inyouagain
Posts: 418
Joined: 1/6/2004 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rain I've noticed that quite a few people here have served in the military at one time or another. I wanted to know the following: How did serving in the military affect your political beliefs, if at all? What side of the political spectrum are you on now? ~rain~ For those that only see red dots for her posts, the nature of the topic rain posted is quoted above. If you were never a member of the military, the question does not apply whether you choose to see it or not. As a military member, I saw a dedicated and quite capable group of military people working some cases around the clock to accomplish objectives levied on us by the politicians in office. We were contractually bound, and bound by our sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution and Officials of the US Government. I have lost some very good friends during a few "non-official actions" that never made it into the media and newspapers. Nonetheless, military personnel cannot decide whether the "mission" is just or justified in any way... your job is to carry out the orders handed down by your superiors in the chain of command, not to debate politics. My political views are essentially the same as prior military, however I've acquired a greater awareness that lack of concern for a "soldier's life" is most prevalent in politics, among politicians... it's the old "out of sight, out of mind" concept, made worse by the soldier's activities being covert or not known to the masses who elected those same politicians. When they say go, you don't ask why... you just go and just do what you have been trained to do, under the auspices that you are doing it for your country. Can military people be used by flakey or corrupt politicians? Hell yes Are military people always convinced what they are ordered to do is right? Hell no Often times, many theaters of operation are of a new variety or sort... and there is no preordained method, and lives are often lost in a rapid learning/maturation curve. What pisses me off is that we have other agencies like the CIA and FBI that get involved, and bend the rules to their liking, often being placed in the chain of command unless questions arise... then they will quickly disappear like they were never even there, such as is the case with the maltreatment of Abu Gharib prison detainees in Iraq. Nearly eavery one of those being charged states they were carrying out orders of their superiors... and CIA and FBI have both been mentioned. Who will be punished? Most likely the lowest face on the totem pole will catch all the FLAK, whether deserving or not. As a prior military member, it infuriates me to see the pictures in the media, yes. Do I believe they were sinister and unstaged, not necessarily so. I've worked with both these agencies as a military member and I know what they are capable of and how they are never held directly accountable (but how those working with them usually are). I know some of their tactics and the value of "propaganda" applications, especially with regard to "what can or will happen to you" if you don't go along with their methodology and practices for which "they" are not held accountable. It's even more frustrating when the agencies mentioned are "working" with Rear Echelons... those in the rear, away from the actual confict and fighting. Rear Echelon military members are usually very eager to "help out", but many times take the fall. For my own reasons, I agree Bush has to go. A military experienced leader in the White House and in charge of US Foreign Policy would be a much needed improvement over our "rich boy George idiot" who's military experience consisted of visiting Topless Bars in Alabama while he served proudly for a few months with The Alabama Air National Guard during the Viet Nam conflict. Inyouagain
_____________________________
Careful with that axe, Eugene
|