Three Good Reasons Not to Join the Military

I hope you sent that to the recruiter!

My first question would be "Do you have any personal relationships with a person who has served in the military?" Your shallow article shows a lack of insight to the life of a soldier and the function of a military fighting force. At the outset, I hoped your article would have been thought provoking or enriching based on references to deceit and propagandized recruiting efforts. You failed to deliver Mr. Khan. In the end your article focused on horrible things like discipline, self-reliance, pride. Heaven forbid anyone develop any of those characteristics. Do you rail at the 10 commandments, Law of Chastity, and Word of Wisdom like you do against folding shirts into "perfect six inch squares?"

Quite contrary to your belief, the armed forces are not "fascist, armed gang of thugs." I had the PRIVILEGE to serve with some of the best people either of us would ever meet in this life. Yes, many times young 18 and 20 year olds drunk on the high of "power" and "freedom" do stupid things. How is this any different from any other college kid? I wonder how the rate of sexual assault in the military compares with the rate of any major university in the USA? Perhaps it is the age group? I digress...

How do you feel about the men and women who joined the military and defeated the Axis powers during World War I and World War II? What about the bombing campaigns across European cities that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians? They were members of the same organization and lived under even more restricting guidelines than that of today's military.And these actions are NEVER disagreed with out loud. A life is a life, but I would strongly argue that the US military of the 21st century takes action with more exacting standards that ever. No touchy feely army back then. A simple study of military procedure will instill the understanding in your narrow mind that the military isn't strict just because an officer gets his jollies out of it. It saves lives. It creates order and discipline that can keeps a unit cohesive through the utter chaos of combat. Yes, the task seem mundane and pointless, but they serve a purpose. It is only the immature youngster that complains and whines when someone is doing something that will save their life in the future. You may not believe me, but I can share many first hand accounts of how little things have saved my life and the lives of those I have served with.

Finally, the oath sworn is to the Constitution of the united States and not to an individual. It is ONLY to obey LAWFUL orders. Go back and do some fact checking. As a matter of fact, talk to some folks who have first hand experience.

p.s. Your first mistake was to stereotype service members.

Matt P.,
Yes, I do have a personal relationship with a person who has "served" in the military; myself. I enlisted when I was 18 years old and did my full four years with an honorable discharge, so yes, I am familiar with the life of a soldier and military procedure. I note this fact in the original pamphlet that this article was taken from. I've also participated in alot of anti-war activism with other military veterans, including Iraq and Afghanistan War combat veterans, who agree with me that militarism does more to destroy liberty than it does to protect it. I personally know more than a few veterans of the invasion and occupation of Iraq who openly admit that they killed innocent people over there, and they deeply regret what they did in the name of Uncle Sam. Before you assume that the military of the 21st century has such high standards of ethics, talk to some of the Iraqis who have been tortured by U.S. soldiers or who have lost homes and family members to U.S. bombs and guns, or go to ivaw.org and listen to the Winter Soldier testimonies given by dozens of Iraq War Veterans who tell a very different story than the official government/FOX News version. Read some of the Human Rights Watch reports about the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Take note of the soldiers involved in the Haditha Massacre who got off without any punishment whatsoever. For every one example you can give me of soldiers doing something helpful, I can give you a thousand examples of soldiers doing something harmful. As for your assertion that the military only requires soldiers to obey "lawful orders", tell that to Suzanne Swift, the soldier who was punished for refusing to have sex with her Sergeant and then was further punished for standing up for her rights. Tell that to the many soldiers who have been punished for refusing to participate in the unlawful, unconstitutional invasion and occupation of Iraq. Many soldiers have been put behind bars for refusing to obey unlawful orders. Even if your assertion that soldiers are only forced to obey lawful orders were true (which it is not), well, an awful lot of unnecessary misery and suffering has been caused by people who were obeying lawful orders. The Nazis who rounded up Jews and sent them to concentration camps were only obeying lawful orders. The U.S. officials who rounded up Japanese-Americans and put them in concentration camps were just, as far as they knew, following lawful orders as well. There are plenty of Iraq War veterans who did horrible things because they were obeying lawful orders. Just because an order is lawful does not necessarily mean that order is right. You seem to think that the only problem with the military is that 18 and 20 year olds make stupid mistakes, but many of the worst human rights abuses of the Iraq Invasion and Occupation have been committed by people much older than that and higher ranking than that, and they weren't just "stupid things", they were major human rights violations. You ask how that's different from any college kid. Well, for starters, college kids aren't issued assault rifles and ordered to go kidnap, torture, and kill. Even a quick glimpse at numbers indicates that something is seriously wrong with the military; Department of Defense statistics show that suicide, domestic abuse, alcoholism, divorce, and just about any number that indicates unhappiness in a group, is higher in the military than it is in the civilian population. You try to excuse the high rate of sexual assault in the military by saying that Universities also have high sexual assault rates. It is true that Universities have high sexual assault rates, especially Universities with football teams (According to studies, schools with football teams have much higher sexual assault rates than schools without them, perhaps due to the dumbass, drunken, macho culture that surrounds football, quite similar to the dumbass, drunken, macho culture in the military.), but the military has a history of not only ignoring instances of sexual assault, but of actually punishing military women who stand up for themselves. The case of Suzanne Swift, who was finally thrown behind bars on a military base for asserting her right to be free of sexual assault and harrassment, is only the tip of the iceberg. If you have been under a rock on planet mars for the last ten years and honestly aren't aware of the military's problem with mysogyny, then I suggest a good place for you to start educating yourself about this issue is with Huibin Aimee Chew's article in the journal Off Our Backs. I remember when I was in the military, a male staff sergeant was talking to us younger guys about how the military "used to be sexist". Just at that moment, a female sergeant walked into the room and said, "What do you mean used to?"
Of all my anarchistic writings in the past five years, none inspire as much anger in patriots as my writings against militarism, as though the military is led by God himself and is beyond criticism. When I was fresh out of high school and inexperienced, I probably would have believed alot of that patriotic silliness about how great the troops are and America fighting for freedom, etc., in fact, I did believe alot of that nonsense and I joined the military; and it didn't take long for disillusionment to set in. I went into the military a relatively normal, patriotic kid, but after experiencing first-hand the stupidity and sometimes plain evil of the military system, I rejected it and came out an anarchist. Some of the most dedicated anti-war activists I know are veterans. We encourage young people considering military servitude to find a better way to make a living because we don't want them to have to learn the hard way like we did, or worse, we don't want them to become brainwashed automatons who think it's cool to kill "hadjis" (a racist term U.S. soldiers use to dehumanize Arabs). Lastly, I didn't "stereotype service members". Uncle Sam did that by forcing them all to wear the same uniforms, have the same haircuts, march to the same beat, follow the same orders, and fight in the same idiotic wars. I just pointed it out. As for WWII soldiers being so great, I suggest you read some of Hugh Nibley's accounts of fighting in WWII, he sure didn't think the troops were so great. Like his account of when U.S. soldiers invaded a wedding and raped the bride. Yeah, those guys were the "greatest generation". He referred to WWII as the wicked fighting against the wicked, and even though he was a WWII veteran, he maintained a strong anti-war stance for the rest of his life. As for your comments about discipline and self-reliance, I have no problem with those things, I do have a problem with the instilling of unquestioning obedience and groupthink. I do have a problem with coercion, patriotic pride, and controlling people by fear; all things that the military system could not function without.
Believing that "our troops" are great men of high ideals may make a person feel warm and fuzzy inside, but it requires a person to shut off part of the brain and engage in a denial of plain facts. Maybe a good definition for patriotism is just that: The willful denial of plain facts. When you hear any criticisms of the troops, just stick your fingers in your ears and sing the national anthem. It'll make everything all better.
p.s. Your first mistake was to assume that I have no military experience.

Mr. Khan,
I stand corrected, you have experience in the military. Thank you for your sacrifice whether you understand it or not. War has always been and will always be a bad thing. No questioning that. I mentioned WW2 to point out the oft overlooked fact that many more atrocities were commited during that war than during the wars waged by the US in this decade(more for other readers than those familiar with the history of warfare.)

You do stereotype service men and women in your article. It is exactly that oversimplification that fuels the anger behind the responses you perceive as unquestioning patriotism or denial of "the facts." It doesn't anger me that someone disagrees with my point of view or is critical of the military system. Disapproval of the "system" is exactly why I got out.

How would you respond if I spat in your face? Pissed on the grave of someone you loved? The most common emotional reaction would be that of anger. No? Your article insinuates that those who have served in the military unavoidably were transformed into rapist, baby killers, and generally bad people or you'll become on if you join the military. The sad and immoral actions of some doesn't cast guilt on the rest of the group. Oh, some white folks had slaves a couple hundred years ago, I guess all whiteys are bad. Or some dang Muslim towel heads blew up another airplane, time for some more racial profiling. In your effort to provoke though, do not engage in the same type of behavior as those you criticize.

1000's of examples of harmful actions to innocents to my one example of decent acts? Not a chance. Why not post the interviews of those soldiers and marines with positive experiences next to the negative to present a balance picture? I could prattle on for hours about the good I have seen and personally engaged in. OK, maybe you're just a pessimist. In that case, the whole world is bad. Believing "people" are great men of high ideals may make a person feel warm and fuzzy inside... Do you apply this sentiment to the entire human race?

Has there existed in history a truly successful military force lacking discipline? Would you abolish the entire US military? If we are going that far, the police then as well, or anyone insisting on enforcing laws that ideally protect basic human rights of life, liberty, and property. Note that I say ideally. Unfortunately we are all in an imperfect state of being and need some type of enforcement for protection. That is why we have communities, right?

I'd agree with you if military service was compulsory, but it is not. Each individual joined the military of his/her own free will. The military serves one purpose, to kill and destroy. Anyone joining had better know it before they join. It's not the Boy Scouts. The actions taken by those individuals during that term of service were also of his/her own free will and choice. Yes, coercion exists. Name a place where it doesn't and our actions are not influenced by external factors. Not a thing on earth can take away personal responsibility or accountability. I'd rather stand for my beliefs and rot in jail than to commit murder.

I fail to understand how stating my personal experience is an act of shutting off my brain and denying the facts. I know what I saw and experienced. I did have the opportunity to serve with men and women of strong moral character and you, nor anyone else cannot deny that for one reason--You weren't there. I don't stick my fingers in my ears, otherwise I wouldn't have given your writings a thought. Don't use such a wide brush to paint such a complicated picture. Perhaps your message would be more effective if it didn't alienate half of your audience. Is it safe to assume that part of your intended audience is the soldier? The vitriol that fills the page above is in no way productive. It only serves to polarize the debate. Calmer language and and attempt to understand another point of view is the only way productive dialogue will occur on this topic or any other controversial issue of this generation. Have a good one.

Matt,
You say that the sad and immoral actions of some don\'t cast guilt on the rest of the group. I agree inasmuch as those sad and immoral actions are somehow unconnected to the military system itself, but when those sad and immoral actions are not simply due to \"a few bad apples\", and are actually the result of the system itself, that\'s a different situation entirely. I\'m not criticizing the military because of what a few bad guys do. I\'m criticizing it precisely because it causes otherwise good people to do horrible things. The Iraq War veterans I know who tortured and killed innocent people were not abnormal, violent, blood-thirsty people. They were regular guys, good people, who were just doing what they were ordered to do. They committed evil acts because the system they were operating in was an evil system. You doubt my claim that for every one example of soldiers doing something helpful there are a thousand examples of soldiers doing something harmful. You are right to doubt my claim. In reality there are far more than a thousand examples for your one example. At least hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died directly as a result of the U.S. military\'s invasion and occupation of Iraq. But you probably would ignore all those deaths and instead focus on some school that soldiers built because you\'re not a pessimist like mean old me. If someone killed my loved ones, or kidnapped and tortured them, and then to make it all better they built some school, I\'d tell them to take back their useless school and give me back my loved ones. I don\'t doubt that you knew good men in the military. I knew good men and women in the military and I know good men and women who are still in the military. My problem is that those good men and women will take part in evil actions when the state orders them to. I made bombs in the military. That was my job. I never personally killed anyone, but I was still part of it. someone used those bombs to kill people, and just because it wasn\'t me, doesn\'t mean I wasn\'t part of it. The military isn\'t a group of individuals acting autonomously, it\'s a team acting within a hierarchy. The mechanic who fixes a bomber is just as guilty as the pilot who dropped the bombs, and he\'s just as guilty as the office worker who did the paper pushing necessary to make the operation happen. realistically speaking, some are more guilty than others, for example, a general who orders soldiers to torture is probably more guilty than some low-ranking 19 year old who follows those orders, but they are still both guilty to some extent. But my argument has nothing to do with how guilty any individual is. I\'m not attacking any individual for being a bad person. I\'m attacking the military system itself for what it does to individuals; the way it takes a good person and gets them to do wicked things, and to even feel good and justified about doing those wicked things. Take, for example, Lindy England, the soldier pictured torturing men in the infamous Abu Ghraib prison. To this day she maintains that there was nothing wrong with what she did. That\'s the effect of the military system on an individual. Someone who would, in any other circumstances, not even consider behaving that way, tortures and sexually assaults defenseless men because the military system led her to believe that that was the correct way to behave. That\'s one of the many reasons why I encourage young people not to join the military. As for my intended audience, the soldier is not my intended audience for this at all. This is part of a counter-recruitment pamphlet I made a few years ago and it was meant to be taken in together with some other counter-recruitment writings. It\'s intended audience is young people who are thinking about joining the military. It\'s purpose is to give them something to think about that the recruiter doesn\'t mention. As for toning down my attitude and using \"calmer language\" in the hopes of not alienating people, that\'s just not my style. I\'m not interested in making people feel good, I\'m interested in speaking the truth, or at least my understanding of the truth, in a direct, clear, undiluted way. Yes, I realize that doing so alienates certain people, but I simply can\'t bring myself to write in a watered-down, neutered, \"I\'m-a-nice-modera te-guy\" kind of way. Truth is, I\'m not a nice, moderate guy. I\'m a pissed off anarchist who hates authority. There is plenty of good counter-recruitment literature out there that does it in a less offensive way than I do, for example the American Friends Service Committee has some great counter-recruitment literature that isn\'t anywhere near as offensive to patriotic people as mine is. I wrote this because I felt that I focused on things that other literature downplayed or ignored. Other literature focused on the economic issues and the deceptions regarding the recruiter\'s economic sales pitch. While I like and appreciate all that literature, and encourage young people to read it, I always wanted to ask the writers of that literature, What if the military paid every soldier a million dollars a year and gave excellent health care benefits and had great quality of life standards; then would you still have a problem with the military? I would, and this pamphlet was my attempt to show some of the reasons why.

can't the criticism?

The military isn't the problem, those will always be required due to human nature, it is religion that is the problem. That causes more death and suffering than anything else in this world, even today. It divides the world and makes people believe that they are better than someone or divinely entitled to more than someone else. If you have a problem with the military, then what in the hell are you doing writing on some religious blog? Renounce your religion and stop being a hypocrite first, then disparage an organization that you think you know a lot about after 4 short years that you probably incapable of ever adjusting to in the first place.

As for Iraq and Afghanistan, both are rooted in religion. We wouldn't be over there if our country was full of Atheists or Agnostics.

SUNNofaB.C.Rich,

We delete comments that meet a combination of the following:

-Explicit Language
-Trolling
-Antagonistic Language
-Off topic comments

You will notice that we have not deleted all of your comments because we don't discriminate against having a voice, but we do not tolerate the above behaviors, particularly if the incidents are repeated.

I hope you will understand that the comments section is here for discussion and that all voices may be heard, but comment abuse is not tolerated.

Thank you for your understanding and please continue to comment if you are interested in joining the discussion.

-Admin

1. As someone whose job was to assemble Bombs I wonder how much first-hand knowledge you have of alleged killing and torture of "innocent" people.

2. This talk about good deeds/bad deeds that's clearly a matter of opinion. I mean unless you joined the military with the mistaken belief that bombs build schools, you should have known what you were getting yourself into.

3. "Guilt" again that's subjective...

4. Read about Lindy England and Charles Graner they were white trash scum before they even joined the military, the military did not "rob them of their morality" Should more officers have gone to prison? YES.

5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajji to me Hajji is about as offensive as the term "charlie" for the Viet-cong...

6. So U.S. involvement in WWII should not have happened because some guy named Hugh Nibley tells a story of a crime supposedly committed by U.S. troops. That's not convincing and completely ignores issues like the necessity of stopping the third Reich etc etc.

7. Your portrayal of U.S. troops as automatons, who follow any and all orders unquestioningly was not my experience in the military, I was a UH-60 Blackhawk crewchief/mechanic/g unner, we were not micromanaged at all... I certainly don't think much of some Ordnance tech whose regrets about military service are basically that you didn't like the uniform, got yelled at a lot, had to salute officers had to fold your socks just so or something? (that sounds like some basic training stuff) and basically you didn't agree with the wars were engaged in at the moment... That's nitpicking... OH, and I sure hope when you trash talk military personnel that you make it known that you were one too... Tell everybody what an Automaton you are/used to be...

8. Just of interest... If I punch an anarchist in the face is he going to call the cops? Cause you know... Anarchists don't believe in stuff like cops and that...

Thanks!

Cheers

So, um, Tariq...

Who stands between you and the bad guys when they come? Or are there no bad guys? Do they only exist because the U.S. created them? Greed, thirst for power and domination, and evil just don't exist in the world unless the U.S. is out there provoking them? Or maybe it's better for a semi-armed rabble to take charge of military operations on a completely adhoc, as-needed basis?

Let me help you out, big guy...
So you're a "pissed-off anarchist who hates authority." Got news for ya--there will always be an authority above you. There will always be laws to which you have to conform. These can range from 1000-page thick Congressional bills to fighting tooth-and-nail with another human being for a scrap of food in a primordial forest. You are fortunate enough to live among people with more vision than you who do indeed realize that they have given up many of their rights, privileges, and autonomy in order to support a system of authority that, while far from perfect, affords a great many rights that we would consider "just" and "moral" to a great many people--as well as a degree of economic security unknown in the annals of history. This system of authority is defended by a military, and every nation on earth that affords similar rights to its citizens has done so behind the protective shield of this admittedly imperfect military for the past 65 years, allowing unprecedented economic growth and expansion of human rights and, inarguably, the bettering of the human condition.
Nobody likes war (except, possibly, Marines ). And nobody really thinks that our military is perfect--examples of documented military misconduct are numerous. But what's better? Are you so near-sighted and possibly blinded by your own experience with those meanies in the military that you allow the perfect to be the deadly enemy of the good?
Once again, think about it--nearly every decent, free society (i.e. minority rights, women participating in the political process, etc.); almost every major technological innovation; almost every major health innovation; nearly the entire spectrum of human rights' progress in the last 65 years has occurred, at least to some degree, behind the shield of the imperfect U.S. military (rather than in the shadow of the Nazi or Soviet militaries). So fine...your feelings were hurt that your drill sergeants or whoever didn't appreciate your deep ponderings on the workings of mankind and rather only cared whether your shirts were in perfect 6-inch squares. But thank goodness that there are plenty of decent, upstanding, and intelligent young men and women that recognize what truly sustains their freedom and are willing to make personal sacrifices to defend it.

SUNNofaB.C.Rich,
I wasn't ignoring the necessity of stopping the Third Reich, I was just showing one example, out of many, that illustrates that the military has always been a sleazy organization even in the "best wars". As for what you seem to think are my "regrets about the military", if you think that's all it boils down to, then all I can say is that you have serious problems with reading comprehension. As for your claim that you "were not micromanaged at all", I find that very hard to believe. No one in the military, no matter what their rank is or what their job is, goes without ever being micromanaged, so don't try to b.s. me. Also, I'm not trash talking military personnel, I'm criticizing the military system itself (again, reading comprehension), and yes, when I criticize the military system, I certainly do make it known that I was in the military, as I already said (reading comprehension). Also, are you seriously defending the use of a racist slur like hajji? Calling Arabs "hajjis" is the same as calling Vietnamese "gooks" or calling black people "niggers", and all of these terms serve the same purpose; to dehumanize a group of people for the purpose of making it psychologically easier to treat them as less than human. It's easier to kill, kidnap, or torture a hajji than it is to kill, kidnap, or torture a person. And are you really using Wikipedia as your source? Lastly, you ask what will happen if you punch an anarchist in the face. I suppose that depends on the anarchist who you punch. Some will probably turn the other cheek. I, however, am not a pacifist, so if you punch me in the face, I'll beat the snot out of you until you no longer have the physical ability to punch. I have no problem with self defense, I have a problem with militarism, which is not at all synonymous with self defense. Interesting though, that you seem to want to commit violence against anarchists simply because they express ideas that you don't like.

Joshua,
Who stands between me and the bad guys? Who, exactly, are the "bad guys" you are referring to? I have been attacked by people who the term "bad guys" might apply to, and no one stood between me and them. No cops or soldiers protected me, and sometimes those bad guys have actually been cops and soldiers themselves. The most ironic of these attacks was made by U.S. Marine who yelled at me for a few minutes about how I should respect him because he protects my freedom of speech, and then he proceeded to physically assault me in an attempt to force me to stop engaging in free speech. No cop or soldier has ever protected me in any real life situation, but some have assaulted me. As for your claim that "the entire spectrum of human rights progress in the last 65 years has occurred, at least to some degree, behind the shield of the U.S. military"; that is an absurd claim. Any human rights progress this country has made has been in spite of the state, not because of it. Not too long ago I visited Kent State University and met a survivor of the Kent State Massacre, who told my associates and I about when U.S. military troops fired their guns at nonviolent students at Kent State, killing some of them in cold blood, because the students were standing up for human rights. Whether you are talking about women's rights, the rights of people of color, the rights of queer people, the rights of the differently-abled, the poor, or of the elderly, you can see that whatever progress has been made in these areas has come about not through the military, but through people's struggles, and whenever the state finally has come around to do something, it wasn't until after many years of people working outside the system were able to build strong enough movements that the state had no choice but to follow their progress. Governments don't make progress, they usually stand in the way of progress, and whenever they do move in a progressive direction, it is because they are following progress, not leading it. I have no desire to give you the long history lessons that you clearly need, but encourage you to read up on the history of people's struggles, perhaps Howard Zinn would be a good place for you to start. Lastly, you praise the military for defending freedom. Pretend for a moment that this country actually is a free country (even though it really isn't a truly free country); How does killing people in the middle east defend our freedom? What does dropping bombs on Baghdad or Afghanistan do to protect my freedom?

<shrug>
I can't give you intellectual maturity or perspective. Go to Eastern Europe and discover the great progress that was being made while Kent State was under siege. Or China during that time frame. Or Africa. Or...<yawn> Oh, yeah, anywhere not behind the shield of the U.S. military.

Also, please do not put words in my mouth. The idea that progress occurred behind the shield of the U.S. military does not at all imply that it was a direct result of government action (although in some cases it has been).

I find it hard to reconcile the idea that out of something fundamentally evil there can still exist some good. For example, the mechanism and decadence of a corporation. Stimulated by greed and fear, many corporations inflict ghastly devastation and pillage communities, countries, natural environments alike. What some do is inexcusable. Even the military, as you say, is responsible for so much destruction and utter ruin. Yet, there still manages to be good people associated, even sometimes leading, these institutions. Perhaps, the 18 year old who joined the Army because rather than taking away his agency, he saw the Army as an opportunity out of the doldrums that were his life. Maybe it was Army, or gang. Maybe it was Army or prison. Maybe it was Army, or unemployment. I think if we look at the demographics behind the recruitment, these are their best sellers. Men and women who are left with very few good options. Men and women with very little privilege. Probably people who've never heard of Chomsky or Zinn. And maybe, just maybe, they are genuinely good people. And this is what is so hard for me--how can there be anything good in something so bad?

I think perhaps I agree with your criticism of the militaristic system and the fascist components that seem to run thick in parts of our society (although I blame much of this on capitalism). However, I think there is much larger problem--the fact that you and I, and every tax paying, voting citizen is implicit in the evils perpetuated by this system. Your criticism implicates yourself. And me. And you are doing a good thing. As long as we live as citizens of a nation that controls an army we must never relax, never sit silent, never condone anything we view as inappropriate, or as history has taught us, people will suffer dreadfully.

I think your arguments have somewhat of a personalized, cavalier rhetoric that attacks the individual, rather than the institution. While I would never want to join the team at ExxonMobil, I do not fault the muscle on the oil rig. They don't understand the complexities and consequences of corporate greed. Likewise, I find most of the recruits are not inherently bad people. With exception, many are persuaded by what you say, "economic" pressures. We live in an economic world. Ideals don't put bread on the table, and for many bread on the table has always been a scarcity. Luckily, there are people like you who raise the alarm, who put institutions on the hot seat and force them to answer the difficult questions. I think if many in the Army have read what you have read they may share your sentiments, but until then I am of the persuasion that it is far safer to criticize the institution than it is the individual. I see the soldier in many ways as a victim, "only a pawn in the game." I think it is safe to condemn things collectively, but use discretion individually. For example, I hate alcohol because of the suffering and ruin caused by its addictive qualities, but I still know there are genuinely good alcoholics. "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."

Perhaps this is just rationale for joining the Army. But I believe as an Army physician I can meet the needs of an underserved, exploited population (both soldiers and civilians alike) in some of the most difficult environments in the world.

1. in your article up there at the top there wasn't any mention about you having been in the military... Maybe you should start off with that and tell how the military made YOU want to rape torture and kill... oh it didn't?

2. Your regrets about the military, well for lack of anything else of substance in your ranting (nazi army, dorky uniforms, shouting orders at each other etc etc.)that's the conclusion I came to, complaining about the fact that the military kills and that our current enemies are in the middle east, what, were you surprised by that? First reason you give is basically you have to sign a contract to join the military, second paragraph killing, torture, sexual assault (Does the military turn people into rapists?) third paragraph and largest basically complaining about basic training type stuff...

3. The word Hajji is not an ethnic slur, it's basically someone who has completed the pilgrimage to Mecca, Wikipedia says the same thing as all other sources, speaking of sources you stated a statistic about sexual assault rates, what's your source?

4. Maybe your personal experience was that you had to be micromanaged, being the only onboard mechanic in a crew of four hundreds of miles from the FOB you have to do things on your own.

5. As for your writing skills, Dude I thought for sure you were about 15 years old (flag in place of a brain, lol come on...), and yeah as for trashing the troops, find some and call them rapists, mindless automatons and stuff and see how many teeth you have left afterwards, hope you know a good "anarchist" dentist.

SUNNofaB.C.Rich,
1. In the original pamphlet I wrote, I made it quite clear that I was in the military. I didn't have any control over what form it took in the Mormon Worker or what they left in or took out; but in the very first comment I made on this thread I made that quite clear and I don't make my military servitude a secret. As for the military making me want to kill, they certainly tried to instill a love of carnage in me. In fact, the motto they tried to push on me was "We live that others may die." And they even made us tee-shirts with that motto on them. But, if you were paying attention to anything I've been saying, you would see that my criticisms have less to do with whether or not the military makes soldiers want to kill, as it does with the fact that in the military, you have to support mass slaughter whether you agree with it or not. I've met recruiters who claimed to be against the war, but they still supported the war simply by doing their job. I personally, was anti-war in my ideas by my last year in the military, but I still supported war simply by following orders and doing my job. The military system is set up so that the personal opinions of soldiers are irrelevant. You're against war, soldier? No problem as long as you keep following orders. You can be as anti-war as you want so long as you keep building those bombs. Many veterans I've worked with who have killed or tortured have said that they didn't want to do it, but they had to do it because it was their job.
2. I never said that I'm surprised that soldiers kill people in the middle east. In fact, I would be surprised if they didn't. I was simply explaining to potential recruits what they should expect. I've heard recruiters tell young men that they won't get sent to Iraq. I'm telling these same young men that the recruiter is full of it. If you join the military, don't expect it to be like boy scout camp (I've also heard recruiters tell people it's like boy scout camp. I went to boy scout camp when I was a lad, and it was nothing like being in the military.), rather, you should expect to be part of a death machine that follows orders, has no respect for your individuality or personal liberty, and regularly (yes, REGULARLY) commits human rights violations. I'm telling young people the truth about what the military is in order to counter the deceptive tactics of the recruiter. Again, reading comprehension.
3. Really? You're still trying to argue that it's not racist when soldiers refer to Arabs as Hajjis? So when some soldier says, "I wanna kill me some Hajjis!", he only means that he wants to kill people who have completed the pilgrimmage to Mecca? Who do you think you're fooling with your "wealth of knowledge" acquired from a quick reading on Wikipedia? As for the source on my statistics, they come from the Department of Defense. But do you honestly deny that there is a serious problem with sexual assault in the military? Even military officials themselves admit there is a problem. They just don't do anything real about it. When I read your "arguments" against what I'm saying, I get a feeling that you don't keep up with the news or read very much; and honestly, when I say that, I'm not just trying to attack you personally. You really do need to do some more reading up about these things. Read the Human Rights Watch reports about the war. Read the Winter Soldier testimonies, which are testimonies given by veterans of the U.S. invasion of the Middle East. Read the accounts of Arabs, South Asians, Persians, and Kurds who have had run-ins with U.S. soldiers. Look at the the DODs own statistics. Read the reports from real investigative journalists like Robert Fisk and Jeremy Scahill. Listen to the victims of U.S. militarism instead of just listening to the propaganda of government officials and fake news like FOX. Read the issue of Off Our Backs that was dedicated to issues about women and militarism. Read the writings of Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Amy Goodman, Arundhati Roy, and members of Iraq Veterans Against the War. Do some actual research before you try to defend militarism. (and Wikipedia does not count as real research). There is no reason for you not to know anything about these issues. The information is out there and it is easily accessible.
4. Yeah, right. I'm supposed to believe that they left you to do whatever you wanted simply because you were far away?
5. So, you thought I was fifteen-years-old, yet you wanted to punch me in the face? You, an adult, wanted to punch a fifteen-year-old boy in the face? Furthermore, your threat that the troops will knock my teeth out if I call them names only serves to strengthen my entire argument, so good job on that one. It always amuses me when authoritarian-minded people try to teach me that I'm wrong about them by acting exactly the way I've accused them of acting. "We're not violent idiots, and if you say so again we'll beat you up!!"

1. again that\'s nit-picking... how well do you think the military would work if people just did whatever they wanted whenever? That\'s like really basic...

2. LOL did you think being in the military was going to be like boy scout camp??? Do you spend a lot of time around recruiters? Is that how you actually heard a recruiter tell someone it was like boy scout camp?

3. Wow don\'t tell me you don\'t even know what that term really means, is it a slur used in that context? First of all the example you used above is kind of like something someone who doesn\'t get around combat much would say. Most troops that actually come into closer proximity with the enemy know them by more specific terms, Mahdi army etc etc. yes, sexual assault happens in the military and I asked your source for stating that it is 5 times higher than in the civilian world... You tell me I need to read about the Iraq war... I did two years there pal... Did you?

4. Like I said your frequent use of the word \"Automaton\" might have applied to you in your specialty, your job might have been something that didn\'t require much intelligence but that wasn\'t the case in my job... Do you have a job?

5. If you really were only 15 then you\'d have an excuse for the childish ranting up there but you\'re not, I\'m not a huge fan of authority myself but your self absorbed whining tone is just pathetic. I never said the military wasn\'t violent that\'s self evident, and if you think getting the crap beat out of you will prove people to be mindless automatons then by all means make it happen.

By the way.. are you using the G.I. Bill? I sure hope youre not, that would be.. hypocritical...

You're not a huge fan of authority? You sure sound like one. Interesting that you are unable to post a comment without expressing a desire for someone to commit violence against me. Looks like that two years in Iraq really made you into a great person. And please do explain to me what freedoms of mine you protected by going to Iraq. What freedoms would I have lost had you not gone there?
I know plenty of combat veterans who've used the term "hajji" in the exact same way I used it in my example. It's a racist term used to denigrate Arabs. It's astounding that you are unable to admit that simple fact. I've also heard U.S. soldiers use other racist terms like "towel head" and "camel jockey". It's a sleazy organization where racist attitudes like that are not only tolerated, but actually encouraged. Psychologically, it's easier to kill and torture hajjis, towelheads, and camel jockeys than it is to kill and torture human beings. The fact that you have tried to defend the use of the term hajji is indicative of the kind of person you are.
Yes, I do have a job. Now you have resorted to a typical right-wing tactic of accusing people you disagree with of having no job. "Get a job, hippy!"
Seriously though, you really do need to do some reading. When your attacks against me basically amount to you expressing a desire for someone to use violence against me, you accusing me of having no job, and you calling me names like "childish" and "hypocritical", then you really have nothing of substance to say. Read some real books. Educate yourself.

The fact that Tariq is a military veteran is mentioned in his Bio in the "Contributors" page. Sorry we didn't make this clear in the intro to the article itself.

for someone who by your admission is pretty much out to be as offensive as possible in this matter you sure are surprised that you don't have many fans. What difference between you and me does having spent 2 years in Iraq make? I have a better idea of where the blame belongs, you however just cannot stop trashing the individual troops, (you stated the point you were trying to make was military personnel are "violent idiots") your words pal. WOW is the use of the word Hajji really that freakin big of a deal? These combat vet guys you know, what are they a sailor that never actually set foot in Iraq and some air force guy that stayed in Kuwait watching TV? I was asking if you had a job because most of your gripes are basic things that people have to do in ordinary every-day jobs. You really have no idea on my opinion on the war in Iraq, I dont make any illusions about people owing me for their freedom or any of that stuff but what I can't stand is some posturing "anarchist" who probably read the clif notes on some Chomsky after he heard that's what anarchists read, who claims to be so "well read" and produces the steaming pile of a master piece up there... "pissed off anarchist" youre a freaking T-shirt from hot topic.

I never said I was out to be as offensive as possible. I said that I speak my mind, and don't water it down to seem more friendly. And who said anything about fans? Your two years in Iraq means that you have about as much understanding of the situation of Iraqis as white cops who assaulted black people in the 60s and 70s had an understanding of black liberation movements. And yes, the word hajji is a big deal. It shows the racism and lack of humanity U.S. soldiers have towards people in Iraq and Afghanistan. The use of the word hajji is just as big of a deal as the use of the word nigger. The fact that you don't know that shows that your two years in Iraq taught you nothing about the situation there. Do you even speak Arabic? Did you even try to learn the laguage before you went over there? Do you know anything about the cultures and religions in that region, or the history? Just because you invaded someone else's country doesn't mean that you understand anything about that country. The arrogance and racism of the U.S. military is so strong that you don't even realize that calling people hajjis is a big deal, just as white supremacists don't understand why black people get so offended by the word nigger.
None of what you call my "gripes" have to do with basic things that people have to do in ordinary everyday jobs. Committing human rights violations, killing people, kidnapping people, bombing people, stomping out individual rights, busting into houses in the middle of the night, throwing bags over men's heads, and taking them away to be tortured and leaving their families without fathers and sons, all the while instilling an oppressor mindset in the soldiers doing that dirty work so they will actually feel like the wicked deeds they are committing are actually heroic acts that deserve praise rather than condemnation; none of these things are basic things that people have to do in ordinary everyday jobs.
Ok, you don't claim to have been fighting for our freedom when you were in Iraq. So, what were you fighting for?

Gee sorry I didn't have the time to immerse myself in the culture there dude, afterall it's not like I was on vacation or something... I know more about the situation from the perspective of a U.S. soldier than you do even if you went you would have been on a FOB the whole time. Obviously you are offended by the term Hajji, I don't really care... I've heard black and hispanic people use the term, the background of the word is religious, nothing to do with race... sure Iraq is mostly arab, whatever. I'm pretty sure white supremacists say the word nigger because they know it offends. You seem to have some problems drawing logical conclusions about things ... Really, tell me how the military instills an "oppressor mindset" in the troops. Is it wicked to bust into the house of some guy in the middle of the night who has been lobbing mortar rounds at our base? Do you think everyone in Iraq is an "innocent civilian"? Guilt and innocence are pretty subjective. You and Amy Goodman think you can judge guilt and innocence all the way back here in the states? What was I fighting for in Iraq? Same reason as your bombs.

And what reason is that? You say you were fighting in Iraq for the same reason I made bombs for the military. Well, there was absolutely no good reason for any of the bombs I made. So I guess you were in Iraq for no good reason. Maybe someone was lobbing mortar rounds at your base because your base had no business being there in the first place. If some foreign military invaded the united states and built bases here against the will of the vast majority of the population of the country, wouldn't you lob mortar rounds at them? You act like you, the invading force are the victims, and the people fighting to rid their country of an invading force are the aggressors. Yes, it's wrong to bust into the house of someone who is defending their country from an outside, invading force. If you don't want mortar rounds lobbed at you, then leave. It's like you back a dog into a corner and poke it with sticks, and then, when the dog bites you, you act like the dog was the aggressor and use its bite as an excuse to kick it. Who is invading whose country? As for the word hajji, I'm not criticizing it because it's offensive. I could care less about whether or not it's offensive. I'm criticizing it because it is racist. The way U.S. soldiers use it certainly is racist. They use it the very same way U.S. soldiers in Vietnam used the words gook and goomer, which is the same way white supremacists use the word nigger. You are trying to defend the indefensible by arguing that there is nothing wrong with calling people hajjis. I'm sure the black and hispanic people you heard use the word hajji were also U.S. soldiers. And yes, it was racist when they used it. Just like there were black U.S. soldiers in Vietnam who called the vietnamese gooks and goomers. In the documentary "Sir, No Sir!" there is a scene when a black veteran of the U.S. invasion of Vietnam talked about how he used the word gook without realizing how racist it was, and he talked about how it was a wake up call for him when he realized that "a gook is the same thing as a nigger", and that realization was his first step in questioning the entire military system. He later became involved in the movement to stop the Vietnam War. How does the military instill an oppressor mindset in the troops? Well, for starters, by teaching them that the oppression they are crushing the Middle East with is justified and righteous. By teaching soldiers that the love of carnage and macho atttitudes are virtuous qualities. By using racist terms like hajji (soldiers as high ranking as generals have used that racist term). By encouraging mistreatment and torture of "the enemy". By rewarding people for committing wicked deeds (like when pilots are given medals for the time and effort they spent on dropping weapons of mass destruction on defenseless people). By having mottos like "We live that others may die." By teaching soldiers in training to yell chants like, "What are we? Killers! What do we do? We kill! We Kill! We Kill!" (That's a real chant that U.S. Marines in training have yelled.) By letting murderers like the people responsible for the Haditha Massacre get off with no punishment whatsoever, while at the same time punishing women in the military for standing up to sexual assaulters. Need I go on? There are many ways that the military instills an oppressor mindset in the troops. It doesn't always work. Some troops are able to retain their sense of humanity in spite of the military's efforts to destroy it; but the military is very good at turning good, ordinary people into tools of oppression.

sure, your tax dollars pay for those bombs and doors getting kicked in so it only stands to reason you should be considered a "legitimate target" for anyone who takes exception to the war in Iraq. If you happen to run into such a person i'm sure you would be more than happy to let them kill you, right?

If my tax dollars were a voluntary contribution, then yes, but my tax dollars that go to the military industrial complex are not voluntary. The state takes them from me against my will, by coercion. For example, if the mafia forces a shop keeper to give them money, and then the mafia uses that money to do wicked things, I don't hold the shopkeeper who was robbed at gunpoint responsible for the wicked things that money went to. Now, if someone voluntarily donated money to the mafia, under no threats or coercion, and they knew what that money was going to be used for, then that person is just as guilty as the mafia. Taxation is not voluntary, it is extortion, so no, I don't hold the taxpayer responsible for what the state does with the money it steals from those who it claims as its subjects.

so who's forcing you to live here? By the way, is Nidal Malik Hasan your hero?

Who's forcing me to live on planet Earth? The laws of nature, I suppose. I assume that's what you're asking, because no matter what country I go to, there is a sleazy government there that will tax me, against my will. And since there is no truly free country in the world, I assume you are asking me who's forcing me to live on planet Earth. You seem to be taking the "love it or leave it" attitude concerning the USA. That attitude is stupid, unrealistic, and leads to complacency. A better attitude to have is, "love it or work to change it". What if the Boston Tea Party participants who resisted the English parliament said, "If we don't like the British pushing us around, then why don't we just move away from the English colonies."? What if civil rights activists in the 1960s said, "If we don't like racism, then we should just move somewhere else."? I could go on and on with these kinds of questions. The point is, no progress can be made until people put their feet down and stand up for themselves, rather than simply going somewhere else (where they will simply be met with the same kinds of problems, just under a different authority). To those people who suggest that if I don't like the authorities here, then I should move to some other country, I suggest to them, if you don't like listening to me criticize institutions, then you move to some other country, because I'm staying right here and I'm going to keep on waving my black flag of anarchy. You don't want to look at my black flag of anarchy waving? Then buy a plane ticket and move to a country that doesn't have anarchists. Love it or leave it, baby!

oh I don't think youre trying hard enough... I'm sure you could get away with not paying taxes in parts of Afghanistan or maybe Irian Jaya... If your idea of changing the USA for the better is abolishing taxes and the military... Well, you might as well move to Afghanistan because that's what we'll end up like... Those aren't reasonable ideas and any sort of scenario where that ends up being the case is most likely going to be cause by something well outside of your control. No answer to the second question huh?

Thanks for the advice, but no, I\'m not going to move to Afghanistan. I didn\'t realize your second question was serious. I thought it was just a smart-alec comment. So since you want an answer to your real question so bad, here it is: no.

I just want you to succeed at being the best anarchist you can.

philosophical anarchist that is...

Will, are you the same Will that did the "why torture is evil" piece? Doesn't seem that one is open for comments? Why?

{"What if the Boston Tea Party participants who resisted the English parliament said, "If we don't like the British pushing us around, then why don't we just move away from the English colonies."? What if civil rights activists in the 1960s said, "If we don't like racism, then we should just move somewhere else."?}

The difference between the two arguments mentioned is that the power your anarchist struggle is against is native. The Boston Tea Party was the effect of a rebellious people seeking to throw off a foreign power. American Colonists (almost all of whom undoubtedly had never seen England) did not think of their land as "English" thought thats what it legally was. They were the inhabitants of the land they were born on, much like you are the inhabitant of the land you were born on, which explains your devotion to your nation despite your hate for the state. Unfortunately for you, your nation supports your state despite its imperfections. So if you don't like it, and you cannot possibly convert your people...you kind of have to leave. Or just keep being angry, and surprised when others tell you to leave. Personally, I kind of like anarchists in the political debate. They generally spice things up in a way that makes people think, but they will never have any legitimate power, and their most radical assumptions and policy suggestions will absolutely never be implemented. Because, though you can say your guitar is your weapon...its a real shoddy weapon. You'll never get anything done with a guitar. Sorry. Well..you might. But it will only be other people listening to you who already agree with you. That's not what you want. Yeah. Outspoken anarchists are like having your cake and eating it too. It's fantastic.

Also, you can't compare your struggles to the ones made in the Civil Rights movement, and it's a classic mistake made by liberalistic anarchistic "freedom fighters". The Civil Rights movement was made to alter a limited portion of the system, not to completely destroy and replace it. You may not have specifically cited those as your ultimate goals in this particular essay, but that's what you want or you aren't an anarchist. Well...maybe you aren't seeking to replace the system so much as just abolish it. Also, you kind of ask for the treatment that you get from other veterans and police by being so outspoken, and i think you expect it and are proud of it, which means you aren't a hypocrit, which i like. Anarchists that expect society to like the disrespect they dish out on what their audience holds sacrosanct (however irrationally) are cognitively blind, and, quite possibly, stupid. So good for you for keeping up the fight and not being surprised (in reference to earlier comments about abuse from police and veterans).

Finally, nobody likes somebody who thinks they are smarter than them, even if its true. While your article made a beautifully written argument with logical fitness, and the people you are arguing with on this site are equivalent first graders in respect to debating prowess and intellect, you are just unlikeable. Literally. I can't like you. I can't agree with you, because it is so obvious that you despise me for things that i support, and if you and i were to actually meet face to face, you would sneer at me. Mainly because i disagree with you. It's your main problem. You sneer. Stop sneering. Start treating people like me, who are open-minded but still conform to the views you are so adamantly opposed to, as if you might generally like me. Lie a little bit. I don't have to KNOW that you don't like me, because i'm an automaton i suppose. You just need to..you know..convince me a little bit. It won't help you look smart, that's for sure. But you might convince some people who don't already agree with you. I can't tell you how to do it, or critique your writing, because it was masterful. But i can say what i've said, because that's how i feel and i'm your audience. That is, if your goals are in line with this publication, and i'm assuming they are.

So yeah...Overall bravo for writing chops! Didn't change my mind though...

The Ancient of Days,
There is alot for me to take issue with in your comment, but I really don't want to get into another lengthy rant on this thread, so I'll just respond to one of your points, which is your comment that I "ask for" veterans or cops to stomp on my right to free speech, (a right, by the way, that is not based on any government pronouncement, but is mine because I exist). I don't "ask for it" any more than a woman who is dressed a certain way is asking to be sexually assaulted or harassed. I don't try to take away the rights of right-wing, authoritarian minded people to say the stupid crap they say, and I expect them to respect my rights as I respect theirs. I don't respect what they say, but I respect their right to say it, and likewise, while I don't expect them to respect what I'm saying, they darn well better respect my right to say it too. That's just Free Speech 101. However I would like to point out that most veterans I've dealt with actually agree with my criticisms of the military industrial complex and don't get offended or angry at me; it's only a small, loudmouthed few who have ever messed with me (cops, on the other hand, tend to be a rotten lot in general). In fact, one day a couple of years ago when I was doing a little bit of anti-war street theater next to an army recruiter's display, some right-wing students surrounded me and began to harass me, and it was a marine veteran who'd served two tours in Iraq who came to my side to yell at the students, accusing them of knowing nothing about the military, and defending what I was saying, (and what I was saying was that "war is terrorism"). There are more veterans than you may think who, as a result of their experiences in the military system, are now very anti-war and outspoken against militarism, and, believe it or not, I know a good handful of veterans who are now anarchists.
I don't sneer at anyone for joining the military or for disagreeing with me. I sneer at the military system itself. Believe it or not, there are plenty of people who I associate with who disagree with alot of my beliefs, and I don't sneer at them for disagreeing with me, just as they don't sneer at me for disagreeing with them. I actually get along with plenty of people who are not radicals. But, I will not "lie a little bit" in order to get people to like me. I don't base my ideals on religion and I certainly don't claim to be some great example of a good Mormon, but as this is a blog serving the Mormon community, I will ask, what if Jesus just "lied a little bit" to get the Pharisees to like him, or to more easily convince them? Maybe if he was less straight forward and more flattering, he wouldn't have alienated the Pharisees. Maybe Abinadi should have lied a little to the wicked judges, and then he would have been more likeable and he wouldn't have been executed.
I'm not inspired by people who "lie a little bit". I am inspired by examples like Diogenes (the Cynic philosopher), the Russian nihilists of the mid to late 19th century, and, of course anarchists like Voltairine de Cleyre, Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman. None of these people tried to be nice; rather, they tried to speak the truth and call things what they really are. Yes, this alienated some people and made some people dislike them, but they inspired me, and I look up to people who have the courage to speak the undiluted truth even when it is unpopular. It's not about going out of one's way to be mean or to offend, but it is about not allowing "niceness" to interfere with truth when it comes to important issues like war and occupation.
As for my guitar being a shoddy weapon, I have to agree with you on that one. In a bad attempt at being humorous, I was alluding to the folk music legend Woodie Guthrie who had the words, "this machine kills fascists" written on his guitar. Woodie Guthrie is another example of a person who didn't let niceness interfere with standing up for what's right. In one instance, during WWII, after he played a show to an audience of "respectable citizens" at a dinner fundraiser to support, what he believed at the time, was a war against fascism, he was invited to sit down and eat, while the black musicians he played music with were told to go to another area, away from the white people to eat. Woodie said, "If they're good enough to play music with me, then they're good enough to eat with me." But the hosts of the fundraiser insisted that black people had to eat in a different area. So, Woody, who clearly didn't care about alienating people or being nice, flipped over a table and yelled to the crowd of respectable, racist white people, "The fight against fascism's got to start right here!" and he demanded that the black musicians be allowed to eat in the same room with the white people. I'm sure he didn't make any friends with the white people in that room that day, and maybe he didn't convince them, but he did what was right anyway. "Lie a little bit." Be more "likeable". I sneer at such ideas.

how did I miss such impressive, beautifully written logical fit arguments as "marching around in dorky uniforms shouting orders at each other" I gotta tell you that guys post was suspiciously praise laden... He lets you off the hook on the hypocrisy charge pretty easily because you have a basic understanding that youre unpopular... That's cheap.. but yeah nobody likes people who think they're smarter than others but I think that applies more to that ancient of days guy than Khan... and the being unlikable stuff... that's really just nitpicking... In the likely event of a state of anarchism following the collapse of the state I doubt either of you are really prepared to survive...

diss something else than what i believe in

How dare you compare our recruiters to the Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels? After reading through your blog. I've concluded you're a traitor to this country, and you do not belong here. You spew Communist propaganda and promote hatred and class warfare. It's also sickening that you hide your hate behind Mormonism.

I'm responding to Mr. Khan.
There is a lot of truth in what you say but for the most part is over generalization
and stereotyping that I see from the likes of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. I agree
with your assessment of the use of the military in the two Gulf Wars but times have
changed.

I was in the military during the Korean War. I was drafted. I believe the Korean War
was the last legitimate war. At least, it was for honorable reasons and not for mega
businesses or for war profiteering. I volunteered for the paratroopers because I was
told my my platoon sergeant who befriended me that airborne troops weren't likely
to be used in Korea. I wasn't afraid of dying, at 21 I thought I was invincible, I DID
NOT WANT TO KILL ANYONE.

I would join you in advising anyone today to avoid the military. The current war is
evil and is being fought not for freedom but for profit. People who participate
voluntarily are part of the evil process. I am weary of our love of war. War on drugs,
War on crime, War on poverty. The killers who ran the planes into the towers were
not soldiers, they were criminals. It was an act of murder, not an act of war. I hate
the fact that our military is killing innocent men women and children in a futile
attempt to catch a few criminals.

I cannot abide, however, your mockery of the uniform. I wore it with pride and I am
proud of my service. I served five years after the end of WWII and there were still
veterans of Bastogne in my regiment. They were heroes. Were it not for them, we
may not be discussing the military as we are now.

I also disagree with your description of military life. Discipline is not a bad thing.
Our Church demands discipline. I made many friends in the army. For the most
part, my superiors were fair and decent men. I still correspond with some of them. I
had no problem saluting officers, just as I have no problem calling the leaders in my
Church by their titles. I had three opportunities to become an officer but didn't want
to stay in any longer.

Bottom line, you are right about staying out of the military but you probably should
have just left it at that.

I\'m responding to Mr. Khan.
There is a lot of truth in what you say but for the most part is over generalization
and stereotyping that I see from the likes of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. I agree
with your assessment of the use of the military in the two Gulf Wars but times have
changed.

I was in the military during the Korean War. I was drafted. I believe the Korean War
was the last legitimate war. At least, it was for honorable reasons and not for mega
businesses or for war profiteering. I volunteered for the paratroopers because I was
told my my platoon sergeant who befriended me that airborne troops weren\'t likely
to be used in Korea. I wasn\'t afraid of dying, at 21 I thought I was invincible, I DID
NOT WANT TO KILL ANYONE.

I would join you in advising anyone today to avoid the military. The current war is
evil and is being fought not for freedom but for profit. People who participate
voluntarily are part of the evil process. I am weary of our love of war. War on drugs,
War on crime, War on poverty. The killers who ran the planes into the towers were
not soldiers, they were criminals. It was an act of murder, not an act of war. I hate
the fact that our military is killing innocent men women and children in a futile
attempt to catch a few criminals.

I cannot abide, however, your mockery of the uniform. I wore it with pride and I am
proud of my service. I served five years after the end of WWII and there were still
veterans of Bastogne in my regiment. They were heroes. Were it not for them, we
may not be discussing the military as we are now.

I also disagree with your description of military life. Discipline is not a bad thing.
Our Church demands discipline. I made many friends in the army. For the most
part, my superiors were fair and decent men. I still correspond with some of them. I
had no problem saluting officers, just as I have no problem calling the leaders in my
Church by their titles. I had three opportunities to become an officer but didn\'t want
to stay in any longer.

Bottom line, you are right about staying out of the military but you probably should
have just left it at that.

I'm responding to Mr. Khan.
There is a lot of truth in what you say but for the most part is over generalization
and stereotyping that I see from the likes of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. I agree
with your assessment of the use of the military in the two Gulf Wars but times have
changed.

I was in the military during the Korean War. I was drafted. I believe the Korean War
was the last legitimate war. At least, it was for honorable reasons and not for mega
businesses or for war profiteering. I volunteered for the paratroopers because I was
told my my platoon sergeant who befriended me that airborne troops weren't likely
to be used in Korea. I wasn't afraid of dying, at 21 I thought I was invincible, I DID
NOT WANT TO KILL ANYONE.

I would join you in advising anyone today to avoid the military. The current war is
evil and is being fought not for freedom but for profit. People who participate
voluntarily are part of the evil process. I am weary of our love of war. War on drugs,
War on crime, War on poverty. The killers who ran the planes into the towers were
not soldiers, they were criminals. It was an act of murder, not an act of war. I hate
the fact that our military is killing innocent men women and children in a futile
attempt to catch a few criminals.

I cannot abide, however, your mockery of the uniform. I wore it with pride and I am
proud of my service. I served five years after the end of WWII and there were still
veterans of Bastogne in my regiment. They were heroes. Were it not for them, we
may not be discussing the military as we are now.

I also disagree with your description of military life. Discipline is not a bad thing.
Our Church demands discipline. I made many friends in the army. For the most
part, my superiors were fair and decent men. I still correspond with some of them. I
had no problem saluting officers, just as I have no problem calling the leaders in my
Church by their titles. I had three opportunities to become an officer but didn't want
to stay in any longer.

Bottom line, you are right about staying out of the military but you probably should
have just left it at that.

I'm responding to Mr. Khan.
There is a lot of truth in what you say but for the most part is over generalization
and stereotyping that I see from the likes of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. I agree
with your assessment of the use of the military in the two Gulf Wars but times have
changed.

I was in the military during the Korean War. I was drafted. I believe the Korean War
was the last legitimate war. At least, it was for honorable reasons and not for mega
businesses or for war profiteering. I volunteered for the paratroopers because I was
told my my platoon sergeant who befriended me that airborne troops weren't likely
to be used in Korea. I wasn't afraid of dying, at 21 I thought I was invincible, I DID
NOT WANT TO KILL ANYONE.

I would join you in advising anyone today to avoid the military. The current war is
evil and is being fought not for freedom but for profit. People who participate
voluntarily are part of the evil process. I am weary of our love of war. War on drugs,
War on crime, War on poverty. The killers who ran the planes into the towers were
not soldiers, they were criminals. It was an act of murder, not an act of war. I hate
the fact that our military is killing innocent men women and children in a futile
attempt to catch a few criminals.

I cannot abide, however, your mockery of the uniform. I wore it with pride and I am
proud of my service. I served five years after the end of WWII and there were still
veterans of Bastogne in my regiment. They were heroes. Were it not for them, we
may not be discussing the military as we are now.

I also disagree with your description of military life. Discipline is not a bad thing.
Our Church demands discipline. I made many friends in the army. For the most
part, my superiors were fair and decent men. I still correspond with some of them. I
had no problem saluting officers, just as I have no problem calling the leaders in my
Church by their titles. I had three opportunities to become an officer but didn't want
to stay in any longer.

Bottom line, you are right about staying out of the military but you probably should
have just left it at that.

I'm responding to Mr. Khan.
There is a lot of truth in what you say but for the most part is over generalization
and stereotyping that I see from the likes of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. I agree
with your assessment of the use of the military in the two Gulf Wars but times have
changed.

I was in the military during the Korean War. I was drafted. I believe the Korean War
was the last legitimate war. At least, it was for honorable reasons and not for mega
businesses or for war profiteering. I volunteered for the paratroopers because I was
told my my platoon sergeant who befriended me that airborne troops weren't likely
to be used in Korea. I wasn't afraid of dying, at 21 I thought I was invincible, I DID
NOT WANT TO KILL ANYONE.

I would join you in advising anyone today to avoid the military. The current war is
evil and is being fought not for freedom but for profit. People who participate
voluntarily are part of the evil process. I am weary of our love of war. War on drugs,
War on crime, War on poverty. The killers who ran the planes into the towers were
not soldiers, they were criminals. It was an act of murder, not an act of war. I hate
the fact that our military is killing innocent men women and children in a futile
attempt to catch a few criminals.

I cannot abide, however, your mockery of the uniform. I wore it with pride and I am
proud of my service. I served five years after the end of WWII and there were still
veterans of Bastogne in my regiment. They were heroes. Were it not for them, we
may not be discussing the military as we are now.

I also disagree with your description of military life. Discipline is not a bad thing.
Our Church demands discipline. I made many friends in the army. For the most
part, my superiors were fair and decent men. I still correspond with some of them. I
had no problem saluting officers, just as I have no problem calling the leaders in my
Church by their titles. I had three opportunities to become an officer but didn't want
to stay in any longer.

Bottom line, you are right about staying out of the military but you probably should
have just left it at that.

i like this, keep it going!

Tariq,
Amen to all you said.
Something inherently evil can never be good. The military - the mechanization of destruction, the warping of free thinking, and the exclusion of compassion, can never be something good.

The problem on this thread is that You are addressing a group of intellectually immature beings who wouldn\'t understand the difference between the military system and principles of self defense if the were forced to memorize them.

Everything you said is clear. But the audience you are reaching isn\'t the correct one.

Stand fast. The True King of the is Coming with the True defenders of Liberty.

Along with the time progress, the sports becomes one fashion which the common people pursue, more and more people like the movement at the same time, each kind of movement equipment also becomes one fashion, for instance <a href="http://www.trade-nfl.com/">MLB Jerseys</a>< ;color='red'> clothing, basketball clothing and soccer clothing. I believed that you might find the ball clothing which you wanted in <a href="http://www.trade-nfl.com/">Cheap NFL Jerseys</a>< ;color='red'>

What does this rant have to do with LDS theology?
I'm failing to see a connection.

I'm not an anarchist; I stumbled across this site, and out of curiosity decided to read this articke. But I agree with the assessment of the military made by the author of this blog post, Tariq Khan. Well done! I wrote a smiliar blog post years ago on the same topic. I said that I couldn't imagine Jesus ever being in a drill sargent or other member of our military, treating people like s***t, etc. The whole system is evil by design. I could never be a part of it. How can a military like ours ever expect to have the full blessings of God on their side? That's not to say that God doesn't answer prayers in protecting the lives of individual soldiers. But I don't think God can support the military as a whole, or their cause, when they are the way they are.

A sign I saw at a rally said it perfectly: "Bombing for peace is like f*ing for virginity." War and militarism promulgate war and militarism; a lesson we can and should learn from the Book of Mormon. What a happy ending that book had!

I find this article amusing because the author of it obviously traded in a stint being part of "armed fascism" for the G.I. bill... no doubt in pursuit of his own "personal happiness and freedom" Must have been a slow month for recruitment.