US Troops are "Warriors" now?

[DeBunkem]

Yes this is religion, too, IMO. I'm puzzled by the effort of the Pentagon to implant the idea of US troops as "warriors." I find it repulsive. What other advanced nation is doing this? Is "soldier" too tame? "Warrior" connotates bloodthirsty barbarian hordes such as Goths, Huns, and Mongols. "Soldier" connotates the armies os civilized nations with advanced laws, such as Rome, England, and the (former) USA. With reports on how much the US military is becoming infiltrated with militant Fundamentalists, (i.e., the USAF cadet scandals)i would suggest a sinister long-term strategy.
Which sounds better next to "Holy"? Holy Soldiers or Holy Warriors? I'm just sayin'. Holy Moly I hope I'm wrong but it would also fit the direction that AIPAC is pushing us. Obama said their control over our policy is "sacrosanct."

Here's a picture of Pastor John Hagee (Google 'im) forya:

[FinalEnigma]

Examined objectively, all paid members of the invading military are "mercenaries".
Be they guns for hire or the support for guns for hire, no exception absolves the blood on their hands.

now wait a moment.

There's most certainly a distinction between a countries national military and mercenaries, and I take objection to the members of our military being called 'hired guns'

[cnorman18]

Examined objectively, all paid members of the invading military are "mercenaries".
Be they guns for hire or the support for guns for hire, no exception absolves the blood on their hands.

now wait a moment.

There's most certainly a distinction between a countries national military and mercenaries, and I take objection to the members of our military being called 'hired guns'

You have to take into account the point of view of some who have been posting to this thread. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I misstate it, but according to some, virtually every military action that the US has engaged in since WWII has been in the service of the wealthy corporate elites that actually run the country, to enrich the wealthy and secure the power of the powerful. Virtually nothing we have done, according to them, has been in the service of peace, freedom, defense of ourselves or our allies; those are all phony excuses for basically looting other nations and oppressing and gleefully murdering their innocent citizens for no apparent reason, just for fun. Seen from that perspective, of COURSE all US troops are murderous hired guns worthy only of contempt. Yes, even the medics and physicians and the construction battalions that are working to rebuild infrastructure and restore power in the Haiti disaster; that's all fake, a cover to seize power and wealth.

And of course, anyone who disagrees is an idiot, a gullible dupe of the powers that be, probably a racist, xenophobic bigot, fascist, and probably a flag-waving - yeesh, recoil in disgust - America-lover.

[Wyvern]

Examined objectively, all paid members of the invading military are "mercenaries".
Be they guns for hire or the support for guns for hire, no exception absolves the blood on their hands.

If you actually wanted to be objective you would have wrote something to the effect that the only mercenaries would be employees of mercenary companies. Most of the independant contractors are used in support roles for the national armies in the field. If it is your contention that the soldiers in the national armies are also mercenaries then you are simply mistaken.

[DeBunkem]

Examined objectively, all paid members of the invading military are "mercenaries".
Be they guns for hire or the support for guns for hire, no exception absolves the blood on their hands.

now wait a moment.

There's most certainly a distinction between a countries national military and mercenaries, and I take objection to the members of our military being called 'hired guns'

You have to take into account the point of view of some who have been posting to this thread. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I misstate it, but according to some, virtually every military action that the US has engaged in since WWII has been in the service of the wealthy corporate elites that actually run the country, to enrich the wealthy and secure the power of the powerful. Virtually nothing we have done, according to them, has been in the service of peace, freedom, defense of ourselves or our allies; those are all phony excuses for basically looting other nations and oppressing and gleefully murdering their innocent citizens for no apparent reason, just for fun. Seen from that perspective, of COURSE all US troops are murderous hired guns worthy only of contempt. Yes, even the medics and physicians and the construction battalions that are working to rebuild infrastructure and restore power in the Haiti disaster; that's all fake, a cover to seize power and wealth.

And of course, anyone who disagrees is an idiot, a gullible dupe of the powers that be, probably a racist, xenophobic bigot, fascist, and probably a flag-waving - yeesh, recoil in disgust - America-lover.

Anyone who objects or opposes such obvious Romanesque Conquests as Iraq is demonized by the right. Even before WWII anti-Imperialists such as Mark Twain objected to such adventures as the Spanish-American-Phillipines conquest. The troops do not make these decisions, though obviously some have committed atrocities.

What is important is "how do those whose countries the Pentagon decides to invade or attack view such invasions?" It doesn't matter how many pictures of smiling Iraqi kids and US troops handing out candy the media shows us. Iraqis almost universally want all foreign troops and mercenaries out of their countries, as do Afghans. It is also significant how our NATO allies in Afghanistan experience tremendous popular opposition to this gas pipeline war. In fact, it brought down the Dutch government, resulting in an imminent pullout of Dutch troops...about 3000. Our corporate media does not focus on this sort of inconvenient fact, but makes sure we get 24/7 coverage of Tiger Woods' ridiculous public confession.

"I spent thirty-three years and four months in active
military service... And during that period I spent
most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big
business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In
short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for
capitalism...I helped make Mexico safe for American
oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
decent place for the National City Bank boys to
collect revenue in. I helped purify Nicaragua for the
international banking house of Brown Brothers... I
brought light to the Dominican Republic for American
sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras
"right" for American fruit companies in 1903. Looking
back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints."
US Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler

[cnorman18]

Examined objectively, all paid members of the invading military are "mercenaries".
Be they guns for hire or the support for guns for hire, no exception absolves the blood on their hands.

now wait a moment.

There's most certainly a distinction between a countries national military and mercenaries, and I take objection to the members of our military being called 'hired guns'

You have to take into account the point of view of some who have been posting to this thread. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I misstate it, but according to some, virtually every military action that the US has engaged in since WWII has been in the service of the wealthy corporate elites that actually run the country, to enrich the wealthy and secure the power of the powerful. Virtually nothing we have done, according to them, has been in the service of peace, freedom, defense of ourselves or our allies; those are all phony excuses for basically looting other nations and oppressing and gleefully murdering their innocent citizens for no apparent reason, just for fun. Seen from that perspective, of COURSE all US troops are murderous hired guns worthy only of contempt. Yes, even the medics and physicians and the construction battalions that are working to rebuild infrastructure and restore power in the Haiti disaster; that's all fake, a cover to seize power and wealth.

And of course, anyone who disagrees is an idiot, a gullible dupe of the powers that be, probably a racist, xenophobic bigot, fascist, and probably a flag-waving - yeesh, recoil in disgust - America-lover.

Anyone who objects or opposes such obvious Romanesque Conquests as Iraq is demonized by the right. Even before WWII anti-Imperialists such as Mark Twain objected to such adventures as the Spanish-American-Phillipines conquest. The troops do not make these decisions, though obviously some have committed atrocities.

What is important is "how do those whose countries the Pentagon decides to invade or attack view such invasions?" It doesn't matter how many pictures of smiling Iraqi kids and US troops handing out candy the media shows us. Iraqis almost universally want all foreign troops and mercenaries out of their countries, as do Afghans. It is also significant how our NATO allies in Afghanistan experience tremendous popular opposition to this gas pipeline war. In fact, it brought down the Dutch government, resulting in an imminent pullout of Dutch troops...about 3000. Our corporate media does not focus on this sort of inconvenient fact, but makes sure we get 24/7 coverage of Tiger Woods' ridiculous public confession.

"I spent thirty-three years and four months in active
military service... And during that period I spent
most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big
business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In
short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for
capitalism...I helped make Mexico safe for American
oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
decent place for the National City Bank boys to
collect revenue in. I helped purify Nicaragua for the
international banking house of Brown Brothers... I
brought light to the Dominican Republic for American
sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras
"right" for American fruit companies in 1903. Looking
back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints."
US Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler

Like I said...

I don't think the "demonizing" here is being done by the right.

[DeBunkem]

I don't think the "demonizing" here is being done by the right.

I see plenty of condemnation of pentagon AKA military/industrial complex policies. This has been done by anti-imperialists since the nation's beginning. Anyone involved in opposing Bush's wars when they were beginning (most of the world) were certainly demonized not only in forums, but by the myriads of FOX and rightist radio commentators such as Limpbaugh. remember "Freedom Fries?" "America hater" would have been applied to Twain, Eisenhauer, and most of the rest of the world, including our closest allies. The hate talk from the right and the arrogance of the Bushists alienated us from the rest of the world, except Israel, of course.

[FinalEnigma]

Examined objectively, all paid members of the invading military are "mercenaries".
Be they guns for hire or the support for guns for hire, no exception absolves the blood on their hands.

now wait a moment.

There's most certainly a distinction between a countries national military and mercenaries, and I take objection to the members of our military being called 'hired guns'

You have to take into account the point of view of some who have been posting to this thread. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I misstate it, but according to some, virtually every military action that the US has engaged in since WWII has been in the service of the wealthy corporate elites that actually run the country, to enrich the wealthy and secure the power of the powerful. Virtually nothing we have done, according to them, has been in the service of peace, freedom, defense of ourselves or our allies; those are all phony excuses for basically looting other nations and oppressing and gleefully murdering their innocent citizens for no apparent reason, just for fun. Seen from that perspective, of COURSE all US troops are murderous hired guns worthy only of contempt. Yes, even the medics and physicians and the construction battalions that are working to rebuild infrastructure and restore power in the Haiti disaster; that's all fake, a cover to seize power and wealth.

And of course, anyone who disagrees is an idiot, a gullible dupe of the powers that be, probably a racist, xenophobic bigot, fascist, and probably a flag-waving - yeesh, recoil in disgust - America-lover.

Anyone who objects or opposes such obvious Romanesque Conquests as Iraq is demonized by the right. Even before WWII anti-Imperialists such as Mark Twain objected to such adventures as the Spanish-American-Phillipines conquest. The troops do not make these decisions, though obviously some have committed atrocities.

What is important is "how do those whose countries the Pentagon decides to invade or attack view such invasions?" It doesn't matter how many pictures of smiling Iraqi kids and US troops handing out candy the media shows us. Iraqis almost universally want all foreign troops and mercenaries out of their countries, as do Afghans. It is also significant how our NATO allies in Afghanistan experience tremendous popular opposition to this gas pipeline war. In fact, it brought down the Dutch government, resulting in an imminent pullout of Dutch troops...about 3000. Our corporate media does not focus on this sort of inconvenient fact, but makes sure we get 24/7 coverage of Tiger Woods' ridiculous public confession.

"I spent thirty-three years and four months in active
military service... And during that period I spent
most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big
business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In
short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for
capitalism...I helped make Mexico safe for American
oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
decent place for the National City Bank boys to
collect revenue in. I helped purify Nicaragua for the
international banking house of Brown Brothers... I
brought light to the Dominican Republic for American
sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras
"right" for American fruit companies in 1903. Looking
back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints."
US Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler

I realize we get into inappropriate conflicts. I have no problem with this being pointed out, discussed, whatever. Demonize the people getting us into them if you want. What I do have a problem with is demonizing the soldiers who are out there doing the fighting.
Yes, some soldiers do the wrong thing - even commit atrocities. but that's some. there are always going to be a few people in every group who do bad things, but do not, I repeat, do not demonize and attack the soldiers as a whole who are out there fighting and dieing in these conflicts.
It takes a lot more guts and grit and determination to be an American soldier than most people think. They have fought and struggled against themselves and others for you. Even if that isn't how they are being used, that's what they chose to do, and what they've done to get where they are.
They have done a very significant laudable, commendable thing, and then some people feel the need to attack them for it. If they commit an atrocity, condemn them for it, and I will be right there doing the same, but to attack them for the horrendous crime of daring to put their own lives at risk to serve you, and beyond that, for fighting for the privilege of doing so and for overcoming obstacles you know nothing about to get them there is simply wrong.
Most Americans lead relatively easy lives. The biggest effort they actually put out is writing lines of code or using an elliptical at the gym till they 'feel the burn'. When was the last time you had to physically fight to keep standing? or, like a soldier I knew, complete a ten mile march literally crawling becasue your ankle was broken?
yet some Americans feel they have the right to sit at a desk in their dreamland and condemn these soldiers just for being soldiers. Not even for what they may or may not have done, but for being soldiers. This is simply wrong. Period.

[DeBunkem]

Examined objectively, all paid members of the invading military are "mercenaries".
Be they guns for hire or the support for guns for hire, no exception absolves the blood on their hands.

now wait a moment.

There's most certainly a distinction between a countries national military and mercenaries, and I take objection to the members of our military being called 'hired guns'

You have to take into account the point of view of some who have been posting to this thread. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I misstate it, but according to some, virtually every military action that the US has engaged in since WWII has been in the service of the wealthy corporate elites that actually run the country, to enrich the wealthy and secure the power of the powerful. Virtually nothing we have done, according to them, has been in the service of peace, freedom, defense of ourselves or our allies; those are all phony excuses for basically looting other nations and oppressing and gleefully murdering their innocent citizens for no apparent reason, just for fun. Seen from that perspective, of COURSE all US troops are murderous hired guns worthy only of contempt. Yes, even the medics and physicians and the construction battalions that are working to rebuild infrastructure and restore power in the Haiti disaster; that's all fake, a cover to seize power and wealth.

And of course, anyone who disagrees is an idiot, a gullible dupe of the powers that be, probably a racist, xenophobic bigot, fascist, and probably a flag-waving - yeesh, recoil in disgust - America-lover.

Anyone who objects or opposes such obvious Romanesque Conquests as Iraq is demonized by the right. Even before WWII anti-Imperialists such as Mark Twain objected to such adventures as the Spanish-American-Phillipines conquest. The troops do not make these decisions, though obviously some have committed atrocities.

What is important is "how do those whose countries the Pentagon decides to invade or attack view such invasions?" It doesn't matter how many pictures of smiling Iraqi kids and US troops handing out candy the media shows us. Iraqis almost universally want all foreign troops and mercenaries out of their countries, as do Afghans. It is also significant how our NATO allies in Afghanistan experience tremendous popular opposition to this gas pipeline war. In fact, it brought down the Dutch government, resulting in an imminent pullout of Dutch troops...about 3000. Our corporate media does not focus on this sort of inconvenient fact, but makes sure we get 24/7 coverage of Tiger Woods' ridiculous public confession.

"I spent thirty-three years and four months in active
military service... And during that period I spent
most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big
business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In
short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for
capitalism...I helped make Mexico safe for American
oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
decent place for the National City Bank boys to
collect revenue in. I helped purify Nicaragua for the
international banking house of Brown Brothers... I
brought light to the Dominican Republic for American
sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras
"right" for American fruit companies in 1903. Looking
back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints."
US Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler

I realize we get into inappropriate conflicts. I have no problem with this being pointed out, discussed, whatever. Demonize the people getting us into them if you want. What I do have a problem with is demonizing the soldiers who are out there doing the fighting.
Yes, some soldiers do the wrong thing - even commit atrocities. but that's some. there are always going to be a few people in every group who do bad things, but do not, I repeat, do not demonize and attack the soldiers as a whole who are out there fighting and dieing in these conflicts.
It takes a lot more guts and grit and determination to be an American soldier than most people think. They have fought and struggled against themselves and others for you. Even if that isn't how they are being used, that's what they chose to do, and what they've done to get where they are.
They have done a very significant laudable, commendable thing, and then some people feel the need to attack them for it. If they commit an atrocity, condemn them for it, and I will be right there doing the same, but to attack them for the horrendous crime of daring to put their own lives at risk to serve you, and beyond that, for fighting for the privilege of doing so and for overcoming obstacles you know nothing about to get them there is simply wrong.
Most Americans lead relatively easy lives. The biggest effort they actually put out is writing lines of code or using an elliptical at the gym till they 'feel the burn'. When was the last time you had to physically fight to keep standing? or, like a soldier I knew, complete a ten mile march literally crawling becasue your ankle was broken?
yet some Americans feel they have the right to sit at a desk in their dreamland and condemn these soldiers just for being soldiers. Not even for what they may or may not have done, but for being soldiers. This is simply wrong. Period.

I have never condemned anyone for soldiering, even though many join up for lack of decent jobs. Fact is, US soldiers and vets themselves are a sizeable portion of the opposition to corporate war profiteering, which only protects profits, not Americans at home. The FBI et al is responsible for that during a foreign war, and they have been effective when not tampered with by neoCon politics, as during the awful Bush years. So I believe what many say as to why a soldier fights...they mainly fight for each other. The same cannot be said for Blackwater hired gunnies and others like them. To kill for money is despicable.

oh, and I was recently assaulted by a Vietnam vet off his meds or something. He tried to choke me and I got some bruised ribs out of the fracas, which was unprovoked. I mainly had to struggle not to hurt the guy. He was arrested later.

[FinalEnigma]

I understand, debunkum, I was responding to an appearance of defending people who demonize soldiers, rather than actually doing it.