prisoners are a very small minority? Well whoohoo for you, I already said they were. Try responding to what I actually said.

I did. Your statement was "Seriously though, the way the American military brainwashes it's troops fucking scares me. It is far more severe than that of other countries." and yet, you have provided no actual basis for that statement. All you have provided is a couple of isolated statements. Do you have any actual basis for the statement, or are you just enjoying being able to pull things out of your ass without getting called on it?

Any military (well any military that wants to have any chance of success) trains it's members to react instantly and effectively to whatever command they are given. Other than the rare instances when an illegal order is given (for instance, to torture someone), this is necessary for survival on the battlefield. That is the only thing that could even REMOTELY be considered in the vaguest realm to be considered "brainwashing" and isn't actually anything of the sort. What it IS is teaching it's members to have the discipline to do things they really don't want to do when they have to do it (as is, unfortunately, what war is all about). As I said, this is NO different from anything ANY military (successful) does. I speak from personal experience that there is no "brainwashing" going on outside of this.

All of which has NOTHING AT ALL to do with statements that are made by sociopaths who just happen to BE in the military (which you seem to be using to substantiate your claims of brainwashing). Those sociopaths aren't that way because they're in the military...they're in the military because they're sociopaths and so the sociopaths see it as a "legal" outlet for their problems.

OK, I fully believe most soldiers do the job the way they should. That said, there is far more of a tendency for military people to excuse even the truly heneous acts (by military standards). This causes problems for everyone, most especially other soldiers. Those who come out with legitimate concerns about military actions help the military and our nation to be better. Those who cover up the jerks, make it worse.

Prime example:

Six sailors from a canine unit in the U.S. Navy interviewed by Youth Radio told stories of hazing and abuse a few years ago. The Navy investigated the abuse and found evidence to support accusations of physical assault on sailors and prostitutes on base, but no courts-martial resulted.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2

(and for those of you who think NPR is "anti-military", they have just run a series on what its like for military families, several about real life in the military, etc all sympathetic This one just happens to fit the topic here.)

PLAYER57832 wrote:OK, I fully believe most soldiers do the job the way they should. That said, there is far more of a tendency for military people to excuse even the truly heneous acts (by military standards).

MOST people in the military will not in any way excuse those acts. In fact, we are trained to REPORT those acts. However, I do agree with you that there is a bit of a tendency to "kneejerk to defense" when these issues are brought up...I think it's a natural response to having something you hold very dear (most of us in the military do hold our service very dear) being attacked. That doesn't in any way excuse the knee-jerk, as I wish they'd think first and really consider the situation before responding. But in my experience, once they DO objectively view those sorts of situations, the tendency is then NOT to excuse the acts.

Sadly, the upper echelons of the military as well as the civilians appointed over the military seem to be more concerned with image (and the "embarrassment" of having someone convicted of these acts) than they are with justice. To me, THAT'S where the real problem lies...convictions need to happen and the punishments need to be severe. But at the lower levels, this is definitely not true, in my experience.

PLAYER57832 wrote:This causes problems for everyone, most especially other soldiers.

I agree 100%.

PLAYER57832 wrote:(and for those of you who think NPR is "anti-military"

I've never considered NPR to be anti-military. I love NPR.

Woodruff wrote:To me, THAT'S where the real problem lies...convictions need to happen and the punishments need to be severe. But at the lower levels, this is definitely not true, in my experience.

This is how I see it, too. That is, jerks are everywhere, but its up the the brass to keep them in line or appropriately "boot" them.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:To me, THAT'S where the real problem lies...convictions need to happen and the punishments need to be severe. But at the lower levels, this is definitely not true, in my experience.

This is how I see it, too. That is, jerks are everywhere, but its up the the brass to keep them in line or appropriately "boot" them.

And THAT has been the REAL failure in recent times. <sigh>

(Aw to hell with "lurker mode")

Am I insane seeing "Woodruph" post here?


Or am I insane for thinking he wasn't coming back?



S***

Army of GOD wrote:Am I insane seeing "Woodruph" post here?
Or am I insane for thinking he wasn't coming back?

I believe the answer to your two questions is "Yes".

(My situation is being satisfactorily resolved, and that's all I have to say on the matter...oh, except that it wasn't about chaosfactor, you blooming idiots.)

Geez, woody I was happy to see you back -- but now I remember you. Talk about conflicted.

mpjh wrote:Geez, woody I was happy to see you back -- but now I remember you. Talk about conflicted.

Conflicted how? I've always thought of myself as VERY certain of my convictions (probably too certain, from others' perspectives <grin>).

Woodruff wrote:

mpjh wrote:Geez, woody I was happy to see you back -- but now I remember you. Talk about conflicted.

Conflicted how? I've always thought of myself as VERY certain of my convictions (probably too certain, from others' perspectives <grin>).

I thought you left. He is back!!!!!

Well he couldn't be back if he hadn't left...