Tough Questions on Veteran's Day

rgambs

The passing of Mr. Young just before Veteran's Day has me thinking more about this holiday than perhaps ever before. I have seen many comments, all from the heart and therefore wonderful to see. It does, however, bring some questions to my mind. Does thanking Mr. Young for his service (I take that to mean military service and not civil) sort of missing the point of what his life became, what he chose to do with it after his tragedy? Isn't his antiwar stance the most important thing he did, and wasn't it the bravest, to stand in a position which put him at odds with his brothers? It makes me think of some tough questions.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war?
Where is the line on being antiwar and still trying to respect those who made sacrifices?
How can we discourage youth from resorting to joining the services when our leaders set out for war-for-profit, without offending those who served? Can it be done at all?

benjs

Well, a couple of things:
1) Veteran's Day celebrates the end of a war - not the beginning. I think this is a big distinction.
2) Veteran's Day is about respect and honour for a specific set of people, and the understanding that they made very hard decisions to fight for ideals they believed in: justice, freedom, peace. Tomas Young was one of the best examples of the reality of the thanklessness of a war.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war? I think that depends on where you're taught about it's history, and how you're taught about it. For example, in school we were taught about the horrific realities of war. I'd like to see Veteran's Day (or Remembrance Day in Canada) continue to be respected, but perhaps after a brief lesson on the omnipresent ingredients in an indoctrination campaign: idealists created and/or gathered by one central body, deep pockets of the central body to facilitate acting on that idealism, and clear gain for the central body based on those acts.

Where is the line on being anti-war? Probably empathizing with those who made sacrifices. All we can really say is that the set of premises they were raised with, their core values, their notions of security and liberty and nationalistic pride - those are all products of a specific time in history. It usually goes back to indoctrination: pervasive campaigns that plant seeds of dissent so unimaginably amplified in the head that one is compelled to embrace the unity of a sect instead of the unity of humanity, and march forward willingly. I empathize with anyone who was subject to, succumbed to, or was obligated into byproducts of that indoctrination, to suffer the fate of death, or the worse fate of living through it. I can't help but empathize with anyone whose life has known the cruel sting of war, regardless of my opinions on war.

How do we stop it? We combat the campaign of indoctrination with a campaign of self-educating, and questioning everything. How incredible it is that my generation has such pervasive exposure to billions of facts, billions of perspectives - and all free! How pathetic it is that my generation exerts so little effort finding it.

I read a linked article on Facebook the other day about a political issue, and mentioned to my sister how great it is to finally see people consuming media from such a multitude of sources and sharing them to raise awareness for what they believe in with such effectiveness and relative ease (no carrier pigeon, no snail mail, not even email - just a few clicks to reach 190 people - that's the average number of friends one has on Facebook). She didn't share my opinion. "I go to Facebook to look at pictures with my friends and to see stupid crap, I don't want to see news on my feed". The end of war begins with the end of opinions like that: a truly open-minded people whose prime characteristics are expressing skepticism, but still giving a shit.

mickeyrat

A Generals perspective on this question and equally important questions and assessments of our recent history.
Excellent read with a thoughtful and completely necessary desire for the unvarnished truth of it. (note the lack of qualifier after his name in the by line)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/11/opinion/the-truth-about-the-wars-in-iraq-and-afghanistan.html?smid=tw-share

The Truth About the Wars

By DANIEL P. BOLGER NOV. 10, 2014


AS a senior commander in Iraq and Afghanistan, I lost 80 soldiers. Despite their sacrifices, and those of thousands more, all we have to show for it are two failed wars. This fact eats at me every day, and Veterans Day is tougher than most.

As veterans, we tell ourselves it was all worth it. The grim butchery of war hovers out of sight and out of mind, an unwelcome guest at the dignified ceremonies. Instead, we talk of devotion to duty and noble sacrifice. We salute the soldiers at Omaha Beach, the sailors at Leyte Gulf, the airmen in the skies over Berlin and the Marines at the Chosin Reservoir, and we’re not wrong to do so. The military thrives on tales of valor. In our volunteer armed forces, such stirring examples keep bringing young men and women through the recruiters’ door. As we used to say in the First Cavalry Division, they want to “live the legend.” In the military, we love our legends.

Here’s a legend that’s going around these days. In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq and toppled a dictator. We botched the follow-through, and a vicious insurgency erupted. Four years later, we surged in fresh troops, adopted improved counterinsurgency tactics and won the war. And then dithering American politicians squandered the gains. It’s a compelling story. But it’s just that — a story.

The surge in Iraq did not “win” anything. It bought time. It allowed us to kill some more bad guys and feel better about ourselves. But in the end, shackled to a corrupt, sectarian government in Baghdad and hobbled by our fellow Americans’ unwillingness to commit to a fight lasting decades, the surge just forestalled today’s stalemate. Like a handful of aspirin gobbled by a fevered patient, the surge cooled the symptoms. But the underlying disease didn’t go away. The remnants of Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Sunni insurgents we battled for more than eight years simply re-emerged this year as the Islamic State, also known as ISIS.

The surge legend is soothing, especially for military commanders like me. We can convince ourselves that we did our part, and a few more diplomats or civilian leaders should have done theirs. Similar myths no doubt comforted Americans who fought under the command of Robert E. Lee in the Civil War or William C. Westmoreland in Vietnam. But as a three-star general who spent four years trying to win this thing — and failing — I now know better.

We did not understand the enemy, a guerrilla network embedded in a quarrelsome, suspicious civilian population. We didn’t understand our own forces, which are built for rapid, decisive conventional operations, not lingering, ill-defined counterinsurgencies. We’re made for Desert Storm, not Vietnam. As a general, I got it wrong. Like my peers, I argued to stay the course, to persist and persist, to “clear/hold/build” even as the “hold” stage stretched for months, and then years, with decades beckoning. We backed ourselves season by season into a long-term counterinsurgency in Iraq, then compounded it by doing likewise in Afghanistan. The American people had never signed up for that.

What went wrong in Iraq and in Afghanistan isn’t the stuff of legend. It won’t bring people into the recruiting office, or make for good speeches on Veterans Day. Reserve those honors for the brave men and women who bear the burdens of combat.

That said, those who served deserve an accounting from the generals. What happened? How? And, especially, why? It has to be a public assessment, nonpartisan and not left to the military. (We tend to grade ourselves on the curve.) Something along the lines of the 9/11 Commission is in order. We owe that to our veterans and our fellow citizens.

Such an accounting couldn’t be more timely. Today we are hearing some, including those in uniform, argue for a robust ground offensive against the Islamic State in Iraq. Air attacks aren’t enough, we’re told. Our Kurdish and Iraqi Army allies are weak and incompetent. Only another surge can win the fight against this dire threat. Really? If insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, I think we’re there.

As a veteran, and a general who learned hard lessons in two lost campaigns, I’d like to suggest an alternative. Maybe an incomplete and imperfect effort to contain the Islamic State is as good as it gets. Perhaps the best we can or should do is to keep it busy, “degrade” its forces, harry them or kill them, and seek the long game at the lowest possible cost. It’s not a solution that is likely to spawn a legend. But in the real world, it just may well give us something better than another defeat.

Daniel P. Bolger, the author of “Why We Lost,” retired from the United States Army last year as a lieutenant general.

badbrains

mickeyrat said:

A Generals perspective on this question and equally important questions and assessments of our recent history.
Excellent read with a thoughtful and completely necessary desire for the unvarnished truth of it. (note the lack of qualifier after his name in the by line)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/11/opinion/the-truth-about-the-wars-in-iraq-and-afghanistan.html?smid=tw-share

The Truth About the Wars

By DANIEL P. BOLGER NOV. 10, 2014


AS a senior commander in Iraq and Afghanistan, I lost 80 soldiers. Despite their sacrifices, and those of thousands more, all we have to show for it are two failed wars. This fact eats at me every day, and Veterans Day is tougher than most.

As veterans, we tell ourselves it was all worth it. The grim butchery of war hovers out of sight and out of mind, an unwelcome guest at the dignified ceremonies. Instead, we talk of devotion to duty and noble sacrifice. We salute the soldiers at Omaha Beach, the sailors at Leyte Gulf, the airmen in the skies over Berlin and the Marines at the Chosin Reservoir, and we’re not wrong to do so. The military thrives on tales of valor. In our volunteer armed forces, such stirring examples keep bringing young men and women through the recruiters’ door. As we used to say in the First Cavalry Division, they want to “live the legend.” In the military, we love our legends.

Here’s a legend that’s going around these days. In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq and toppled a dictator. We botched the follow-through, and a vicious insurgency erupted. Four years later, we surged in fresh troops, adopted improved counterinsurgency tactics and won the war. And then dithering American politicians squandered the gains. It’s a compelling story. But it’s just that — a story.

The surge in Iraq did not “win” anything. It bought time. It allowed us to kill some more bad guys and feel better about ourselves. But in the end, shackled to a corrupt, sectarian government in Baghdad and hobbled by our fellow Americans’ unwillingness to commit to a fight lasting decades, the surge just forestalled today’s stalemate. Like a handful of aspirin gobbled by a fevered patient, the surge cooled the symptoms. But the underlying disease didn’t go away. The remnants of Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Sunni insurgents we battled for more than eight years simply re-emerged this year as the Islamic State, also known as ISIS.

The surge legend is soothing, especially for military commanders like me. We can convince ourselves that we did our part, and a few more diplomats or civilian leaders should have done theirs. Similar myths no doubt comforted Americans who fought under the command of Robert E. Lee in the Civil War or William C. Westmoreland in Vietnam. But as a three-star general who spent four years trying to win this thing — and failing — I now know better.

We did not understand the enemy, a guerrilla network embedded in a quarrelsome, suspicious civilian population. We didn’t understand our own forces, which are built for rapid, decisive conventional operations, not lingering, ill-defined counterinsurgencies. We’re made for Desert Storm, not Vietnam. As a general, I got it wrong. Like my peers, I argued to stay the course, to persist and persist, to “clear/hold/build” even as the “hold” stage stretched for months, and then years, with decades beckoning. We backed ourselves season by season into a long-term counterinsurgency in Iraq, then compounded it by doing likewise in Afghanistan. The American people had never signed up for that.

What went wrong in Iraq and in Afghanistan isn’t the stuff of legend. It won’t bring people into the recruiting office, or make for good speeches on Veterans Day. Reserve those honors for the brave men and women who bear the burdens of combat.

That said, those who served deserve an accounting from the generals. What happened? How? And, especially, why? It has to be a public assessment, nonpartisan and not left to the military. (We tend to grade ourselves on the curve.) Something along the lines of the 9/11 Commission is in order. We owe that to our veterans and our fellow citizens.

Such an accounting couldn’t be more timely. Today we are hearing some, including those in uniform, argue for a robust ground offensive against the Islamic State in Iraq. Air attacks aren’t enough, we’re told. Our Kurdish and Iraqi Army allies are weak and incompetent. Only another surge can win the fight against this dire threat. Really? If insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, I think we’re there.

As a veteran, and a general who learned hard lessons in two lost campaigns, I’d like to suggest an alternative. Maybe an incomplete and imperfect effort to contain the Islamic State is as good as it gets. Perhaps the best we can or should do is to keep it busy, “degrade” its forces, harry them or kill them, and seek the long game at the lowest possible cost. It’s not a solution that is likely to spawn a legend. But in the real world, it just may well give us something better than another defeat.

Daniel P. Bolger, the author of “Why We Lost,” retired from the United States Army last year as a lieutenant general.

Thanks for this read Mickey, good honest article

mickeyrat

rgambs said:

The passing of Mr. Young just before Veteran's Day has me thinking more about this holiday than perhaps ever before. I have seen many comments, all from the heart and therefore wonderful to see. It does, however, bring some questions to my mind. Does thanking Mr. Young for his service (I take that to mean military service and not civil) sort of missing the point of what his life became, what he chose to do with it after his tragedy? Isn't his antiwar stance the most important thing he did, and wasn't it the bravest, to stand in a position which put him at odds with his brothers? It makes me think of some tough questions.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war?
Where is the line on being antiwar and still trying to respect those who made sacrifices?
How can we discourage youth from resorting to joining the services when our leaders set out for war-for-profit, without offending those who served? Can it be done at all?

in regards to your question(s) about Young, no it does not. In fact I think it make s all the more poignant and right in light of and especially FOR his work after leaving the service. I view that work as a continuation of the service to the nation, his comrades, and in service to the Constitution which he swore an oath to defend and protect against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

He served admirably in that respect exposing a truth about war in general and in broader terms about treatment of and for veterans by our society.

Unfortunate thing is , those who would send young folks like him are still in power and we continue to vote for false patriotism and the selling of fear.

If I may, let me suggest you lay off the disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be. At its heart the choice is about serving their country. They just choose to do so in that capacity. Instead, redirect ALL your energies to the policy makers and MIC who actually reap the profits of war.

badbrains

Fear is your only god

Godfather.

a day that is in rememberance of our American solders (and end of WWI) is turned into a finger pointing party.

Godfather.

vickisomoya

Thank you for posting this commentary and for posting the article by General Bolger.
It was so moving and sad to hear what little effect all of those lost lives from the campaigns he referred to have actually had. Although never do I think it evens out, even if we win.

As Americans we have a right to know what happened in any war and why, but as benjs states now we have to EXERCISE our right by sifting through a hell of a lot of shit before we get the real story. It is time consuming at best but again, the right to know still belongs to us.
WE HAVE TO GIVE A SHIT and make the time because even as our right to know what really happened to our money and troops is completely stripped away from us, what's not far behind is our ability to remain human. Or is it just human to not really give a shit about others?

Where are the leaders who would be able to look at the bigger picture, be able to change the lense and look at what it means for humanity to keep making this same mistake over and over and over. When do we get to hear loud and clear and learn from one who was actually there, like the General. He should have been on every single talk show today. But no one wants him. Wow.

gimmesometruth27

i think veteran's day is good for reminding regular american citizens of the sacrifices made by their fellow countrymen. i think willingly risking your life, no matter the cause or the reason for war, is very noble and worthy of being remembered. i think one day is really understating the sacrifices these people have made.

if they really want to honor vets, they would make sure that they have the best health care in the world, make sure that none of them become homeless, and make sure that none of them are unemployed and broke when they get out of the service. those things, to me, are supporting the troops. putting on a yellow ribbon does nothing.

i have come to realize that there is no reason for having any ill will against soldiers. they were following orders from those in the executive branch who set the mission and put them in harm's way. these people do the fighting for the rich old people who are in charge. they are not "fighting for your freedom" or any bullshit like that. they are fighting for their buddy who is fighting right next to them.

for me, veteran's day would have more importance to me if our military was used as a deterrent, like it had always been before vietnam. since vietnam, it seems that we are using our military to start wars, and that is not the purpose of the american military.

badbrains

gimmesometruth27 said:

i think veteran's day is good for reminding regular american citizens of the sacrifices made by their fellow countrymen. i think willingly risking your life, no matter the cause or the reason for war, is very noble and worthy of being remembered. i think one day is really understating the sacrifices these people have made.

if they really want to honor vets, they would make sure that they have the best health care in the world, make sure that none of them become homeless, and make sure that none of them are unemployed and broke when they get out of the service. those things, to me, are supporting the troops. putting on a yellow ribbon does nothing.

i have come to realize that there is no reason for having any ill will against soldiers. they were following orders from those in the executive branch who set the mission and put them in harm's way. these people do the fighting for the rich old people who are in charge. they are not "fighting for your freedom" or any bullshit like that. they are fighting for their buddy who is fighting right next to them.

for me, veteran's day would have more importance to me if our military was used as a deterrent, like it had always been before vietnam. since vietnam, it seems that we are using our military to start wars, and that is not the purpose of the american military.

And let's not forget the ones who've committed suicide. That number is UNBELIEVABLE! Fucken shame

rgambs

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

The passing of Mr. Young just before Veteran's Day has me thinking more about this holiday than perhaps ever before. I have seen many comments, all from the heart and therefore wonderful to see. It does, however, bring some questions to my mind. Does thanking Mr. Young for his service (I take that to mean military service and not civil) sort of missing the point of what his life became, what he chose to do with it after his tragedy? Isn't his antiwar stance the most important thing he did, and wasn't it the bravest, to stand in a position which put him at odds with his brothers? It makes me think of some tough questions.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war?
Where is the line on being antiwar and still trying to respect those who made sacrifices?
How can we discourage youth from resorting to joining the services when our leaders set out for war-for-profit, without offending those who served? Can it be done at all?

in regards to your question(s) about Young, no it does not. In fact I think it make s all the more poignant and right in light of and especially FOR his work after leaving the service. I view that work as a continuation of the service to the nation, his comrades, and in service to the Constitution which he swore an oath to defend and protect against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

He served admirably in that respect exposing a truth about war in general and in broader terms about treatment of and for veterans by our society.

Unfortunate thing is , those who would send young folks like him are still in power and we continue to vote for false patriotism and the selling of fear.

If I may, let me suggest you lay off the disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be. At its heart the choice is about serving their country. They just choose to do so in that capacity. Instead, redirect ALL your energies to the policy makers and MIC who actually reap the profits of war.

I reread my post twice and I don't see anything in it that was disparaging to those who serve. If we aren't willing to ask tough question I don't see how progress can be made. Are you close with any active duty service persons? I am, just so you know I'm not just a keyboard warrior with opinions. It is a deeply complicated issue, and our cultural willingness to serve the MIC in dealing death is pretty disturbing. Is it so outrageous to attach a level of personal responsibility to the decision to join an organization which is known to commit atrocities? Do all soldiers get a pass? Nazis? The soldiers of the Khmer Rouge? The men who serve ISIS?
There's nothing wrong with asking questions IMO, but refusing to touch a subject like that is kind of scary.

rgambs

gimmesometruth27 said:

i think veteran's day is good for reminding regular american citizens of the sacrifices made by their fellow countrymen. i think willingly risking your life, no matter the cause or the reason for war, is very noble and worthy of being remembered. i think one day is really understating the sacrifices these people have made.

if they really want to honor vets, they would make sure that they have the best health care in the world, make sure that none of them become homeless, and make sure that none of them are unemployed and broke when they get out of the service. those things, to me, are supporting the troops. putting on a yellow ribbon does nothing.

i have come to realize that there is no reason for having any ill will against soldiers. they were following orders from those in the executive branch who set the mission and put them in harm's way. these people do the fighting for the rich old people who are in charge. they are not "fighting for your freedom" or any bullshit like that. they are fighting for their buddy who is fighting right next to them.

for me, veteran's day would have more importance to me if our military was used as a deterrent, like it had always been before vietnam. since vietnam, it seems that we are using our military to start wars, and that is not the purpose of the american military.

I have no interest in ill will towards soldiers. I am very interested in how we can teach our children not to fight for the greed of the rich. It's easy for your own child, but as a society how we can emphasize personal responsibility without ill will? We have to start by stopping with the blanket use of the word hero for anyone with a uniform and gun.

gimmesometruth27

rgambs said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

i think veteran's day is good for reminding regular american citizens of the sacrifices made by their fellow countrymen. i think willingly risking your life, no matter the cause or the reason for war, is very noble and worthy of being remembered. i think one day is really understating the sacrifices these people have made.

if they really want to honor vets, they would make sure that they have the best health care in the world, make sure that none of them become homeless, and make sure that none of them are unemployed and broke when they get out of the service. those things, to me, are supporting the troops. putting on a yellow ribbon does nothing.

i have come to realize that there is no reason for having any ill will against soldiers. they were following orders from those in the executive branch who set the mission and put them in harm's way. these people do the fighting for the rich old people who are in charge. they are not "fighting for your freedom" or any bullshit like that. they are fighting for their buddy who is fighting right next to them.

for me, veteran's day would have more importance to me if our military was used as a deterrent, like it had always been before vietnam. since vietnam, it seems that we are using our military to start wars, and that is not the purpose of the american military.

I have no interest in ill will towards soldiers. I am very interested in how we can teach our children not to fight for the greed of the rich. It's easy for your own child, but as a society how we can emphasize personal responsibility without ill will? We have to start by stopping with the blanket use of the word hero for anyone with a uniform and gun.

the "ill will towards soldiers" was for me. back when the iraq war started i had a big problem with soldiers because they were killing innocent civilians in an illegal war. having volunteered at the local vfw the last several years it made me realize that yes, a small number of soldiers do bad things like kill civilians, and some when they get out of the service join companies like blackwater and go back to war zones and kill more innocents. i realized that those actions are just a symptom of the real problem, and that is that the less fortunate always fight the rich man's wars. my problem was with the soldiers as equally as the leaders, when my anger should have been 100% directed at the leaders, the administration, the congress, and the war profitteers.

mickeyrat

rgambs said:

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

The passing of Mr. Young just before Veteran's Day has me thinking more about this holiday than perhaps ever before. I have seen many comments, all from the heart and therefore wonderful to see. It does, however, bring some questions to my mind. Does thanking Mr. Young for his service (I take that to mean military service and not civil) sort of missing the point of what his life became, what he chose to do with it after his tragedy? Isn't his antiwar stance the most important thing he did, and wasn't it the bravest, to stand in a position which put him at odds with his brothers? It makes me think of some tough questions.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war?
Where is the line on being antiwar and still trying to respect those who made sacrifices?
How can we discourage youth from resorting to joining the services when our leaders set out for war-for-profit, without offending those who served? Can it be done at all?

in regards to your question(s) about Young, no it does not. In fact I think it make s all the more poignant and right in light of and especially FOR his work after leaving the service. I view that work as a continuation of the service to the nation, his comrades, and in service to the Constitution which he swore an oath to defend and protect against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

He served admirably in that respect exposing a truth about war in general and in broader terms about treatment of and for veterans by our society.

Unfortunate thing is , those who would send young folks like him are still in power and we continue to vote for false patriotism and the selling of fear.

If I may, let me suggest you lay off the disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be. At its heart the choice is about serving their country. They just choose to do so in that capacity. Instead, redirect ALL your energies to the policy makers and MIC who actually reap the profits of war.

I reread my post twice and I don't see anything in it that was disparaging to those who serve. If we aren't willing to ask tough question I don't see how progress can be made. Are you close with any active duty service persons? I am, just so you know I'm not just a keyboard warrior with opinions. It is a deeply complicated issue, and our cultural willingness to serve the MIC in dealing death is pretty disturbing. Is it so outrageous to attach a level of personal responsibility to the decision to join an organization which is known to commit atrocities? Do all soldiers get a pass? Nazis? The soldiers of the Khmer Rouge? The men who serve ISIS?
There's nothing wrong with asking questions IMO, but refusing to touch a subject like that is kind of scary.

No there is nothing wrong with asking questions.

know any Vets?
Yes, My father was a vet from the 50's , served in Africa , pics I have seen suggest Egypt.

My brother retired from the Air Force as a Fire Fighter. Now serves as a Fire Chief for DoD, was on scene commander in the firefight of the only B2 Bomber to crash. No injuries except for a twisted knee to a Civilian FF from a local dept called in to help. He encourages his guys to get as much training and certifications as they can in order to better position themselves after service. MANY local FD's are getting very well highly qualified firefighters as a result.

I served 1 yr 5 mo (excluding boot camp time) in the Navy so according to rule changes since '82(?) I am not technically a veteran for purposes of qualifying for benefits. Admin Discharge due to alcohol abuse.(full disclosure , dont ya know)
dis·par·ageddis·par·ag·ing
Full Definition of DISPARAGE
transitive verb
1
: to lower in rank or reputation : degrade
2
: to depreciate by indirect means (as invidious comparison) : speak slightingly about
— dis·par·age·ment noun
— dis·par·ag·er noun
— dis·par·ag·ing adjective
— dis·par·ag·ing·ly adverb
See disparage defined for English-language learners »
See disparage defined for kids »
Examples of DISPARAGE

Voters don't like political advertisements in which opponents disparage one another.
It's a mistake to disparage their achievements.
The article disparaged polo as a game for the wealthy.

Origin of DISPARAGE
Middle English, to degrade by marriage below one's class, disparage, from Anglo-French desparager to marry below one's class, from des- dis- + parage equality, lineage, from per peer
First Known Use: 14th century
Related to DISPARAGE

Synonyms
bad-mouth, belittle, cry down, denigrate, deprecate, depreciate, derogate, diminish, dis (also diss) [slang], discount, dismiss, decry, kiss off, minimize, play down, poor-mouth, put down, run down, talk down, trash, trash-talk, vilipend, write off


here is where I see that..... thread US military defends our freedoms. nver responded to my question here.

mickeyrat Posts: 10,600
June 21 edited June 22 Flag

rgambs said:

when my best friend joined the army as an infantryman i made sure he knew that i considered him a mercenary joining a criminal organization and he understood exactly why i felt that way. Our relationship will never be the same, we both felt betrayed by each other. This guy is smart enough to know better, but just like ALL his army buddies (the ones smart enough to even question), the signing bonus and promises of lucrative contracts and high tech careers lured him into schlepping a rifle. I will always feel like harassing him unmercifully was the best thing I could do for him... I couldnt enable him, and I wont do it for any other soldiers either.
A man has to find his own way in the world.

Umm, I can see how YOU betrayed HIM, but I fail to see how he betrayed you?

Dont support his decison but support the friend.
"The most I can do for my friend is simply be his friend."
Henry David Thoreau

Still waiting for the answer to this post.


So as I see it you look down from some kind of moral mountaintop, slamming EVERY person in uniform. Many I suspect do so in the hopes of a better future for themselves after their service.

So please enlighten me how you aren't disparaging service members?

rgambs

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

The passing of Mr. Young just before Veteran's Day has me thinking more about this holiday than perhaps ever before. I have seen many comments, all from the heart and therefore wonderful to see. It does, however, bring some questions to my mind. Does thanking Mr. Young for his service (I take that to mean military service and not civil) sort of missing the point of what his life became, what he chose to do with it after his tragedy? Isn't his antiwar stance the most important thing he did, and wasn't it the bravest, to stand in a position which put him at odds with his brothers? It makes me think of some tough questions.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war?
Where is the line on being antiwar and still trying to respect those who made sacrifices?
How can we discourage youth from resorting to joining the services when our leaders set out for war-for-profit, without offending those who served? Can it be done at all?

in regards to your question(s) about Young, no it does not. In fact I think it make s all the more poignant and right in light of and especially FOR his work after leaving the service. I view that work as a continuation of the service to the nation, his comrades, and in service to the Constitution which he swore an oath to defend and protect against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

He served admirably in that respect exposing a truth about war in general and in broader terms about treatment of and for veterans by our society.

Unfortunate thing is , those who would send young folks like him are still in power and we continue to vote for false patriotism and the selling of fear.

If I may, let me suggest you lay off the disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be. At its heart the choice is about serving their country. They just choose to do so in that capacity. Instead, redirect ALL your energies to the policy makers and MIC who actually reap the profits of war.

I reread my post twice and I don't see anything in it that was disparaging to those who serve. If we aren't willing to ask tough question I don't see how progress can be made. Are you close with any active duty service persons? I am, just so you know I'm not just a keyboard warrior with opinions. It is a deeply complicated issue, and our cultural willingness to serve the MIC in dealing death is pretty disturbing. Is it so outrageous to attach a level of personal responsibility to the decision to join an organization which is known to commit atrocities? Do all soldiers get a pass? Nazis? The soldiers of the Khmer Rouge? The men who serve ISIS?
There's nothing wrong with asking questions IMO, but refusing to touch a subject like that is kind of scary.

No there is nothing wrong with asking questions.

know any Vets?
Yes, My father was a vet from the 50's , served in Africa , pics I have seen suggest Egypt.

My brother retired from the Air Force as a Fire Fighter. Now serves as a Fire Chief for DoD, was on scene commander in the firefight of the only B2 Bomber to crash. No injuries except for a twisted knee to a Civilian FF from a local dept called in to help. He encourages his guys to get as much training and certifications as they can in order to better position themselves after service. MANY local FD's are getting very well highly qualified firefighters as a result.

I served 1 yr 5 mo (excluding boot camp time) in the Navy so according to rule changes since '82(?) I am not technically a veteran for purposes of qualifying for benefits. Admin Discharge due to alcohol abuse.(full disclosure , dont ya know)
dis·par·ageddis·par·ag·ing
Full Definition of DISPARAGE
transitive verb
1
: to lower in rank or reputation : degrade
2
: to depreciate by indirect means (as invidious comparison) : speak slightingly about
— dis·par·age·ment noun
— dis·par·ag·er noun
— dis·par·ag·ing adjective
— dis·par·ag·ing·ly adverb
See disparage defined for English-language learners »
See disparage defined for kids »
Examples of DISPARAGE

Voters don't like political advertisements in which opponents disparage one another.
It's a mistake to disparage their achievements.
The article disparaged polo as a game for the wealthy.

Origin of DISPARAGE
Middle English, to degrade by marriage below one's class, disparage, from Anglo-French desparager to marry below one's class, from des- dis- + parage equality, lineage, from per peer
First Known Use: 14th century
Related to DISPARAGE

Synonyms
bad-mouth, belittle, cry down, denigrate, deprecate, depreciate, derogate, diminish, dis (also diss) [slang], discount, dismiss, decry, kiss off, minimize, play down, poor-mouth, put down, run down, talk down, trash, trash-talk, vilipend, write off


here is where I see that..... thread US military defends our freedoms. nver responded to my question here.

mickeyrat Posts: 10,600
June 21 edited June 22 Flag

rgambs said:

when my best friend joined the army as an infantryman i made sure he knew that i considered him a mercenary joining a criminal organization and he understood exactly why i felt that way. Our relationship will never be the same, we both felt betrayed by each other. This guy is smart enough to know better, but just like ALL his army buddies (the ones smart enough to even question), the signing bonus and promises of lucrative contracts and high tech careers lured him into schlepping a rifle. I will always feel like harassing him unmercifully was the best thing I could do for him... I couldnt enable him, and I wont do it for any other soldiers either.
A man has to find his own way in the world.

Umm, I can see how YOU betrayed HIM, but I fail to see how he betrayed you?

Dont support his decison but support the friend.
"The most I can do for my friend is simply be his friend."
Henry David Thoreau

Still waiting for the answer to this post.


So as I see it you look down from some kind of moral mountaintop, slamming EVERY person in uniform. Many I suspect do so in the hopes of a better future for themselves after their service.

So please enlighten me how you aren't disparaging service members?

Ah OK, referencing another post...yes I am not afraid to admit I have given condemnation to soldiers before, and will do so in the future I am sure. I hope you recognize that in this post, on Veteran's Day, I was trying to ask tough questions with respect.
You can call it a moral mountaintop if you like, it doesn't bother me. Maybe I am arrogant, but I am confident that I would never trade an innocent life of a stranger for "a better future for myself after service"... OK no maybe about it, I am arrogant, but as long as I forgo the possibility of murdering someone, I will sleep just fine at night.

Sorry I didn't answer your question, good bad right wrong that isn't my style. I felt betrayed by him because he abandoned his family and friends. He isn't around anymore and that hurts, he was my best friend, and ideological differences aren't the reason he isn't anymore...he just isn't around anymore...selfish? Yeah sure it is, but life is short and wasting time is wasting life.

Godfather.

rgambs do you live in California ?

Godfather.

muskydan

i am going 2 bet Canada.

benjs

rgambs said:

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

Truncated for length.

Truncated for length.

I reread my post twice and I don't see anything in it that was disparaging to those who serve. If we aren't willing to ask tough question I don't see how progress can be made. Are you close with any active duty service persons? I am, just so you know I'm not just a keyboard warrior with opinions. It is a deeply complicated issue, and our cultural willingness to serve the MIC in dealing death is pretty disturbing. Is it so outrageous to attach a level of personal responsibility to the decision to join an organization which is known to commit atrocities? Do all soldiers get a pass? Nazis? The soldiers of the Khmer Rouge? The men who serve ISIS?
There's nothing wrong with asking questions IMO, but refusing to touch a subject like that is kind of scary.

No there is nothing wrong with asking questions.

know any Vets?
Yes, My father was a vet from the 50's , served in Africa , pics I have seen suggest Egypt.

My brother retired from the Air Force as a Fire Fighter. Now serves as a Fire Chief for DoD, was on scene commander in the firefight of the only B2 Bomber to crash. No injuries except for a twisted knee to a Civilian FF from a local dept called in to help. He encourages his guys to get as much training and certifications as they can in order to better position themselves after service. MANY local FD's are getting very well highly qualified firefighters as a result.

I served 1 yr 5 mo (excluding boot camp time) in the Navy so according to rule changes since '82(?) I am not technically a veteran for purposes of qualifying for benefits. Admin Discharge due to alcohol abuse.(full disclosure , dont ya know)
dis·par·ageddis·par·ag·ing
Full Definition of DISPARAGE
transitive verb
1
: to lower in rank or reputation : degrade
2
: to depreciate by indirect means (as invidious comparison) : speak slightingly about
— dis·par·age·ment noun
— dis·par·ag·er noun
— dis·par·ag·ing adjective
— dis·par·ag·ing·ly adverb
See disparage defined for English-language learners »
See disparage defined for kids »
Examples of DISPARAGE

Voters don't like political advertisements in which opponents disparage one another.
It's a mistake to disparage their achievements.
The article disparaged polo as a game for the wealthy.

Origin of DISPARAGE
Middle English, to degrade by marriage below one's class, disparage, from Anglo-French desparager to marry below one's class, from des- dis- + parage equality, lineage, from per peer
First Known Use: 14th century
Related to DISPARAGE

Synonyms
bad-mouth, belittle, cry down, denigrate, deprecate, depreciate, derogate, diminish, dis (also diss) [slang], discount, dismiss, decry, kiss off, minimize, play down, poor-mouth, put down, run down, talk down, trash, trash-talk, vilipend, write off


here is where I see that..... thread US military defends our freedoms. nver responded to my question here.

mickeyrat Posts: 10,600
June 21 edited June 22 Flag

rgambs said:

when my best friend joined the army as an infantryman i made sure he knew that i considered him a mercenary joining a criminal organization and he understood exactly why i felt that way. Our relationship will never be the same, we both felt betrayed by each other. This guy is smart enough to know better, but just like ALL his army buddies (the ones smart enough to even question), the signing bonus and promises of lucrative contracts and high tech careers lured him into schlepping a rifle. I will always feel like harassing him unmercifully was the best thing I could do for him... I couldnt enable him, and I wont do it for any other soldiers either.
A man has to find his own way in the world.

Umm, I can see how YOU betrayed HIM, but I fail to see how he betrayed you?

Dont support his decison but support the friend.
"The most I can do for my friend is simply be his friend."
Henry David Thoreau

Still waiting for the answer to this post.


So as I see it you look down from some kind of moral mountaintop, slamming EVERY person in uniform. Many I suspect do so in the hopes of a better future for themselves after their service.

So please enlighten me how you aren't disparaging service members?

Ah OK, referencing another post...yes I am not afraid to admit I have given condemnation to soldiers before, and will do so in the future I am sure. I hope you recognize that in this post, on Veteran's Day, I was trying to ask tough questions with respect.
You can call it a moral mountaintop if you like, it doesn't bother me. Maybe I am arrogant, but I am confident that I would never trade an innocent life of a stranger for "a better future for myself after service"... OK no maybe about it, I am arrogant, but as long as I forgo the possibility of murdering someone, I will sleep just fine at night.

Sorry I didn't answer your question, good bad right wrong that isn't my style. I felt betrayed by him because he abandoned his family and friends. He isn't around anymore and that hurts, he was my best friend, and ideological differences aren't the reason he isn't anymore...he just isn't around anymore...selfish? Yeah sure it is, but life is short and wasting time is wasting life.

There's a big difference between fighting for something you believe in, and fighting for something someone else believes in. If someone goes to war, and they feel that they've seriously spent the time and effort, and done their due diligence in ensuring that their core set of values is aligned with the core set of values of the army they are joining - then I have nothing but admiration for their mostly selfless act. If someone has omitted that crucial step of stepping back and objectively looking at what the party they're about to join stands for - then I have nothing but sadness that the indoctrination in their lives have been so complete that they would, without asking, kill for something or someone whose agenda is foreign to them.

Overall, where do most soldiers stand? My guess is closer to the latter, but I'm truthfully not sure. In any case, Veteran's Day/Memorial Day are good opportunities to educate on what true nobility, selflessness, and sacrifice look like, all the while reminding about the power of influence in our lives (though with the amount I say that these days, I might as well walk around wearing a tin foil hat), and the necessity of asking the simple question "why" when ever possible.

For the record rgambs - I think that "betrayal" is based on a notion of "belonging". While having a friend or family member leave for war might hurt to us, to be honest, I'm not sure our allegiances belong with our family any more or less than I believe that our allegiances belong with our country: both are heavily influenced by emotion, and are based on a semblance of 'giving back' to a body which has done something for you. When it comes to emotion, this is something we typically avoid when we're going to be put in hard situations in our lifetimes. This is why if I require a lawyer, doctor, nurse, psychiatrist, etc. - it can't be someone I have a relationship with. Is this better or worse than an emotionally-driven decision? I'm not in a place to say - but I certainly could understand how a patriot would feel equally betrayed by a friend who refuses to serve at a 'time of need' to remain safe and cozy with his or her family.

rgambs

Godfather. said:

rgambs do you live in California ?

Godfather.

Couldnt be much more wrong. Rural Ohio, near Amish country... You guys do realize that there are plenty of conservatives in California and Canada right?

Godfather.

rgambs said:

Godfather. said:

rgambs do you live in California ?

Godfather.

Couldnt be much more wrong. Rural Ohio, near Amish country... You guys do realize that there are plenty of conservatives in California and Canada right?

California is full of .......well never mind, in 1 to 2 years I will be out of california it's time for a change.

Godfather.

mickeyrat

vickisomoya said:

Thank you for posting this commentary and for posting the article by General Bolger.
It was so moving and sad to hear what little effect all of those lost lives from the campaigns he referred to have actually had. Although never do I think it evens out, even if we win.

As Americans we have a right to know what happened in any war and why, but as benjs states now we have to EXERCISE our right by sifting through a hell of a lot of shit before we get the real story. It is time consuming at best but again, the right to know still belongs to us.
WE HAVE TO GIVE A SHIT and make the time because even as our right to know what really happened to our money and troops is completely stripped away from us, what's not far behind is our ability to remain human. Or is it just human to not really give a shit about others?

Where are the leaders who would be able to look at the bigger picture, be able to change the lense and look at what it means for humanity to keep making this same mistake over and over and over. When do we get to hear loud and clear and learn from one who was actually there, like the General. He should have been on every single talk show today. But no one wants him. Wow.

same place I got the link to the article. Michael Smerconish had him on his SiriusXm radio show. Heres the soundcloud interview.

Drowned Out

Godfather. said:

rgambs said:

Godfather. said:

rgambs do you live in California ?

Godfather.

Couldnt be much more wrong. Rural Ohio, near Amish country... You guys do realize that there are plenty of conservatives in California and Canada right?

California is full of .......well never mind, in 1 to 2 years I will be out of california it's time for a change.

Godfather.

Lemme guess....Florida?

As usual, I like what you have to say in this thread, rgambs. I think it's important to discourage people from joining the military. Unfortunately, your government (both parties) seem content to let it become one of very few career options available to the less fortunate. Also, considering their age when they make this decision, I don't hold them entirely accountable. It's a choice I would never have made, but at that age, it would have had nothing to do with knowledge of the MIC or politics...plus, I can admit to making a lot of regrettable decisions at that age...I think my feelings toward the military are along the lines of my feelings toward police. I view the organizations as a whole with scepticism bordering on contempt...but would never judge an individual in those organizations based on my feelings toward the whole. That goes both ways - in judgement of heroes, and thugs. Everyone has their own story to tell and path followed to where they're at...

As one of those typical asshole, peace loving Canadians, who has travelled somewhat extensively in the states, I've noticed one thing for sure: many many Americans don't realize, or don't see a problem with the level of nationalist indoctrination they're subjected to, nor how militarized the country is. It's shocking for an outsider (at least a Canadian one) to see this. I visited a mall food court in Orlando in which half the patrons were uniformed servicemen...freaked me out. I see so many ads for the military, in all forms of media...endless tributes at sporting events... flags everywhere...homeless veterans on every second street corner...airports filled with uniforms and 25 year old amputees...it's fucked up.
I really wish more people would question the wisdom of joining our military instead of unflinchingly supporting, even glorifying them.

mickeyrat

Drowned, Orlando is home to a navy boot camp base. In uniform is a requirement while on liberty. Likely had just graduated but not gotten final orders as yet

badbrains

https://twitter.com/medialens/status/532108489121071104

badbrains

^^^^^pretty powerful stuff!

benjs

badbrains said:

^^^^^pretty powerful stuff!

Even more so... Harry Patch words, Radiohead music.

I am the only one that got through
The others died where ever they fell
It was an ambush
They came up from all sides
Give your leaders each a gun and then let them fight it out themselves
I’ve seen devils coming up from the ground
I’ve seen hell upon this earth
The next will be chemical but they will never learn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ2ELVsz2Yk&spfreload=10

badbrains

benjs said:

badbrains said:

^^^^^pretty powerful stuff!

Even more so... Harry Patch words, Radiohead music.

I am the only one that got through
The others died where ever they fell
It was an ambush
They came up from all sides
Give your leaders each a gun and then let them fight it out themselves
I’ve seen devils coming up from the ground
I’ve seen hell upon this earth
The next will be chemical but they will never learn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ2ELVsz2Yk&spfreload=10

That's wild Ben, I didn't even know a song was written about/for him? First time I ever heard of this guy.

benjs

badbrains said:

benjs said:

badbrains said:

^^^^^pretty powerful stuff!

Even more so... Harry Patch words, Radiohead music.

I am the only one that got through
The others died where ever they fell
It was an ambush
They came up from all sides
Give your leaders each a gun and then let them fight it out themselves
I’ve seen devils coming up from the ground
I’ve seen hell upon this earth
The next will be chemical but they will never learn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ2ELVsz2Yk&spfreload=10

That's wild Ben, I didn't even know a song was written about/for him? First time I ever heard of this guy.

Radiohead released it shortly after Mr. Patch died several years ago, and all proceeds were given to the Royal British Legion. The words were taken from one of Harry Patch's interviews, and the song gets to me every single time I hear it.

rgambs

Drowned Out said:

Godfather. said:

rgambs said:

Godfather. said:

rgambs do you live in California ?

Godfather.

Couldnt be much more wrong. Rural Ohio, near Amish country... You guys do realize that there are plenty of conservatives in California and Canada right?

California is full of .......well never mind, in 1 to 2 years I will be out of california it's time for a change.

Godfather.

Lemme guess....Florida?

As usual, I like what you have to say in this thread, rgambs. I think it's important to discourage people from joining the military. Unfortunately, your government (both parties) seem content to let it become one of very few career options available to the less fortunate. Also, considering their age when they make this decision, I don't hold them entirely accountable. It's a choice I would never have made, but at that age, it would have had nothing to do with knowledge of the MIC or politics...plus, I can admit to making a lot of regrettable decisions at that age...I think my feelings toward the military are along the lines of my feelings toward police. I view the organizations as a whole with scepticism bordering on contempt...but would never judge an individual in those organizations based on my feelings toward the whole. That goes both ways - in judgement of heroes, and thugs. Everyone has their own story to tell and path followed to where they're at...

As one of those typical asshole, peace loving Canadians, who has travelled somewhat extensively in the states, I've noticed one thing for sure: many many Americans don't realize, or don't see a problem with the level of nationalist indoctrination they're subjected to, nor how militarized the country is. It's shocking for an outsider (at least a Canadian one) to see this. I visited a mall food court in Orlando in which half the patrons were uniformed servicemen...freaked me out. I see so many ads for the military, in all forms of media...endless tributes at sporting events... flags everywhere...homeless veterans on every second street corner...airports filled with uniforms and 25 year old amputees...it's fucked up.
I really wish more people would question the wisdom of joining our military instead of unflinchingly supporting, even glorifying them.

Yes, you hit at the root of it for me. I guess in all my hard words the root of my point gets lost. I speak in hyperbole out of frustrated reaction to the fact that NOBODY questions a soldiers motivation, and NOBODY dares to lend any personal responsibility to the decision to join a murderous group. It is beyond question that one must support the troops entirely and never utter a contrary word. It is a scary level of indoctrination.

rgambs

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

The passing of Mr. Young just before Veteran's Day has me thinking more about this holiday than perhaps ever before. I have seen many comments, all from the heart and therefore wonderful to see. It does, however, bring some questions to my mind. Does thanking Mr. Young for his service (I take that to mean military service and not civil) sort of missing the point of what his life became, what he chose to do with it after his tragedy? Isn't his antiwar stance the most important thing he did, and wasn't it the bravest, to stand in a position which put him at odds with his brothers? It makes me think of some tough questions.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war?
Where is the line on being antiwar and still trying to respect those who made sacrifices?
How can we discourage youth from resorting to joining the services when our leaders set out for war-for-profit, without offending those who served? Can it be done at all?

in regards to your question(s) about Young, no it does not. In fact I think it make s all the more poignant and right in light of and especially FOR his work after leaving the service. I view that work as a continuation of the service to the nation, his comrades, and in service to the Constitution which he swore an oath to defend and protect against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

He served admirably in that respect exposing a truth about war in general and in broader terms about treatment of and for veterans by our society.

Unfortunate thing is , those who would send young folks like him are still in power and we continue to vote for false patriotism and the selling of fear.

If I may, let me suggest you lay off the disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be. At its heart the choice is about serving their country. They just choose to do so in that capacity. Instead, redirect ALL your energies to the policy makers and MIC who actually reap the profits of war.

So let me ask you a question that I posed before in the other, or another, thread.

A boy child is raised to believe that family is the most important thing. Family is what matters, and you always put the family above all else. His family loves him and treats him kindly, and he owes them much. Not a bad set of ethics is it? So when the child grows up, he starts to see some fishy business, and realizes his family is mafia. What does he do and how do you feel about his decision? Is it his responsibility to turn away from his blood family because they murder and ruin lives? Or should we "lay off disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be.". After all, " At it's heart the choice is about serving their family". ??? The same question can be applied to "hood gangs" like the crips and bloods. The older gang members take care of kids and teach them a set of ethics about brotherhood, and then expect them to join their murderous organization when they reach semi-maturity. ??? What do you think? Should we hold mafia families and gangs responsible for their murder or should we "lay off " disparagement".
I am fine with you calling me out on failing to answer your question, as I said, that isn't my style...but now I expect the same from you.

mickeyrat

rgambs said:

mickeyrat said:

rgambs said:

The passing of Mr. Young just before Veteran's Day has me thinking more about this holiday than perhaps ever before. I have seen many comments, all from the heart and therefore wonderful to see. It does, however, bring some questions to my mind. Does thanking Mr. Young for his service (I take that to mean military service and not civil) sort of missing the point of what his life became, what he chose to do with it after his tragedy? Isn't his antiwar stance the most important thing he did, and wasn't it the bravest, to stand in a position which put him at odds with his brothers? It makes me think of some tough questions.

Does Veteran's Day contribute to the glorification of war?
Where is the line on being antiwar and still trying to respect those who made sacrifices?
How can we discourage youth from resorting to joining the services when our leaders set out for war-for-profit, without offending those who served? Can it be done at all?

in regards to your question(s) about Young, no it does not. In fact I think it make s all the more poignant and right in light of and especially FOR his work after leaving the service. I view that work as a continuation of the service to the nation, his comrades, and in service to the Constitution which he swore an oath to defend and protect against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

He served admirably in that respect exposing a truth about war in general and in broader terms about treatment of and for veterans by our society.

Unfortunate thing is , those who would send young folks like him are still in power and we continue to vote for false patriotism and the selling of fear.

If I may, let me suggest you lay off the disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be. At its heart the choice is about serving their country. They just choose to do so in that capacity. Instead, redirect ALL your energies to the policy makers and MIC who actually reap the profits of war.

So let me ask you a question that I posed before in the other, or another, thread.

A boy child is raised to believe that family is the most important thing. Family is what matters, and you always put the family above all else. His family loves him and treats him kindly, and he owes them much. Not a bad set of ethics is it? So when the child grows up, he starts to see some fishy business, and realizes his family is mafia. What does he do and how do you feel about his decision? Is it his responsibility to turn away from his blood family because they murder and ruin lives? Or should we "lay off disparagement of those who willing choose to serve for whatever their personal reasons may be.". After all, " At it's heart the choice is about serving their family". ??? The same question can be applied to "hood gangs" like the crips and bloods. The older gang members take care of kids and teach them a set of ethics about brotherhood, and then expect them to join their murderous organization when they reach semi-maturity. ??? What do you think? Should we hold mafia families and gangs responsible for their murder or should we "lay off " disparagement".
I am fine with you calling me out on failing to answer your question, as I said, that isn't my style...but now I expect the same from you.

I fail to see an adequate comparison in your analogy.
Military members arent born into service. in the first place. The military on its face isnt criminal in its existence( I'll grant shady shit does happen, not as a root of its existence). outside of what the CiC and Congress directs for declaring war or authorizing action, such as "extrajudicial executions" ANY service members should be held to account for those crimes. But in the course of lawful orders within the bounds of internationally recogonized rules of engagement , no I dont see it.

Case in point, the friend you said was in Kuwait? Criminal behavior and should be held to account.