The morality of being a soldier

[Sokartawi]

The country does not have the right to force him into service in the first place.

Bullshit. If the country can't fulfill it's defense requirements with volunteers than they have the right to draft.

I'd say they don't have any right to force anything.

The fact that Sweden still employs the draft implies that the majority of the populace approves. The majority of Europe and Scandinavia employed the draft unitll recently. With the approval of their populace.

More and more people disagree, I'd say it'll be abolished in 10 years or so like most of Europe, or reduced to a shorter time like what happened in Germany.

Face it, if your father pulled his shit in wartime, he'd be hung.

He'd probably do it anyway.

[Sokartawi]

Actually Kendall he'd be shot.

Either way, I'd dance on his grave while pissing on it.

You probably won't mind my dancing on yours if you would have the chance again to give your precious life for your nation, and took it, either then?

Don't worry though, I'm not that kind of person, but don't expect any bit of gratitude either.

[Sokartawi]

Kuroneko nailed it. Sokartawi's ethical system is intrinsically based on selfishness. it's all about her karma, her responsibility, how something reflects on her, whether something can be blamed on her, etc. There is no "big picture" there; the rest of the world factors into her belief system only insofar as it affects her standing in her value system.

Actually there is a very big picture here, however we must work on it as individuals.

[Imperial Overlord]

That's nice. So your unprovable, self created, theory says you must be personally selfish.

Convenient. No wonder you came up with your own brand of mysticism.

[Aaron]

I'd say they don't have any right to force anything.

The government is empowered to make decisions for the country by the populace. If they don't like the decisions than they can vote them out. They have the moral authority granted to them by the people to impose a draft if it will fulfill their military requirements.

More and more people disagree, I'd say it'll be abolished in 10 years or so like most of Europe, or reduced to a shorter time like what happened in Germany.

Than it will be abolished if it is the will of the people. In the mean time it's necassary for Sweden to use it to defend the country.

He'd probably do it anyway.

Good than he'd be hung/shot. Cowards like that don't deserve to live.

[Sokartawi]

Bullshit. People are to some extent driven to do some things by their environment. However, many people suffer unjust treatment, abuse, poverty, discrimination, etc. and they do not all become killers. At the end of the day, we are all responsible for our own actions.

Look out everyone, because according to Sokartawi, when some deranged lunatic knifes you to death because his salisbury steak told him too, it's your fault.

You're overreacting here, of course people are responsible for their actions, but the assumption that a criminal could NEVER have benifited society is wrong, if events had turned different his 'problem' might never have manifested.

So what if he could have benefitted society? Maybe he could have. BUt what's more important - FAR more important - is that he's not benefitting society; he's harming it. If in some way he's been "driven over the edge" by circumstances beyond his control, I do feel sorry for him. But I feel sorrier for his victims. And long, long before I devote a single iota of energy to "understanding" or "reaching" him, I will be concerned about protecting them. And my sympathy really stops dead when people kill randomly, like Harris and Klebold at Columbine, or like Charles Whitman atop that tower with his rifle. The fact that you were abused may count as mitigating circumstances - if you exact vengeance on your abuser. But if someone is not harming you or has never harmed you, then you have an absolute obligation not to harm him or her. There are no extenuating or mitigating circumstances for violating this obligation. If you have pain in your life that someone else has caused, and you feel you need some payback, go find the person who caused it and deal with them (though you'd better be prepared for the consequences); killing completely innocent people is absolutely indefensible.

(Note that I am talking about the behavior of individuals here. Innocents do get killed in war, and unfortunately, this sort of collateral damage is inevitable, though armies which act morally do try to limit it as much as humanly possible.)

I don't see much of a a difference between murder in war and murder by 'normal' people, especially not when it concerns innocents. Both soldiers and 'normal' murders are pretty screwed in the head if they are able to take innocent lives.

And of course it's very wrong what murderers do, but most of the time their heads are fucked up enough that they do not think rationally, and do not have empathy for their victims. I do honestly wonder how they got that way, and if it could have been prevented.

You will forgive me, I trust, if I think that you are simply saying this in order to avoid being revealed as a complete hypocrite. After all, you earlier stated:
which seems to indicate you have no intention of risking your life in this fashion.

You're ripping my statement completely out of context here, I think you should reread what I replied to.

I read it the first time. You were asked:

The problem with using non-lethal weapon against those with lethal weapons is this;

What happens if it doesn't work? How many lives are you willing to risk just to take this violent offender alive?

You're reply was basically "who cares? It's their decision to risk their lives." Your reply clearly indicated it would not be you.

That is correct in this case, because someone said *I* would be risking other people's lives. *I* am not risking lives to take the offender alive in this case, other people are risking theirs. That doesn't mean I would not risk mine if I would be in that situation.

This is the black & white fallacy. All violence is wrong. Bullshit. Violence in self defense is not only not wrong, it's a survival trait hardwired into us by millions of years of evolution. Very few creatures in nature will not fight for survival when threatened with death. We are no exception. I agree with Robert A. Heinlein's definition of morality. It must be rooted in survival behavior. That may not be everyone's idea of moral, but you would have a hard time arguing that what is moral is rooted in behavior that is contrary to survival. By this definition, it is moral to fight for your own survival. It is moral to fight to defend your family, or other people from harm. It is immoral to do nothing and allow them to be killed.

While a lot of people are animals, there are also humans. What seperates the two? The first follow instincts and indoctrination, and the second think and are their own master.

Sorry, but a few thousand years of having intelligence is not going to erase behaviors that have been built into us by millions of years of natural selection. There is a good reason we and other animals will fight and kill to survive: species that lack this trait will go extinct. Again, I believe morality is rooted in this. It is moral to defend yourself. It is moral to defend your family. It is moral to defend your society by protecting it (or more accurately, the people in it) from enemies foreign and domestic.

I already said I believe in souls, and while evolution would apply to our bodies, and I do not deny that there are some basic traits in humans, we DO have something else, and can ignore that 'hardwired behavour' if we wish. IF we wish. A lot of people choose not to.

[Sokartawi]

I'd say they don't have any right to force anything.

The government is empowered to make decisions for the country by the populace. If they don't like the decisions than they can vote them out. They have the moral authority granted to them by the people to impose a draft if it will fulfill their military requirements.

I don't recall signing anything saying they have any authority over me.

More and more people disagree, I'd say it'll be abolished in 10 years or so like most of Europe, or reduced to a shorter time like what happened in Germany.

Than it will be abolished if it is the will of the people. In the mean time it's necassary for Sweden to use it to defend the country. .

Against the evil imaginary goblin armies.

He'd probably do it anyway.

Good than he'd be hung/shot. Cowards like that don't deserve to live.

I consider him more brave then you will ever be.

[Aaron]

I don't recall signing anything saying they have any authority over me.

As a citizen you forfiet some of you rrights to the government. It is elected to make decisions for the people. Otherwise nothing would get done.

Against the evil imaginary goblin armies.

What do you think kept Sweden free in WWII? Who do you think fought to keep your family free in The Netherlands in WWII? Thats right soldiers.

I consider him more brave then you will ever be.

How do you figure that a man that fucked up on purpose so the military would kick him out has more courage than a soldier who puts his life on the line willingly for his country? If your father had any balls he would have refused to serve and gone to jailk for his beliefs. Instead he took the cowards way out, he became such a nuisance that they kicked him out. Great man your father, he had a yellow streak so wide that he wouldn't even stand up for what he believed.

[Sokartawi]

I don't recall signing anything saying they have any authority over me.

As a citizen you forfiet some of you rrights to the government. It is elected to make decisions for the people. Otherwise nothing would get done.

Indoctrination by those that want to remain in power.

Against the evil imaginary goblin armies.

What do you think kept Sweden free in WWII? Who do you think fought to keep your family free in The Netherlands in WWII? Thats right soldiers.

Who took their freedom in the first place? Soldiers. Who murdered part of my family? That's right, soldiers.

I consider him more brave then you will ever be.

How do you figure that a man that fucked up on purpose so the military would kick him out has more courage than a soldier who puts his life on the line willingly for his country? If your father had any balls he would have refused to serve and gone to jailk for his beliefs. Instead he took the cowards way out, he became such a nuisance that they kicked him out. Great man your father, he had a yellow streak so wide that he wouldn't even stand up for what he believed.

At least my father would put his life on the line for his beliefs if there ever is another war. As for service, he believed he could change more if he went in and openly voiced his opinions there.

[Aaron]

Indoctrination by those that want to remain in power.

Than surrender your citizenship, become person non grata. See how far you get.

Who took their freedom in the first place? Soldiers. Who murdered part of my family? That's right, soldiers.

Not all soldiers are the same. The German soliders that invaded Holland in WWII were following legitimate orders of their government. The ones that followed, the SS and Gestopo were definetly evil. If you can't see the difference than you are a fool.

At least my father would put his life on the line for his beliefs if there ever is another war. As for service, he believed he could change more if he went in and openly voiced his opinions there.

Ahh but he didn't put his life on the line for his beliefs. He simply fucked around until they got fed up with his BS and booted him out. You have no idea how the military works, they wouldn't listen to an individual, at the most they'd lock him up, instead they booted him. He accomplished nothing. Just like you.

[Sokartawi]

Indoctrination by those that want to remain in power.

Than surrender your citizenship, become person non grata. See how far you get.

I'm considering that, and I'm considering emigrating to a nation I like a bit better. Or I can stay here and try to reform this one.

Who took their freedom in the first place? Soldiers. Who murdered part of my family? That's right, soldiers.

Not all soldiers are the same. The German soliders that invaded Holland in WWII were following legitimate orders of their government. The ones that followed, the SS and Gestopo were definetly evil. If you can't see the difference than you are a fool.

Following orders doesn't make them any less responsible for what happened afterwards. Many germans were executed later, while they used the same lame excuse: "Befehl ist Befehl!"

At least my father would put his life on the line for his beliefs if there ever is another war. As for service, he believed he could change more if he went in and openly voiced his opinions there.

Ahh but he didn't put his life on the line for his beliefs.

Not yet but he would if required.

He simply fucked around until they got fed up with his BS and booted him out. You have no idea how the military works, they wouldn't listen to an individual, at the most they'd lock him up, instead they booted him. He accomplished nothing. Just like you.

They might not have, but some other recruits definately did listen. He managed to get his entire squad to come out of the baracks in underpants only, for instance. (first he was the only one that showed up in underpants, the squad got sent back in, and had to come out uniform. Which was exactly what they did.)

[Aaron]

I'm considering that, and I'm considering emigrating to a nation I like a bit better. Or I can stay here and try to reform this one.

I dare you to find a nation that will put up with your BS. Try Iran, I hear they love rebelious woman.

Following orders doesn't make them any less responsible for what happened afterwards. Many germans were executed later, while they used the same lame excuse: "Befehl ist Befehl!"

My point is that not all soldiers are the same. The German Army in WWII simply followed the LEGAL orders of their governement and were not evil. The Gestapo and SS were evil and were probably the ones that were actively oppressing your family.

Not yet but he would if required.

Ahh how cute, he'd fuck with the people that have the moral and legal authority to tell him what to do/.

They might not have, but some other recruits definately did listen. He managed to get his entire squad to come out of the baracks in underpants only, for instance. (first he was the only one that showed up in underpants, the squad got sent back in, and had to come out uniform. Which was exactly what they did.)

Than they all should have been imprisoned. How can you justify your fathers actions? Thats the kind of shit that gets your buddies killed in a war.

[Sokartawi]

Following orders doesn't make them any less responsible for what happened afterwards. Many germans were executed later, while they used the same lame excuse: "Befehl ist Befehl!"

My point is that not all soldiers are the same. The German Army in WWII simply followed the LEGAL orders of their governement and were not evil. The Gestapo and SS were evil and were probably the ones that were actively oppressing your family.

That doesn't matter shit. Yes there are some that are more evil then others, and some that actively commit war crimes and some that do not, and some that oppose warcrimes commited by their side. There was that German soldier that refused to shoot at innocent civilians for the sake of setting an example (in Austria I believe, but not sure), and was executed along with them. I'd say that was a hero. Todays world needs a lot more like that person.

The problem is that normal soldiers that are 'merely following orders' do clear the way for worse to happen. If they would not have obeyed those orders, suffering would have been prevented.

Not yet but he would if required.

Ahh how cute, he'd fuck with the people that have the moral and legal authority to tell him what to do.

Moral?

Legal? I don't care what kind of crazy laws the government tries to force down our throats. If I don't agree with it, I won't do it, simple as that. I never sold my soul to them.

They might not have, but some other recruits definately did listen. He managed to get his entire squad to come out of the baracks in underpants only, for instance. (first he was the only one that showed up in underpants, the squad got sent back in, and had to come out uniform. Which was exactly what they did.)

Than they all should have been imprisoned. How can you justify your fathers actions? Thats the kind of shit that gets your buddies killed in a war.

Since when do we have any obligation to them? We're not part of your soldier-family-structure, we never have been, nor do we want to.

[Aaron]

That doesn't matter shit. Yes there are some that are more evil then others, and some that actively commit war crimes and some that do not, and some that oppose warcrimes commited by their side. There was that German soldier that refused to shoot at innocent civilians for the sake of setting an example (in Austria I believe, but not sure), and was executed along with them. I'd say that was a hero. Todays world needs a lot more like that person.

NOT ALL SOLDIERS ARE THE SAME! Why can't you grasp that? In case you hadn't noticed most Western soldiers don't kill innocents. In fact the only modern soldiers engaged in that activity are Arab terrorists and they are not real soldiers, but illegal combatants.

The problem is that normal soldiers that are 'merely following orders' do clear the way for worse to happen. If they would not have obeyed those orders, suffering would have been prevented.

Your a fucking moron, if those orders are legal by the standards of their government than they have no right to contest them.

Moral?

Yes moral. The majority of your populace elected them, therefore thay have the legal and moral authority to tell them what to do.

Legal? I don't care what kind of crazy laws the government tries to force down our throats. If I don't agree with it, I won't do it, simple as that. I never sold my soul to them.

Than renounce your citizenship, Try and find a country that will allow you to have your views without tossing you in prison. If the majority elects the government in than they have the authority, despite what your twisted value system says.

Since when do we have any obligation to them? We're not part of your soldier-family-structure, we never have been, nor do we want to.

Your father had an obligation to thewm regardless if he was a willing participant in the military or not. He was drafted. The number one priority to a soldier is his buddies. Frankly if war had broken out, I hope your fathers squad mates would have fragged him.

And guess what? Your part of the structure as long as your a citizen. If you don't like it than renounce your citizenship and become person non grata. You'll get absolutely nothing from that. And thats what you deserve.

[Questor]

OK Sok-it-to-me, how do you feel about people who are willing to join the military but are turned down? How about police officers?

BTW, I attempted to join the USN first by attempting to get an appointment to Annapolis, and then by attempting to enlist. I was willing to go into submarines. My reasons are not that I wish to kill people, but that I wish to serve my country in the best way I can.

I am now studying computer science and criminialistics, with the intent of eventually working in a crime lab.

At the moment I work for a public school district as an hourly employee and I put in at least four times what they pay me, while attending classes full-time.

According to you, if someone tries to kill me I should not defend myself, at least to the point of using lethal force. How is my life worth less than the life of the person attacking me? Note that I am not saying that it is worth more from an objective standpoint, just that it is not worth less. Of course from a subjective standpoint I feel my life has value and should be preserved, why am I wrong?

On another note, do you have children? Does this lack of action apply to threats to them if you do?

If it does, I do not se how you can consider yourself anything but a plant. Any animal I can think of, at least at the moment, would die to prevent its young from being killed.

[Sokartawi]

OK Sok-it-to-me, how do you feel about people who are willing to join the military but are turned down? How about police officers?

Got no problems with police officers as long as they don't kill people or give fines for rediculous reasons just to get their quotum. As for the military, it comes down to the question if you're willing to kill another human being or not.

BTW, I attempted to join the USN first by attempting to get an appointment to Annapolis, and then by attempting to enlist. I was willing to go into submarines. My reasons are not that I wish to kill people, but that I wish to serve my country in the best way I can.

First, I do not believe that going into the military is a very good way of serving your country, but that's my opinion. Secondly, a country isn't worth killing for, but again that's my opinion.

I am now studying computer science and criminialistics, with the intent of eventually working in a crime lab.

At the moment I work for a public school district as an hourly employee and I put in at least four times what they pay me, while attending classes full-time.

A much better job to do I'd say.

According to you, if someone tries to kill me I should not defend myself, at least to the point of using lethal force. How is my life worth less than the life of the person attacking me? Note that I am not saying that it is worth more from an objective standpoint, just that it is not worth less. Of course from a subjective standpoint I feel my life has value and should be preserved, why am I wrong?
Your life is not worth less at all. However, that does not matter in this case, since any differences in value of them would not justify killing anyone.

On another note, do you have children? Does this lack of action apply to threats to them if you do?

No to the first, and not likely that I ever will have (you may celebrate and/or make nasty comments now), but I might consider adopting kids at a later time or create a clone army when that technology becomes widely available

If it does, I do not se how you can consider yourself anything but a plant. Any animal I can think of, at least at the moment, would die to prevent its young from being killed.

Either lions or some other big feline do not. If the males of a group get driven off by stronger males, then the young get killed off by the new males, so that the females become fertile again. The females hardly protect their young in this case.

[Sokartawi]

That doesn't matter shit. Yes there are some that are more evil then others, and some that actively commit war crimes and some that do not, and some that oppose warcrimes commited by their side. There was that German soldier that refused to shoot at innocent civilians for the sake of setting an example (in Austria I believe, but not sure), and was executed along with them. I'd say that was a hero. Todays world needs a lot more like that person.

NOT ALL SOLDIERS ARE THE SAME! Why can't you grasp that? In case you hadn't noticed most Western soldiers don't kill innocents. In fact the only modern soldiers engaged in that activity are Arab terrorists and they are not real soldiers, but illegal combatants.

The only? All innocent deaths in Iraq are caused by Arab 'terrorists'?

The problem is that normal soldiers that are 'merely following orders' do clear the way for worse to happen. If they would not have obeyed those orders, suffering would have been prevented.

Your a fucking moron, if those orders are legal by the standards of their government than they have no right to contest them.

They have the MORAL DUTY to contest them if they are not moral! The government can go FUCK themselves if they issue immoral orders.

Moral?

Yes moral. The majority of your populace elected them, therefore thay have the legal and moral authority to tell them what to do.

The majority of the populance COULD be indoctrinated immoral bastards.

Legal? I don't care what kind of crazy laws the government tries to force down our throats. If I don't agree with it, I won't do it, simple as that. I never sold my soul to them.

Than renounce your citizenship, Try and find a country that will allow you to have your views without tossing you in prison. If the majority elects the government in than they have the authority, despite what your twisted value system says.

Once again, the majority of the populance can be wrong.

Since when do we have any obligation to them? We're not part of your soldier-family-structure, we never have been, nor do we want to.

Your father had an obligation to thewm regardless if he was a willing participant in the military or not. He was drafted. The number one priority to a soldier is his buddies.

So what if he was drafted? I already said that I refuse to give the government the right to draft anyone.

Frankly if war had broken out, I hope your fathers squad mates would have fragged him.

Thank you for your kind words.

And guess what? Your part of the structure as long as your a citizen. If you don't like it than renounce your citizenship and become person non grata. You'll get absolutely nothing from that. And thats what you deserve.

Sometimes it's better to get nothing then to get fed shit.

[Aaron]

The only? All innocent deaths in Iraq are caused by Arab 'terrorists'?

Not all innocent deaths in Iraq are caused by terrorists, but on a whole I think the majority are. Western soldiers do not purposely kill innoncents.

They have the MORAL DUTY to contest them if they are not moral! The government can go FUCK themselves if they issue immoral orders.

They may have the moral duty to contest them but they don't have the legal authority too. They'll just wind up imprisoned or hung/shot.

The majority of the populance COULD be indoctrinated immoral bastards.

Are you seriously contending that the whole of Sweden is brainwashed by the goverenment? What are you smoking?

Once again, the majority of the populance can be wrong.

Are you seriously contending that the whole of Sweden is brainwashed by the goverenment? What are you smoking?

I refuse to give the government the right to draft anyone.

It doesn't matter whether you give them the authority. The majority of Sweden's populace has given them the right. In a democracy the majority rules.

Thank you for your kind words.

No problem, he deserves it.

Sometimes it's better to get nothing then to get fed shit.

Ok than renounce your citizenship. Try and find a country that will take you and put up with your shit. You'll never get refugee status as your not being persecuted.

[Perinquus]

So what if he could have benefitted society? Maybe he could have. BUt what's more important - FAR more important - is that he's not benefitting society; he's harming it. If in some way he's been "driven over the edge" by circumstances beyond his control, I do feel sorry for him. But I feel sorrier for his victims. And long, long before I devote a single iota of energy to "understanding" or "reaching" him, I will be concerned about protecting them. And my sympathy really stops dead when people kill randomly, like Harris and Klebold at Columbine, or like Charles Whitman atop that tower with his rifle. The fact that you were abused may count as mitigating circumstances - if you exact vengeance on your abuser. But if someone is not harming you or has never harmed you, then you have an absolute obligation not to harm him or her. There are no extenuating or mitigating circumstances for violating this obligation. If you have pain in your life that someone else has caused, and you feel you need some payback, go find the person who caused it and deal with them (though you'd better be prepared for the consequences); killing completely innocent people is absolutely indefensible.

(Note that I am talking about the behavior of individuals here. Innocents do get killed in war, and unfortunately, this sort of collateral damage is inevitable, though armies which act morally do try to limit it as much as humanly possible.)

I don't see much of a a difference between murder in war and murder by 'normal' people, especially not when it concerns innocents. Both soldiers and 'normal' murders are pretty screwed in the head if they are able to take innocent lives.

By this logic then, we were morally obligated to sit on our hands and do nothing against the Nazis, because making war against them would inevitably involve the death of innocents. Of course, the fact that this would have allowed the Nazis to murder many millions more Jews, Gypsies, et al. is apparently insignificant to you. Based on your fucked up system of morality, making war on the Germans, and killing the 3,810,000 German civilians estimated to have died in WWII (World War II Casualties), to say nothing of the 3,250,000 German soldiers, sailors, and airmen killed, put us morally in the wrong. Nevermind the fact that not fighting the Germans would have enabled them to kill many millions more, not only Jews and others slaughtered like sheep in the death camps, but soldiers they were fighting, and civilian deaths they caused in the Soviet Union and other countries.

According to you, what is moral is whatever keeps you from getting your hands dirty, no matter how much more death and devastation result from it. I don't know whether to call this squeamishness or cowardice, but I do know it's despicable, whatever it is.

And of course it's very wrong what murderers do, but most of the time their heads are fucked up enough that they do not think rationally, and do not have empathy for their victims. I do honestly wonder how they got that way, and if it could have been prevented.

Since no human society has ever existed that has been able to prevent things like this from happening, or individuals like this from committing the crimes they commit, I would have to say, realistically, no, it can't be prevented. Perhaps if we lived in a utopian society, we could somehow, but we don't. And since no human institutions are, or ever have been, or ever will be perfect, I would have to say that our chances of successfully preventing any murders from ever taking place are essentially zero. So this leaves us with the necessity of facing up to what we can do to combat this problem. You're solution, apart from unrealistic and unrealizable fantasies about understanding and preventing murderers from murdering, is apparently to do nothing. This is unacceptable.

You're reply was basically "who cares? It's their decision to risk their lives." Your reply clearly indicated it would not be you.

That is correct in this case, because someone said *I* would be risking other people's lives. *I* am not risking lives to take the offender alive in this case, other people are risking theirs. That doesn't mean I would not risk mine if I would be in that situation.

Actually, based on the tactics you have advocated to apprehend murderers, I would say you would not risk your life, you would throw it away. The problem is also that you insist your way is the only moral one, and you clearly disapprove of more forceful and traditional ways of dealing with violent individuals - ways that may include the use of lethal force. I imagine that if you had the power to do so, you would require everyone else to act as you say you would do. Just because you are living in a fantasy world, and are willing to throw your life away by using ineffectual methods, do not expect others to join you.

Sorry, but a few thousand years of having intelligence is not going to erase behaviors that have been built into us by millions of years of natural selection. There is a good reason we and other animals will fight and kill to survive: species that lack this trait will go extinct. Again, I believe morality is rooted in this. It is moral to defend yourself. It is moral to defend your family. It is moral to defend your society by protecting it (or more accurately, the people in it) from enemies foreign and domestic.

I already said I believe in souls, and while evolution would apply to our bodies, and I do not deny that there are some basic traits in humans, we DO have something else, and can ignore that 'hardwired behavour' if we wish. IF we wish. A lot of people choose not to.

And I believe you are wrong. There is no evidence whatsoever that souls exist. I personally believe that there is no afterlife, and this life is the only one we get. I base this belief on the total and complete lack of evidence to support the existence of an afterlife. Therefore, I would like to hang onto to my one and only life for as long as I possible can. And I, for one, do not intend to lose it prematurely, because I have crippled myself with unrealistic and ineffective behaviors, based on unproven and unprovable fantasies.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Your a fucking moron, if those orders are legal by the standards of their government than they have no right to contest them.

What do you mean here? Just becaues the government legalizes something, it is moral to follow it?

[Aaron]

What do you mean here? Just becaues the government legalizes something, it is moral to follow it?

I mean that if the orders from your government are legal than as a soldier you have no right to contest them.

[Sokartawi]

The only? All innocent deaths in Iraq are caused by Arab 'terrorists'?

Not all innocent deaths in Iraq are caused by terrorists, but on a whole I think the majority are. Western soldiers do not purposely kill innoncents.

While some (not all mind you) do, or some simply do not give a shit if they do, a lot of civilan deaths have been caused by helicopter gunfire and other attacks from the air. Kinda hard to see who exactly you're shooting at, I give you that.

They have the MORAL DUTY to contest them if they are not moral! The government can go FUCK themselves if they issue immoral orders.

They may have the moral duty to contest them but they don't have the legal authority too. They'll just wind up imprisoned or hung/shot.

Then it's their moral duty to wind up improsoned or hung/shot instead of cooperating with evil.

The majority of the populance COULD be indoctrinated immoral bastards.

Are you seriously contending that the whole of Sweden is brainwashed by the goverenment? What are you smoking?

I think I wrote 'could' in caps here...

Once again, the majority of the populance can be wrong.

Are you seriously contending that the whole of Sweden is brainwashed by the goverenment? What are you smoking?[/quote]
Maybe I should have put 'can' in caps here too...

I refuse to give the government the right to draft anyone.

It doesn't matter whether you give them the authority. The majority of Sweden's populace has given them the right. In a democracy the majority rules.

I never signed anything that said the majority had any power over me.

Sometimes it's better to get nothing then to get fed shit.

Ok than renounce your citizenship. Try and find a country that will take you and put up with your shit. You'll never get refugee status as your not being persecuted.

Already answered.

[frigidmagi]

No he means if a government gives a legal order to a solder, the solder has no right to contest this, has the solder has already agreed in advance to follow all legal orders of the government in order to protect and preserve his society.

[SecondStorm]

NOT ALL SOLDIERS ARE THE SAME! Why can't you grasp that? In case you hadn't noticed most Western soldiers don't kill innocents. In fact the only modern soldiers engaged in that activity are Arab terrorists and they are not real soldiers, but illegal combatants.

Nitpick: Western soldiers does kill innocents but they do not intend to do so. Both morally and legally.
Theres a bunch of rotten eggs (Israel as an example) though but they are the extreme exception not the rule.

[Aaron]

While some (not all mind you) do, or some simply do not give a shit if they do, a lot of civilan deaths have been caused by helicopter gunfire and other attacks from the air. Kinda hard to see who exactly you're shooting at, I give you that.

Are you contending that professional western soldiers don't care who they shoot at? Fuck you. When I was in the Army we got yearly lectures on the Conventions and our rules of engagement were clear. And they didn't include killing civvies.

Then it's their moral duty to wind up improsoned or hung/shot instead of cooperating with evil.

And what would that accomplish?

I think I wrote 'could' in caps here...

No you need to understand that the only people who believe your shit is your pathetic reletives and you.

Maybe I should have put 'can' in caps here too...

No you need to understand that the only people who believe your shit is your pathetic reletives and you.

I never signed anything that said the majority had any power over me.

Though shit. You live in a democracy, thats how one works. If you don't like it leave. I dare you to find a system that works better. Perhaps you'd rather live in a Middle Eastern shithole, in which you have no rights?

Already answered.

Where?