As title, if you have post or link any useful resource you have

  • Ithral@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    So, veteran here. I’ve tried to talk people out of joining the military or at least trying to avoid jobs with high probability of seeing combat. Usually the result is they just start prying about what combat is like and make statements about how much they want to experience it.

    Another tack I haven’t tried but it might be more effective, is to describe how miserable it is to have the stench of a burn pit wafting over you, always wondering if the distant gunfire will move in your direction, being stuck manning a 24/7 watch where if even one person who can do that job dies or is otherwise incapacitated you will be stuck doing 12hr shifts instead of 8. Then you get back home and have to fight tooth and nail for benefits from the country that fucked your life up in the first place.

    War is hell, coming home is hell, forcing that on someone can only be justified if they are literally at home fighting off an invading force.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      forcing that on someone can only be justified if they are literally at home fighting off an invading force.

      Empire propaganda must be real good if this commenter has to say this out loud

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s not the propaganda that’s good, SunZu.

        It’s the poverty. Tens of millions of young people in this country have no other way out of debt or to move upward economically.

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          It IS the propaganda that makes people decide that the military is a way out of poverty and not just another trap OF poverty. If there weren’t recruiters in every poor neighbourhood’s school, people might decide that joining a mission or Greenpeace or digging wells in Africa for a charity is their “only way” out of poverty.

          • PiJiNWiNg@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            I have to disagree a little bit, as, at least in the US, there are some really great perks associated with miltary service. GI bill and VA home loans are some of the bigger perks, but theres plenty of smaller perks as well (if you know where to look).

            Dont get me wrong, these benefits shouldn’t have to be “earned”, but one doesnt necessarily have to put themselves in harms way (or sacrifice their morals) to get those benefits. For example, I enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve at 18 and picked IT as my “rate”. I often joke that i picked the “lowest form” of miltary service, but Bush’s illegal war in Afghanistan was in full swing at the time and I wanted nothing to do with it, so I justified my choice with, “I’d rather help save people, then help kill people.”

            As i joined the reserves, i was able to skip the otherwise mandatory time in service requirements for IT school, and went right after bootcamp. After training, i got stationed with my permanent reserve unit in my home town. Less then a month later i secured an entry level IT job, and have been in the industry ever since. A few years after that, I bought my first house with a VA loan.

            While i was in, my service obligation was ludicrously easy. One weekend a month I’d shave and cut my hair, throw on a uniform, and do the same job I’d been doing in my civilian life for the weekend (when there was work to do anyway, we fucked off A LOT). Further, working in both private sector and government IT gave me some really useful perspective that helped me accelerate both my civilian and government careers.

            Last thing ill mention is that, presumably due to my ADD, I tend to excel in a job in the first couple years, but eventually get bored and start slackin. CG deployments (at least for IT folks), were very rarely mandatory, but there was usually enough going on that if you wanted to deploy, you just had to say so. Because of this, if i started to feel bored at my civilian role, I’d just throw my name in the hat for a set of orders (ranging from 2-12 months in duration), travel the country on the governmwnt dime, work on some cool shit, maybe learn something, then go back to my civilian job feeling rejuvinated and wanting to apply what i learned. In case you dont know, employers are federally required to keep your position available for when you return (for up to 5 years). Also, depending on the orders, you’d often make more money then active duty folks doing the same job because you’d receive BAH to pay your rent/mortgage at home, while also receiving per diem based on the location of your orders.

            Anyway, not trying to sound like a recruiter, but you dont have to sell your soul to get those bennies.

            • ksdhf@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              So you would rather assist with war crimes/genocide than live in poverty? I would rather serve crack than serve the empire.

    • index@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      forcing that on someone can only be justified if they are literally at home fighting off an invading force.

      I believe abolish someone rights is never a good thing. If you are fighting against someone that wants to take these away you have even more reason to respect these rights and stand for them.

  • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    The issue, from what I can tell, is that the question you’ve asked here doesn’t match the argument you just had in comments of a post about about the Ukraine war. The argument you were trying to make is not “war bad”, but specifically that Ukraine’s counteroffensive is bad. You were additionally arguing that it is morally reprehensible for other countries to provide economic support to Ukraine rather than leaving them to “defend themselves”.

    There’s a few important details that such an argument (intentionally) ignores.

    • This invasion was not a choice between war or no war. It was simply a decision between locations that battles take place. It is entirely legitimate for Ukraine to pursue a counteroffensive strategy into russian territory if it believes it to be a more effective military strategy than defensive attritional warfare within their own borders.
    • The fact that combat is taking place in Russian territory doesn’t change the fact that the war itself is a defensive war against an aggressor with overtly territorial/imperialist goals.
    • As far as I am aware, the units involved in the counteroffensive are exclusively non-drafted volunteer units.
    • Cessation of funding to Ukraine would lead to their imminent loss. The fact that they have been able to innovate cheaper strategies like domestic drone usage doesn’t change the fact that war is extremely expensive and technology dependent, and their economy is dwarfed by that of Russia’s.

    The combination of your proposals that Ukraine should not proactively fight back, and that they should lose access to the resources that would allow them to continue to defend their territory end us meaning that Ukraine would not be able to effectively defend itself.

    From reading your comments alongside this post, it seems that the title should actually be “how do you make someone understand that rolling over and dying is good”, to which the answer is “oh fuck off mate”

    • index@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      5 months ago

      The question asked in the thread title is really simple and you should try to stay on topic.

      The argument you were trying to make is not “war bad”, but specifically that Ukraine’s counteroffensive is bad.

      You were additionally arguing that it is morally reprehensible for other countries to provide economic support to Ukraine

      You are twisting what i’ve said. I encourage you to read other people post better because i never made such claim.

      From reading your comments alongside this post, it seems that the title should actually be “how do you make someone understand that rolling over and dying is good”, to which the answer is “oh fuck off mate”

      If you believe that not being drafted by force and ordered to invade another country is the equivalent of rolling over and dying you are probably victim of the propaganda. As other have suggested here i advise you to watch drones videos from this war where they roll over and die

      • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Let’s go look at your comment history and check, shall we?

        Defending yourself and launching invasions or orchestrating soldiers are two different things

        It’s not defending yourself if you have an army! What a great take 👍

        it sounds like the government is giving out plans and commanding the army. The government of ukraine and people from ukraine are two different things. When people ask what’s the alternative to send billions to the ukrainian government what they need to understand is that people can defend themself even without an authority on top of them playing war games with soldiers and possibly forcing conscript to go on missions

        Oh, why did Ukraine never consider magically winning the war by sheer willpower instead of this “having an army” nonsense, smart!

        I’m not twisting anything. Context matters, and the context of your post was you throwing a tantrum after around 10 different Lemmy users calling out your bad takes.

        If you believe not being drafted blah blah blah

        That’s not what I said at all, mere moments after you accused me of “twisting” what you said. What I said, louder for the people in the back is BEING UNABLE TO FIGHT BACK IN THE ENEMY’S TERRITORY, BEING DISALLOWED TO RECEIVE FOREIGN AID AND BEING DISALLOWED TO FORM AN ACTUAL ARMY is the equivalent of rolling over and dying.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        The “invasion” of Russia isn’t an invasion though. They have no desire (and no capability) to actually take land.

        It’s a war Russia started by invading Ukraine. Of fucking course it’s reasonable to expect Ukraine to counterattack.

        You can’t simply hit someone unprovoked and then get mad when they hit back.

        Or course drafting is controversial but it’s much less so when the purpose is to protect your country and home compared to what Russia is doing with their drafts where the only purpose is to kill and invade Ukraine.

        If Russia surrendered with reasonable terms, Ukraine would obviously exit Russia. They have no desire to keep it.

        • index@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          The “invasion” of Russia isn’t an invasion though. They have no desire (and no capability) to actually take land.

          Russia propaganda be saying the same thing, for them it’s a “special operation” and not an invasion. The conversation you are replying to makes reference to another thread in which “orders to invade russia” were mentioned.

          Or course drafting is controversial but it’s much less so when the purpose is to protect your country and home compared to what Russia is doing with their drafts where the only purpose is to kill and invade Ukraine.

          So let me ask you something: if you were born in russia and kazakistan declares war to russia would you be fine with you and your friends be drafted by force and sent to the front fighting under the command of putin and its mobsters? Perhaps not everyone is willing to die burned alive in a trench, be it for the russian or ukrainian government.

          If Russia surrendered with reasonable terms, Ukraine would obviously exit Russia. They have no desire to keep it.

          Ukrainian people perhaps no. Worldwide governments seem to have an interest in this war because they are doing everything to fuel it.

          • rdri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Worldwide governments seem to have an interest in this war because they are doing everything to fuel it.

            Bingo. This nullifies your credibility. Either you’re a troll or an idiot.

            • index@sh.itjust.worksOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              Bingo. This nullifies your credibility. Either you’re a troll or an idiot.

              That’s simply what is happening look around you. Rulers and politicians profits in war, the military industry is booming, the cash is flowing. You think the really same people aiding israel in its genocide gives a fuck about peasants dying in a war?

              https://www.rbth.com/defence/2016/01/25/russia-continues-to-buy-iveco-lmv-armored-cars-from-italy_562027

              • rdri@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                Companies mentioned in an article you linked aren’t getting the cash flow enough to warrant any improvement in related economies. I see Russian politicians profiting off various things during war but they were doing the same before.

                So, short effects of the war on economies are not worth the long term effects of deaths of many consumers anywhere. Using the “war helps economy” argument while forgetting how the deaths and active aggression affect the world and lives, is a manipulation, which is also heavily used by those aggressors (Russia).

                Telling Israel is doing a genocide without mentioning what hamas were doing to Israel is also a manipulation.

          • lud@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I would never be fine with fighting for a tyrannical country like Russia. I would absolutely fight Russia if they invaded my home and we somehow managed to counterattack on Russian territory.

            Ukraine is a way better country than Russia, of course the majority of its people want to stay Ukrainian. And no I’m not saying Ukraine is perfect, it’s just better than Russia.

            • index@sh.itjust.worksOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              The government of ukraine and its politicians don’t seem too different from these or russia, germany, france, italy or usa. In all these countries climate activists gets beaten and civil protests get repressed. All these countries support israel in its genocide and sell weapons to saudi arabia. In a way or another they are all tyrannical and not worth die burned alive in a trench for.

  • sweng@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    Whether it’s a good thing or not depends entirely on your philosophical views. There is no objectively correct answer, and which arguments may convince someone very much depends on the values and perspectives of the person you are trying to convince.

      • Vanth@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        How could one convince you that your philosophical views are bad?

          • Vanth@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            So if you have an immoveable stance against war, isn’t it just as likely someone out there believes they have a similarly immovable stance in favor of the draft?

              • Vanth@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                5 months ago

                Uh, just to be clear, I’m not actually trying to sway you. Just pointing out to OP, and to you I guess since you’re engaging, that when someone holds an “immoveable stance” as they themselves say, and aren’t open to changing their views, it is highly unlikely one can convince them to change. Like, someone could up to you and say you’re wrong and evil for your views but that probably isn’t going to convince you, right?

          • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Is every alternative preferable to war? For example, should Ukraine have agreed to become part of Russia to avoid war?

            • SLfgb@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              Quite a few nations capitulated against the Nazis within days or even without a fight to avoid war. It saved a lot of lives. Does that make it the right choice? Who is to say…

              What’s for sure is that Boris shouldn’t have vetoed the peace agreement in 2022.

              • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I didn’t think it saved lives, since it empowered the Nazis to kill more people. So I say no it wasn’t the right choice.

                • SLfgb@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Look it’s hard to say if it saved lives in the overall ww2 tally, but surrender to save lives was the rationale of the Generals eg in The Netherlands. They looked at what the Luftwaffe had done to Rotterdam, looked at what weapons they had themselves, considered the prospect of what was going to happen to Utrecht next, and decided that further resistance was futile. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_in_World_War_II#German_occupation

          • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            What kind of resources are we talking about here? Clearly it doesn’t help to make you talk to 1 person that holds contrasting views, as that seems to be your starting point. A study of 1000? A study of 100000? An empirical research over 100 years? 500? A meta analysis? 5 people talking to you about it? 10? 100?

          • Vanth@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            5 months ago

            So have you tried that with the people who agree with the draft? Did you find it was convincing to them?