Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > Special Forces > Base Camp

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-02-2010, 12:06   #1
nuwt
Asset
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Great Northwest
Posts: 0
Why Should We Respect Professional Soldiers?

I found this argument when I Google searched "Professional Soldiers" here.
It upsets me quite a bit, and I was wondering what a QP would say to such an outrage?

Why Should We Respect Professional Soldiers?

By Pseudonymous

I’ve never understood the exaggerated public respect that is accorded to professional soldiers. Most recently in the UK we’ve witnessed the spectacle of the Prime Minister effectively being emotionally blackmailed into phoning the mother of a soldier killed in the war in Afghanistan because apparently he made a few mis-spellings when he sent her a hand-written note of condolence. Frankly, I would prefer it if the leader of our country delegated this little administrative task to someone who can spare the time.

Why do we owe these soldiers respect? Some would argue that they are fighting for their country and while this is true it is also true that they are in the situation of their own accord. No-one joins the army of ignorance of what the job involves.

In fact this is the very reason why soldiers do not deserve the exaggerated respect they receive. Soldiers join the army knowing full well that they will have to kill people. I cannot begin to imagine the mindset of someone who thinks this is ok. The fact that these men and women are apparently okay with the idea of being paid to kill others is pretty disturbing to say the least and hardly worthy of respect.


In fact it is no surprise to find that 8.5% of inmates in the UK prison system are former soldiers. In 2007, 11.6% of US army recruits needed ‘moral waivers’ for past criminal acts in order to be able to join. We should not be surprised about this, the lack of empathy needed to be a decent criminal is a top requirement for any prospective soldier.

The huge wars of the last century, WW1 and WW2, were fought largely by conscripts. True, there were also plenty of volunteers, but I think it is fair to say that from the point of view of the UK at least, both wars posed a serious risk to the country’s existence.

That is the difference between soldiers in those wars and professional soldiers. Soldiers in WW2 especially did not want to be involved but they had little choice. By comparison, professional soldiers today are like a bizarre kind of tourist. They sign up, get kitted up with things which hurt people and off they go.

I remember speaking to a guy who was in the Paras (the UK Parachute Regiment) once and he was saying how ‘gutted’ he was that he had missed the Falklands war and left before he had a chance to be involved in the first Gulf War and so never really saw any ‘action’. I find it hard to believe that this is an uncommon attitude amongst professional soldiers. Many of those who are now complaining about poor (killing) equipment would have been the most enthusiastic about the prospect of war back in 2001.

Now your trenchant flag-waver will defend these soldiers by saying that they are defending their country but that is not true. Both UK and US soldiers are involved in wars which have little or no bearing on the security of their respective countries. Sure, there are important geo-strategic interests at stake, but it is not the case that there is a massive risk to the ordinary citizens of either country from Islamic extremists, let alone Afghans or Iraqis.

There are plenty of people who do far more important jobs in our societies but receive far less credit. Just off the top of my head it should be fairly obvious that, for a country not threatened by war - doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, firefighters and policemen all perform far more useful jobs than soldiers. I don’t think we should put these guys up on a pedestal either as there are plenty of reasons why people choose these jobs, not all of them gratifying, but the fact is that they contribute vastly more to society.

All of these groups, especially teachers and social workers, are subject to all kinds of abuse from the media and other commentators when things don’t go perfectly. Yet it seems as though soldiers can do no wrong, unless of course they are actually implicated in a war crime, in which case these soldiers are hastily labelled as ‘not representative’ of the rest of the army.

Do soldiers have their uses? Sadly, our world is still troubled enough that they do. In particular there is a benefit in the international community deploying soldiers to keep the peace in troubled countries, though clearly there is a need for international agreement on the wheres, whys and hows of deployment.

But this does not mean that soldiers deserve the excessive respect that they are accorded. No-one joins the army in ignorance of what the job involves and the choice to join is weighed up against the often generous benefits of joining. Most worryingly of all has to be the mindset of the kind of person who considers killing for money acceptable, irregardless of the patriotic nonsense with which these motivations are disguised.

Last edited by nuwt; 02-02-2010 at 12:08.
nuwt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 12:36   #2
Utah Bob
Quiet Professional
 
Utah Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: 11 miles from Dove Creek, Colorady
Posts: 3,924
Not worth a response.
__________________
"...But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive."
Shakespeare - Henry V
Lazy Bob Ranch
Utah Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 13:40   #3
Paslode
Area Commander
 
Paslode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Occupied Wokeville
Posts: 4,629
IMO anyone (not just QP's) who puts there life on the line for the well being of others, without an agent and a Multi- Million Dollar contract.

That is selfless service, it is deserving of respect.
Paslode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 13:56   #4
neecheepure
Quiet Professional
 
neecheepure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Islamic Republic of
Posts: 67
Let me reach way back and quote "Toy Story" on this one....
"You are a sad, strange little man..."
__________________
You can't train "shot."
neecheepure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 14:15   #5
head
Quiet Professional
 
head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 568
Last comment...
Quote:
Hey, bro - what's so wrong with killing? Just imagine if you never brushed your teeth - oh wait, nevermind. Umm.. imagine if you never flushed your toilet after "moving your bowels" (as someone such as yourself might say). That's all we're doing - flushing the toilet so you guys don't have to smell it.
__________________
Every man has three characters: that which he shows, that which he has, and that which he thinks he has.
head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 16:02   #6
Warrior-Mentor
Quiet Professional
 
Warrior-Mentor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: America, the Beautiful
Posts: 3,193
Clearly someone who doesn't understand that some things are worth fighting and dying to defend.

Someone who is either making an argument for a conscript (read UNprofessional) Army, or outright surrender.

Someone not worth discussing this with at any length.

And yet, we will continue proudly defend their right to say things we find repugnant.

Because that's who we are and what we believe.
__________________
Like a free America? Join www.actforamerica.org

"The views expressed in this post are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy
or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government."
- From Army Regulation 360-1, Paragraph 6-8 (2)
Warrior-Mentor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 16:19   #7
Sigaba
Area Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utah Bob View Post
Not worth a response.
With utmost respect, I disagree. I find attacks upon professions vital to everyday life problematic, especially those directed at professionals in the armed services. While this particular commentary is directed at the British army, it indirectly assails the American army as well. IMO, such attacks, if left unchallanged, can have devastating historical consequences. An example from our own past illustrates my point.

During the Gilded Age, the U.S. Army was regularly subjected to these types of broadsides in what we now call the "MSM." In 1868, the Independent averred that the likelihood of “a respectable American citizen” joining the regular army was less “than [if] he would volunteer for the penitentiary.” Nine years later, the New York Sun described the army as a collection of “bummers, loafers, and foreign paupers.” In 1887, the New York Herald suggested that the army, a pack of “poor shiftless waifs” who had enlisted out of desperation, could not provide adequate national defense.*

These types of attacks had a significant, if not decisive, impact on military reformers' collective ability
  1. to communicate that the military effectiveness of army was deteriorating throughout the Gilded Age,
  2. to articulate why reform was necessary despite the fact that there was no strategically significant foreign threat to America itself, or
  3. to respond to American navalists who sought to promote the navy directly at the army's expense.
An example of the first dynamic listed above can be found in a 1869 article in the New York Times. This article discussed a report by General W.T. Sherman that was a part of the secretary of war's annual report to Congress. The article primarily focused on the reduction of the army's personnel that followed the American Civil War. The article stated that the reduction required a “delicacy of management,” and had been achieved “without the slightest difficulty or embarrassment.” The piece concluded:
Quote:
And it has been done, too, so effectually that, as General Sherman shows, “we have not a single regiment that may be said to be in reserve.” We have reached, think our officers, the limit of wise and prudent reductions considering the vast extent of the country and its present condition.**
However, if reads General Sherman's report, one quickly realizes that it was a document written by a professional soldier to warn civilians that the army was in bad decline. Yet, because the media had placed themselves as the interpreter of contemporaneous military affairs, the message was not only missed, but distorted so that it became the opposite of what General Sherman wrote.***

By my reading, it was not until 1939, when General George C. Marshall sat before congress as the army's chief of staff during numerous rounds of testimony that American civilians began to re-align their views of professional soldiers.

_______________________________________________
* These quotes are from Jack D. Foner, The United States Soldier Between Two Wars: Army Life and Reforms, 1865-1898 (New York: Humanities Press, 1970), p. 74.
** "Our Army in Time of Peace," New York Times, 7 December 1869, p. 6.
*** William T. Sherman, “Report of the General of the Army, 20 November 1869,” as attached to U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of War, Being Part of the Messages and Documents Communicated to the Two Houses of Congress at the Beginning of the Second Session of the Forty-First Congress, Volume I, House of Representatives Executive Document 1, pt. 2, Forty-First Congress, Second Session (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1869), as printed in U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Executive Documents Printed by Order of the House of Representatives During the Second Session of the Forty-First Congress, 1869-’70, Volume II (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1870).
**** Mark Skinner Watson, Chief of Staff: Prewar Plans and Preparations [The United States Army in World War II: The War Department] (1950; reprint, Washington, D.C.: United States Army Center of Military History, 1985), pp. 8, 15-56.
Sigaba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 16:28   #8
bandycpa
Guerrilla Chief
 
bandycpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 583
This is an awful lot of attention for an article written by someone named "Pseudonymous".

MOO YMMV


Bandy
__________________
“Critics are men who watch a battle from a high place then come down and shoot the survivors.”—Hemingway.
bandycpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 16:52   #9
armymom1228
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I doesn't take much honor to write that kind of trash and hide behind a psuedonym..try saying that to my face.

An Army Mom.

Last edited by armymom1228; 02-02-2010 at 16:58.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 17:36   #10
Gypsy
Area Commander
 
Gypsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 7,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandycpa View Post
This is an awful lot of attention for an article written by someone named "Pseudonymous".

MOO YMMV


Bandy
Word.

The writer is a tool. And a coward.
__________________
My Heroes wear camouflage.

Last edited by Gypsy; 02-02-2010 at 17:44.
Gypsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 17:59   #11
echoes
Area Commander
 
echoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: OK. Thanking Our Brave Soldiers
Posts: 3,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warrior-Mentor View Post
Clearly someone who doesn't understand that some things are worth fighting and dying to defend.

And yet, we will continue proudly defending their right to say things we find repugnant.

Because that's who we are and what we believe.
Very well said Sir!!!

Some folks just do not understand that we live free beacuse brave Special Forces Soldiers fight and die to protect Our freedom...because They are Men, trained to do things "others" would not or could not do!

IMVHO, there is a majority of dime, pencil, and welfare "pushers" who seem to think Freedom is Free, and their sad-assed right in this world....

Thank God for Special Forces Soldiers...for without them...honestly, where would be??? Have a couple of guesses, but the details are gruesome, so I will refrain from posting...


Holly
echoes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 18:15   #12
Dozer523
BANNED USER
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuwt View Post
I found this argument when I Google searched "Professional Soldiers" here.
It upsets me quite a bit, and I was wondering what a QP would say to such an outrage?
Golly, I googled Professional Soldier and I found this. http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/professional-soldier/
A fascinating comparison of Professional Soldiers to hackers. Ooooo La Lah.

The only thing I find upsetting is that on your second post you toss this turd onto our expensive Living Room Persian carpet -- we picked it while we were deployed.
What? Didn't we pay enough attention to you when you posted your 15 word intro? BTW you DID manage to spark a sarcastic comment from Mitch. Which is pretty damn hard to do! (He's one of the nicest QP's here . . . not like me.)

This question O2 theft.
Dozer523 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 18:49   #13
nuwt
Asset
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Great Northwest
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dozer523 View Post
Golly, I googled Professional Soldier and I found this. http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/professional-soldier/
A fascinating comparison of Professional Soldiers to hackers. Ooooo La Lah.

The only thing I find upsetting is that on your second post you toss this turd onto our expensive Living Room Persian carpet -- we picked it while we were deployed.
What? Didn't we pay enough attention to you when you posted your 15 word intro? BTW you DID manage to spark a sarcastic comment from Mitch. Which is pretty damn hard to do! (He's one of the nicest QP's here . . . not like me.)

This question O2 theft.
QP Dozer523, I would like to apologize for defiling the QP carpet

I didn't mean to stir anything out of QP Mitch, I made the mistake of posting a weak intro and just wasn't sure how to unscrew myself.I thought my best option was silence since I'm a nobody.

I'm disappointed in myself for making such a bad impression to the men I look up to so much in only two posts.

I'm sorry for all the racket.

I am not a QP or military, my opinion therefore does not matter, I realize now there is no need for me to post.

I just wanted the opinion of the men I respect the most,

but I forgot my place.

It won't happen again.

back to lurking

-Shawn

Last edited by nuwt; 02-02-2010 at 18:59.
nuwt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 19:00   #14
TOMAHAWK9521
Quiet Professional
 
TOMAHAWK9521's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,200
"War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
- John Stuart Mill
__________________
"It is a brave act of valor to condemn death, but where life is more terrible than death, it is then the truest valor to dare to live." -Sir Thomas Browne (1605-1682)
TOMAHAWK9521 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 19:22   #15
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuwt View Post
QP Dozer523, I would like to apologize for defiling the QP carpet

I didn't mean to stir anything out of QP Mitch, I made the mistake of posting a weak intro and just wasn't sure how to unscrew myself.I thought my best option was silence since I'm a nobody.

I'm disappointed in myself for making such a bad impression to the men I look up to so much in only two posts.

I'm sorry for all the racket.

I am not a QP or military, my opinion therefore does not matter, I realize now there is no need for me to post.

I just wanted the opinion of the men I respect the most,

but I forgot my place.

It won't happen again.

back to lurking

-Shawn
Shawn:

You are an American citizen, and we serve to guarantee your right to speak your mind.

We represent you, and do the bidding of the civilian leadership you have elected to lead us.

As professionals, we are different from amateurs. Conscription has served this nation well, but may not be the correct method for providing military forces in today's complicated world.

Not all soldiers are perfect, but the Army today is the finest I have ever served in, no disrespect to our forebearers. Our soldiers know their craft, and try to accomplish their assigned missions with a minimum of collateral damage. Consider the difference between our bombing campaigns in WW II or Vietnam, and our efforts today.

I would further challenge his comments about the incarceration rate of servicemembers, at least here in the U.S. Friends of mine working in the Federal Prisons have told me that there are very few veterans among their population. I suspect that a bit of quick demographic research would demonstrate that.

Pseudonymous writes anonymously because he presents an argument which he lacks the intestinal fortitude to attach his name to. He is a coward and a buffoon. He is the guy who hides at home and hopes that the men on the wall who have the courage to stand their posts do their job and keep the bad men at bay. Were he around in 1941, he would have been a Nazi sympathizer, a Communist, or a pacifist. Whatever it took to get along, and to ensure his personal security, selling out his brothers, right up till they came for him. He can write his screed today and make his criticism of better men who serve their nations, without the moral courage to identify himself, and then go back to a meaningless existence, holding his manhood cheap, likely depending on the charity of the state.

Behold the modern, liberal, pacifist pussy, in all his glory.

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2025
The Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 16:19.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies