Role of a Military

[James]

Supposing you were allowed to make a declaration of what your nation's Armed Forces was or wasn't allowed to do. What would you use your nations military for, and then make an argument against it. This is my social experiment in objective thinking, so please do atleast make some effort to prove why your idea isn't perfect.

My philosophy:
I would forbid any military action on any nations soil other than my own. I feel a soldier only has a duty to protect his nation and it is not ethically sound to send them to "police" other countries. Every nation must sort its own problems out for itself.
I feel this would bring back alot of respect to the profession as well as put an end to "unjust wars".
Nuclear Strikes against us would not be any more of an issue than they are now because we could continue to maintain the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction while abiding by the afforementioned policy.

Why my idea won't work:
Genocide. While It's easy for me to say the above, how could we have stood by while Germany invaded other countries and rounded up Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals for execution. Or while Tutsis and Hutus are killing eachother. There will always be conflict somewhere in the world, so we'll always have to make the tough call of which side to back even when both sides are doing such horrible things.

[Unforgiven]

I was actually going to say the same thing. Purely for defense of national borders, with the added allowance to take part in international forces, such as UN Peacekeeping Missions, that sort of thing. Nothing alone, though, as part of a team.

[Bones]

My philosophy:
The complete and utter subjugation of our enemies and global domination! To obtain all the worlds natural resources for our own.

Why my idea won't work:
Hippies

(I'm kidding)

[James]

Well, I dont see anything wrong with using force to take over other peoples countries, since force really it is the natural way of things. as long as A: you don't claim to be doing something else, you have to say "yeah, we're taking over" not "we're here to help you". and B: when the war is over you have to treat the conquered people with the exact same rights as those in your country have, afterall it is now part of your country. This rules out genocide and political killings.

[Bones]

The Horde is not trying to recreate the Roman Empire. No man shall survive our onslaught! We don't need their competition for the ladies.

[Bassmama]

My philosophy:
The complete and utter subjugation of our enemies and global domination! To obtain all the worlds natural resources for our own.

Why my idea won't work:
Hippies

(I'm kidding)
Quit talking about me, sucka!

[caufield]

I'm with unforgiven. Military should really be used defensively. Then there are the peacekeeping missions. It's technically policing other countries but for the most part, the policing is done for the benefit of all.

[James]

Here is the problem with policing those conflicts though: Neither side see's their side as the "evil" side or aggressor.

The province of Countrystan used to be part of Nationland until last year. Last year Canodo invaded Countrystan and began ethnically cleansing all Nationians from Countrystan. Which side do you help?
You look at a history book and see something interesting, 30 years ago Countrystan was owned by Canodo and had a thriving snow-cone industry that could be traced back 300 years. But then Nationland invaded, claiming that they had rights to the province of Countrystan.
The farther back you look the more it becomes apparent that both sides have been fighting over the same peice of land for thousands of years. Each side invariably thinks of the other side as evil incarnate, everyone in both countries has lost family members to the "murderous" enemy.
Which side do you help? How do you tell the country that isn't currently in posession of the province that the other country gets to keep it forever, even though both have an equal claim to the land.
Perhaps you decide to split the land in half. What do you do with the people in the newly divided province who are now living in the half that was given to the side that was recently slaughtering their relatives? Do you tell them to forget the past and love their new country? Do you tell them to give up the house that their great grandfather built and the farm that has been in their family for generations and whose soil is drenched with the blood and sweat of their labour? You would be dooming their entire family to a painful existence either in a refugee camp or to homelessness in one of the cities.
So what do you do? The fact is we can't do anything because no matter what we do, in 30 years those two countries will be fighting again, the land the farmer had to leave will lie fallow and eventually become barren like the desert it was when his grandfather first came across it. And all the pain that we inflicted upon him and his family will not have improved a damn thing.

This kind if history is what has happened everywhere in the world, even in our own countries (except England i guess, you lucky bastards), how would we feel if Native Americans started violently taking back land and then we started taking back lands they invaded. Then all of a sudden SURPRISE! Russia and China show up and say, "we're peacekeepers and there will be no more fighting, the natives will now establish a nation and you will respect all borders that are currently being held".
As unlikely as that situation is, Imagine for a second how you would feel if your house was in one of the areas that the Natives took back. And your mother was killed accidentally in the crossfire in one of the battles.
That's how both sides in every conflict ever has felt.

[Bones]

how would we feel if Native Americans started violently taking back land

I would feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

/me goes on warpath

[James]

lol, so you identify with them, that's fine, how would you feel then if the U.N. intervened with your glorious reclaimation of the land that belonged to your people for tens of thousands of years? Or worse yet, helped take back the land for whitey.

[Bones]

I'd nuke em. The good thing about overthrowing a government is you get to keep all their toys.

[JakeD]

Jesus Christ.

[Sean]

:D

[Unforgiven]

No problem there...

[JakeD]

lawl

[trekbugging]

the purpose of our military should be to protect the inhabitants of the country-- which is a far and wide ranging problem--who considers what is a threat to our country-- yes a airplane to the tallest twin buildings in our country is a direct threat--but have we found those responsible?
and a murdurous evil dictator that was killing half his country is a threat--but we didn't consider it a threat till we were actually bombed at a major naval base..

and "policeing and ""peacemaking"" how can you prove that , that will make us safe?

why will not work-- man by his nature wants to dominate and control-- figure every war is about dominance and control--some "little man" (figurativally) wanted to control more than what he had

but history is also written by the winners, until recently, so looking back at history it was always ,I AM STRONGER SO I WILL TAKE YOUR WOMAN AND LAND, from the sone age man who clubbed his neoghbour to death to hitler who gassed and killed millions to our leaders now who are....
hopefully we can change that a little, but just changing the president isn't the total answer-- so get out there this year and vote--but know what and who you are voting for

[James]

yes a airplane to the tallest twin buildings in our country is a direct threat

I'd like to point out that attack was a direct result of our interference in other countries matters. It just makes me want to shit my pants in terror when people say that it was an unprovoked attack. No, i'm not trying to justify the attack, it was a horrible event, but fuck, until you realise why shit like that actually happens it will keep happening.