Americans don't want to fight for their country anymore

Lee Duna@lemmy.nz to News@lemmy.world – 258 points –
Americans don't want to fight for their country anymore
newsweek.com
191

You are viewing a single comment

Two things not mentioned it that article:

  1. Why would anyone want to fight for a country that is so callously disinterested in the welfare of it's citizens?

  2. In the last quarter-century it has become extremely apparent that the US Military is not the "global force for good" that it wants to portray itself as. Most young people probably aren't interested in joining up to commit war crimes in the name of making money for the military industrial complex.

  1. Every branch of the military has become increasingly toxic, cutting things like training and cleaning up black mold in favor of new uniforms every 2 years

How's training and cleaning up mold supposed to line the pockets of the senator's buddy who owns the uniform company?

3 more...
4 more...

@kvasir476 @throws_lemy Suggested edit: After "In the last quarter-century" insert "I've finally noticed".

Butler saw the scam first-hand, 100 years ago. Every generation seems it must relearn the lessons of our grandparents.

As for young people not enlisting for wars of convenience - exactly. That's partially why a draft was around, and why it was so unpopular. And why the money each service pays for college benefits goes way up when there's a shooting war and goes down in peacetime.

My time in the Navy overlapped with the VEAP program, which would give me a 2-to-1 match for college - up to the maximum contribution of $2700. What a joke.

Compare that to the current GI Bill plus extra money each service pays directly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley\_Butler

\3. Pay hasn't kept up with civilian work.

\4. They stopped offering student loan repayment as a benefit.

  1. They stopped offering student loan repayment as a benefit.

What really? That was the biggest reason anyone joined when I was in. Wow. So the headline should be "Military reduces benefits of service, less people willing to serve"

Never has been the global force for good

I mean... defeating the Nazis?

After Germany declared war on them? They didn't defeat them out of good will, in fact, I'd say America and South Africa were the closest things to Nazi Germany outside of the Reich

Really? Closer than Russia which actually did invade its neighbors? Go back to lemmygrad.

Should I remind you of the land the USA originally had and what they did to the people who lived in the lands they conquered?

You can if you want to pretend that Russia didn’t do the same thing and that it somehow makes the comparison better for you!

Is it good to beat the shit out of the school bully after he picks a fight with you so he learns to stop picking fights with people? I would say so.

Not if you're quite similar to that bully

There's a difference between being a good country and being a global force for good. In helping to defeat the Nazis, the U.S. was a global force for good regardless of what else they did, had done or will do. The same with Stalinist Russia.

Not really

Bad countries can't do good things?

If they did they'd be good countries

2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
3 more...
3 more...
3 more...
3 more...

stopped clocked fallacy.

the united states is in so many wars, they were bound to achieve one somewhat correctly.

Ok...? Does that dispute the point? Original comment said they were "never" a force for good

Global force for better

Good would’ve involved them allowing Spanish civil war vets to fight

17 more...
17 more...
21 more...