Soldiers: Heroes, murderers or fools?

Remove all ads!

This is a little thing that has been on my mind for several years since my own army days. I will not go into any depth of my own views here yet even if I am quite sure that some of you can guess what they are. The question is simply, are soldiers patriotic heroes who make a conscious, intelligent decision to fight for their country and the values they believe in? Or are they nothing but murderous thugs who see a chance at some "insert degrading remark of possible enemy here" killing? Or finally naive fools dazzled by lies to risk their lives for no benefit to themselves?

 

Do you mean professional soldiers or conscripts?

 

I've seen all three joachin. Fortunately, at least in my experience, individuals falling into the last two categories tend to leave the military after a single tour. Career military personnel (those serving more than one tour and make up the senior enlisted and officers) are predominantly made up from people in the first category -- a few "killers" may squeek by (usually, they don't like the rules), but after one tour the naive are gone (either they are no longer naive or no longer serving).

murtaug, joachin has been called many things on these boards (I admit I had a similar opinion of him when I first got here). He is a self-proclaimed jerk, but he has also shown remarkable insight. It's an interesting question, one that brings out biases and encourages thought.

[martaug has since blanked his post and I've deleted it. -Tal]

 

Well, speaking as a civilian American with an all-volunteer army...

I would say 5% heroes or wanna-be heroes (though, actual heroes never set out to be such), 5-10% trigger-happy macho pricks (some of whom, yes, become murderers per se or end up working for Blackwater), 5% fools (who either aren't bright or motivated enough to do anything else or just wanna "blow stuff up"), 10-20% who like the discipline and structure enough to make a career out of the military life, and the remaining 60-75% are men and women who just want a better life for themselves and see a stint in the military as a means to an end. The majority of those who go into the service (I have no exact figures, sorry) do so to pay for college, especially where an expensive degree is concerned (medical, veterinary, flight, law, etc.).

I have to say I have a problem with your phrasing (edit: which I'm hoping was purely rhetorical). My brother was a marine and he is neither a hero, murderer, or fool. He's just a guy who wanted a better life and loved his country enough to serve it for a few years. Your rather negative generalization is, franky, pretty insulting, at least from my perspective (USA compared to Sweden). It also raises the question...having served yourself, which one are you, jaoquin - a hero, a murderer or a fool?

Oh, and [martaug's post has now been ignored - dmc]

 

DR: joachin's definition of hero was delibrate -- he defined it as a person "who make a conscious, intelligent decision to fight for their country and the values they believe in." In which case your brother is a hero. And you should think of him as a hero.

 

I don't know what Martaug posted that was so offensive, but I wanted to go on record that I consider this entire poll offensive.

 

Well...considering that soldiers are all human, there are all types of them. There are those who are heroic, and will run in to a burning building that just got bombed to save a life, there are those who do the bare minimum to stay alive and get paid, and there are those who abuse their authority to commit a crime.

All my military friends fall in to that second category.

As for 'naive fools', I know of no one who falls in to this category...they all know they're being lied to from day one. Among other things, they do it for themselves, their families, and their country.

 

I said heroes. They are the ones that place themselves in harm's way to protect the rest of the nation from those that would seek to do it harm. You may see killers and fools join the army, but as has been mentioned before, they are weeded out.

 

Following BOC's ignored question, in some countries people are conscripted rather than volunteered. What about them?

I think soldiers are human, and only human. Humans have cruel base instincts that may truly - perhaps only - show in places where they are allowed to do as they please, where they can pillage, loot and kill. So, murderers are perhaps made through circumstances, propaganda, and the whole psychology of warfare: kill or be killed. Each person has the potential to be a hero or a murderer, and may even be both on different days, so sweeping generalisations like this may be a bit unfair.

I am not of course saying that everybody is like this. It's just a thought, and people like DR's brother deserve respect.

http://www.warpoetry.co.uk/owen1.html

My horrible two cents, possibly off-topic, over.

 

The entire point was to make it stereotypical. To so to speak force the issue. It also matter how you define soldiers. I define it as anyone who fights for something or someone in an organized way. With that definition anyone who wages an armed conflict is a soldier be it Palestinian suicide bombers, Colombian guerillas or an American fighter pilot.

As with most important questions and especially ones involving human beings there really cant be any clear cut answer all I ask for is your general view. I personally think that the naive fools make up the bulk of any armed force. From my point of view you must be pretty stupid to risk your life or even give up your life, not to mention taking the lives of others, for what? That is the question is there anything that it is worth doing those things for? As I see it there is no conflict today that would be worth it which from my point of view means that any soldier is a brainwashed pawn who is willing to do the dirty work for others.

When all things are said and done you join any armed force to kill other human beings, you can say that it is a decent job and you get an education but you get all that over the corpses of other humans. I am well aware that most people do not view it like that and that you can be a nice person anyway. There is a reason most people who join armed forces are young and lacking in education, they are easier to manipulate and oyu need to twist a human being quite a lot to get him to shoot down others in cold blood. I have a few Israeli friends and I remember one them saying once that he had been out partying with a friend who was celebrating that he had shot his first terrorist. Is that something to celebrate? Was it a terrorist or a poor desperate man standning in hte wrong place in the wrong time?

What bugs me the most about this issue is that it isnt an issue for most people, they dont think along these lines. They read soldier and think about honor and bravery instead of what it really means: Someone who is paid to kill. When I joined the army (conscript) I was under the glamor as well, I was a naive fool and thought it all was kinda cool. The more I started to think though the more insane and even silly it all become. Here we have a billion dollar industry for killing people that employs millions of people worldwide and no one reflects over the insanity of it all?

To end this long rant, we would not have any wars if people stopped being naive fools and refused to listen to the lies they are fed with. Let the people in power fight in their own conflicts and dont let them use you as pawns. I must be the most idealistic cynic or cynical idealist I have ever encountered. As I see it, soldiers are in general naive fools, there are a few murderous thugs and even fewer people who are aware of what they are doing and accept it as the right thing to do but I guess there are people of all sorts.

 

I think you are missing a fourth and very crucial cathegory, soldiers as victims. It could be argued that it's not quite right when the only path for some towards higher education is going to war. This could also be applied to most conscripts as they are forced to do military service under the law.

I don't think the point with this poll is to paint all soldiers with the same brush. War is obviously hell, and I would inclined to say (or at the very least hope) that people don't set out to the military because they like war, because if they do then I'd be quite happy to toss them in to the "murderers" cathegory. The question still remains why are people still willing to become soldiers if they know they might (and I assume in the US it's quite likely right now that they do) end up in war.

To me they are victims, I obviously don't see that dying in Iraq serves some higher purpose.Their lives are in many ways wasted, whatever US was set out achieve either has been achieved or is showing to be more expensive than it's worth. They are not serving their country there, they are serving a failed policy. So soldiers are not dying for what they believe in they are actually dying for what someone else believes in. If they happen to believe the same then it's a wonderful and happy coenicende but does not change the fact that soldiers do not decide when to go to war.

EDIT: Seems like I'm on the other side of the coin with you there joacqin.

 

2 Weeks ago, I left the German Army after serving my 9 month military service, which every German man who is healthy has to do by law. Of course, nowadays you have the option to refuse serving in the army and to do civil service instead, but basically everyone is forced to be a soldier by law. Therefore, there are not only "special types" of humans in the army. There are people of every social layer, and every type of character serving in the army (at least if you consider the military service, this doesn`t fit exactly for professional soldiers). So there are good people and evil people, brave and coward, heroes and bounders, it`s like a picture of the civil society. All aspects of human Nature can also be seen in Soldiers, thats the reason why I don`t think, you can classify Soldiers into these groups in generall.

Of course, I can only speak for a system like we have it here in gGermany, where everyone has to serve in the army.

 

Well Morgoroth, I do not think so. The difference between viewing them as naive fools and victims is rather slim close to non-existant as I see it. They are victims but tehy are being naive fools and to let themselves be victims if you know what I mean.

 

You could say that, however that line of thinking really forces you to think the entire humanity as naive, I don't think that's a big step for you to take and considering your views on religion etc. I think you see most people as naive, probably even most of if not even everyone of us here. It then becomes increasingly irrelevant if they are soldiers or not, they are very likely naive fools in your eyes anyway.

I'd like to know why? I think it's a very nice start for serious conversation. The way I see it this was never to be taken personally since it's tries to take a more abstract sociological perspective to being a soldier in general? If you view this thread as offensive I think you have seriously missed its point. I think the war has made Americans a bit too touchy towards discussing war and soldiers from a more critical perspective.

 

Tal summed up my feelings. The point of the thread seemed to be "soldier bashing" more than anything else.

 

If this thread is about bashing anything it is about the situations and people who demand soldiers to throw into the meatgrinder of hate. Although, I do think there is a small bit of personal responsibility, people are actively deluding themselves and rather willingly let themselves be victims. It is kinda like criminals, the deck may be stacked against you but you still have a personal choice if you want to turn to crime or if you want to sign up to bomb mudhuts/fly airplanes into buildings/beat up Tibetan demonstrators. Conscription further muds the issue but seeing as it is quite rare nowadays for goverments of different kinds to send conscripts into combat zones that point is not as important as it could have been.

Morgoroth well yes, we are all more or less naive fools I just fight a small personal vain battle to make a few more people aware of it.

 

Soldiers are just like the rest of people. Trying to make ends meet, trying to make the situation the best that they can imagine. And when it comes to killing, they like it or loath it just as much as the average person.

Now mercenaries are a different category alltogether...

 

Umm, arent mercenaries soldiers? What would be the difference between a mercenary and a soldier? Is it who you fight for? If, as has been mentioned in this thread, you join the army to get an education does that make you a mercenary? Is it "nobler" to fight for a country or cause than to fight as a profession? Isnt it generally countries and causes who employ mercenaries anyways? Where do you draw the line between what you see as a soldier and a mercenary? Is there really even a difference?

The only difference I see is that mercenaries in general are a bit more cynical and aware of what they are doing and are for some obscure reason ok with it.