Coming to this late, but No, I don't think so, based on all the enlisted/officers I know personally. Soldiers do not get to prozetilise. It is strictly prohibited regardless to what the media might portray, Of course you might get the pious few that might try most will get in trouble if they show a religious book and even the women have to cover their heads in places. This is what all our friends have told us after returning from duty. One thing though, there is a higher than normal attrition for Chaplains. Burn out City. What does that say? are they losing God?
On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Clogtowner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi y'all - could it be that the current Bush/Cheney created economic > "crisis" is designed (amongst other things) to stimulate enrollment > into the military for evangelizing the misguided overseas? If so, the > plan is working! > > On Dec 26, 10:18 am, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't know what Obama plans to do with the military as far as base > > closures and the size of the standing army. As I see it he has one of > > two reasonable routes. > > > > 1. He can accept that America has taken the role of worldwide enforcer > > and do the job right. The first most important step here is to take > > the army back from control of the international corporations. I > > believe that war for profit has been the primary force running the > > American army for well over 100 years. As evidence, here is a link to > > the book "War Is A Racket," by Major General Smedley Butler. > http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html > > Once the army is following the will of an informed citizenry, then it > > will be used for self-defense and when feasible to help fight tyranny > > and oppression. Notice that I said when feasible. Helping others, when > > possible, does help us, or so I believe. But not when it leaves us > > overextended. Then it helps no one. Life Guards, for example, are > > taught not to attempt a rescue that they think is not possible. Why > > risk two lives. Why run down our military, lose American lives and > > ruin our economy for nothing. The army must not be dominated by > > mercenaries. This is one of the things that led to the downfall of > > Rome. When our sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, cousins and friends > > are in the army, we will not go to war so easily. When we do, we will > > have a plan to win with the fewest possible casualties, like Clinton's > > war in Yugoslavia. If the Commander in chief is failing, he should be > > recalled. Much of the killing of non participating civilians occurs > > when the mission is not clear and it stalls, like in Vietnam and in > > Iraq. > > > > 2. The second approach would be to give up being the world's > > policeman. Neither the Iraq or Afghanistan wars would have been > > necessary. The Afghanis were willing to turn Bin Laden and his crew > > over to a neutral world court. Now they are roaming free. The pressure > > was working on Saddam Hussein. Inspectors were being allowed to do > > their jobs. Of course if these wars had been run properly then things > > wouldn't have turned out so badly and as much as I hate war, I might > > believe that we did the right thing. > > > > As I see it these are two reasonable options. Both of them are far > > from ideal, but necessary in the world that we live in > > > > On Dec 25, 10:01 pm, CrossBow <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > No, I did not say anti-military, but any generic reference to faceless > > > people as child killers is not exactly positive either. We risk > dehumanize > > > them like we accuse them of dehumanizing their target enemy if we drop > the > > > casual killer labels. I believe we agree on most as I said before, how > we > > > say it is just as important. Curious enough, the old GI benefits you > > > mention are in place, and for some, particularly those diagnosed with > > > traumatic stress disorder, reprieve has finally come, it is now > > > formally recognized as an actual medical condition.... > > > > > read more » > > > > > Education benefits are working if you use them. Active Duty military > offers > > > a GI bill of $50,000 - while not Ivy League, can get you a degree that > will > > > keep you from re-enlisting if you are done with active duty. The rest > is up > > > to the individual's drive. I'm not sure that the National Guard has > > > decreased or increased, do not have the stats on that, but surely the > border > > > duty and over seas tours have. National Guard and Reserve have been on > the > > > rise for years since the decrease of combat troop count, and base > closures, > > > but more attention has spotlighted them since Bush and 9/11. What > Obama's > > > appointees do will be interesting. Any suppositions on that? > > > > > On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Isparklaria <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > > > > Crossbow, > > > > > > While I enjoyed your reply, I think you misread mine. I am not > against > > > > the military. I just want to see it reporting to a President who > > > > reports to the people. I would like see the public informed and also > > > > able to recall a president who is definately incompetant and probably > > > > criminal. I would also like to se the old GI benefits restored where > > > > military service gets you a college education. I would like to see > > > > real military service, not Bush's national guard stint, be a > > > > prequisite to be commander in chief. I would like to see national > > > > service of some sort, either military or peace corps or something > else > > > > required for full citizenship. Enough service would also get you a > > > > free college education. There are many more changes that I would like > > > > to see. I am not for killing but I accept the necessity for now and > > > > for any forseable future of a strong military. But it must, must, > > > > must, must be accountable to the people. The people and or the > friends > > > > and family should also be in the army, so that war hurts all of us, > > > > not just the few who have enlisted. And a tax cut durring a war so > > > > that we don't feel it. That is a treasonous act. > > > > > > On Dec 25, 1:53 pm, CrossBow <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > "the average joe is quickly turned into a killer through military > > > > > training" As well as are martial artists and police, whose training > is > > > > > much deeper at times than footsoldiers...and I believe those are > whom you > > > > > are concentrating on - right? Interesting that you choose only the > > > > > perspective of "killing machine" as not all troops are trained to > be foot > > > > > soldiers, but a vast majority of today's standing armies are > technical > > > > and > > > > > removed to supply line and command. Most of the boot camp training > and > > > > > follow-up techinical schools are focused on building teamwork, and > > > > > preventive/protective technology instead of end result killing. Of > course > > > > > units are taught to kill in unison, while covering thier asses, to > > > > survive > > > > > long enough to achieve objectives. Where was a standing military > > > > > invented? WHY? originally? to protect and if you are Amerind, it > was war > > > > for > > > > > resources to survive. Even Chimps do this today over territory. > > > > > MOST primitive tribes either trade or fight, or both on occasion. > > > > Soldiers > > > > > are never instant inhuman killing machines. When was the last time > you > > > > > really talked to a lifer in the military? or a bootcamp graduate? > Many > > > > > humans can kill and we all can be cruel! I am not just blasting you > for > > > > > questioning, or divulging your perspective,, I am protesting a > current of > > > > > codswallop fueled by this Burning Bush administration that has made > a > > > > > mockery of many. Along with the spining hate mongers of TV!... > > > > > > > read more » > > > > > > > Too many people believe in HollyWoods version of the Arnold > Swartzenegger > > > > > commando. All movies with military representations follow a stupid > > > > > off-base generic, very far removed, twisted glorification of the > real > > > > > thing. Though I agree with much that you are saying about the > regimes > > > > that > > > > > control our soldiers...some of your information is very > unrepresentative > > > > of > > > > > the real military human on a day to day basis. This administration > has > > > > done > > > > > more damage to the image of soldiery than the Vietnam War because > the > > > > > current altercation has potential to never end. You are accusing > the > > > > many, > > > > > and degrading the few in the manner you present them. I am not > > > > panglossian > > > > > in my views...I've just lived with military personnel long enough > to > > > > know. > > > > > GOD DAMN Dick Cheney and his ilk for dragging the image of the > soldier > > > > > through the mud until all you see is a faceless killing machine! > Damn > > > > this > > > > > regime again for creating the same version of the "baby killer" > that > > > > Vietnam > > > > > did. Spit on all of humanity for not staying aware enough after > WWII and > > > > > hiding our heads in the sand long enough to have so little > influence on > > > > the > > > > > political machine. > > > > > > > What is the solution? Disband the military because they are all > baby > > > > killers > > > > > aching for an excuse to kill children? Sanction misbehaving > countries to > > > > > death? which is worse? What to do when sanctions don't work? Nah, > don't > > > > make > > > > > up stories of WMD's, keep the sanctions going...and going and > going. > > > > What > > > > > is that perfect solution? The UN maneuverings? ok. What is your > > > > alternative > > > > > to a standing army? Should be become isolated and beg off > globalization > > > > and > > > > > cooperation with other countries? How long will interests be > protected > > > > that > > > > > way in even the most harmless of instances? Reduce ourselves to > > > > > a non-influence? would that help? Live in small insular > communities like > > > > > the more harmless "savage"? Avoid global visits to other > countries, stop > > > > > cooperating scientifically? Do you realize how much of this effort > is > > > > still > > > > > protected by military prescence and sanctions that depend on it to > stand > > > > > firm? > > > > > > > what philospher portrays a humanity free from darwinian combat? > Does it > > > > > depend on population? The savages you speak of are in small groups > using > > > > > smaller resources.... Does population necessitate Civilization? > How is > > > > > savagery controlled? usually by standing arms and not by > > > > > prayer...obviously. As creatively destructive as humanity is, It > may be > > > > that > > > > > we will endlessly find something to gripe and fight over...it only > takes > > > > two > > > > > to disagree. According to smarter people than me, we are all > savages that > > > > > happen to cooperate if given reason to do so...ie survival. If we > can > > > > get > > > > > past this bully on the edge of the world philosophy what will we > replace > > > > it > > > > > with? what can we replace it with? Love? there will always be a > > > > > Machiavellian to screw things up. Too bad we can't genetically > engineer > > > > > ourselves to be complacent and docile and lay around in a > > > > ... > > > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > -- gnothe se auton --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
