Memorial day

Army Tweets 'How Has Serving Impacted You?' Gets Thousands of Responses About the Horrors of War

"My cousin committed suicide while on duty at the armory after coming home from a tour abroad."

|

On Friday, the United States Army asked Twitter users how the service impacted their lives, likely as part of a Memorial Day campaign.

The sad responses are a poignant and timely reminder of the toll of war. Appropriate for the holiday, but probably not what the Army P.R. team intended.

 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

260 responses to “Army Tweets 'How Has Serving Impacted You?' Gets Thousands of Responses About the Horrors of War

  1. I really liked Dave Smith’s take. People ask him for detailed specifics about his vision for an anarchist society as a way to debunk it, and he responds that we have an insane system now, where our rulers love death and war, where our politics fetishizes the warrior and sends our youth to destroy and be destroyed, and our representatives pass thousand-page laws without even reading them.

    What a country!

    1. I can’t think of a single thing the government does competently, except possibly prevent another government taking its place. I used to be ambivalent, figuring that even if most of government was incompetent, surely some parts must be competent. Gradually I lost that naiveté. That was the practical impetus to being libertarian.

      (The theoretical impetus was self-ownership, and realizing how bizarre it is to think any individual could delegate the power to mind other people’s business when no one has such power themselves — how can you possibly delegate that which is not yours?)

      1. Go one step further, from incompetency to malevolent hubris.

        1. Even their evil is incompetent. Can you think of anything more harmful to a war effort than killing your own citizens who helped in the last war and would have helped in the current war? Not only do you lose their productivity, you lose even more carrying out their killing. Then add in killing the partisans you liberated who were eager to help you kill more of their oppressors.

          Then there’s the V-2, so expensive in every way, and which displaced so many other weapons which could have done so much more damage. Talk about opportunity cost!

          Every time someone writes of the efficient Nazis, I shake my head. They weren’t even efficient at killing Russians; that was a case of the Communists being more efficient at dying.

          1. Suggest “Wages of Destruction” Adam Tooze.
            Germany was just barely above an agrarian society when they started the war and had no more chance of winning than did the Japanese.
            By the war’s end, the German population was living on stored body fat as Hitler turned potatoes into fuel for his aircraft.

            1. Hitler’s plan was to start the war in 1945 but he ran out of money and had to start in ’39 so he could loot other country’s gold.

      2. Government’s primary area of competence is in providing pensions to former government workers.

      3. A limited government based on the rule of law can work. There have been so few examples of it in history that it seems like a myth. But at least it’s an achievable goal that doesn’t instantly trigger knee-jerk skepticism like anarchism does. And if we’re ever going to get true anarchism, it’s probably going to be via a limited government rather than violent overthrow of every institution.

    2. Every single civilization that has ever mattered and left its mark on human history has glorified its martial aspect. It’s how these nations conquer and spread their culture (and their genes, through rape of the local women). The US, as one of the most powerful nations in human history, is certainly no different.

      Nations that are thoroughly pacifist and have no “sponsor” with a strong military to protect them, find themselves wiped out in short order.

      This isn’t to cast a moral or value judgement, it’s just the way things have always been.

      1. And what does it benefit a dead soldier having had their country “leave its mark on history”? Dead is dead. It’s not like one gets some transmuted glory through collective membership in a group. That is just a lie we tell patriotic suckers so they will willingly sacrifice themselves and their families for some made up concept we call a “nation”. Nations don’t leave their mark on history anyway…individuals do. Some of the greatest individual contributors to human knowledge have been from non-nations, or conquered groups. The whole idea of a “nation” is just a crutch for the weak who don’t have anything to offer on their own and so try to rely on some sort of collective glory.

        1. Spoken like someone who gladly will allow others to sacrifice themselves for his protection, all the while he sneeringly looks down his nose at them. You are welcome.

          1. You misunderstand me. This has nothing to do with being grateful or not to soldiers/sailors/marines/airmen. I don’t look down my nose at anyone. And I will thank you to do the same. I will and do actively give thanks to those who have protected my family and property when/if it was threatened.
            But that is beside the point. What I was taking issue with had nothing to do with honoring soldiers. It was solely the notion of collective or national glory being a noble cause for sacrificing oneself. Countries which are worth their salt don’t need “national glory” to convince people to fight. They are hopefully fighting for the values of freedom and not some esoteric 19th century concept of “nation”. When American troops liberated Europe in WW2, I imagine the locals weren’t throwing parades for them simply because they were American, but because they were protecting them and protecting their freedom. In other words, it was bigger than any nation. Fighting for freedom is what counts not what nation you belong to. It is my hope that America can, more often than not, be on the right side.

            1. Well, I would ask you not to label us patriotic suckers and to understand that for a lot of us (for most I know) national glory is freedom. I mean that the ideals (not necessarily all the actions) of America, of the importance of individual liberty as enshrined in the Constitution, are a glorious thing and that is why we served. I take umbridge at those who infer that we served because we were conned or out of some jingoistic nativity.

            2. Nothing I wrote had anything to do with promoting national “glory,” you insecure idiot.

        2. Pretty much everything you wrote here was ahistoric campus pablum, or deliberate missing of the point.

          1. Word a day calendar you got from Aunt Trudy has come in very handy I see.

            1. Gee, I donno. Could have been a well-tuned bullshit-detector, since what you posted is pretty much bullshit, top to bottom. But as a brain-washed idiot, you have our sympathy.
              Before you shovel another such pile of bullshit, perhaps you might read some military history. And, no, not the flag-waving, ain’t-we-great sort, just some real history. You won’t look the fucking ignoramus you do now.

            2. Slack-jawed troglydytes tend to get ass-mad when their verbal diarrhea isn’t indulged.

    3. Gostei muito do artigo, apesar de não saber inglês.

      1. I liked your comment, although I did not know Portuguese.

  2. A Whitney Brown is a comic writer who used to be on SNL. His tweet was a shitty attempt at comedy. I also call bullshit on at least a few others too.

    1. Yes, it was a dark joke. I’m surprised he doesn’t have a check mark.

  3. All those tweets were from third parties. Those who never served.

    This whole article strikes me as a way to shit on our military and veterans for Memorial Day. Perhaps all the Reason staff should just go to a Memorial Day event on Monday and spit on some veterans while they’re at it. In true subversive progtard fashion.

    1. Yeah, my mom still wont open up about the first Gulf War.

      She was probably served one of those Diet Cokes that got too hot

    2. Right? Who ever heard of an anti-war libertarian? Sounds more like these folks are a buncha queers whose parents should’ve beaten them more, amirite?

      1. Shitlord is not a libertarian. I am not sure why he hangs out here.

        1. Something about this site attracts anti-social right-wing malcontents.

          1. And the occasional stupid, left-wing asshole.

            1. You left out “bigoted”, but yep.

          2. I think it’s the unmoderated comments.

          3. As well as retarded gimps like you who should blow their fucking brains out with a .45 so the rest of the world can celebrate. Seriously, just kill yourself you fucking rube.

          4. And illiberal bigots feigning progressive thought.

        2. Hey Chip, you are in no way a libertarian yourself. Just an anarchist malcontent.

          As for me, I’m a conservatarian, who is extremely militant against the enemies of freedom. Progtards in particular.

          1. In other words, you’re a thug. The right-wing version of Antifa.

            1. Has he hit someone with a bike lock yet, beat up some Hispanic Marines, or tried to break into a media personality’s house when it was just his wife and children at home?

              1. I swear I have done none of those things. I leave the lefty thirds to inanely protest in peace, although I do point and laugh at them.

              2. I don’t know if he has or if he hasn’t. He continually threatens to murder Democrats here on the forums, so I frankly wouldn’t put it past him.

            2. Jeff, you’re not a libertarian. Stop pretending asshole.

              1. Pedo Jeffy is a moron who flagellates nonsensically between anarchist and progtard. He is empty headed and an enthusiast of child raping foreigners (by his own admission).

                He just doesn’t like to be called out on it.

                1. You really are a tiresome troll. You say you’re not a thug but you certainly behave like a thug and an asshole here. If you’re not a thug in real life then you’re just a pathetic keyboard loser threatening violence but too scared to actually put your money where your mouth is.

                  Either get help, or just go away. Better yet, do both.

                  1. You know how ironic it is when you accuse others of being a tiresome troll?

              2. Oh fuck off Jesse. Here is a clue, “libertarian” does not mean “Republicans who smoke pot”.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist
                  May.27.2019 at 9:34 pm
                  “[…]Here is a clue, “libertarian” does not mean “Republicans who smoke pot”.”

                  Tired; have you saved that for a long time?
                  Here’s a clue, lefty scum: “Libertarian” does not mean “Dems who favor abortion”.

          2. Your type of conservative is more libertarian than the roll over and die because muh principles crowd.

            If you aren’t trying to increase liberty on the whole, you have no business calling yourself a libertarian, imo.

            1. Last I checked, murdering Democrats isn’t “increasing liberty”.

              1. chemjeff radical individualist
                May.27.2019 at 9:36 pm
                “Last I checked, murdering Democrats isn’t “increasing liberty”.”

                Last I saw, no one claimed it was.
                Are you trying to prove how mendacious you can be?

              2. Last I checked, murdering Democrats isn’t “increasing liberty”.

                Getting rid of things or people that are eliminating or are working fervently to eliminate liberty isn’t ‘increasing liberty’?

        3. Chipper is as far from a libertarian as one can get… well except Arthur and Jeff.

        4. Shitlord is not a libertarian. I am not sure why he hangs out here

          Obviously to counterbalance the stink of all you progs.

      2. You can be anti war without shitting on troops. You know… like writing about a balanced story.

        1. That’s what bothers me here. I see no point to this story at all, other than to upset vets and some families of vets. This is all anti military crap from unverified tweets. Except for A Whitney Brown who is a known leftist satirist.

          It just comes off as disrespectful on a weekend like this. Not that Reason has ever shown much respect for the military in the past.

          1. Why would they show respect for the military? I’d be surprised if a single one of them would ever serve. They’ve all gone left since the 2016 election, they crap all over the one President in the last 20 years who respects the military enough not to drag them into new wars, and their entire schtick is about shitting all over America when it’s doing well economically.

            They’re foul-weather friends to this country…they’re only happy when everything is miserable, and when it isn’t they have a pathological need to shit on everything and everyone who won’t be miserable with them. It’s why I finally decided that libertarianism was the ideology of the loser…they’d rather see this country overrun by socialists than lift a finger to help or contribute themselves, because at least it would let them go back to being foul-weather friends.

        2. “You can be anti war without shitting on troops”

          This.
          My grandfathers and most of my great-uncles served in WW2. They all had trauma, one almost starved to death as a Japanese prisoner of war and would only eat hamburger, cabbage and potatoes afterwards.

          That said, every single one of them thought that they did what had to be done. They didn’t think of themselves as victims, they thought of themselves as noble sacrifices in the battle against evil.

          Yes war is horrible, it sucks and should be avoided if at all possible, but on rare occasions it has to be done. And a lot of the maimed see themselves as valorous, not victims, because they are.

        3. Maybe some of us are tired of the bullshit hero worship that too many soldiers get *undeservedly*. I’m sorry, just because one wears a uniform, does not make one a hero alone.

          Maybe some of us have actually met some real soldiers who frankly admit that the reason why they enlisted had nothing to do with honor or duty or patriotism or any of that abstract noble crap, but to get FREE BENNIES like free health care and free college tuition. That their mentality for enlisting is no different than the stereotypical lazy welfare moocher.

          I once met one 20-year-old kid, who told me, straight up, that he was going to become a doctor, and his strategy was to enlist in the Army, because then the Army would pay for his medical school for him. He figured it was actually better for him to volunteer for indentured servitude to the Army for a “free” medical school tuition, than to endure debt slavery via student loans. Tell me how this guy is any different in his thinking than the Bernie-bros who demand free college tuition “just because”.

          1. Is there something beyond full retard?
            Chemjeff seems determined to show it

          2. Because he is willing to sacrifice something, his enlistment, in order to earn something, his education benefits. If you can’t see how that is different, you are obviously pretty obtuse. One volunteered to serve, with all the risks that entails and the other demands society give him something. So one person joins in exchange for something of value. They join an organization were it is very possible that they could be asked to die for others. Where the can be seriously wounded or maimed. Hell, even during peacetime the risk involved in training to be a soldier is far higher than most civilian careers. Servicemembers are routinely maimed and even killed during training accidents. Using live ammunition and explosives, working around 60 ton armored vehicles, being exposed constantly to the elements is not exactly safe. So, in exchange for undertaking this risk, they receive certain benefits, and you don’t see how this is different then someone demanding free stuff for nothing? Really? And we don’t demand you worship us as heroes. Quite frankly most veterans will tell you we really don’t like to when people say “thank you for your service”. It is all empty platitudes. But the difference between the kid who signed to help pay for medical school and someone who expects stuff for free is the former understands that their choice involves sacrifice. Hell, basic is no tea party. And training is hard on your body. Lack of sleep, heavy packs, marching on asphalt for 20+ kilometers carrying more than 50% of your body weight. Running on asphalt. Etc. Then, you get the call. I remember getting the call. It was 16 years ago but I remember it vividly. I remember climbing on a bus, and watching my wife waving goodbye as tears escaped her eyes. I remember what it is was like on 9/11, a month before my wedding, to turn on the TV, to realize that we may have to cancel our wedding because I may be headed downrange instead of getting married. I ended up not going to war, our mission was scrubbed at the last minute. But I had good friends who were severely wounded, scared and maimed for life. I had friends who missed the births of their children because the mission wouldn’t allow them to go home. I had friends who marraiges ended because our mission got extended. I had friends who to this day must sit with their backs to the wall in order to feel comfortable, who cannot deal with loud noises or crowds. I have friends who never served in combat but lost their hands in a training accident. Or injured their backs so bad that they are never without pain (I have my own arthritis in my back from my service, pain is my companion but usually it is low grade). Yes, our receiving a GI Bill is no different from some soy boy wanting free college.
            We don’t want you worship, but we wouldn’t mind a little respect.

            1. And the respect I speak about isn’t for me, but for those whose tour has never ended, those who lost their limbs, who carry scars both seen and unseen. Don’t talk down to them, don’t act superior to them. Don’t patronize them. Understand, the difference is that we chose this. For whatever reason, we chose to serve. We gave up our youths, we endured mental torture that no civilian will ever understand. Your first week at basic you cannot do anything right. Your ego is broken down. But then it is built up again. You accomplish stuff you never thought you could. Rather it is completing a 25 km ruck march in full battle rattle, or finishing two miles in under 15 minutes, or scaling a 100 foot tower and repelling down the other side. To some it is qualifying with a rifle, having never handled one before, or throwing live hand grenades. And when that drill sergeant calls you a soldier for the first time (you are not a soldier until you earn the title) you realize that you are not the person you were when it started. You have learned discipline and confidence. You learned to adapt and overcome, to endure hardship and persevere. You learned to put the team before yourself. And you fully understand the meaning of team (well actually, those who serve in combat understand the meaning of team even better). You understand that excuses are not adequate enough to explain away failure. That mission comes first. That sacrifice is required. You also have learned that the world is full of bullshit. That the government is inept. So inept it borders on wanton cruelty. That sometimes you just have to suck it up and drive on. That life isn’t fair and you will never receive anything unless you earn it. No you don’t get a bonus if you fail basic and no you don’t get educational benefits unless you receive an honorable discharge. Those benefits Jeffy sneers at are not given freely. They are earned through sacrifice. They are given in exchange because we were willing to step up and take on those risks and because we didn’t quit when that drill Sergeants was in our face screaming at us to quit. Calling us failures. Many did, they asked to leave. And they usually were granted that wish. The funny thing is we would see them, pulling details waiting for orders to go home. We were graduating, going onto AIT, proud in our class A uniforms and they were still there, forever branded as quitters. Most didn’t even make it out of the first week. No we are not given free tuition. We are not given something for nothing.

    3. Everyone that’s ever had a job has served.

      1. Yea, I assume all these tweets are from people who got PTSD as career waiters/waitresses and bar tennders.
        The horror

        1. Look what it did to AOC.

        2. That is really funny thank you … not sure the point of the article was anything other than more crap about the horrors of war. WTF? I served with combat vets and am the son of and brother of 2 combat vets. I think I know enough to say war sucks. But what sucks more is living a life in a command and control society where personal freedoms are sacrificed for the collective good. My Brother and Father would agree emphatically.

      2. Right – anyone that’s served others has served. I do respect those that fought for our freedoms, but I can’t say that applies to anyone who’s served in the military for the last 50 years considering what the politicians have had them doing (and I’ve no doubt some fought against our government for our liberty). I’m also reminded of “American Sniper”, when Chris Kyle states in the movie he didn’t realize he was being sent to kill women and children (who were engaged in battling US forces, but who obviously thought were defending their country). And while I had no problem going after the 9/11 terrorists, what a waste to attack Afghanistan.

        1. So those of us who chose to serve don’t deserve respect because of what our politicians have done? Including those who were drafted? Or just those who volunteered after the draft ended? Because we didn’t join to serve others, to protect the Constitution? But because politicians are power hungry our service is less important? Please explain. Do you think if we didn’t volunteer, that politicians wouldn’t simply enact a draft to fill the ranks? That because of our service, you didn’t have to serve and now have the freedom to judge those of us who did? I serve because I love the ideals of this country (not that we live up to them always. I am proud I served and would serve again, but my political leaders betrayed me. It doesn’t make mine or any other servicemembers service any less honorable. Your user name is More freedom, but how much freedom would you have if not for those of us who served over the last 50 years? Do you truly not understand there are those who have no problem taking away your freedoms? Yes we may not have fought against anyone (except possibly Islamic terrorist) who are assaulting our freedoms, but how long would that have been the case if our military wasn’t around? That we didn’t serve?

          1. Hell, how long until one of our own politicians attempted to seize control?

        2. You and your pompous posturing can both fuck off.

    4. “All those tweets were from third parties. Those who never served.”

      Yeah, ’cause those who served and were so PTSDed out that they committed suicide, cannot communicate to us from the “beyond the beyond”.

      If you want to communicate with anyone from the “beyond the beyond”, then I have only ONE address that might POSSIBLY work for you:

      C/O
      Satan J. Trump
      1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.
      Washington, D.C. 20500

      1. FFS you’re an asshole. And no, most of us who served are not offing ourselves.

        1. On the other hand, suicide rates among veterans are CLEARLY, w/o a doubt, higher than among civilians. I served, and I did have a fellow veteran (not a close personal friend, just an acquaintance as I served) who, very sad to say, did punch her own ticket…

          1. And how much of that higher vet suicide rate is due to who decides to enlist, rather than their military experience?

            1. Some sources suggest that this rate may be undercounting suicides. A recent analysis found a suicide rate among veterans of about 30 per 100,000 population per year, compared with the civilian rate of 14 per 100,000.
              United States military veteran suicide – Wikipedia
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_veteran_suicide

              One link per post, let’s see what else I can find…

              1. Big difference in military and civilian suicide rate when controlling for demographics, is that women who served commit suicide along the same rate as men which is much higher than women who haven’t served.

                1. Cite, please.

            2. https://www.militarytimes.com/pay-benefits/military-benefits/health-care/2015/04/01/study-no-link-between-combat-deployment-and-suicides/

              Study: No link between combat deployment and suicides

              At a glance, enlistment alone, not the combat, seems to be the big deal.

              The lady veteran I knew did not see combat, to my knowledge… In my grand total of knowledge of ONE case here! She was a bit strange. I think she was still “in” when she did the dirty deed. One of my fellow vets who knew her commented “she wrestled with her demons and lost”. How literally you want to take that, is up to you. I guess I’m a bit of a whack job, and take it kinda literally…

              1. I do some pro bono consulting for a local chapter of a veteran’s outreach group that helps vets with PTSD assimilate into a normal functional routine. There are a lot of vets that were probably over deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. One guy I talked to spent four years between the two and had pretty severe nervous issues. He was a combat medic and his hands his buddy’s guts after an explosion one too many times. It finally did a number on him.

                One of the reasons these guys have so many problems is lack of resources from the VA. Illegals get all kinds of immediate services when they cross the border, but combat vets with real problems wait on line, endlessly some times. That when they slip between the cracks.

                1. So our options are:

                  1. Raise taxes or borrow more to fix broken soldiers.
                  2. Stop sending so many soldiers to pointless, open-ended wars with no clear objective, that are managed by politicians who have no concept of war or geopolitics.

                  Don’t know about y’all, but I choose option 2.

                  1. 3. stop giving illegals free shit and use the resources for people who are here legally.

                    1. 4. Both 2 and 3.

                    2. “3. Stop giving illegals free shit and use the resources for people who are here legally.”

                      3. Stop giving anyone free shit. Full stop.

                      FTFY

              2. That’s extremely interesting to me. I looked up the numbers back in 02, just before our yearly “suicide prevention training.” I pissed off my boss when I provided documentation that the suicide rate in the military was slightly less than that of the general population. IIRC, it was ten and eleven per 100,000 respectively.

                I’ve seen the numbers now, and ASSUMED the increase was due to combat deployments. Perhaps it has to do with the significantly increased ops tempo (for everyone) impacting the ability to deal with personal problems?

                1. It’s like a lot of things that anti-war types like to attribute to war-time PTSD…the truth is more complex than the narrative. It’s like when people see “homeless vets” and rail about how Bush or Trump (always the Republican, of course) is responsible for them ending up on the street because of the wars, but then when you look at the data or dig into the stories you realize that those stories come from a bunch of community activists who do zero effort to distinguish actual homeless vets from the standard junkies and drunks who lie about serving because it makes a good story when panhandling.

                  The reality is that veterans are actually less likely than the general population to end up on the streets, and a lot of those who do (possibly most) aren’t there because of combat PTSD but because they had mental conditions and/or substance abuse problems that weren’t related to deployment. But of course telling people that it’s a bunch of junkies and drunks who lie to get handouts isn’t as compelling a narrative for the social program funding that “community activists” hope to obtain, so they sell the lie instead.

                2. One good tipoff for telling the actual homeless vet from the standard transient junkie/drunk lying about being in the military…ask to see their DD-214, what their MOS was, or what bases they served on. If they don’t know how to respond to any of those, they’re most likely lying.

                  1. Ask ’em in what units they served.

                    1. That usually works.

            3. Suicide is higher among those who are male, elderly, and own a gun. The majority of vets are male and a large percentage own guns. And there are quite a few elderly. Suicide is more prevalent among those elderly vets. Compare with a similar demographic and it’s about the same.

              1. I’m not sure that’s true. I’d need to see an objective study.

          2. I too knew a vet who committed suicide while in the brig on drug charges . My Dad and my brother on other hand both decorated combat vets died of natural causes.

            1. The boyfriend I had right before I met my husband to be was a Navy Seal. I didn’t even know what a Navy Seal was, he had to explain it to me, that it was similar to Green Berets, which I did know about. He saw combat in Vietnam, dived behind enemy lines, etc. But he was always a little “off”. I don’t know if it was because he was that way before he became a Navy Seal, or if he became that way.

              At any rate, after we broke up I found out he died, apparently racing a train at a crossing. I always wondered if it was on purpose.

              1. “on purpose”
                No, probably part of his character.

          3. Suicide rates among transgender are above soldiers, so maybe we should stop with that bullshit too.

            1. Definitely a group incompatible with military service. It’s not a fucking jobs program anyway.

              1. But according to the three dudes who now think they’re chicks who worked in admin 30 yrs ago that the media always seem to find, there are thousands of similarly confused individuals right on the brink of shipping off to basic if not for transphobic Trump.

                1. Part of the problem is a the complete lack of understanding non veterans have over the demands and logistical challenges of military service over time. Which, let’s face it, is less than ideal for almost everyone. Throw in a severe body dysmorphia, an overwhelming tendency towards depression, scorchingly high suicide rates under normal circumstances, and a likelihood of dependence on lifelong hormone therapy, and you have a recipe for tragedy and disaster.

                  1. And yet you still get war boners and want to send young men and women off to fight in open ended conflicts around the globe.

                    Obviously, you don’t mind exploiting them if it helps your “consulting” business grow exponentially.

                    I am a vet and I’m willing to bet you haven’t ever wore a uniform except the one that was issued to you by McDonald’s.

                    I’m still willing to show you my DD214, Shiteater.

    5. You may want to consider that one can support the troops, honor the dead AND be anti-war all at the same time.

      You want to “support the troops?” Bring them home and insist that they are only used in self defense and against credible threats to our existence/way of life.

      1. Thank you Francisco d’Anconia!!!

        Couldn’t-A-Said-It-Better-Myself… AND short and to the point, which is something I often do NOT do…

      2. I’m with you Francisco. And this attempt to posts about being proud soldiers, was good in ways they didn’t intend (unlike so many government actions that are bad in ways they didn’t intend). It’s good people learn being a soldier isn’t something people should want to do, when there are so many alternatives. And it makes it harder for the MIC and military interventionists to go to war.

        Still, the military is good for a lot of people who don’t get damaged by war deployments – it gives them discipline many didn’t have. I’ve seen several people who realized if they worked half as hard as they do in the military, they’d be successful in the free market, and did exactly that.

        1. You should be glad for those of us who did want to be in the military. And we mostly are not naive. The fact is that over 60% of those who have served since the end of the draft had family that served before them. Myself I am 4th generation Army (and have a plethora of Uncles, Aunts and cousins who served in different branches). The all volunteer military requires those of us who are willing to serve. If we didn’t enlist voluntarily, it wouldn’t end war, because the government would just re-enact the draft. Some European countries are doing just that because they can’t get enough volunteers, even for their rather small military. The difference isn’t that I served and you didn’t, it is that I chose to serve, despite the sacrifices and difficulties I knew it entailed.

      3. You want to support our troops?

        Then pull your head out of your ass and understand that damned near EVERYONE shares this sentiment–

        Bring them home and insist that they are only used in self defense and against credible threats to our existence/way of life.

        But they might have a different interpretation of “credible threats to our existence/way of life.”

    6. Yeah, I noticed that about the article, too. Took the words out of my mouth. No veterans, nonetheless combat veterans.

    7. The way you honor veterans is to not send them off to be killed in pointless wars.

      WWII was not pointless, but it was the indirect result of our actions. Could have been avoided. In any case, my father never served, he missed the war by only a few weeks. But many of his friends did, and some were scared by their experiences.

      I’ll honor the veterans, but I’ll be damned if I honor the system that used them as pawns in a political game.

  4. Not surprising. I doubt if anybody would get recognized for saying “I went through a lot of shit, then went home and resumed my life”.

    1. Like CTE, the effects of PTSD can surface decades later.

  5. “I didn’t serve but my brother did
    he never went to war but still shot himself in the head so”

    I am not trying to be insensitive but can you get PTSD without seeing any actual ” horrors of war”?

    1. Yes. PTSD comes from stressing someone beyond their breaking point.

      Take someone with a low breaking point, run them through something moderately stressful (like basic training), and you get PTSD.

      Basic, in part, is to identify those who’s breaking points are too low. Assuming it’s true, sounds like he broke at the end and no one caught it.

      1. Any trauma can cause it.

        Car accidents are a common cause.

        1. Only in the minds of plaintiff attorneys. And the docs that the plaintiff attorney’s recommend…

      2. Yes in agreement those that broke in training had no business being in the military. I would argue they will have trouble most of their life.

    2. Yes you can

    3. I am not trying to be insensitive but can you get PTSD without seeing any actual ” horrors of war”?

      No.

      Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is a term that has been stretched to include so much these days that it is as meaningless as ‘racist’ .

      It is the vainglorious cry of the SJW, whose PTSD is triggered by people saying things they don’t agree with.

      Our vets live in a world where something that is a serious issue for them has been appropriated to serve the progressive cause–and, in so doing, leaves true sufferers to suffer.

      Why not? They are, after all, babykillers, right?

  6. Since this is twitter, the chance any of these are truthful is low.

  7. I served. Never went to combat – just did my four years and got out. I would call it the best mistake I ever made. I learned that I was capable of dealing with way more shit than I ever thought possible. Built a lot of self confidence. Got out and put myself through engineering school (a path I would have never realized otherwise) with the help of the GI Bill and have quickly progressed in my career by focusing my energy on what is important.

    Would I do it again? Absolutely. Would I ask my son to do the same? No, but only because I’m working to teach him the important lessons I learned and build confidence and grit while he’s young so he doesn’t have to learn things the same way I did.

    You know what else I figured out along the way? That this country (and even more so, what our constitution stands for) is unique in the world. And it’s worth protecting. Some of you think soldiers have some responsibility in the crimes of our politicians, just by volunteering, but you’re wrong. Soldiers/sailors/marines/airmen volunteer for all kinds of reasons and definitely don’t get a say in who and where they fight. Getting rid of or blaming the volunteers isn’t the issue. Changing the politicians is how you make it better. And from what I’ve seen, veterans understand the importance of freedom and liberty more than any other cross section of society. Who do you think is going to help bring about the change you want to see?

    So to all the vets out there, I hope you enjoy your long Memorial Day weekend. Keep pushing for change and keep spreading the word on the importance of liberty. And to those pointing fingers and placing blame where it doesn’t belong: fuck off.

    1. I’d say the main thing I learned was hot to get along with people I can’t stand. I finally came to the conclusion that the military teaches that because you can’t quit and they can’t fire you. The only way to get out early is punch an officer in the face, or simply refuse to work. It works both ways: you have to get along with them, and they have to get along with you. It enforces a certain tolerance I have never seen in the civilian world.

      I’ve never been in combat. That is something entirely different, I imagine.

      1. Exactly, was explaining this to my manager the other day. I told him it doesn’t matter if I like someone or not, the mission comes first. I served with plenty of assholes, blue falcons and shirkers, but I learned to suck it up and get the mission done. It is a mentality I rarely see in the civilian world.

        1. That is funny I haven’t thought about the losers I served with. Rather like to remember the good friends I made and the guys I would never leave behind ….including the guys passed out in a TJ whore house with vomit running down their shirts…

          1. The friendships are irreplaceable. My wife rolls her eyes whenever my old squad leader and I get together (his wife rolls her eyes to) because it is beer and retelling the same stories over and over.

            1. I found an old video from when I was deployed where it was just a bunch of banter between us. I found it so funny that I decided to show my wife. She watched and said “I don’t get it.” I didn’t bother trying to explain.

    2. Thanks for the rational viewpoint. Not a vet but I have many friends and family who are, and it does offer a great developmental opportunity, confidence, and coping skills.

    3. The politicians couldn’t do much if the volunteers weren’t there to do the job.

      I served – 21 years in the US Navy – to pretend that I have no responsibility for the things the US government has had the military do during that time is ridiculous.

      Soldiers/sailors/marines/airmen volunteer for all kinds of reasons and definitely don’t get a say in who and where they fight.

      We do get a say – we have to affirmatively choose to don that uniform. Any of us could have chosen to not do so. Any of us could have chosen to walk away at the end of our enlistments.

      Take responsibility for your actions, don’t try to deflect blame onto others to make yourself feel better. ‘Just following orders’ is not an excuse we use.

    4. I love this response, just the tip. Thanks for your service and your input!

    5. Who is calling to get rid of the military???

      1. You might get an answer if you bothered to paste the comment you claim was made.

  8. As you can perhaps tell from my screen name I spent a lot of time in the Army, and I went to Iraq multiple times. I have no regrets about either, actually I take a lot of pride from both. Most of those I know from those times are thriving, but there are always those who struggle. So I won’t say that those who responded on twitter are lying or exaggerating, plenty of people need help dealing with life’s difficulty. I come from a long line of soldiers and none of them ever had any debilitating problems from their time in the Army, but maybe we are just lucky. In any event deciding to join is not a decision to make lightly or for the wrong reasons.

    1. Some should never be in any combat or even near as just not a fit!

    2. I wonder how many of these responses were the Twitter version of PX rangers? Yeah, there was a lot of shit I hated about the Army but I am proud I served and would do it again. I kicked myself I got out after 10 years.

  9. Memorial Day.

    I don’t know much. Remember my father coming home in his captain uniform 1968 from Vietnam. He was medevac and chief triage officer for his unit I found out.

    I remember he sent pictures and letters, those reel tapes. My mother would sit and cry at the kitchen table. I could not understand at my age.

    So I do not know what to say.

    Thanks dad.

    1. My cousin Bobby Vail died on Saipan. My Aunt Alice was heartbroken. His story is that he was in a foxhole and it was night. They were waiting for reinforcements. A Japanese soldier appeared as a scout. They all had to be as quiet as possible so as not to give away their positions. Someone could have shot him, but that would have given away their position. At any rate, the Japanese soldier didn’t spot them, but tossed a grenade anyway, just to be sure.

      The grenade landed close to their foxhole and tore off my cousin’s leg and arm. He spent the whole night silently bleeding to death despite the makeshift first aid his buddies managed to apply. His last words were “Tell my mother I’m sorry”.

      1. You’re 90 years old?

        1. My dad was the same as my cousin and they grew up together. Big Irish family. My Aunt Alice was the oldest of fourteen, and my dad was the youngest. I heard this story when I was a little kid. (And yes, I’m Social Security eligible). Later I found it online by googling my cousin’s name. And it was pretty much like my Aunt and Grandmother told it, except for WHY he died. His best friend could have shot the Japanese soldier, but his orders forbade it. The flash of the gun would give away their position. His friend apparently lived with a certain amount of guilt to this day.

  10. Tomorrow morning, I plan to leave flags at the forgotten graveyard where 10 Civil War USCT (United States Persons of Color Troops) are buried. Here were men who truly fought for their freedom.

  11. laws don’t let them hire attorneys to rep them in VA issues

    Is this not unconstitutional?

    1. There are all sorts of lawyers who work on VA cases (just like any other aspect of law), so the claim is either misinformed or outright bullshit.
      https://www.military.com/militaryadvantage/2018/10/22/should-you-hire-lawyer-file-va-disability-claim.html

      1. agreed!

  12. Dear U S A and U S Army,

    Where is Sgt Jerry Michael Shriver Army E-6 , Special Forces , Sighting And Observation Group reported MIA during a bomb damage assessment mission on the site of NVA/VC Headqts Cambodia

    You know U S Army that you and U S A Govt. left U S Fighting Men like “Mad Dog ‘ Behind.

    It’s is our Hope actions like this causes you nite mares and mental anguish!

    1. Google had this to say for those wondering:
      Jerry Michael Shriver, Sergeant First Class, exploitation platoon leader, Command and Control South, MACV-SOG. Born 24 September 1941 in DeFuniak Springs, Florida. Entered service on 9 December 1958 at Sacramento, California. Missing in action since 24 April 1969, when his platoon was engaged by intense fire 1.5 miles inside Laos west of the DMZ’s southern boundary of Vietnam; last seen by Capt. Paul D. Cahill, moving against machine gun bunkers and entering the wood line, whereupon he continued radio contact until transmission ceased. Ten air strikes and 1,500 rockets were required to extract the few survivors of the platoon from the battlefield.

      1. Thank John McCain, at least in part, for that. As a US Senator he consistently stymied efforts to find POWs and have remains returned after the war.

  13. Yes, war, especially combat, is hell and should be avoided at (nearly) all costs. There are very few activities which reduce the wealth of mankind as thoroughly as war, or concentrate the powers of government. But even given the NAP, war is at times indicated, as sad as that is; “optional” wars not included.
    And then people vary in their ability to tolerate stress; most doing pretty well. Witness most of those returning from WWII and the Korean war; Eleanor proposed isolating returning WWII vets until they were ‘civilized’ again. Not a good idea.
    So let’s despise and oppose “optional” wars as the friend of government and the killer of wealth, let’s despise non-optional wars but tolerate them. And let’s be careful judging people’s response to violence from a bunch of 3rd-party anecdotes. Especially in the case where (unlike the present commenter) they chose to join.

  14. AP distributes fake news:

    “Hate makes a comeback in the Pacific Northwest”
    […]
    “SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) — Nearly two decades after the Aryan Nations’ Idaho compound was demolished, far-right extremists are maintaining a presence in the Pacific Northwest.
    […]
    In 2018, at least nine hate groups operated in the region of Spokane and northern Idaho, including Identity Evropa, Proud Boys, ACT for America and America’s Promise Ministries, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. The center does not track how many members belong to each group.
    […]
    Keegan Hankes, a researcher for the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the number of hate groups is growing across the U.S., driven in part by a toxic political culture. The human rights group counted 784 active hate groups in the U.S. in 2014 and 1,020 in 2018….”
    https://apnews.com/f2c9c20176ea427fa3833bbcbbe1a265

    Lefty fake news and I’m sure CNN will include it in the news feed.

    1. I live in Spokane. Anymore there are a few wannabe skinheads, plus a handful of other malcontents that run their mouths. That’s about it. Also, the Proud Boys are not a hate group, and there isn’t a chapter here anyway.

      On the other hand, both MeIissa Click and Rachel Dolezeal live here. More leftist pogtard hate in those two than the rest of the city combined.

      1. And I love how they always talk about the Aryan Nation’s compound in Hayden Lake. I grew up in Benewah County and southern portion of Kootenai county, so spent a lot of time in CDA. I don’t remember ever seeing a skinhead in CDA growing up (graduated in 1994) except once when home on leave. It was a teenage kid in the old K Mart on Neider. He was scared senseless because he everyone was so hostile to his being there. There was never more than 25 of those (Kootenai county had a population between 50,000 and 100,000 at the time) morons on the compound anyhow, but the media loved to play it up.

        1. Remember their annual march? That always mad the annual news. Most of those turds came in from outside the area. Kootenai County has been far more of a resort area than home for white Supremacy.

          1. Yep. All outsiders and local counter-protestors. But the national media always managed to find some idiot to interview that supported the group and then used it to insinuate that we all supported them. They, the media, also always state that locals probably never met anyone who wasn’t white, despite that the Coeur d’Alene Indian reservation is just 13 miles south of CDA (I grew up on the Rez myself).

          2. Wait, didn’t they kick Rachel Dolezal out of the NAACP? For faking being black?

            1. I think so. She still lives near me as far as I know. I hear shit about her locally every so often, I’m surprised I haven’t run into her or Melissa Click downtown yet. I frequent a number of places where the EWU and GU people hang out.

              1. Those both used to be halfway decent universities. What is it with Jesuit institutiona and going bat shot crazy (GU in this instance)?

                1. The Jesuits have always been batshit, inordinately obsessed with the affairs of the world and salvation by works. They’re pretty much in charge of the entire church, now, with the ascension of Francis.

                  1. There is some truth to that. I am just glad that some German monk for pissed off and decided to use his footware to publicly display his grievances. I embrace my Lutheran heritage were it seems our biggest divide is rather it is acceptable to serve meatballs at the annual lutefisk and lefse fundraiser and how many casseroles we really need at a potluck. And the biggest controversy is when someone forgets to make coffee for fellowship (of course this is all tongue in cheek, the ELCA is undergoing quite a bit of friction right now).

                2. Eastern WA U is still relatively conservative. At least as colleges go. One of my friends at the gym is a senior professor in the chemistry department. His biggest problem is that the school keeps pressuring his department to dumb down the coursework. Which isn’t really possible.

                  He also tells me that Ethnic studies professors earn more than science professors there.

                  1. GO EAGLES

      2. There are alt-right racists there. Always have been. Not many, but they’re there. In recent years it’s almost expected as the entire state get run by a hyper-progressive left in Seattle. Any state run by the hyper-progressive left has some extremist malcontents in the hinterlands. You have then in eastern Oregon too, and northern California. Red states ruled by Blue metropolises.

    2. Always suspicious of anything out of the SPLC. When they refer to the number of Hate groups growing what are their points of reference and proof? What are the aggregate numbers? What constitutes a hate group?

      1. Their definition of hate groups is extremely ambiguous as well.

        1. I’d be inclined to “arbitrary”; chosen to fill the need of the latest number claim.

          1. Possibly ideological is even better than arbitrary?

  15. just before I looked at the paycheck four $6755, I accept that my friend could realey making money in there spare time online.. there friend brother haz done this less than 22 months and resently cleard the morgage on their appartment and purchased a great new Acura. I went here,

  16. A suggestion for the commentary section. You need to make flagging a two step process. It is to easy to accidentally flag someone if you are using a phone to read and comment.

  17. Wife unit recommended a new holiday that would alleviate my conflicted opinion about “patriotic holidays.” She suggests a “Murderous Politician Day” in which we honor all the country’s brave civilian leadership who’ve sent soldiers off to die so that they might increase their own political power.

    Heroes all!

    1. “Murderous Politician Day”…

      Send my blessings and commendations to your wife unit! (And to you as well, for relaying that to us. I am going to go now and share it with my Dearly Beloved Unit).

      1. In honor of “Murderous Politician Day”, in the same general spirit, I must post this…

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kX8lqXAONg

        The Call – The Walls Came Down

  18. I learned the term “rainy season” is a colossal understatement, to make a bed fairly quickly, and that I never want to go “camping” again, ever, anywhere.

    1. Bill Mauldin covers your concerns very well in “Up Front”.

      1. When I leave the Army I’m going to become a professor in the various types of European soil.

        1. I seem to recall something very similar.
          He was *not* a Europhile; it wasn’t “honest” mud there…

  19. It’s unfortunate and telling that America decided to turn Armistice Day into Memorial Day during the cold war in 1954.
    What began after WWI as an international day of remembrance for the terrible cost and atrocity of war “that we should never forget or repeat” needed to be replaced with a jingoistic celebration of war were pointless death is recast and meaningful “to maintain the state.”

    America’s love for war is second only to their love for police and prisons. The politician who comes up with a national holiday to celebrate mass incarceration is sure to win a landslide election among the middle class hold such things dear.
    I think the reaction in this thread to those who have expressed the suffering terrible cost of war in this tweets as “unpatriotic” during a day that was created to remember such tragedies only validates my point.

    1. Considering not one person used the phrase unpatriotic, nice straw man.

    2. And you are also completely mistaken about your holidays. Memorial Day was first honored in 1866, and at that time was called Decoration Day, and was when families of those killed in the Civil War, on both sides, decorated the graves. Congress made it a national holiday in 1887 as a step to lead to reconciliation. Armistice day is what would become Veterans Day, and is honored on November 11th, the day the Armistice was signed ending the First World War, the 11th hour of the 11th day, of the 11th month I’m the year 1918. Memorial Day has expanded to cover all those who have fallen, Armistice Day was expanded in 1954 to include veterans of the Second World War and Korea, rather than give them their own holiday. Armistice Day was first celebrated in 1919 through an executive proclamation by Woodrow Wilson. It was made an official holiday in 1938 and was changed to All Veterans’ Day in 1954. You basically didn’t get anything right in your rant.

  20. I find the uniformity of responses to the Army tweet to be a little suspicious. I served for a couple of decades, retired some time ago, and had experiences I’d never trade as well as experiences I wish I’d never had. most retirees I know had about the smae experience. some of it was great, and some of it sucked more than I could effectively explain to someone who’s never been there. I would have expected the responses to contain some good and some bad, perhaps leaning more in one direction or the other, but a mix. the consistent list of horror stories, especially when some of them seem over-the-top tragic or ironic, seems like it could only be the result of intent.

    1. They’re almost assuredly bullshit. All from non vets, and so consistent in their message.

  21. Let’s start here: We can safely divide “vets” into those were in combat and faced ‘shoot or be shot’ decisions from those who didn’t. By the accident of bureaucracy, that was never my choice, so while I was in the military (not my choice, either), I do not claim to be a “vet”; merely a temporary slave of the government.
    But it takes little reading of WWII history before you happen on to the claim that the US doggy was not nearly as proficient a soldier as the Brits and suffered greatly in comparison to the Krauts.
    A bit more reading will tell you that, while the comparison to the Brits may have been true in northern Africa, it was not true by Normandy. Neither the US nor the Brit national cultures celebrate the military as did pre-WWII German culture, and by the summer of ’44, the Brits were tired of this shit!
    Regarding the Krauts, the claim is valid, except as ‘corrected’ by the result of “The Bulge”. Even there, the Krauts still kept keeping on in what was by now a lost cause against a hugely superior enemy!
    I am pleased that the US culture has yet to raise those who would be considered a ‘warrior’ generation equal to the idiocy of the Krauts by winter of ’44.
    Neither we nor the world needs that sort of culture; the supposed criticism of the US doggy performance was nothing other than an admission that the US culture does not hold the military in high regard; it is a necessary evil and nothing more.

    1. The US Army has always relied on its artillery, and by WWII, it’s air superiority to compliment it’s infantry. I have read a few accounts by German infantry who described the pure terror of fighting the Americans. Our infantry was possibly not up to theirs (however, I have seen historians who argue the opposite) but it was never just our infantry. Our infantry tactics were (and remain for the most part) to make contact and then call in overwhelming fire and air support. This was novel to the Europeans. The lowest American private could call in artillery support or air support, while in the much more rank conscious European forces, usually only officers, and possibly senior NCOs could call in for fire support. And few Europeans even came close to the integration of forces that the US had achieved by 1944. The Japanese forces also ran into similar situations, especially the level and sophistication of naval fire support our Marines and soldiers had in the Pacific.
      The US Army has always relied heavily on the King of Battle. Even during the Revolution, American Artillery (albeit often outnumbered) was one of the few areas were our forces were equal and even surpassed their European counterparts. During the war of 1812 , the Royal Navy found out that US Naval gunnery was up to (and possibly surpassed) their own. European observers during the Civil War were amazed by American (and Confederate) Artillery prowess and the sheer volume of artillery that was utilized. Americans have always preferred being able to stand off and rain death on our adversaries rather than waste our infantry.

      1. “I have read a few accounts by German infantry who described the pure terror of fighting the Americans. ”

        The terror also extended to the French civilians killed in these artillery barrages. It’s a little counter intuitive, but democracies managed to kill more innocent civilians than the fascists did. The same thing holds today in Afghanistan where US troops rarely die, but innocent Afghans being killed is routine.

        1. Wow, your not even close. French Civilian deaths from military actions were 390,000 from 1939 to 1945. Civilian deaths by the Nazis were in excess of 12 million. Most civilian deaths from US forces is because the Nazis had no problem using civilians as cover, especially in occupied territory. The same can be said of the Taliban. US forces attempt at all times to reduce civilian casualties, even to the point of having restrictive ROEs that put our own troops in increased danger.

          1. You’re is the correct English. You said yourself that Americans prefer heavy artillery and aerial bombardment which lead to higher collateral damage. This was especially true in the fighting around Normandy after D Day.

            Democracies like Israel also counter intuitively manage to kill more innocent civilians than the terrorist groups they face like Hezbollah. I think in their last dust up, Israel managed to kill 20 civilians for each victim of Hezbollah, while casualties among fighters was in the same ball park for each side.

            1. “…This was especially true in the fighting around Normandy after D Day…”

              Cherry-picking lying sack of shit.

            2. I didn’t say heavy bombardment or heavy artillery. I stated the integrated use of artillery and air power. From the get go this was meant to be used as much as possible as a precision tool, i.e. to subdue a specific threat, not used indiscriminately. Yes, the US Army experimented with using heavy bombers in a tactical situation but quickly abandoned it because it was ineffective. The P-47 was most often used in tactical situations. American artillery protocol was to fire 3-6 rounds and then re-evaluate. If the target was subdued then no more artillery was utilized. If not, more rounds were fired. The Army and Army Air Corp worked diligently (as did Naval gunnery) to better coordinate fire and improve fire control methods, always with the dual goals of reducing casualties while increasing effectiveness. This also decreases the amount of resources needed.
              As for your correction of my grammar, I realized it, unfortunately there is not an edit button, however, it is my experience that those who lead off with correcting others grammar generally do so because they realize their argument is fallacious.

              1. ” This also decreases the amount of resources needed.”

                I think you are missing my point. The use of overwhelming firepower that causes so many civilian casualties seems related to protecting Americans from getting killed. It happened in WWII and it’s happening today in Afghanistan. In the entire month of May, Americans at war managed to get through the entire month without a single casualty. Afghan civilians haven’t been so fortunate. They are killed in NATO airstrikes all the time.

                1. Overwhelming can either mean high volume or extreme accuracy. The US has always strived for the latter. Of course the use of artillery and air power is to avoid getting Americans killed however, we do not use it indiscriminately. And there are multiple cases where the use was either severely limited or outright denied, resulting in US casualties, for the purpose of avoiding civilian casualties. So your point is far less salient than you believe.

                  1. “we do not use it indiscriminately.”

                    I was only pointing out that democracies are more indiscriminate than totalitarian regimes when it comes to killing innocent civilians as collateral damage.

                    “he US has always strived for the latter. ”

                    Strove is the correct English. And believe me, the Germans were no slackers in their striving for accuracy.

            3. Again, you use the fact that Hezbollah purposely hides behind civilians, thus resulting in high civilian casualties, to condemn the enemies. Hezbollah sites rockets in school yards and hospitals, fires on Israeli civilians, is Israel to ignore this to avoid inflicting civilian casualties?
              Nazis, especially the Waffen SS, deliberately sites artillery, ammo dumps etc in civilian areas in France, the refused to allow civilians to abandon cities as allied troops advanced on these cities. What were the allies to have done? What would you have us do? Not liberate France?

              1. Trueman seems to have been ‘educated’ by thorough study of Parade Magazine and the like; his grasp of history is, to be generous, flawed. Rather than admit he is ignorant, he simply posts bullshit and hopes others will be more ignorant and accept it.
                In his claims regarding the relative collateral casualties, he’s managed to ignore what the Krauts did east of Germany; the Poles, Ukrainians and Russians would tend to disagree with his bullshit.
                And then, notice, when called on that bullshit, we get a change of subject to the Jew/Pal conflict, and again, as you mention, he ignores how those casualties come about. Further, he assumes to know who is an ‘innocent civilian’; the vid of the armed Pals pouring out of a red-crossed truck comes to mind, as do those ‘innocent civilians’ wearing suicide bombs.

                1. Also, from accounts 8 have read, the French were saddened by their losses but blamed the Nazis not the Americans. In fact, most felt some casualties were the price to be paid to be liberated from the Nazis (as did the Dutch later). Eisenhower wrestled with the decisions as to how heavy the pre assault prep should be, right up until the eve of Battle. How close should he order the naval units, closer more accurate but increased danger from enemy shore batteries. In the end he compromised. But even as the Battle unfolded he had his naval commanders move closer to shore to limit civilian casualties and increase accuracy. This did result in increased naval losses from shore batteries.

                  1. If I recall, the North Vietnamese had anti aircraft guns mounted on top of a dam to the Red River, that had the US taken out, would have flooded and killed tens of thousands of North Vietnamese civilians, but collapsed the economy and food supply of Vietnam, bringing a quick end to the war. There was some debate to actually doing this, but it was decided the cost to North Vietnamese civilian lives would be too high.

                    1. There is other examples of similar situations. Although it seems counterintuitive, deciding to use the atomic bomb was actually an attempt to shorten the war without the need to invade, which would have likely resulted in far more Japanese civilian casualties.

                2. Trueman is a purposely dense pseudo-intellectual lying sack of shit who postures as if he’s more educated than the riff raff here.

        2. “…It’s a little counter intuitive, but democracies managed to kill more innocent civilians than the fascists did…”

          Lying sack of shit.

      2. soldiermedic76
        May.27.2019 at 11:06 am
        “The US Army has always relied on its artillery, and by WWII, it’s air superiority to compliment it’s infantry. I have read a few accounts by German infantry who described the pure terror of fighting the Americans.”
        It’s been credited to several general officers: “Never send a doggy where you can send an artillery shell”. Properly so. If war is destructive of wealth, make sure you reduce that destruction by saving the most valuable assets: Lives.

        “…The Japanese forces also ran into similar situations, especially the level and sophistication of naval fire support our Marines and soldiers had in the Pacific…”
        The Japanese had the opportunity to use art’y on Guadalcanal, if they could have ever organized the logistics properly, but by Okinawa, they had learned that you cannot beat art’y with bayonet-charges.
        And you also cannot win a war by staying in your cave, hiding from the art’y.

        1. Artillery and air power are also force multipliers allowing you to do more with less.

  22. “How has serving impacted you?”

    I learned that I can push on when I feel like giving up, that whining about minor irritations is childish, and that everyone hates Drill Sergeants until they’ve finished basic and realize what they’ve accomplished.

    I was painfully shy my whole life, but those Drill Sergeants, as cruel as they seemed at the time, forced me “out of my shell.” I’m still an introvert but I left the Army far more outgoing and sociable than when I entered it.

    I also learned to stop being so fussy about food. When MREs are the only option in the field, and you’re hungry as fuck from working all day, you’ll eat what’s available.

    I got some government funded education too. I didn’t get a good job out of it, but I’m a smarter, more educated citizen. And a more critical citizen.

    I also get free medical care. It’s not perfect, but who, besides the wealthy, gets that?

    So I’d say I’m way better off for spending three years of my youth being a soldier.

    1. Wow, what chance does a civilian American citizen have?

      1. The difference isn’t that we served and you didn’t, it is that we chose to serve and you chose not to. We chose to serve so that you can be free to look down your nose at us. You’re welcome.

    2. I learned in the Army that you can be very content with little more than a full stomach, a good night’s sleep, a warm dry set of clothes, some good friends, and a regular paycheck. I still like the nicer things in life, but I learned to be content with less and I credit the Army for teaching me that.

      1. Don’t forget hot shower and name brand cigarettes (or chew if that was your thing).

  23. War requires propaganda. The elite conspirators, the prime profiteers and their minions, know this.

    If people knew the truth, only the most desperate would choose to kill for the bosses.

    Free speech on the internet is our greatest weapon against propaganda. We are experiencing it for the first time in earths history.

    Soldiers aren’t as brainwashed as they used to be. They are more aware of the reality that wars of aggression are government funded crimes against humanity.

    They are increasingly conflicted.

    While the government is trying to censor free speech on the internet to reaffirm its control through propaganda, I don’t think they will put the genie back in the bottle.

    People who value free speech will take down the corrupt establishment first, or after the fascists make their move.

    1. You obviously never knew real veterans, few I served with or knew were “brainwashed”. In fact, since the draft ended, the majority of those who have served in the all volunteer military (over 60%) are related to those who have served before. We are second, third (and in my case) fourth generation. We have parents, uncles, aunts, cousins etc who have served. We understand out service far better than at any point in the history of the US, and have done so since before the internet was really powerful. Over half of my basic training company were at least second generation military and this was in 1995. In my Platoon was the son of the CSM for the Florida National Guard and my battle buddy’s father was a retired Lt. Col. My father was in the infantry, his sister and her husband were in the Air Force, his younger brother was in the Air Force, his youngest sister’s husband was in the Army, and his father and uncle were both in the Army. My mother’s side has even longer service history. I love how people who never served make generalizations about those of us who did serve. The myths persist, despite the internet. Propaganda goes both ways. And the idea that veterans were brainwashed and naive has never truly been the case. The veterans of the Revolution were often the children of those who served during the French Indian Wars. The War of 1812 those of the Revolution, etc.

      1. Obviously the propaganda worked well on your family.

        WMD.

        Do you even have any clue that the US was duped into WW1 by the people who control the propaganda? For the Balfour Declaration.

        A few years later, global boycotts by the same scum, who bragged about it, drove Germany to defend itself by invading nations that were trying to starve it. Once again propaganda duped your ancestors.

        Now the last 71 years of the Middle East conflict, initiated by the same scum. Did I mention WMD?

        Some people just want to believe that their shit don’t stink and will believe any propaganda that makes their war crimes actions of heroism.

        I’d say wake up and smell the coffee, but you’re one of them.

        1. “A few years later, global boycotts by the same scum, who bragged about it, drove Germany to defend itself by invading nations that were trying to starve it. Once again propaganda duped your ancestors.”

          Your tin-foil hat it too tight, anti-semite scumbag.

        2. I know exactly how the US was tricked by both Europe and our Progressive President into getting into the First World War. You obviously are a victim of progressive Propaganda, and also incapable of understanding that some of us care far more for others than ourselves, and are also willing to sacrifice ourselves for our beliefs. I know that is difficult for the self centered progressives who want everyone else to sacrifice but are unwilling to do such themselves. BTW, the only one here who seems to have swallowed the Koolaid of propaganda is yourself. I stated I joined knowing full well what it entails. You on the other hand resort to age old tropes and conceit.

          1. All kinds of extreme zealots are willing to sacrifice themselves for their “beliefs”. You are nothing special.

            Value truth demonstrated by logic and science and you’ll have to recognize the folly of killing for mere beliefs.

            Then you won’t be afraid to recognize the truth when you are wrong.

            Until then, you’re part of the problem.

            1. Logic states man is a pack animal, and predatory, thus he is aggressive. War is inevitable, and some beliefs are worth dieing for. The belief that freedom and liberty is the birthright of everyone Isa belief worth dieing for. The idea that protecting those who are to weak to protect themselves is an idea worth dieing for. Sacrificing yourself to save others is a worth dieing for. You call it logic but it isn’t logical, because you refuse to take into account human nature. There will always be those who want power and are happy, in fact joyful, to use force to gain such power. To ignore them is to strengthen them. The only answer to the Bonepartes, Hitlers, Maos, Stalins etc is to be willing to use force to resist them. It would be great if no one ever had to die saving others or stopping tyrants but that will never be the case. You ignore both science and logic if you think otherwise. I never claimed to be anything special, however, I served with many who were special. I didn’t serve put of zealotry and yes politicians betrayed me and my fellow veterans, it is what politicians do. But it wasn’t because of what the politicians said that convinced me to join. It was because I wanted to serve others. I was willing to risk being wasted in a pointless war to help try and protect our Republic. Unfortunately, it seems many Americans are willing to sacrifice their freedoms and liberties for their own comfort. You call me part of the problem, but it seems far more likely that you are as much if not more the problem. Your tribalism and dogmatism, and shallow cynicism, has not made this world any better. It has however, created conflicts and divisions. You refuse to even consider that your views are narrow-minded and possibly wrong. You consider yourself superior despite any evidence to support this assumption. You accuse others of zealotry while displaying zealotry yourself. You cannot grasp that people can want to serve for any reason besides being brainwashed or because they love war. This is not a sign of wisdom on your part, but you are unable to understand that. You claim logic while resorting to dogma.

              1. I value truth demonstrated by logic and science, never belief.

                Truth only resolves conflicts that are only created by the denial of it.

                I am not a pack animal.

                Rights supported by the truth of logic and science are not beliefs, they are facts proven true by the same logic and science.

                You don’t recognize the difference. That makes you part of the problem.

                1. You are not a pack animal, really? Do you deny our great ape heritage or that we are social and predators? The fact that you deny basic evolutionary anthropology demonstrates that your idea of science and logic is lacking. You denial of basic human nature does not demonstrate logic. In fact it demonstrates illogic and the fact you keep insisting that that you resort to logic while at the same time denying the a century of anthropology and sociology shows that science is the last thing you resort to. You accuse me of being part of the problem, but do not define what the problem is. You deny human mature and claim to be scientifically driven. You claim logic but by your denial of human nature and our evolutionary past leads you to illogical conclusions. Serving in the military is not being part of the problem. War will always exist and even if I had not served, it would not bring about peace. You have fooled yourself into believing you have discovered something new but you are regurgitating old tropes. You are not demonstrating knowledge but dogma. Sorry, you can deny it all you want but your stance is not based on science, or history or logic, because you deny both science and logic.

                  1. I hold humanity to a higher standard than the lower forms of life that you aspire to.

                    By valuing truth, reality, and acting accordingly one becomes an equal member of civilized humanity. This is also the requisite behaviour for being considered rational.

                    You aim far lower. Your inability to recognize truth is a self fulfilling prophecy.

                    1. No, the difference is that I recognize human nature. I strive to be better than my nature but I do not deny it. I am true to myself. You keep referring to truth that only you seem to grasp. True science realizes that you will never be able to achieve actual truth, instead you can only achieve a better understanding. And even that will be flawed and wrong. Science is the process by which we strive for a better understanding. We are not striving for some “truth” (which speaks more of orthodoxy then science in the way that you use it). You seem to be under the misapprehension that the acceptance that human nature is flawed, and that we are predisposed to conflict means I am resolved to that. This isn’t true. You are relying on a caricature of what you assume servicemembers are like. That we are in love violence. That we thrive in at. And yes, there is undeniably an adrenaline and serotonin release, but that is true of a good number of other dangerous activities. No, I served not because all I aspired to was the basest of human nature. I served because I recognize others are perfectly content to give into, even em race these base natures. I served because I am a realist. That no matter how much I may wish that man can overcome our hostile nature, it is unlikely to occur. You keep referring to truth and reality, but fail to explain what you mean by this. From the context it appears to be almost a religious mantra on your part. This is further enforced by how you believe that those who disagree with you don’t know this ambiguous “truth” you refer to. Their are many truths, and all to often they are revealed to be more fantasy then realism. The truth is is that some people will always prey on other people. Their has never been a time when this has not occurred. This is reality. It does not mean I am satisfied with this reality, nor does it even mean I do not wish it were otherwise. However, wishing is unproductive. So the reality is that someone must be willing to protect others. If there were no need for my childrebs’ generation to serve, I would fully embrace that. I would gladly celebrate that day. But there is no evidence that that will ever occur, unfortunately. I do not want my children to join (and neither did my Dad want me to join) but if they so choose, then I will support them. If they choose another path, that is also their choice. I made my choice, of my own free will. I did it because the truth is that there will always be a bin Laden, a Pol Pot, a Cortes, a Caeser, a Stuart, a Richard the 3rd, willing to use force to achieve their aims. We can either choose to confront them, to stand up to them, or we can attempt to reason with them and wonder why they instead chose to invade Poland. Or give them our proverbial milk money in order to avoid a fight. How well does it work giving into bullies? Does it lessen their behavior? Does it make them more empathetic? You claim truth, but I see only delusion and ambiguity.

                    2. Rob, you’re a holocaust denier. That not only brings your commitment to the truth into question, but also destroys your credibility.

                      Ion there word, you might want to stop pulling too hard on this thread.

        3. And just out of curiosity I am one of who? Because based upon your rather predictable and inaccurate rant (yes the western powers were just as much to blame as Germany but Germany was hardly without blame) I am certain that my understanding of geopolitical issues and history is far more than your superficial progressive talking points. I know your type. And they are rarely anywhere as smart as they think they are. They tend to think their diploma makes them special, however, they rarely are capable of individual thought and rarely are able to draw their own conclusions. They regurgitate what others have said and insult the intelligence of anyone who thinks differently than them. They rarely are capable of anything more than two dimensional analysis. They are so convinced of their own intellectual superiority that they feel to realize that their “truth” tends to be sophomoric and dogmatic rather than truly knowledgeable. Those who accused others of being brainwashed, rather than offer counter arguments, tend to be the most brainwashed. You have swallowed your own preferred propaganda hook, line and sinker. I doubt you ever have spent any meaningful time with a true veteran and have instead drawn your own mistaken conclusions based upon half truths spoon fed to you by the media, your professors and your little echo room of similarly minded friends. You are happy in your predictable group think and don’t even realize how much a victim of group think you really are.

          1. You’re projecting.

            1. Notice how you are incapable of actually countering my points, instead you religiously stick to your talking points? Notice how you are incapable of original thought but instead resort to ad hominems and generalizations (from your very first post)? See how you show little empathy or even attempt to understand those who have a differing life experience and thus a different perspective? And yet you state I am the one projecting? Self awareness isn’t one of your stronger suits is it?

              1. You know nothing about me.

                You’re well rehearsed rant was just randomly cast in my direction.

                You made no specific points to be countered.

                You are responding to my initial comment. If you want to make any point at all about that, go for it, and I will reply in truth much to your chagrin.

                1. Was your point that truth isn’t knowable?

                  What makes you believe that self fulfilling prophecy to be true?

                  1. Was your point that the truth isn’t knowable?

                    What makes you believe that self fulfilling prophecy to be true?

                    1. I think Soldiermedic knows you better than you think. Your mentioning science and logic is hilarious because you are a very predictable idealogue.

                    2. You demonstrate only idle rhetoric.

                      While I have provided many points supported by logic and science.

                      It appears that you are the predictable ideologue.

                    3. Just to provide you the benefit of doubt, could you demonstrate which points of science and logic you have presented? What do you consider to be examples of this irreputable logic you claim to have made?

                2. It is rather rich that you are affronted that I made assumptions without knowing anything about you, but you were perfectly happy to make assumptions about anyone who has served. You accused us of being brainwashed. I also have made several points about how your entire premise is flawed. That rather than being brainwashed, veterans are very aware of what military service involves. I also countered your rather superficial explanation of the causes behind the first world war (I stated Germany was hardly blameless). Not is my rant well rehearsed since I posted it with no editing or prose but as the thoughts occurred to me. I made several points which you have chosen to ignore. Instead you have a preconceived idea that you seem incapable of questioning. Your original premise was based upon faulty knowledge and was superficial and demonstrated a sense of (unearned) superiority. I do not need to know you other than to read your posts. They demonstrate someone with conceit that exceeds their abilities. You lack empathy and lack intellectual curiosity. You also demonstrate a Pollyandish understanding of war and international relationships.

                  1. WMD was propaganda brainwashing. It enabled the US to initiate a war of aggression in Iraq. We all know the truth now that the deed was done. You refuse to.

                    It simply illustrates the repeated brainwashing in every war.

                    You and your dipshit ancestors would swallow every propaganda that needs only say “us good, them bad”.

                    You wouldn’t recognize truth if you tripped over it.

                  2. Did I deny that we did not find an active WMD program? Did I deny that our politicians do betray the sacrifices made by our servicemembers? Again, you haven’t demonstrated that I am brainwashed but you have demonstrated that you are unable to adjust your arguments and parrot talking points. You claim that I was brainwashed but you haven’t demonstrated it. I never addressed WMD and you do not know my service history, nor does the invasion of Iraq have any bearing on my reasons for serving (BTW I joined in May of 1995, long before we invaded Iraq). You claim I was brainwashed but you still haven’t proven it, instead you make some sophomoric insults. Your references to WMDs is a non-sequitor. You haven’t yet made a case for anything but your own tone-deaf conceit. You consider yourself an intellectual but your reference to WMD and the inference that I refuse to admit none were found (which I never did) your reference to a war that started 8 years after I joined as evidence of my being brainwashed is all the evidence needed to prove my original thesis that you are shallow and incapable of original thought. You are just embarrassing yourself at this point.

                3. You belittle others who think differently. You belittle those of us who served. You are convinced, with little evidence that you posses a truth that we fail to see (by accusing us of being zealots and brainwashed). You attempt to lecture me about the causes of the first world war, but your explanation was both shallow and inaccurate. You simplify the rather complicated history of the current Middle East conflict. You infer that if we didn’t volunteer for the military that wars of aggression would end and we would all live in some peaceful Utopia. You claimed that logic and science is on your side, but based upon history, anthropology and a number of other fields, your premise seems to be the one that is incongruent with logic and science. You argue like a freshman sociology student who doesn’t realize that true wisdom is admitting that you don’t know everything. That others posses truths that you do not have. That even those who may be mistaken can still teach you. I don’t have to know you. Your conceit and shallowness is evident in your posts, both today and in the past.

                  1. I said you were brainwashed by propaganda and have given specific examples of it.

                    Your arrogance, partly caused by the brainwashing, prevents you from recognizing or caring about the truth.

                    You said you would die for mere beliefs. That’s not heroic it’s fucked up.

                    When anyone doesn’t value truth, like you, there is nothing they could say that anyone needs to hear.

                    1. Rob Misek
                      May.27.2019 at 8:16 pm
                      “When anyone doesn’t value truth, like you, there is nothing they could say that anyone needs to hear.”

                      Posted by an anti-semite conspiracist.
                      Fuck off, scumbag.

                    2. What examples have you given? Not a single one that has any bearings. You haven’t given me a single example of anything that applies to me or to a large percentage of veterans. You made a mistaken riddle reference to the causes of World War One. Yes, Germany was poorly treated by England and France, but Germany was hardly an innocent party. The First World War had a multitude of causative factors. You oversimplified the causes and insinuated that I was unfamiliar with them. You also forgot to mention the massive internal pressures of the Austro-Hungarian empire and how those contributed to the war. Or how the embarrassment suffered by France during the Franco-Prussian war contributed to France seeking alliances that forced Germany to seek alliances until war was inevitable. Or how internal strife in Russia contributed to xenophobia in it’s ruling classes. Nor did you mention the fact the industrial revolution was causing strife between the people and the monarchies, who used nationalism as an excuse to strengthen their positions. You also forgot to mention that for all intents and purposes WWI was a family squabble, the majority of the principles monarchs being grandchildren of Queen Victoria. Or how Russia was trying to recapture it’s pride after the embarrassment of the Russo-Japanese war. In fact, you demonstrated that if anything you are the brainwashed one. Your gross oversimplification is not evidence of my being brainwashed. Instead, it is evidence of the shallowness of your analysis.
                      As for your non-sequitor about WMDs, I addressed that above. You made two reference that had nothing to do with me (or any of my family). My great-grandfather was a WW1 vet, but he was drafted. So even your reference to WW1 isn’t even accurate in his case.

                    3. And your reference to my arrogance demonstrates your lack of self awareness. If anyone is arrogant (and undeservedly so) it is yourself. You insult and generalize people you have never met (inferring we are incapable of independent thought and only serve because we are weak-minded enough to be brainwashed). You double down on it. You make some ambiguous statement about WMDs and claim it is evidence. You make ad hominem attacks, you oversimplify complex situations, you imply greater understanding that others cannot achieve, yet you have the Moxie to claim I am arrogant? The irony is is that I actually believe that you are so self absorbed that you do not realize how idiotic you sound. How intellectually deficient and shallow you sound, how dogmatic you sound. You have convinced yourself that you rely on science and logic but reject the science of anthropology and evolution. You deny human nature. This is neither logical nor scientific. You trot out unoriginal tropes and accuse others of being brainwashed. You do not demonstrate any originality in your statements, but instead refer to WMDs as if it was some ace in the hope. You haven’t demonstrated how this applies to me. In fact if anything you have proven that you are incapable of making a rational argument.

                    4. How is dieing for your beliefs fucked up? And do you know what beliefs I refer to? I believe that the weak should be protected from the strong. I believe that tyranny should be resisted. That all men are created equal and that all men are born with basic human rights, including freedom of speech, thought, the right to self defense, the right to be free of fear that their government will imprison them or deprive them of life or property on a whim. These are worth dieing for. To protect from those who will inflict evil, who will threaten my family, who will deprive others of their humanity. What is fucked up about being willing to die for these principles? The fact is evil does exist. It cannot be reasoned with. It cannot be wished away. Pacifism does not stop those who are intent upon using force to bend others to their will. You claim to prefer logic, logic dictates that if you are unwilling to confront tyranny than you must accept it. You criticize those of us who are willing to stand up to tyrants, to give our lives so that others can live in peace. Can you negotiate with the Napoleons of the world? Does neutrality protect you from the aggression of others? You refer to how politicians have obscured the truth, but you fail to realize that we didn’t join for those politicians. We were not the ones who made the choice to go to war. We signed up to protect this country. Yes, that has meant some of us have served in wars of questionable origins. But even if we had not joined, those wars would still have happened. Deterrence does exist. A military, even in peace time, is needed. This is an unfortunate reality. One you seem not to grasp. We will never know what wars were avoided, what evils were curtailed by those who served during peace. You have little understanding of why we chose to join. Instead you make glib assumptions. Rather then considering my responses you dismiss them out of hand. You are so convinced that you are right, you reject anything that doesn’t fit your own bias. Rather then fitting your conclusion to the evidence, you have instead chosen to start with a conclusion and make the evidence fit aforesaid conclusion. You have rejected the scientific process. You have decided to discount any evidence that does not strengthen your bias. Rather then follow the evidence you have instead started from the conclusion, and one that reinforced your personal bias. You claim to be scientific, but any scientist knows the bias you just fight the hardest against is your own. You do not adhere to logic, instead you adhere to your own tenets of faith. It is religious for you. It is not drawn from logic but drawn from doctrine. And the sad thing is, you don’t even realize it. From your writing it is hard to conclude anything other than you are a pseudo-intellectual, and quite likely a narcissist. And like all narcissist, you cannot conceive that some are willing to put others before themselves. So to explain this incongruency, you dismiss them as weak-minded and lacking self will. They must be brainwashed because you cannot understand how anyone can put the needs of others before their own needs. It is so foreign a concept that you literally aren’t even able to start to consider it as genuine. I almost feel sorry for you. It must be difficult, going through life lacking self awareness and convinced wrongly of one’s own superiority. It is going to be devastating when you finally realize the fact that you are not gifted. That your abilities are average at best. That you are not unique or original. That your failure to examine your own beliefs is evident to everyone else but yourself. It is going to devastate you when this finally occurs. And I doubt you lack the fortitude to recover from this setback. How could you, you are so convinced of your own righteousness that you haven’t even considered the possibility that you are wrong. I however, have spent plenty of time both before and after joining examining why I joined. I have dedicated much of my time to self reflection. I have examined my beliefs, and my own conclusions. And when evidence is presented that requires it, I have modified or even rejected previous conclusions. I am by far my own worst critic. There is no metaphysical angel looking over my shoulder, I do not need one, because I am perfectly capable of performing that task all by myself. In fact, if anything, I often spend to much time examining an issue from every point of view before making a decision. And even once a decision is made, I will revisit it and re-examine my thought processes.

        4. Rob Misek
          May.27.2019 at 5:10 pm
          “Obviously the propaganda worked well on your family.
          WMD.”

          Notice the incantation of magic symbols by an ignoramus accusing others of being brain-washed.
          Tell us Misek, at what frequency do you have to repeat the magic phrase?

          1. He refers to WMDs but since none of my family joined with the intent to invade Iraq (I did go back in after 9/11 but that was in response to 9/11 not to invade Iraq) I am not even certain what point he thinks he made here.

            1. Misek has no intention on his/her part to make a logical claim or cite; the “WMD” is simply a religious incantation.
              Hence my question regarding how often it needs repetition.

              1. If you say it five times in the mirror, Dick Cheney appears and shoots you in the face with birdshot.

  24. you need a online job please visit this site….. http://www.online-3.com

  25. Yes, war sucks and is hell, but this being Twitter I’d bet half the responses are made-up BS from lying left-wing assholes like Welchie Boy and his gang of creeps.

    1. Agreed. The tweets do seem suspiciously uniform in nature.

  26. There tend to be very few tweets from people who were pacifistic enough to NOT shoot back when a neighboring population launches missiles onto their land. Dead people do not tweet.

  27. I joined in June, 1971, because I had nothing better to do and spent three years in the Army. Some times were bad, most were good. I mostly remember the good times. I went to college on the GI bill. College was out of the question for me if not for the GI bill; somehow my white privilege failed me.

    War is bad. Leaders, real leaders, know that.

  28. So all the tweets were bad? Or did you cherrypick them on purpose?

  29. From some lawyer:

    “Didn’t serve, did pro bono legal work for veterans bc laws don’t let them hire attorneys to rep them in VA issues.”

    Umm, then how did you represent them?

    1. You can usually spot those who have had little to no interactions with the military beyond watching “The Hurt Locker” by the mistakes they make. P.S. I purposely chose a movie that many veterans despise because of all the stupid tropes and mistakes it promotes.

      1. Can confirm. Hurt Locker is complete trash.

  30. Paloma
    May.27.2019 at 7:36 pm
    “I think Soldiermedic knows you better than you think. Your mentioning science and logic is hilarious because you are a very predictable idealogue.”

    Most anyone here knows Misek very well indeed: A fucking anti-semetic, homophobic ignoramus, stupid enough to claim the world’s problems are cased by ‘the Jooze and the gaays!’

  31. Rob Misek
    May.27.2019 at 8:44 pm
    “You demonstrate only idle rhetoric.”
    You demonstrate the idiocy of a scumbag bigot.

    “While I have provided many points supported by logic and science.”
    Really? I seem to have missed them. Perhaps you could offer a cite to one or two?

    “It appears that you are the predictable ideologue.”
    It is obvious you’re a fucking bigoted ignoramus lacking both knowledge of history and the ability to make logical conclusions.
    Fuck off, bigot.

  32. If we are to deal with war, as we seem to be doing:
    There are several (well, maybe the better part of a dozen) of books on the shelves supposedly dealing with why the Japanese entered WWII in the Pacific. None really offers a satisfying explanation; they all seem to be an historical record of who did or said this or that. My communications with acknowledged authorities in the matter have offered no better answers.
    As it happens, I’m reading “The Human Swarm: How Our Societies Arise, Thrive, and Fall” (Mark W. Moffett)
    The title raises red flags, but this is not one more Ehrlich confusing rats with humans; the comparisons with other animals are careful to note the differences, and the term ‘society’ is defined such as to keep this from being ‘I said so, thus it is’.
    Regardless (and Moffett has yet to address this specifically), his careful analysis of how human ‘societies’ fission suggest that wars are nothing other than the (violent) fission of one ‘society’ into at least two societies.
    Not finished yet, but there seems to be a hint that societal fission does not require war in all cases.

    1. BTW, I make no comment (nor does Moffett as yet) regarding how disparate human societies might fuse peacefully.

    2. I would love to conclude that war can be avoided, that it is not part of human nature. But alas, our nearest animal relatives are territorial on average and aggressively so. Chimpanzees also practice warfare, and even fashion weapons and practice tactics. This may suggest that we are hard wired for conflict. I wish it were not so, but I have seen little evidence that leads me to doubt this conclusion (outside anything created by Gene Roddenberry, and even then you have Klingons and Romulans).

  33. soldiermedic76
    May.27.2019 at 11:44 pm
    “What examples have you given?”
    Misek has given none.

    “Yes, Germany was poorly treated by England and France, but Germany was hardly an innocent party.[…]Your gross oversimplification is not evidence of my being brainwashed. Instead, it is evidence of the shallowness of your analysis.”
    Imbeciles cherry pick; that’s what they do.
    You are welcome deal with the scumbags Misek and trueman in an honest manner and many of us will applaud you for doing so. But both of those fucking ignoramuses are due insults and nothing more.
    Hey, Misek! Tell us about the Jooze and the Gayys, you fucking scumbag!

    1. It amuses me. The total lack of self awareness on their parts, the mistaken overconfidence in their own intellectual prowess, their inability to understand that they are as dogmatic as any orthodox religious practitioner is entertaining. And my wife is on night shift so I am bored. And who knows, they may actually make a pertinent point, albeit that seems unlikely.

  34. I made the point that the US was duped into WW1 with propaganda by Zionists fulfilling their part of the Balfour Declaration bargain with the UK in exchange for Palestine.

    Do you think that point is supported by the truth demonstrated by logic and science?

    1. “I made the point that the US was duped into WW1 with propaganda by Zionists fulfilling their part of the Balfour Declaration bargain with the UK in exchange for Palestine.”

      How about something which isn’t the fantasy of a bigoted asshole, you pathetic piece of shit?

  35. No, it is well documented that British propaganda was created from the first day of the war with the aim of convincing the US to enter the war on their side. British film makers exaggerated German atrocities (albeit German did commit some atrocities) against Belgium civilians with the sole aim of convincing the American public that Germany was the sole aggressor. Britain (with the aid of Wilson, hardly a Zionist) also hid the fact that civilian shipping was being used to ship war goods to the UK and France (despite our pledge of neutrality). This resulted in public outrage when the Lusitania was sunk (even though she was transporting munitions). BTW this was in 1915, the Balfour declaration occurred in 1917. Wilson, also ran on a platform of keeping us out of WW1, but as soon as he achieved re-election he began looking for an excuse to get us involved (a pattern FDR would repeat in 1940). Wilson was aware that the Zimmerman telegram was dubious, but he needed an excuse to declare war on Germany. He was allowing munitions to be shipped to England and France on US flagged vessels but was upset by Germany’s unrestricted submarine warfare. The Zimmerman telegram gave him this excuse. It is also not a well kept secret that Wilson, who was a strong supporter of England and France from the start, was well aware of and supportive of British and French exaggerations in regard to Germany. Many Americans actually supported Germany, but Wilson and his advisors favored Germany’s enemies. So they played right along with the propaganda coming out of the western allies. Wilson was also a progressive who despised the hierarchical and rank conscious German empire. Wilson was a bigot, who was sympathetic to the Klan. Who openly supported the Klan. He was hardly an ally of the Zionist. Anti-Semitism, yeah, hardly a scientific or logical stand on your part but you seem willing to embrace it. Oh, and add onto that q conspiracy but to. I should have listened to Sevo and not wasted my time. Go back to stormfront and masturbate to exerts from Mein Kampf. I now realize that any attempt at honest dialogue with you was futile because you are consumer by bigotry.

    1. You admit that Britain tried to use propaganda to dupe the US into the war.

      You admit that Wilson lied to the US with propaganda to dupe the anti war citizens to favour war.

      The only reason Wilson would be elected on an anti war platform and suddenly change for no good reason is that he was being manipulated somehow by his war advisers.

      You said Wilson didn’t support Zionism, then why would he appoint Louis Brandeis, chairman of the American Zionist organization controversially to the Supreme Court and as his special adviser to WW1?

      Brandeis who was a great proponent of the Balfour Declaration.

      Samuel Landman, who was the solicitor and secretary to the UK Zionist organization published a paper in 1936, when Zionists were eager to steal Palestine, clearly stating that the Balfour declaration was “a definite contract between the UK and global Zionists” to give them Palestine when they succeeded to bring the US into WW1.

      Brandeis was elected honorary chairman to the World Zionist organization immediately after the war.

      1. Samuel Landmans published paper proving that the Balfour declaration was a contract to dupe Americans into WW1

        https://www.amazon.com/Great-Britain-Palestine-Samuel-
        Landman/dp/1471799131

  36. Freedom Isn’t Free™

  37. Obviously, a REMF came up with this tweet.

  38. War Is Hell!

    The mental and physical traumata suffered by military participants in combat coupled with the fatalities of those “killed in action” put to shame the crass commercial circus of “Memorial Day Sales”. Are we not becoming a fragmenting, declining nation on fire that has lost its soul?

    See … https://www.nationonfire.com/memorial-day/ .

  39. nice article, thanks for sharing useful information with us.
    If you want to prepare ssc mts exam click given below link –
    ssc mts online test

  40. “War is hell on earth and should be avoided…” General Tecumseh Sherman. That about says it.

  41. […] Army Tweets ‘How Has Serving Impacted You?’ Gets Thousands of Responses About the Horror… […]

  42. […] Army Tweets ‘How Has Serving Impacted You?’ Gets Thousands of Responses About the Horror… […]

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.