Matty829 wrote:All I have gotten out of this is:
You don't question what is going on.
That's pretty much all soldiers do, the difference is that it isn't their job to dictate policy, it doesn't matter if you don't like it, you signed a contract.
Matty829 wrote:Questioning what is going on is wrong.
This is also pretty common.
Matty829 wrote:You are not trained,employed or qualified to question what is going on.
Correct, much like a cashier who is also shareholder doesn't dictate policy in his workplace. If a soldiers is told "go take that hill and kill the civilians on it" then he's quite within his rights to question the order (if it's illegal then he's obligated to refuse). What he's not likely to do is stop and say "i don't like the governments policies on this war, i'm taking my platoon back home" when he's asked to go on patrol.
Matty829 wrote:Anyone who questions anything is wrong.
Any modern military encourages soldiers to question things, at the appropriate time and with appropriate reason.
Matty829 wrote:These people who question the army are questioning you personally and need to be convinced otherwise.
Can't speak for Fryzie but i'm putting out my POV because I think you're slightly deluded (probably the same reason you're putting your out).
Matty829 wrote:Do what you will, which is the bases of the intended freedom we have (of which I assume you are supporting with joining the army) but I do have every right to question this just as you have every right to believe it.
And question it I will, and I will always question everything, as is what I do.
Personally I don't find these answers good enough for me to stop questioning the ideals of what is war, the world, the government and our defense force.
Questioning what's going on is great but you need to get over the delusion that military personnel are somehow zombified to not do the same, the only difference is that the majority understand that they've signed a contract and they have a job to do. Realistically you've brainwashed yourself into believing that government is always evil and the military is full of faceless drones.
Doesn't the military treat soldiers as a collective and strip away the individualism? the military would not perform with hundreds of individuals running around with their own ideas thinking that they know best. A tight bond is fostered between soldiers to make them more like a family than just a group of random strangers.
you do not need to be brainwashed in order to be guided in a direction, any soldier starting to think outside the box becomes a liability and are quikly put back in their place by his fellow soldiers.
Thinking outside the box is highly encouraged, you need to get over you ideas about hollywood soldiers mate, the army wants thinking, individual soldiers who are highly capable in a team environment. "Here's the job, go do it to the best of your ability", are you really saying that soldiers should stand around and debate every action?
There's a pretty big difference between needing to follow orders being brainwashed, I get the feeling that if the military was run by you then they'd never actually be able to do anything (other than stand around listening to everyones opinion that is).
conditioning would make it easier to shoot another human being, world war 1 had more troops firing over the head of the enemy or not firing at all.
World war 2 the % had increased marginally
by the time Vietnam arrived they military had already learnt that human silhouette target training gave them a far higher % of soldiers actively engaging the enemy,During basic training for WWI and WWII the round targets where used and there where no round targets on the battlefield, just people.
"How you train is how you fight". You're talking about 2 different types of thing here, shooting at human silhouettes in training is more about the role repetition and muscle memory play in performance than conditioning to kill.
All you need to do is take a look at some statistics to see that PTSD is just as bad (if not worse) than it was in any of our previous wars, conditioning someone to kill without it effecting them isn't something you can do to an adult, our lifestyle and upbringing isn't particularly compatible with combat.
so a percentage of conditioning does come into play in the military, otherwise they would still be shooting over head as it really isn't a normal condition to actually shoot another person.
The dehuminization of the enemy also plays a large role as well.
These would be considered conditioning
That's entirely different to conditioning drones who will fly to another country and slit babies throats with no remorse and no questioning (which is what matty seems to be implying), I recommend "On Killing : The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society" by Dave Grossman if you're actually interested in the subject, his writing on "wolves, sheep and sheepdogs" is pretty also interesting.
At the end of the day matty is implying that military personnel have some kind of subverted moral compass and they're unable to make the same decisions about right and wrong as everyone else is, someone is a little bit crazy.