Why are soldiers treated with so much respect?

Where is that 15-20% number from?

If you join the U.S. military while knowing that its main function is advancing U.S. interests abroad, not defending American shores, I really can't see how anybody can view you as anything other than a fundamentally bad person.

You're also not entitled to respect because you did something hard, only if you do something worthy, in my view.

 

Men Against Fire by S.L. A. Marshall.

 

I think i might have more to do with that they sacrifice alot with the amout of training that they put in missing alot of time with there family simple for a unselfish reason.

 

A lot of them don’t like it and don’t do it for the perks. It we thank them and go out of our way not because they kill people for us but the fact they risk their selves for us. It takes a hell of a person. I can list 4 people I’d take a bullet for outside of my family. They do it for millions of us

 

The guy died in 1977 so I'd hardly say that it's current, and typically if you quote a source you quote the exact source. As in, where those numbers are exactly from?

What unselfish reason?

Statistically, very few of the military will even have the opportunity to take a bullet, and I doubt that that's the reason that the majority of them do it. It really doesn't take a hell of a person, it takes a person who's great at following orders, is reasonably physically fit, and doesn't have any major mental illnesses.

 

Not to bring up a dead thread here, but seeing as the last reply wasn't TOO long ago maybe I'll add some thoughts.

I'm a SGT(p) Combat Medic in the US Army. 1 Deployment, almost 5 years in so far. Currently assigned as a Combat Advisor Team Medic in one of the US Army's new Security Force Assistance Brigades, which is a revised initiative on the US intervention in foreign countries to train, advise, assist and enable foreign security forces.

You'd have to define what you think is a "just cause". Did Iraq have nuclear weapons? No. But did they use chemical weapons on their own citizens and frequently use inhumane punishments disproportionate to crimes? Yes. So is replacing a dictator regime who commits genocide not a "just cause"? Did we invade Iraq for oil? No. Its pretty hard to convince 36 other countries to send their sons and daughters to die just so we can have low gas prices. But, while we're there ousting a dictator is it really that bad that western based companies invest in business there? Iraq receives whatever taxes and tariffs they impose on the oil companies, and money is made all around.


But that was just Iraq, which although it was US Led (providing most of the troops), the coalition into Iraq was 30+ countries strong, including 45000 British troops.

What about Afghanistan? We invaded them right? No. All operations by the UN Security Counsel and ISAF have been hand in hand with the Afghan National Army, Afghan National Police, or ANSF. The USA is one of 59 countries that support, or have supported the conflict in Afghanistan.

The US military is also operating in multiple European countries, both tactical missions such as Kosovo (Operation Joint Guardian, a NATO task force (KFOR)), and a tremendous amounts of training initiatives such as Atlantic Resolve.

Africa is on the list. Training military forces, conducting joint training exercises (Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa).

Now that its clear the modern conflicts aren't only "attacking other countries without a just cause", you have to understand that the world is much bigger than just "right" and "wrong". Yes, everything the USA does on foreign soil, in some way, is "advancing US interests abroad", however that is just how the game is played. China is actively pushing their "Belt and Road Initiative" to extend their influence through almost every continent. Russia has similar initiatives, including their fossil fuel supply to Europe, the (illegal) annexation of Crimea, and their invasion of Ukraine (whether you want to believe directly or through Kremlin funded rebels). The world is a game of chess. Whether you like it or not, the West will continue to advance our agenda globally, or the space we leave otherwise will be filled by the remaining superpowers.

Nobody says you have to thank a service member. Sure, most of them wont fire their weapon in combat, or take a bullet for you. But its ignorant to believe that almost all of the comforts you enjoy on a daily basis aren't a result of the "aggressive" western foreign policy.

 

The US interfered merely for oil interests in that specific region. 9/11 was another convenient excuse for the international community. Ridiculous how people seriously think that US spent trillions of dollars only for packing oil up and shipping to mainland - rather was all about geopolitical influence and controlling who buys the oil. Long game between Saudi and Iran.
Objectively speaking, being at war also helps the military sector in every single way possible (R&D, jobs, advertisment, more sales). So the cost of the war is basically redistributed to US economy.
Also - the US had no idea what it's doing in iraq. They helped to create a failed state and drove iraq into all out civil war. US itself gave chemical weapons to iran to 1980s, whose leader at the time was Saddam Hussein. Relationships are complicated.
Just wanted to point that out. Thanks for the read though.

 

First of all, you're confidently asking yourself a lot of questions, and having easy answers for them. If you had sources to back up your claims, that'd be great, but you apparently don't. You can't just state that the U.S. didn't invate Iraq for ease of accessing oil without a source. Was money made all around? Did the Iraqis receive the majority of those benefits? I don't know, because you didn't provide any sources.

You really haven't made a point there, other than other militaries have the same goals as the U.S. military.

Oddly enough, different military targets have different objectives.

It's incredibly obvious that the rest of the world will continue to advance their agenda, and I never said that they wouldn't, so I'm not sure why you're advancing that as a point for America.

...Of course most of the benefits I enjoy on a daily basis are a result of America's aggressive (no quotation marks needed) foreign policy. Maybe the numbers have shifted slightly, but last time I heard, Americans constituted ~5% of the world's population, while using ~25% of its resources. What a shocker that I'd be angry about that!

 

What would you define as a just cause?

 

Oddly enough, I agree with the Catholic Church's definition of a "just war":

 

If only they followed these points we would be living in a much better world.

 

You need to ask yourself the question really of why wouldn't you?

I understand you don't care too much for war and so on, but you have no reason to either as they are the ones doing it for you. At times they have to make the choice of, do you kill someone to protect everyone you know and love, or do you let them kill your loved ones?

 

"Why are soldiers treated with so much respect?"

because Americans are bootlickers

it boils down to state run propaganda with an intent to recruit people from low economic class who believe their path towards being respected starts with doing grunt work for the U.S. imperial war machine

I pity da fool

 

The situation the OP described sounds very much like an American situation. When was the last time American soldiers killed to protect America?

 

Fun fact, personally I’m not American and most people think Americans are slobs who are not there.
With that being said, aren’t they fighting over in isis, Afghan and other places? Just because it isn’t spoke of, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

 

Every year, probably since America was founded. You're naive to think America doesn't have enemies that wish it great harm, and would be enacting violence IN america if it didn't take a proactive stance.

 

Well said.

 

Killing civilians in other countries and in turn promote even more terrorists for sure isn't helping. It's all a vicious circle in the end.

 

So we let the terrorists rape, murder thousands (MILLIONS - don't forget the many cases of genocide this past century), and destroy entire countries because fundamentalist terrorists prey on those wronged by us??? Tell me how your privileged life would be without the men and women that have sacrificed everything to give you that.

 

What threats in Afghanistan/the Middle East currently threaten the U.S.?

Examples? Of entities that actually pose a threat to the U.S.?

Any specific examples of where U.S. intervention saved more lives than they killed?

Probably the exact same, unless you have any examples of organizations that threatened U.S. sovereignty.