There are many truths. All those pictures are true so are fighting Nazis, imperialism, and famine. See the whole picture not just the part that supports your bias and political position.
Remember that good thing we did once? That means we can now ransack other 3rd world countries for profit, and fight in every country we can make a profit.
The US fights for Imperialism and famine, though. It doesn’t engage in war for moral reasons, but for profit, and as the world Hegemon, that directly incentivizes US Imperialism.
The U.S doesn’t give a fuck about their people. Women are being charged when they have a miscarriage. Seriously. WTF is wrong with you people???
The US is founded on settler-colonialism and genocide, and is currently the world’s largest Empire.
You dont know much about the military. Maybe look up some information on the topic first.
I have, actually. Want to elaboroate at all?
You dont know much about the military. Maybe look up some information on the topic first.
Maybe understand that when an asshole is trying to turn your country into a dictatorship, there’s a time when the military stands for their country. NOT for dictatorship!
they were always a dictatorship for the rest of the world.
They can all go to hell
Do you have… any supporting evidence? Or is this just based off the warm fuzzy feeling you got from doing the pledge of allegiance in school?
My evidence is history. Read a book sometimes.
So, no then. Cool, thanks.
So is there any particular military history in the last 50 years you want to talk about? The invasion of Panama? Granada? Bombing Yugoslavia? Targeting Iraq’s infrastructure during the gulf war, then imposing sanctions estimated to have caused a million excess deaths, mostly of children? Bombing a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan? Iraq II? Arming the groups that would become ISIS and Al Nusra?
Sure, how about Ukraine. If we didnt give them 200 billion in money, weapons, and training they would just be Russian territory by now.
Lets examine the evidence of history:
Do you think the people of Palestine are better off because of the US’s actions? Do you think the people of Syria are better off because of the US’s actions? Do you think the people of Libya are better off because of the US’s actions? Do you think the people of Yemen are better off because of the US’s actions? Do you think the people of Somalia are better off because of the US’s actions? Do you think the people of Afghanistan are better off because of the US’s actions? Do you think the people of Iraq are better off because of the US’s actions?
And that’s just in the last decade, and I know I missed a few. Do you really think Lucy is going to let Charlie Brown kick the football this time?
America is not acting to help the people of Ukraine, we supported the right-wing throughout the coup so we could have a hostile state on Russia’s border so the vultures can eat their fill as both countries are bled dry. Hence why Ukraine was required to sell off state assets to foreigners for pennies on the dollar, accept massive loans, give up mineral rights, lower the draft age, etc. Russia aren’t the good guys, but the US’s actions have resulted in a scenario infinitely worse for the Ukrainian people.
No u lib
Maybe the military should think about what the fuck they’re doing??? Are they going to follow fascists?
But, Elon is throwing the Nazi salute. Your government is stripping away peoples rights. The whole picture is, the U.S. is stripping people of their constitutional rights.
Not really.
They are just getting rid of any and every liberty that any reasonable society would provide.
Not the rights though. We never had such rights. We just didn’t realise those were needed to be written down because others didn’t violate those expectations.
Even in an anarchy, without any written rights, we would have those liberties, given a reasonable society. Just not here.
Ok what rights have they stripped away?
The right for abortion, healthcare (by the DOGE bullshit), among other rights.
free speach for green card holders
This, too.
There is no such thing as a right to an abortion and that has nothing to do with doge. That was decided by the supreme court years ago. Elon Musk has already said he will step down at the end of May. You say he is taking peoples rights away. What rights is he taking away?
Keep in mind my response may have things added, as I verify and look into what you said, but here it is:
1: The Supreme Court is dominated by Republican Justices, which, if you take Trump’s stance about judges being corrupt and bla bla bla, that also applies for his judges - and Trump never accepted the election loss, so the abortion right removal technically happened in his presidency.
2: I never did imply that abortion has anything to do with DOGE, I separated those two things with something called a comma (which you haven’t used at all - oh, that explains it!). Medicare and Medicaid are, however, likely going to be cut off to save those juicy $1T to then give more money to the wealthy.
3: The rights being removed are not all by DOGE, but all are tied to the Trump administration, which does include DOGE.
This is officially rambling territory, but did you that if 99.99% of Elon Musk’s money (assuming he has between 300 and 400 billion dollars) was evenly split between every US citizen, everyone in the US would get 1000+ dollars, and Elon Musk would still have 30-40 million?
Even if he just lost 99.8% of his money, he’d have an enormous amount of wealth ($800M), and the US citizens would still get a lot of money? Do that but 6 times (to count for every billionaire, making each keep $800M), and uni-statians would get $5K each!
P.S. Poverty only happens because the wealthy want to subjugate the working class, and make rebels not make it through.
The ONLY reason they temporarily (and royally late) fought nazis was to stop the Soviets from liberating the whole of western Europe.
European competition nicely destroyed after which these vultures made us their vasals.
If anything they helped plenty nazis escape or rehabilitated them.
And I’m sure they caused more amines than solved them.Exactly. It’s not a clear black and white issue and there are no easy solutions
It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt. – John Philpot Curran
Yes absolutely. And many soldiers have paid the ultimate sacrifice for those things. Plus decisions regarding war are often made by politicians not soldiers.
FYI: top right is prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib
done by American genociders and murderers.
The prisoner appears to be hooked up to mains power in the high res version of that photo.
I am a US veteran
Nothing makes me cringe harder than someone thanking me for my service
Even though I personally didn’t do anything horrible, it’s still making me remember one of the worst experiences of my life
As a nurse who graduated in the middle of COVID (and was working in hospitals leading up to it), A Wizard’s Guide to Defensive Baking by T. Kingfisher was surprisingly healing read.
“You expect heroes to survive terrible things. If you give them a medal, then you don’t ever have to ask why the terrible thing happened in the first place. Or try to fix it.”
It only seems to be a US only thing. I assume it’s because the military is such a big thing for the US where other countries just see having a military almost as a chore.
gotta thank something, can’t just let a stranger go about their day in peace
Thank you.
There is absolutely no reason to blindly respect someone just because they’ve “served their country.” We don’t know what they’ve done. We have so many examples of soldiers doing horrible things to civilians around the world that blind respect is simply not warranted.
Yea, but neither is blind DISrespect. There’s a lot of examples of bad and there’s a lot of examples of good. Kinda fucked up to lump an entire group into one side or the other… Don’t ya think?
Bet I get blasted for this take.
You spend your whole life doing exercises and hauling supplies, but you massacre one village and suddenly everyone hates you.
So you’re going to disrespect and blame the individual that had nothing to do with it because of the actions of others?
I’m not saying that you should let the organization as a whole off the hook, but should we really be putting the individual in the cross hairs without knowing what their story is?
Are you going to put the medic that helped the injured innocent in front of the firing line because other people bombed the area?
The big issue I have with your statements, and those of the OP are that they are extremist. It’s possible to have a nuanced conversation about it without resorting to the extremes. No wonder the pot keeps calling the kettle black
but should we really be putting the individual in the cross hairs without knowing what their story is
Hey so this serial killer who boiled his victims alive had a really sad upbringing. We should just call it a wash and let him back out on the streets right?
Learning what their story is might be good to do for a common thief, and maybe you’ll choose to be sympathetic as opposed to angry at the loss of your material possessions, but at a certain level of depravity, I don’t care what their story is. The victims of their atrocities don’t care what their story is. They can tell their story to the devil before getting thrown in the lake of fire.
While I agree with your sentiment, I disagree with the overreaching arc of it.
I’d also like to note that you’re taking about the person who actually committed the crime rather than someone who is only connected to the crime by the uniform they wear, regrdless of their hand in the action.
A cook or nurse or on the other side of the planet from the atrocity can hardly be blamed for what the infantryman did on the individual level, or what the military has done on an organizational level. Furthermore, you don’t even know if they oppose those actions or are fighting against it in their own way until you talk to them. That’s the point I’m trying to make that others
If you fail to see and acknowledge this, then we have nothing more to discuss.
That said, extremism should be fought, no matter who it’s coming from. I have plenty of right wing friends I’ve cut contact with due to their extremism. And if I had friends from the left that were as crazy as some of the people I’ve seen here, I’d do the same.
Extremism only leads to more extremism and more fighting and more death. I’d prefer to avoid that if possible.
The big issue I have with your statements, and those of the OP are that they are extremist.
Of course they’re “extremist.” Putting the lives of Afghans and Iraqis on the same level as Americans is an extreme position. That’s just the world we live in. But just because it’s “extreme” relative to generally accepted discourse in the West doesn’t make it any less correct.
Not every cop has shot an innocent person. But people still have no problem saying All Cops Are Bastards. Because even those who aren’t directly involved support and cover for those who do. Likewise, not a single troop at Abu Ghraib blew the whistle on what was happening there. If you’re fine with ACAB, you should also be fine with ATAB, and the only reason I can see why someone wouldn’t is that they value the cops’ victims more than those of the troops.
No I absolutely do have a problem with the ‘All’ part. Don’t presume that everyone agrees with that rhetoric.
Hey man, I just fill deliver fuel for the orphan-crushing machine company. Don’t hold me responsible for the monsters who actually crush the orphans!
Agreed. A friend of mine is a veteran, and did something that he regrets every day of his life. Guilt’s been eating the guy. He told some people, and they cut off contact with him. Which he understands and agrees with. He told me too, and yet I can’t blame him for doing something objectively wrong.
In my opinion the individual isn’t respected but they’re a stand in to show respect for the people who sacrificed their lives.
Particularly the people we were indoctrinated to trust. Cops, military, politicians, businessmen (read as American Dream reachers), preachers…
This might get a lot of down votes but I want to say I don’t think it’s fair to blame the soldiers in the field for the choices of the decision makers in the office. Those horrible events were unwanted ‘byproducts’ of the goal of men with evil plans, they were not veterans going off-book. In other words, these veterans did what was asked of them. I’m not saying they didn’t do some very bad things, but they aren’t the people that should be ‘thanked’.
imagine saying this about 9/11 hijackers – they’re just fighting for their country, don’t blame them, blame Bin Laden!
I’m not saying don’t blame the hijackers, I’m saying blame the hijackers for the hijacking (which in turn killed thousands) and blame Bin Laden for planning it and getting those hijackers to do the hijacking. They’re both guilty, but without Bin Laden ordering 9/11 those hijackers wouldn’t have done it. I’m not saying they wouldn’t have something else bad. I’m not saying they’re innocent. But Bin Laden did something worse than those individual hijackers.
Ahh, yes, the mindless drone argument.
You are literally arguing the same as all Nazis did. “I was just following orders”. US military decided to join an organisation that constantly attacks other countries.
This was exactly the take I was looking for. “I was just following orders” is, and has always been, a bad take. Grow a pair and accept the consequences of your poor decision making.
In German penal law there were discussions on how to treat those that act under orders. Many Germans did act under orders and even in accordance to law in WW2 but also in regard to the Mauerschützen (the soldiers that shot dissidents at the inner German border)- meaning that there were difficulties persecuting them as it was technically legal. There were way too few persecutions, however something called the Radebrechtsche formula was developed. Paraphrasing it says, something that is morally wrong to every morally thinking being cannot be legalized or excused. It is simply illegal to act on orders that are naturally wrong.
Sure, but how many 18 year old boys were convicted for being conscripted into the Wehrmacht?
The US uses economic coercion to force poor kids into joining. They give veterans a massive priority bump for public sector jobs and the GI Bill is often the only way poor kids can afford college.
Also, the US military uses far more obfuscation than the Nazis used. When I was in the Air Force, I worked in geo-spatial intelligence which was mostly extracting heat signatures from satellite collected data. They kept us in the dark on what our intel was being used for. All I knew was that our intel was helping to save the lives of our fellow soldiers somehow and that the government would pay for my college when I was done.
It’s a tricky fucking game they play. More communication amongst ourselves is the only way that could ever be undone.
I believe the word you want is “prosecute/prosecution” rather than “persecute”, but thanks for this.
I fully agree.
Ah, the Nuremberg defense. 😶
Nuance matters. You think a 18 year old boy that was brainwashed into nationalisl his entire life should be executed for being forced to serve as a cook in the military? The Nazis used conscription while the US uses economic coercion (gate keeping jobs, healthcare, and college for vets)
should be executed for being forced to serve as a cook in the military?
Sorry, which user was it exactly who said, “Kill every troop?”
I didn’t get the feeling this is what the meme is about, maybe it is. I think your discomfort is good, in that it has you questioning what you may have not questioned, before. On one level, we can’t decide what’s okay for you, internally. The bigger question is, if external forces would compel suffering and death for your beliefs and convictions, are you prepared to accept that? Many of us who think we are may not be, when put into that position, just as many of us who think we aren’t may end up being more certain than we knew. And at that end neither really matters, at all. I think deep introspection will have to be both journey and destination, multiple times in our lifetimes. The questioning is the reward.
No that would be saying they didn’t do anything bad because doing what is asked of you is always good.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders
Superior orders, also known as just following orders or the Nuremberg defense, is a plea in a court of law that a person, whether civilian, military or police, should not be considered guilty of committing crimes ordered by a superior officer or official.[1][2] It is regarded as a complement to command responsibility.[3]
I’m saying we shouldn’t blame the soldiers on the choices of their leaders, I’m not saying we shouldn’t blame the soldiers for their own choice. I totally agree they could’ve chosen to not to follow orders. I’m not saying they are innocent. But their role is not comparable to the role of the people giving orders.
In other words, these veterans did what was asked of them.
They could just have not.
In the aftermath of World War II, Carl Jaspers formulated in Die Schuldfrage that there are four types of guilt (/responsibility). Criminal guilt, political guilt, moral guilt, and metaphysical guilt. It is a great distinction in general. Yes, political leaders bear a different kind of guilt for the actions than the soldiers, but acting on clearly morally wrong commands do not obliterate guilt from the soldiers. Just like everyone who basically didn’t give their life in pursuit of the good and the right bears some metaphysical guilt for what is happening in the world.
Edit: I realized that, since I am neither an English native, nor very articulate in philosophy or politics, I would rather ask perplexity for a summary. So here it is: Karl Jaspers, in his work The Question of German Guilt, distinguishes four categories of guilt and assigns specific instances to each:
-
Criminal Guilt:
Definition: Violations of objectively provable laws that are legally considered crimes.
Instance: The court, which determines the facts and applies the laws in formal proceedings.
-
Political Guilt:
Definition: Arises from the actions of statesmen and the shared responsibility of every citizen for the government of their state.
Instance: The power and will of the victor, especially after a lost war, as in the case of Germany after World War II.
-
Moral Guilt:
Definition: Refers to individual actions for which every person is morally responsible, even if carried out under orders.
Instance: One’s own conscience and dialogue with others.
-
Metaphysical Guilt:
Definition: A shared responsibility for all injustice in the world, based on human solidarity. It arises when one does not do everything possible to prevent injustice.
Instance: God or transcendence.
Jaspers emphasizes that this differentiation is meant to avoid simplistic or generalized accusations of guilt. He rejects the idea of collective criminal or moral guilt for an entire people, arguing that guilt is always individual.
Yes. I wonder what the outcomes of centering the soldiers gult is?
Do we want the solution to be that soldiers have to consider every order given within the historical context of the time to decide the morally correct actions and do them even if it means court martial or death?
Don’t get me wrong. I’m okay for soldiers to do this in extreme examples. But I don’t think this should be the norm.
I think we should shift the focus to the leaders instead of the soldiers. They are better positioned to make these decisions and have the time to do so.
And it’s their job.
Thank you. 18 year old kids who were never given a sufficient education in history, civics, political science, and basic morality can’t be blamed for working as a cook, secretary, nurse, electrician, intel analyst, etc in the military so that they can afford college.
Again - there is and must be a distinction between the blame, responsibility and guilt of an 18 year old uneducated soldier, nurse etc and a political leader. But this does not automatically absolve the former from all responsibility and guilt. You should and hopefully do focus on the latter’s guilt and responsibility, as it is much larger than the others’. Focussing on the people who follow orders is not what I would advertise for and this isn’t the intent, it is actually the exact opposite. By differentiating different aspects and kinds of guilt you have tools and language at hand to talk about it without putting everyone in the same boat.
It is not a black and white issue. Everyone got blood on their hands - you and me included - just in different amounts, in different ways.
Very honestly - I’ve still not read the book entirely and I have started because I felt some feeling of guilt myself for being a Russian living outside Russia. I think that’s actually exactly what Jaspers, along with his students (the book is basically a dialectic lecture written down with results of work of his class from one semester), was trying to figure out. So I am not the best person to lecture you about that.
From as far as I have read these distinctions are exactly what allow people to talk about guilt, responsibility, trauma, the past, etc, without judging everyone by the same standards. Like, a criminal is judged by the court who defines for a crime they committed. A politician who took part in ordering crimes will be judged by the victor of a war. A soldier (just like a secretary) will be judged in dialogue with others and by his conscience for their individual actions, even if they were following orders. And a normal person who looked away or didn’t actively do their best to stop the atrocities that happen in the world, well, this person’s metaphysical guilt can basically only be judged by a metaphysical instance itself, be it God or another undefined transcendence. Basically all of us bear the latter.
They are very distinct and do not have the same repercussions. It is without doubt that political leaders have a much different, much more facetted responsibility for crimes committed. And we should focus on that. But this does not clean the people who followed their orders from all guilt, and their responsibility and crimes (against humanity) will be judged, just in a different way.
Edit: I’ve added a better phrased summary in my original comment above, since I have realized that translating German political philosophy isn’t my strength exactly.
Thanks, for your summary. I think he’s right about different kinds of guilt being judged in different ways. If someone commits a crime and gets away with it, that doesn’t mean that person will never feel the guilt. It sounds like a good read.
It’s basically impossible not to be a PoS. Wish I was just not born now.
The idea is to consistently work toward being better than yesterday and making restitution, where possible, not where comfortable. It’s not always going to be easy. It’s called character development. If we’ve worked hard for a number of years being of bad character, it’s generally going to take an equal or greater number of years of hard work and restitution to be of great character; but with diligence, I would say perhaps the number of exceptions would be greater than the general rule. It doesn’t mean there will actually be external validation of it, though.
That’s the thing. I will always owe something, and I’m always guilty of something just because I am alive.
I actually was so bothered by this, that I spent years trying to develop a system to get around it.
Lol. I feel that to the core. We all do and all are. And I certainly did try to escape too. I think the main thing is doing our best to minimize any harm and maximize any service to our fellow living beings, understanding that everything is a living being.
Never heard of this, thanks
-
I would much rather see a concerted effort to like not do wars, instead of this overtly obvious attempt to stir the pot.
I’m not going to go refind the examples, but there have been stories about things soldiers do that are definitely not ordered by anyone else. There can be a level of cruelty at times that is completely on the individual and they cannot always hide behind “I was told to”.
O i totally agree, this is exactly why i started with ‘this is might get a lot of downvotes’. But the crimes on the pictures where not crimes by individual soldiers. These things were done by individuals who were told to. I’m not saying that makes them innocent, I’m saying they weren’t the most guilty. The most guilty in my opinion are the men who scheme and think up of plans like this, and then order others to execute it.
Abu Ghraib was done by individual soldiers. At least as far as we know, they were not explicitly ordered to do all the things that they did, and when it came to light, several were charged with crimes over it. Furthermore, not a single person at the base blew the whistle on it, it was only because of independent journalists that it came to light.
If we cite war crimes carried out on the initiative of ordinary soldiers, then of course you could claim that it was just those individual soldiers who were responsible. If we cite things that were carried out on a systematic level, then you’ll say it was the leaders who were responsible, not the soldiers. So I have to ask, is there anything that could, theoretically happen that would make it ok to say, “fuck the troops?” What would that have to look like?
If someone did a horrific thing and then told me they weren’t as guilty as their boss I’d be fairly confident saying that if their first priority was to justify their actions then they can also get absolutely fucked.
But not every soldiers’ first priority are justifying their actions. Please note that the title of this post is insinuating that all veterans are to blame, not some or even the majority of them. Also note the title omits the bosses, the people who gave the orders.That is why I replied. We would only disagree if you’d believe the boss isn’t guilty because he didn’t do the execution of his plans.
“Protecting freedom” by torturing and bombing people halfway across the world
reminds me of how they always try to justify the nuking of japan cities that had hundreds of thousands of civillians (twice even)
Yup, the mental gymnastics they use to justify war crimes. No other country has nuked a civilian population. They’ve nuked 2
deleted by creator
Flat out wrong, the Japanese were preparing to surrender prior to the nuclear bombs being used. The USSR had entered the Pacific front and was rolling through Manchuria to hit Japan, and the Japanese empire knew they were finished then and there. The nukes were nothing more than a US stunt to demonstrate the weapons and intimidate the socialist and imperialized countries away from resistance as the US started the Cold War.
Objectively they were used to prevent the Soviets from gaining influence, and forcing Japan into an unconditional surrender, instead of conditional. They didn’t save anyone but US Imperialism.
This is the lie we’re indoctrinated to believe, yes
No no no. None of this should be acknowledged, because Whataboutism.
People got mad at this one streamer for saying American soldiers deserve PTSD. When you consider that most interventions by the US are not justified or just imperial power plays, and that many soldiers commit war crimes, you realize she has a point.
I mean. Jimmy just wanted to go to college. But was forced to go to Iraq. The soldiers don’t have much choice. Especially the boys in trailer parks. They have no opportunity and the military gives them that.
Ooh poow widdwe Jimmy … you know who didn’t have a choice? the kids whose heads he blew off. I don’t care if he had a choice in going there or not, Jimmy doesn’t deserve a blink of sleep for the rest of his miserable cunting life if he didn’t knowingly miss every single shot.
Nobody was “forced” to go to Iraq.
For some reason, people think it’s ok to pull others down to get ahead but only in the context of the military. There are other ways to escape poverty, like selling crack or scamming the elderly. I wonder if you condone those approaches as well because “they didn’t have another choice if they wanted to escape poverty.” I doubt it. But if the victims aren’t people in our own neighborhoods who you can actually see, if it’s dead children on another continent who the news doesn’t talk about, then somehow it’s perfectly fine.
Everyone in that position who chooses to work at McDonald’s or Walmart or Amazon instead of signing up to murder foreigners is a better person than every troop, they are braver, more ethical, more heroic, and more enlightened. The cowards who pull others down to get ahead deserve no respect and no sympathy.
Just so you are aware. Soldiers were forced. They were by the rule of their contracts forced to redeploy after they found out how terrible the situation in Iraq was. I know this because friends were forced to go back to Iraq because there were not enough replacements. They had little to no choice. The POTUS was able to force this upon them.
Now sure, they could just go awol or force their resignation and go to jail. But some of them have families that rely on base housing or medical coverage.
Nobody forced them to sign up.
I can’t really agree with that. Social economic factors make it impossible for some people to get out of their communities. The military during peacetime. Is a great upward mobility tool for folks in gang lands. We don’t invest in their schools. The jobs left in these regions are pitiful. And the only choice they have to get out is to serve.
It’s how the rich make America such a shit hole to force people to fight in wars for their benefit. It’s so much deeper than just blaming the soldiers.
The same is true of selling crack but I’ll criticize that too.
If the choice is “be an acomplice to the destruction of an entier country and it’s people” and “don’t get a discount code for college”, like, surely we can see that’s not really a good excuse.
Yeah, you are not getting it nor are you trying to. You are ignoring the poverty and indoctrination of children aspects of this in order to jerk off.
Some folks really have no other choices. Like Flynt Michigan. Industry has collapsed. Gangs have taken over and life expectancy is shorter than any where else in the world. Those children are told by their parents. Their only choice to get out of this is to serve.
Trading brown people overseas’ lives for your own comfort and livelihood is still- believe it or not- wrong.
“though your path may be set, you can gain as much speed down that path as you would like”
means, even if they had to go to war, they could have missed shots on purpose.
Every US soldier signed up for killing, they deserve whatever they get.
There are definitely some like that. The American system has a number of tricks to try to force people to do what they like as well though. Poverty, over policing of minorities, lack of social safety nets etc can cause people who grew up barely avoiding prison choosing military thinking the only choices they have are death or military, shoved at them when they’re too young to really know the world. Add education that specifically avoids or lies about what US actually does overseas, plus a bunch of jingoistic propaganda making being a soldier appear to be a respectable profession.
I grew up in a cult that avoided military so I never had those feelings myself, so I got to watch it from the outside, and even the pledge of allegiance every morning was weird jingoistic programming from early ages. It can be difficult to see past that at 17. I’m not saying they don’t deserve any punishment, but I do disagree with the idea that every single one wanted to kill people.
Exactly. When I signed up for the military, it was because I wanted to kill people, and not because I had no other good choices
12 year US Army vet, deployed to Iraq 2007-2008.
Number of people I killed: 0
Why? I was a surgical tech. I helped save lives, including local nationals.
But sure. I deserve “whatever I get” for literally signing up to help people.
Cool, you can be a civil doctor too. Glad you fixed up the people who killed for a living.
The amount of cope in this thread is astonishing. I never thought I’d see an actual person justifying killing hundreds of thousands of civilians with a straight face. But here we are
deleted by creator
While I understand the frustration toward those critiquing military personnel, I believe we should consider the broader context of responsibility in our society. Emergency responders who assist during natural disasters deserve our appreciation, even as we examine complex institutional issues.
If we’re discussing responsibility, those in technology fields must also reflect on their contributions. Many STEM professionals work for profit-driven companies developing technologies with significant societal impacts—from military applications to automation that displaces workers.
Throughout history, scientific advancement has brought both progress and devastation. The development of nuclear weapons, chemical agents, and military technology has often proceeded without adequate ethical consideration. When we examine figures like Oppenheimer or Einstein, we must acknowledge both their brilliance and the consequences of their work.
The irony isn’t lost on me that many who quickly assign blame may themselves contribute to systems that concentrate power and wealth. Rather than dividing ourselves through targeted blame, perhaps we should recognize our collective responsibility for the current state of our nation.
I believe that fostering division only benefits those who already hold power. Perhaps approaching these issues with understanding rather than hate might offer a more productive path forward—even if that perspective seems idealistic in today’s polarized climate.
It’s almost like people, places, things, ideas and acts have good and bad consequences, foreseen and unforseen, isn’t it?
Iirc, FBI or some USA government entity convinced? coerced? Hollywood into being the propaganda department of our government sometime during WW2.
Amerikkka!
Reading through the comments I think maybe countries with free healthcare and education dont have a lot of room to weigh in on this.
I am not saying respect the troops or anything. But goddamn.
Edit: if you are down voting then at least give a reason to entirely alienate all the people who are actually trained to fight.
I think maybe countries with free healthcare and education dont have a lot of room to weigh in on this
Why not?
You were the only country to invoke NATO Article 5. Twice. Both times you were the invading aggressor fighting countries half a world away while spinning it as “defense”. Where you forced soldiers in countries with free healthcare and education (like Canada) to fight and die in wars you started. And then refused to pay us after the fact.
And what does free healthcare and education have to do with anything? Are you going to claim that America “subsidises” us?
I didn’t do shit. I was in high school when that happened. Fuck off. You don’t understand how people get pressured in joining and how recruiters con a bunch of kids to sign up using the lack if health care and education as leverage.
I don’t understand why solders from other countries even join up.
Me me me me me
You argue like a conservative.
I work with a lot of veterans and the thing that breaks my heart is how many of them really bought into the lie. They really think they sacrificed years of their lives, some of them went through hell, all for the people of their country. And when or if they realize that they were used, it can break them.
Many, not all obviously, but many of them are victims of this self-same system of oppression. Taking it out on them is exactly what the people who pull their strings want from us.
No war but class war.
If you think the Things the US did as a democracy we’re Bad Just wait and See what autocracy will bring.
Gonna be interesting who’s gonna suffer more. It’s own population or the others.
usa: summons cthulhu to bring destruction of the universe
people: what if it was a republican, things would be worseThere’s just good and bad. No one’s really “good” good. So there’s just bad. So fuck it all. Putin, Obama, Stalin, Trump, Hitler, Merkel. At least some of them don’t even try to hide it so they’re at least honest. That makes it easy.
Well, you’ve already killed one innocent person, so you can go ahead and kill a million more since you’re already a bad person anyway. Much logic.
Those muslim, fascist and communist authoritarians were really just freedom fighters fighting for their people. America bad.
Unironically yes to all of that except the fascists.
I wish I could post this here in Australia without getting rocks from every white Australian. You can search my post history to see their reaction to questioning this.
Australia was involved in every one of those crimes. And the celebration for those meaningless murders are everywhere. Questioning this is questioning the sacrifice of Jesus.
Though by order of our north american overlords the US should not be alone in that title.
❌Lest we forget
✅Best we forget
Text Publishing — Best We Forget: The War for White Australia, - https://www.textpublishing.com.au/books/best-we-forget-the-war-for-white-australia-1914-18
Thanks for the link. And this should be the new motto.
Or I came up with a different one. Lest we forget how some struggled to kill many for the profit of few.
And that includes the sacrosanct anzac. But that opinion can get me killed here.
We really need to separate the trauma that formed the ANZAC legend from the fuckos of any warfare since.
My great-grandfather was an ANZAC - actual, WWI, 23rd Battalion, 16 year old. I knew him extremely well, I was sixteen when he passed. I had a front row seat to what happened to those kids for the rest of their lives.
I don’t fucking venerate servicemen.
Seeing the public reaction to some of the military adjacent cases over the past few years has been incredibly disheartening (e.g. McBride)
Knew exactly what scene this was before I’d even taken a good look, let alone read the text. One of my favourites, along with “I will not carry a gun, Frank”.
A lot of excusing going on on that last panel
This was also said in a context that included a military draft
“Just following orders” etc etc.
How’d that work out in nuremburg?
I’m not defending that defence.
The mods at non credible defence aren’t going to like this.
What even is the purpose of that sub?
It’s just shitposting but defense themed
Defense, in the same way the pictures in OP were defense.
Of course from a russian POV it musst look like that to a .ml enjoyer.
Russians are the only ones who don’t like it when we drop bombs on kids. Idk why they wanna spoil everyone else’s fun! The kids are fine with it, it’s just those mean ol’ Russians going on about “human rights” or whatever. The million dollar bombs that we build instead of paying for healthcare, education, or functional bridges are so damn cool that the only reason anyone would possibly have a problem with them is if they just hate America.
This is what y’all actually believe, but the even crazier part is that you’ve somehow managed to convince yourselves you’re leftists!
Oof, more .ml talk, I’m not gonna read that shit lmao
ja wear a black armband when they shot the man who said peace could last forever?
Par for the course.
hurrr ml 🙈
The first picture is an apartment block getting leveled.
The third is a child who managed to tear her clothes off after the US dropped napalm on them as they fled their village, but was burnt badly enough she had to spend 14 months in the hospital. She was one of the lucky ones.
The fourth is the second atomic bomb the US dropped on a civilian population.
From what perspective is murdering hundreds (hundreds of thousands in the case of Nagasaki) of civilians just trying to live their lives on the other side of the planet acts of self-defense?
Nice spin. The point is that NCD is defense themed and Nato themed, not that the pictures aren’t of atrocities.
NATO “defence” 🍆 ✊
- The Intercept, 2021: Meet NATO, the Dangerous “Defensive” Alliance Trying to Run the World
- CounterPunch, 2022: NATO is Not a Defensive Alliance
- Noam Chomsky, 2023: NATO “most violent, aggressive alliance in the world”
- Thomas Fazi, 2024: NATO: 75 years of war, unprovoked aggressions and state-sponsored terrorism
- Gabriel Rockhill, 2020: The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It
NCD is not about “defence” it’s about war and the glorification of weapons used to murder children. At best it’s ironic and incredibly tasteless, more realistically, they’re just a bunch of bloodthirsty fascists hiding behind irony for plausible deniability.
NATO is the largest Imperialist millitary coalition in the world, NCD being NATO focused directly means that it’s focused on celebrating Imperialist atrocities.
In OP are images of what NATO, an organization that has never fought a defensive war in its entire existence, calls defense.
deleted by creator
Like bear arms?
Literally what the founders wanted.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Fetishizing NATO, basically.
Spreading war propaganda
a place for chuds to cope
The same as NAFO: shilling for the MIC
They might still cum from the top left one
Being an outsider I thought non credible defence was just memes about military things, are they specifically pro US imperialism?
