Send any US solider some stuff

December 1, 2004 5:26 PM

While I'm certainly not a fan of the methods used to get us into Iraq and keep us there, I do feel for the troops on the ground and hope they return safe. Any Soldier is a site that aims to let you contact any random US Soldier in a pen-pal email or postcard kind of style, which is kind of cool if you don't know anyone over there. Recently they've gone and added Treat Any Soldier, a way to send a care package to any random US Soldier serving in Iraq. I didn't vote for Bush and I think the war is a growing mistake, but I'm sending a package over this holiday season. Seems like a great way to actually do some good for someone in the real world than putting a picture of a ribbon on your car will ever do.
posted by mathowie (85 comments total)

While I'm certainly not a fan of the methods used to get us into Iraq and keep us there

So why support a scheme to make troops more comfortable to be there?
posted by raygirvan at 6:12 PM on December 1, 2004

Because most of them had no idea they would be sent to die in a war we started. Have a little heart.
posted by rooftop secrets at 6:19 PM on December 1, 2004

raygirvan, they're stuck there, so it's nice to do something to brighten their day.

I think this whole program would benefit from a real webdesign/UI person helping out. It doesn't actually make sense how you find soldiers, and shipping stuff to them is even more confusing. It should be painless to select someone from one site and have it automatically fill in the shipping info for the packages.
posted by mathowie at 6:24 PM on December 1, 2004

For the kids:

Mountain of Toys Campaign

November - December 17, 2004

The 2004 Mountain of Toys Campaign is accepting contributions of new and new-like unwrapped toys or checks made out to BOSS Program - Mountain of Toys Campaign. The toys will be given to the families of young Soldiers in need of a little assistance this holiday season. A number of our young families have recently incurred the expense of extended temporary lodging and will feel the impact this holiday season. The Mountain of Toys Program works to ensure that every child has a happy holiday.

Donations will be accepted at the following locations:

Shellyann Burke: Mountain of Toys Headquarters
c/o BOSS Program
Fort Drum, NY 13602

Contact the Installation Representative at
(e-mail:) boss 'at' drum.army.mil
[phone]
posted by taosbat at 6:25 PM on December 1, 2004

Because most of them had no idea they would be sent to die in a war we started. Have a little heart.

I'm all for the troops, and this seems like a really good idea, but that's a naive comment.

You sign up for the military fully aware that you 'could' be sent to war. There's nothing you sign that says you will only go to war if someone else starts it.

(And this isn't the first time we've gotten into a war that we didn't start.)
posted by justgary at 6:34 PM on December 1, 2004

1. We started this war in Iraq.

2. Our troops sign up knowing they can die. We owe them a justification for that, and are charged with making sure we do everything possible under the sun to make sure as few of them die once we decide to go to war. Our leadership didn't do that, and our soldiers pay the price, we pay the price, everybody but that leadership pays the price.
posted by owillis at 6:39 PM on December 1, 2004

everybody but that leadership pays the price

Yup!
posted by taosbat at 6:41 PM on December 1, 2004

Hahah. I like it when people call other people naive for something they didn't say. Let's read the comment shall we?

Because most of them had no idea they would be sent to die in a war we started.

Well, you're saying then that most of them did know they were going to be sent into a non-defensive war with a massive ground operation? I bet those national guard reserve units really saw that one coming a mile away! It's was just the rest of the country that was shocked. Those soldiers must have been in the know.

I wasn't saying that when people sign up for the army they don't know there's any risk of war happening...that would be absurd. What I said was these particular troops had no idea they would be a part of this administration's policy of pre-emption and therefore do not deserve our derision. They simply require our support and active pursuit to bring them home as soon as possible.

And it was not my intent to derail the thread (that was raygirvan). This is a good cause and I think it should be supported. That is all.
posted by rooftop secrets at 6:44 PM on December 1, 2004

And this isn't the first time we've gotten into a war that we didn't start.

I'd also like to point out that your comment also makes no sense after what you just said.
posted by rooftop secrets at 6:45 PM on December 1, 2004

I signed up for My Soldier a few weeks ago. Bush's handling of the war in Iraq has a lesson on how not to administer a conquered nation, but there are a lot of good kids over there putting asses on the line on my behalf, whether I like it or not. I feel it's the least I can do; I'll be spending Christmas with my family in extremely comfortable, safe surroundings swilling eggnog. For many of our service members, Christmas will be the third sleepless day of heavy combat, madness and dust. Hopefully, in some small way, I can lighten the load for one of them.
posted by Scoo at 6:54 PM on December 1, 2004

Hahah. I like it when people call other people naive for something they didn't say. Let's read the comment shall we?

Rooftop secrets, I'm not getting into a pissing match with you. I'm just telling you that if someone joins the military, ends up in a war, and says he had no idea this would happen, he was naive.

You join the military hoping you don't go to war (at least most do), and then sadly you are sent to war. In no way did they have "NO IDEA" that would happen. They knew it could happen, that it was a chance.

So this is a good idea even more so because they knew they could be sent to war and STILL joined, for whatever reason, money, college, "see the world", and anything that makes them more comfortable is a good thing.
posted by justgary at 7:00 PM on December 1, 2004

When I send a soldier a CARE package, I want it to really mean something he likes and can get use out of. That is why I contribute to Adopt-A-Sniper:

http://www.adoptasniper.org/

This is a real organization, that helps front line soldiers do their job by giving them the tools to do so.
posted by kablam at 7:07 PM on December 1, 2004

Meet some of the kids stationed in Iraq:

Inside Iraq
posted by taosbat at 7:11 PM on December 1, 2004

I think it's a great idea. I can't imagine the lonliness that so many very young Americans, Britons, Australians, Poles et al must be starting to feel being so far from home at Christmas time, and for many of them for the first time in their young lives. And for more than a few this will be their second time spending Christmas in Iraq.

That being said, I would really like to see much more focus directed towards the needs of the Iraqi people right now, and more attention paid to the thousands of injured and disabled coalition troops who have returned home to a hospital bed and painful days or weeks or months of rehabilitation and readjustment. In other words, please don't forget the people who have actually been hurt by this war.
posted by Cryptical Envelopment at 7:14 PM on December 1, 2004

If you want to sign up for the army, that's your own damn fault. I can't really feel any sympathy for people who are over there. If you join any element of the military, expect to end your life with a bullet in the face, in a ditch somewhere.

Yes, it is sad that people are away from home and might be killed, but maybe they should have decided to be pastry chefs or gardeners instead. It isn't like some sort of crazy surprise when America goes to a war zone. It's pretty much the usual.

Holy shit, honestly, it's the military. They should have read the job description. I feel more sorry for the civilians caught between all the involved factions, who didn't ask for any of this.

Send food to Sudan or buy the new Band Aid single.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 7:25 PM on December 1, 2004

maybe they should have decided to be pastry chefs or gardeners

Maybe pastry chefs or gardeners have a different Karma. Some folks have the Warrior Karma. We often depend on them.

It's not their choice where their CinC sends them.

Send them a little something. It'll fix your 'Bah-humbug.'
posted by taosbat at 7:46 PM on December 1, 2004

I'm no fan of this war, but I've sent a few packages to soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq through the Any Soldier website (after reading about it in this AskMe thread), and while the interface on the website is truly awful, the thank-you notes I've received are really touching. I'd been thinking that a holiday package would be a good thing to do, thanks Matt for the nudge.

The Any Soldier packages usually go to people who either don't have much family or simply aren't getting much mail from their families, and I can't imagine how much it must suck to be in a combat zone, with no family to send you a little care package now and then, especially at the holidays.

and what Scoo said.
posted by ambrosia at 8:04 PM on December 1, 2004

TOMMY
by Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the
wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the
wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

Rudyard Kipling, Barrack Room Ballads

http://faxmentis.org/html/kipling.html
Courtesy: Project Gutenberg
posted by taosbat at 8:08 PM on December 1, 2004

I'll continue my bah-humbuging until the American soldiers in Iraq get an 80s-style charity single of the quality I've come to expect from Bob Geldof. Until then...
posted by Kleptophoria! at 8:11 PM on December 1, 2004

I can't really feel any sympathy for people who are over there.

You're canadian, so I'll give you a pass on this, but even for the hardest core lefties here in the states, those people are doing a job for us (voluntarily, yes) that puts them in harms way instead of us.

buy the new Band Aid single

Ha! I can't behind those lyrics, have you ever really listened to them?
posted by mathowie at 8:20 PM on December 1, 2004

mathowie, these people aren't doing a job for me and I certainly didn't ask to go to Iraq. I will go further and say that it's downright unethical and wrong to support the soldiers in Iraq who are waging a plainly illegal war. I say this as an American who has family members who've been (they're back, thank god) to Iraq. Like Klep said, I'd rather people do something to help out the civilians caught in the crossfire.
posted by nixerman at 8:30 PM on December 1, 2004

The same lyrics as the original Band Aid version, Matt. "Well tonight thank God it's them instead of you" is basically a sarcastic jab at those in the West who are indifferent to Africa's suffering, because they themselves are not suffering and thus do not care if anybody else is. "Don't they know it's Christmas time at all" is basically a bizarre way of saying "Can't everyone stop being retarded for five minutes and hug each other?" The song was originally written for a Christian part of Africa, so may not make as much sense now, considering current hotspots of the moment. But the rest of the song is pretty easy to figure out.

Have you ever really listened to the lyrics. ;)
posted by Kleptophoria! at 8:36 PM on December 1, 2004

There's a false dichotomy people create when they try to make you choose between opposing a war and supporting the troops that fight it. The humane, charitable thing to do is support both the invading troops on the ground and those who actually live there until the decision-makers at the top get their act together.

You can hardly blame - or punish - them for being deployed to a high-risk zone so they can risk their lives in a conflict not worthy of their deaths.

Regarding http://www.adoptasniper.org/, American taxpayers are already paying a massive amount to provide operational gear. Is it really so bad they have to privatise Procurement & Logistics by asking strangers to donate lens wipes, ammo pouches, and other equipment that should be basic issue for a sniper or designated marksman?
posted by cosmonik at 8:41 PM on December 1, 2004

These soldiers have killed tens of thousands of people, people who offered no threat to America until their country was invaded.

This is an entirely volunteer army. Every one of them is there by choice. Military training makes it absolutely clear that you are being taught to kill. You know what you are getting into.

Looking at the history of the American military over the last 50 years, a person killed by an American soldier has better than even odds that they were, in essence, murdered by the American government -- an unfortunate resident of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Nicaragua(*), Grenada whose country offered no threat to the United States but had to be invaded anyway for reasons that appeared highly irrational even at the time and with hindsight appear to be criminal. It was the moral and ethical responsibility of each of these soldiers to become aware of these facts before joining up.

Of their own free will, these "good kids" decided to join the strongest killing machine in the world, one that's been used for ill more often than not, and now they're occupied in killing more innocents and trashing a whole country.

This is what you are supporting.



(* -- yes, I know that few American soldiers were actually in Nicaragua, in South American in general, and all the terror and torture was merely done with American money and weapons. For shame.)
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:44 PM on December 1, 2004

I can't think of anything less in need of sympathy in a war than the unbeatable invading force. What lupus said.

.

And so on.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 8:48 PM on December 1, 2004

To prevent anyone from painting me with the "OUT OF IRAQ" brush: Iraq needs democracy. But don't try to tell me that this is the nicest tea party in their honour ever.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 8:49 PM on December 1, 2004

In every generation the common soldier, who most often comes from less than optimal socio-economic condition & enters the military to better themselves (apart from feelings of duty), while acknowledging (at least conceptually) the implicit hazards of the job, pays the price of bumbling politicians and sometimes incompetent military leadership. Regardless of your politics or position on the current situation, these people deserve our respect - they do a job we are priviledged to chose to ignore or sneer at because of what their military brethern have sacrificed in the past to secure what freedoms we have. Thank you taosbat & Matt, you're hearts are in the right place. To those others who find it beneath them to put aside their politics to acknowledge this debt, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Your glib cynicism is part of the fabric that ails this society that you are so free to otherwise pontificate about. Grow up.
posted by Pressed Rat at 8:50 PM on December 1, 2004

I loathe Bush, I despise his reasons for committing this country and others to the war in Iraq but holding the soldiers on the ground fighting responsible for the situation they're in and wanting them to suffer more is a pretty shitty mentality.

These kids are in a tough place, lots of them are getting killed, lots more are getting badly hurt. Regardless of how unbeatable they are (no military is unbeatable, Kleptophoria), these are kids. Kids like you see in your town everyday, kids who are shooting rifles at people instead of trying to get laid.

Not for Christmas, not for any reason but that its a good thing to do, however small, to let someone over there know that someone back here cares about them, cares about how they are. That can be the most valuable thing to give someone in a dangerous and hostile environment, a reason to come home.

I may be labelled as jingoistic or what-the-fuck ever but, in the end, I feel sorry for those kids. I'm sorry that they have to experience what they are experiencing.

If you're not then I really don't know what to say to you.

Thanks for posting this, Mathowie, this was a nice way to wrap up the day. And I am going to spread the word as best I can.

On Preview: What Pressed Rat said! Right! On!
posted by fenriq at 9:00 PM on December 1, 2004

You're Canadian, so I'll give you a pass on this, but even for the hardest core lefties here in the states, those people are doing a job for us (voluntarily, yes) that puts them in harms way instead of us.

What is this "job" that they are doing?

Surely they are in harm's way because they are invading someone else's country? Do you support burglars who are in harm's way because they break into someone's house?

"Instead of us"? Why would you or I become involved? Do you think Iraq would have invaded the US if the US hadn't invaded them?

Regardless of your politics or position on the current situation, these people deserve our respect - they do a job we are privileged to chose to ignore or sneer at because of what their military brethern have sacrificed in the past to secure what freedoms we have.

Your argument appears to be "some soldiers were good, so these soldiers are good", but it's perfectly possible to remember the great sacrifices of WWII and other wars and still claim that these soldiers are not worthy of support.

Over the last 50 years, strongly excepting UN operations, the US military has a shameful record of failure -- particularly considering how incredibly well-funded and well-armed it is. And I mean both military failure and ethical failure. Gulf War I appears to be the best success in that whole time, and that wasn't much to write home about.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 9:05 PM on December 1, 2004

This kind of misplaced blame reminds me of the protestors throwing pig's blood on troops returning from Vietnam (Want an example of an unwinnable situation? There you go). It's directed against the wrong people, and it takes focus off those who really need a wake-up call: the decision-makers. Don't blame the tools when the craftsman fucks something up. And it's hard to blame kids who are indoctrinated, armed to the teeth, and sent into a lawless environment.

On preview: what soldiers do you claim were not worthy of support by their home country?
posted by cosmonik at 9:08 PM on December 1, 2004

I guess I can feel some sympathy for them, because I'm sure it's no orgy of delight in Iraq. But it's the same amount of sympathy I give to anybody who gets fucked over after willingly walking into something that they know will probably fuck them over.

Even Augustine of Hippo, who thought history was one long pre-ordained march to Judgement Day, believed each person had free will.

So these soldiers are owed our respect not just because they willingly chose to go kill and be killed, but because at one point in history there was an entirely different geopolitical situation taking place that also involved soldiers?

Pressed Rat, you're a stone's throw away from the time-honoured "Without us you'd all be speaking German". Grow up? Take a history class.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 9:11 PM on December 1, 2004

Your glib cynicism is part of the fabric that ails this society that you are so free to otherwise pontificate about.

No, it's massive dishonesty that ails this society.

I might be glib, but I'm still an idealist. I believe that sooner rather than later Americans will wake up and realize that it is wrong to go out to kill people who have never offered them any harm. Giving support to the killers is just going to delay the process.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 9:12 PM on December 1, 2004

Pressed Rat: Thank you very much for the breath of rationality. Supporting military personnel does not require one to be a rabid conservative or supporter of the US' involvement in Iraq. The majority of the military over in Iraq are young with little life experience, being thrown in the most intense and dangerous situation of probably their whole lives. Being in the position of thinking on daily basis that you could be maimed or killed is horrible, and shame on those in this thread that think our military doesn't deserve just a small bit of our sympathy and concern.

(full disclosure: my SO is currently in Iraq. Oh yeah, and neither of us voted for Bush)
posted by dicaxpuella at 9:15 PM on December 1, 2004

This kind of misplaced blame reminds me of the protestors throwing pig's blood on troops returning from Vietnam.

That was completely wrong. But that was very different.

People were drafted into Vietnam. Today, it's a 100% volunteer army.

And they just didn't know back then. They didn't have Vietnam to look back on -- WWII and Korea were all they knew.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 9:18 PM on December 1, 2004

As hard-assed and outrageous as some of my political beliefs are, I have to step in on Pressed Rat and fenriq's side on this one. The vast majority of American soldiers over there are just kids who wanted a stepping stone to a decent education and career. Don't be facile, Kleptophoria!; of course they knew they were putting their lives on the line, but is it too much to ask on their behalf that if the US government is going to endanger its own citizens it should only do so as a last resort when absolutely necessary in the interests of national security or global piece?

And how about the members of the National Guard, who signed up to guard the nation, not get shipped to some desert hellhole? Any sympathy for them? No? Well, how about the retired soldiers who are being reconscripted? They're not even supposed to be soldiers anymore, but they're being tossed out as cannon fodder just like the new kids.

Support our American troops. Support the innocent Iraqi civilians. Hang the bastards who got us all into the mess in the first place.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:27 PM on December 1, 2004

Fair point about conscription in the Vietnam era. But as others have pointed out, those enlisting in the military (especially base-entry level) are not typically students of history nor do they have many other options. The military offers unparalleled training and job opportunities, particularly for careers post-military, back in the private sector - particularly the well funded US military. It's a great jump-start for many people who might otherwise amount to very little (professionally). You can learn a trade, a profession, it will pay for your education through programs such as with the University of Phoenix, and it's guaranteed employment.

So I think it's wrong to blame somebody for taking advantage of such an opportunity. They should be able to do so without the risk of their government taking unjustifiable aggressive military action. Aim a little higher on the blame-o-scope, and your targets might be more righteous.
posted by cosmonik at 9:27 PM on December 1, 2004

Support our American troops. Support the innocent Iraqi civilians. Hang the bastards who got us all into the mess in the first place.

Exactly what I've been trying to say, and succinct, too. Well put.
posted by cosmonik at 9:29 PM on December 1, 2004

I do not support this president and I do not support his war. We were all misled going into it, but none more so that our troops who were sent there under false pretenses. It's not their fault. We are all suffering: American citizens with a moral conscience, our troops, the innocent people of Iraq whose lives we have destroyed -- we owe them the greatest debt of all. Supporting Any Soldier is not an endorsement of this war, it is a way to ease some of the suffering. "Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me." Somewhere we lost that.
posted by Flamingo at 9:32 PM on December 1, 2004

Soldiers in the National Guard (who are the ones fighting the war in Iraq) have to risk their lives in a shameful war because the commander-in-chief has ordered it. If we are attacked, or have any reason to fight a war that is more just (yeah, it's a debatable concept) they're willing to risk their lives to defend the country. You're pissy about a goodie pack at Christmas? It's going to somebody who's ill-paid to be away from home doing dangerous work for bad reasons. I just wish I could send a nice bottle of bourbon. Assuage your liberal conscience by increasing your holiday giving to humanitarian relief agencies.
posted by theora55 at 9:38 PM on December 1, 2004

PressedRat, you presume too much and you're missing the point. (I'll let your comments about "debt" and cynicism pass). This isn't about "politics" or "Bush" or anything so banal. I'm saying that supporting troops in Iraq is morally wrong--not that we should blame the soldiers for Iraq.

Now you might feel it's not a moral decision at all. You might believe that citizens must always support their troops regardless of the nature of the conflict--just because, you know, they're our troops. It's really the politicians to be blamed. But this position is, at best, dishonest. Supporting people doing bad things is just shy of doing them yourself. And at the end of the day this is what you're doing. (Godwin lies at the end of this thinking.)

So the "common soldier" stuff is BS. This isn't about supporting the "common soldier." This is about supporting particular soldiers currently on the ground in Iraq.

As for people like fenriq who will do this out of a misplaced sense of "guilt" for the "kids"--that's cynicism!

(Also I have to laugh when I hear people talk about the "plight" of the "common soldier". Nobody, except for their families, actually give a shit about soldiers until they start dying.)
posted by nixerman at 9:41 PM on December 1, 2004

You're canadian, so I'll give you a pass on this

That pisses me of. I'm Canadian too. You are starting to come off an anti-Canadian, Matt. Watch your ass. I'm on your side but a few more comments like you've made today and you are persona non grata.
posted by Cryptical Envelopment at 9:44 PM on December 1, 2004

I suppose I could continue posting things like:

These people who join the military realize that it isn't Waffle House Taste Testers Without Borders, right?

But I'm starting to sound soulless. Yes, I do blame the government for a lot of things. But they didn't force anybody to sign-up. I apologize if I was needlessly offensive or anything like that, and you really should send care packages if you want to.

My main point is that the soldiers should have known what they could have been getting into, and it's their fault if they didn't bother learning a bit about America's international military mannerisms before signing up. It's sad, yes, and it was the US government that picked the target, but it is ultimately the soldiers' own fault that they are where they are now.

So peace on earth and peace in this thread, and such. Sorry!
posted by Kleptophoria! at 9:47 PM on December 1, 2004

....those people are doing a job for us....

Wrong. Don't attempt to speak for "us".

Invading another homeland and at the behest of "superiors" is about the worst possible thing imaginable, mathowie.

Obedient U.S soldiers and those who direct such tools are creating more violence in the world. They are part of the problem. So, no, many of "us" won't be holding "patriotic" clucking knitting circles to make warm booties to send to those with actual blood on their hands.

But thanks for the links. I recommend folks contact these young Americans and provide them with information on finally doing the Fucking Right Thing: refusing to take part in any more of the bloodletting, immediately leaving the "service", and ultimately growing to become something more than...tools.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 10:16 PM on December 1, 2004

I have to agree with Cryptical Envelopment's last post, the You're canadian, so I'll give you a pass on this came off as condescending, sort of in the vein of "I don't expect you to understand because you're (fill in blank a woman/black, from Iowa...)" And personally I am ambivalent about the issue of support our troops. I can see how people want to send care packages and reach out to those in Iraq (and am sympathetic to the ideals behind this)... But, if we support the troops in this fashion are we sending a mixed message? I'm not saying we should do this... but, if we showed contempt would that deter more people from signing up, forcing the government to either restrict what they use troops for, or commit political suicide by reinstating the draft for silly wars. I have a sneaking suspicion that support for troops gets seen as support for what they are doing and interpreted as support for those that implement the actions, the troops are (in a cold since) nothing more than a tool of the government, so if we support that tool, we support the government yes?
The troops are certainly not there on my behalf, they are there on the Governments behalf, and I no longer think the government acts in the best interest of it's people so... support the troops? Why?

on preview, sorry to repeat some of F&M's stuff
posted by edgeways at 10:18 PM on December 1, 2004

I think the most agreeable thing Kleptophoria! pointed out was that no one is putting a gun to anyone's head to send care packages to troops. (I'll when I say that)
But I fail to see the alternative.
...Not have any soldiers?
It would be a wonderful world if we could. I would go so far as to say we should go back to an all-national guard type military - perhaps something like the Swiss have.
But I'm absolutely opposed to conscription of any kind.
Anyone who joins the military does so not out of any kind of reasoned thought process (what kind of idiot would include himself in any endeavor that puts him first in line if anyone is going to get killed?) but out of an internal feeling.
Others would put it differently, and it's different for everyone who volunteers.
It's an extension of the willingness to place oneself in harms way to protect one's family. This willingness is extended to one's countrymen and that alone makes any service member worthy of respect in much the same way a member of the clergy or a doctor or firefighter seeks to serve others.
As it so happens we (Americans) live in a society that lies as a matter of course, that inflames desire and perverts your internal feelings to associate motherhood for example with fabric softener.
It's easy to get confused and lost in such a mire of messages, PARTICULARLY when that feeling is strong and unfocused on something obviously more productive.
Then along comes Joe Recruiter.
One might as well blame cultists for not investigating the cult before they join up.
This is not to say that the (U.S.) military is not currently doing good things. This time of year you have marines dedicated to rounding up toys for tots and such.
(of course you also have marines blowing people away)
But many soldiers do wish to be true heroes, fight the good fight, pray that their strength will be used justly and that their acts will foster peace and leap to place themselves between their country and the horrors of war.
The tragedy (and stupidity) is that those feelings are time and again perverted to serve selfish ends and time and again.


Supporting people doing bad things is just shy of doing them yourself.


nixerman - so you are currently actively attempting an overthrow of the U.S. government?

Soldiers can't choose where to fight. We can't have men in the military pick and choose what war they will fight.
(As the military is currently structured that is, a militia type army certainly can pick and choose, and would probably choose to go and fight once the enemy is marching through their cornfields)
That aside - their current options? Let's presume they got into it and realized "Hey this is morally wrong!"
Are they the only one? Is everyone else buying the propaganda? Should they desert? Attempt to convince other soldiers to desert?
All soldiers THINK they're doing the right thing. That's what everyone they know keeps telling them. And if they don't, they get killed. At best they get imprisoned.
Whether they are deluded or not I'm not seeing how sending a pack of wet-naps and some candy bars or a postcard to a grunt somewhere makes the sender into Charles Manson.

If it is immoral to support the troops in Iraq, is it moral to support the troops in Afghanistan?
...support the troops in Germany?
...support the troops in North Korea?
...support the troops actively engaged in covert ops preventing ongoing terrorist operations?
...support the troops hunting down rogue nukes jointly with the Spetsnaz?
....support (hypothetically) troops defending the country from an invasion? (What if that "invasion" is to restore "democracy")
...support any armed forces at all ever?
Should we send the troops "up yours" and "you suck" postcards berating them? Outline perhaps our opposition to the war and tell them the could live with us while they're on the lam (sp?) from the feds for desertion?

...hmmm...perhaps I went overboard there on the questions, but I honestly don't have the answers.
War is a blight on humanity and soldiers are always ill-omened, but I can't see any compassionate act as a moral wrong.
(I readily concede there are more worthy acts than others).

So peace on earth and peace in this thread, and such

Hoo-rah to that.





posted by Smedleyman at 10:58 PM on December 1, 2004

Jeez, did you guys finish kicking all the puppies in the neighborhood early or something? I can't believe 3 or 4 of you are going on and on about the babykillers and how we should be spitting on them. Ok! I get it!

I mentioned the canada thing because I was throwing around "us" and "our troops" without qualifying that and knew anyone from outside the US could say "they're not my troops pal." That's how I meant it. Also, I joke a lot about canadians because half my friends are from there and it's what we do offline a lot.

Anyway, I have extended family over in Iraq and watch some of the folks posting photos from over there and it sucks. Everyone looks like they're 18 year olds fresh out of high school, dropped into the shit because they had no other way to afford college and who knows if they'll make it out alive in 12 months (or if they'll even get out when they were promised).

But no, you guys are right, I should be saying "fuck them" and ridiculing them. That'll help things go smoothly.
posted by mathowie at 11:06 PM on December 1, 2004

..soldiers should have known what they could have been getting into..it is ultimately the soldiers' own fault that they are where they are now
Naturally, in say 1999 when Clinton was president and this country still believed in multilateral action, you would have been spot on, predicting the rise of neocons through W, September 2001, and the parlaying of national fear into our current cluster of incredible magnitude.

immediately leaving the "service"
For a life on the run from the law, or at best working at McDonalds thanks to that dishonorable discharge, yeah great idea. Very appealing, I'll do it today, if you quit your job or school or whatever to go wipe people's windshields on the nearest street corner for a living.

You guys are so above those slugs out there taking it the hard way, surviving through chaos while you sit in your cozy little den of self-satisfaction. You wonder why the military is so overwhelmingly conservative, probably because regardless of the situation, on a person-to-person basis the conservatives don't turn their backs on the military as liberals tend to do. Send a package from "a Democrat concerned about our country and military", or better yet, don't, I'm sure they wouldn't want anything from you anyhow.
posted by tetsuo at 11:16 PM on December 1, 2004

Matt, I totally agree with you.

Fuck the soldiers in Iraq. They joined the military and didn't ditch when they found out they were shipping to Iraq. They deserve whatever comes to them.

On that note, fuck all the so-called innocent Iraqis over the age of, say, 13. They were born in a country that the whole world knew would be a war zone sooner or later and didn't leave whent they had at least 13 years to do so. Fuck them. They deserve to die.

And since today is World AIDS day, fuck anyone with AIDS or HIV. They had sex, did drugs, had a tranfusion or did some other act that resulted in their attaining the virus. They deserve it, so fuck them.

Yep, fuck em all.
posted by b_thinky at 11:38 PM on December 1, 2004

From a sample Soldier I found on anysoldier.com (SPC Moore, Charles F III) :

19 Nov 2004:
Thank you all for the many of Boxes and letters that you have sent to us. We appeciate everything and thank all the people who took time out of there busy schedules to think about the troops. We are still here hopefully we will be leaving in about 2 months or so. We must stay throught the Holidays probably until the beginning of February or so. Please still feel free to send boxes and Packages to the soldiers here. They are always looking for something or someone that lets them know that you all care everyday and with the Holidays coming up and people being away from there families it is especially important. It helps to keep the moral of the Soldiers up and lets them know that people still care about them. A lot of people think this thing is over, but its not, we have some soldiers going out to Fallujah right now to do different missions and we have people who go out and do IED(Improvised Explosive Devices) sweeps. This is where our soldiers go out and go up and down the roads looking for different types of bombs that could possibly explode on them or on civilians. But everyday they go looking for these things to save a life of an american civilian and Iraqis along with other troops. This work that they do defintely puts there lives at risk. Half the time after the find these IEDs the are shot at or even get RPG(rocket propelled grenade) shot at them. But getting these packages from you all back home lets them know that people support them. Maybe not in what they do, but as a soldier in general.

I don't support this war, but I can see no good reason NOT to support these fine men and women with letters and some TLC from back Home. I would wager that many of them had no idea they'd be in for this living hell. Most wanted to better their lives, get an education, provide for their families. They have no choice (except for deserting) but to go to Iraq and do their damndest to do a good job and get home in one piece. Don't hate the players, hate the game. My cookie package and letter will be winging its way tomorrow.
posted by NorthernSky at 11:47 PM on December 1, 2004

Nobody is saying "fuck them" or asking you to spit on anybody.

There are valid ethical questions about supporting soldiers fighting in an illegal war. You can respond with "Why do you hate America?" or you can consider the questions before rushing off to send them candybars.

And give the guilt-tripping a rest. I keep hearing what amounts to "think of the children!" What the hell does this even mean? If all the soldiers in Iraq were 40 year old battle hardened veterans this would change things... how exactly...?

Your whole "let's just make the best of a bad situation" tone strikes me as calculating, cynical and base. You might feel better but it's not clear to me that you're actually making things better or helping them go more smoothly.

(And that's what I suspect the current wave of "support our troops" feeling is really about. All this false "guilt" I see over Iraq these days is just that. It's just so easy to feel guilty these days--especially if one can avoid making a choice.)
posted by nixerman at 11:57 PM on December 1, 2004

This Boston Globe article about recruitment tactics says that the military actively recruits from high schools with poor students and ignores more affluent schools.

I'm deeply conflicted about the idea of military service. On one hand, I'm an uncompromising pacifist, and part of me thinks that joining the military knowing that you may eventually kill an innocent person is unconscionable.

At the same time, I can't help but think that these (literally) poor kids are being taken for a ride, getting lied to and sweet-talked and suckered into enlisting because they're sure there's nothing else for them. Military recruiters are visiting them at their homes, calling them, promising them more money than they've ever had in their lives, and offering them a way out of their depressed and depressing towns.

I can't in good conscience point a finger at them and say, "You should have known better than to sign up." Maybe they felt backed into a horrible corner, wishing they had better options but thinking they'd rather risk having to kill a "terrorist" than continue to face the considerably more likely possibility of a jobless, dead-end life after graduation.

I've never had to make such a horrible choice. I can't imagine what it must be like. So although I abhor this war and the idea of ending another person's life, I just can't summon up any condemnation for 17-year-old recruits hailing from places like Economic Downturn, Iowa. All I feel is sorrow.
posted by jesourie at 1:01 AM on December 2, 2004

You guys need to lighten up. While you're all posturing anonymously on metafilter maybe take one second to put yourself in a soldier's shoes. If it was your ass over there you'd probably be thrilled to get a surprise package for the holidays. A donation is an opportunity to help affect a very small (but real) part of their lives. Screw Bush and screw this war - but I refuse to bash the soldiers. Their hands are no more bloody than mine. After all, I help pay the taxes that fund this war.
posted by quadog at 1:05 AM on December 2, 2004

My brother-in-law did a tour in Iraq during the initial phase, and whilst I have never supported this 'war', I have always supported the individuals out there. As a couple of people have said they will have joined the army for a number of reasons, but once they are in the army they are told what to do and they do it. Blame the Governments not the people on the ground. And when I say Governments, I don't only mean Bush, our wonderful leader Blair has done his fair bit of stirring this trouble himself.

Any Soldier is a great idea, does anyone know if there is an equivalent site for other nationalities still out there?
posted by lloyder at 2:15 AM on December 2, 2004

trying to answer my own questions. For Brits found this site . BFPO will send a package free to any British soldier serving abroad - need to find the name of a soldier though
posted by lloyder at 2:19 AM on December 2, 2004

Okay, I'm just trying to clarify. nixman, Kleptophoria, fold_and_mutilate, et al - I'm not sure you have a consensus view, but it sounds like the perspective is that:

1) The war is immoral,
2) Supporting the troops is ethically wrong, because:
3) You cannot support one without supporting the other.

...is this about right (not trying to misrepresent you, just breaking things down)?
posted by Tikirific at 2:36 AM on December 2, 2004

The American soldiers can go fuck themselves. The reports I'm hearing is that the Americans are trigger-happy, not sufficiently worried about civilian casualties, and too many see the civillian population as "untermenchen".

The only people over there with my sympathy are the Iraqis.
posted by salmacis at 2:37 AM on December 2, 2004

http://www.adoptasniper.org/

You know, they don't make this explicit on the site, but some of the language leads me to believe that they're only supplying equipment to one side.

If it was your ass over there you'd probably be thrilled to get a surprise package for the holidays.

Yeah, but it's not is it. And why? Because I didn't volunteer to go and kill anyone my paymasters tell me to.
posted by biffa at 2:39 AM on December 2, 2004

Just make sure you send a parcel for the Iraqi children as well, if you really care to be just. On preview: what kleptophoria, nixerman, cosmonik, lupus and other people who don't see this as an "us and them" situation, said.
posted by acrobat at 4:05 AM on December 2, 2004

As someone who grew up in a place occupied by a 'foreign' army (Northern Ireland), I feel I have something I can add to this. I could see myself being sympathetic to soldiers if, and only if, I genuinely believed that they were treating the people of Iraq with dignity and respect. And it's quite clear that that is not happening. It can't happen, the structures that keep an army functioning don't allow it.

It's funny how general assumptions made by some (war is bad, but soldiers don't really don't what they're doing, they're just kids, it's the government's fault) make it easier for people to continue to be dragged into these sorts of wars.

"The vast majority of American soldiers over there are just kids who wanted a stepping stone to a decent education and career".

That may be true, but they're still moral cowards. Everyone has free will, don't they?
posted by ascullion at 4:12 AM on December 2, 2004

Well, an "all volunteer: army makes it easy to demonize all soldiers for some, but I think it's important to consider the massive recruitment machine that pitches military service in a variety of positive ways. And while the job's description at its very simplest may be "kill for your country," I think you would be hard pressed to find any recruiter using that kind of rhetoric. They, essentially being salesman, feed potential recruits of only the positive aspects of military service: money, education, and job opportunities. Then of course, there are rumors that recruitment intentionally target lower income areas to make the monetary (and other) benefits more appealing to potential recruits that do not have these things. Not to mention the implicit guilt-trips in "protecting your country" and "serving your people," which is probably uttered often unlike "kill these people."

The argument that "they should be expected to research the history of the U.S.'s military involvement in the past, and plan accordingly" I think is somewhat unfair. While the recruitment process may not involve blatant lies it, like any sales pitch, misleads and misinforms many. It's all well and good from the outside looking in to say that someone has failed to educate him/herself, but for the recruitee, it may not be as apparent or as relevant.

And once they're in - as many have mentioned already - their free will is restricted. In addition to a variety of measures that restrict what they say or do (not just code of conduct sorts of things, ideologically as well), deserting during a time of war is punishable by death.

Not every soldier is fooled into joining, just as not every soldier is a unfeeling, unthinking killing machine shooting what he/she thinks are "untermensch." I don't think you can make a sweeping generalization either way. But in opposing the war, I think it should not be forgotten that many current soldiers have had the wool pulled over their eyes and deserve sympathy like any other human being.

On preview:
It's funny how general assumptions made by some (war is bad, but soldiers don't really don't what they're doing, they're just kids, it's the government's fault) make it easier for people to continue to be dragged into these sorts of wars.

I'm not sure how the alternative (blaming soldiers) will prevent being dragged into wars? Not saying that it'll hurt the cause, but don't really see how it makes war "easier" to enter either...
posted by Tikirific at 4:29 AM on December 2, 2004

War should be viewed with contempt, plus shame in this occasion
posted by acrobat at 4:58 AM on December 2, 2004

I'm sending a package

There should be no reason to send a package. The taxes should be high enuf to fund the war.

Sending packages is a back door tax.
posted by rough ashlar at 5:37 AM on December 2, 2004

Wrong. Don't attempt to speak for "us".
Invading another homeland and at the behest of "superiors" is about the worst possible thing imaginable, mathowie.

Actually the violation of soverign borders would be against the constitution. Violations of the Constitution should be bothersome.
posted by rough ashlar at 5:52 AM on December 2, 2004

I'm more of a "make the best of a bad situation" kind of guy so I think supporting the troops is a great idea, especially for the holiday season. They may be fully culpable for their individual plights but this doesn't mean we have to react as harshly as some here have.

Your whole "let's just make the best of a bad situation" tone strikes me as calculating, cynical and base. You might feel better but it's not clear to me that you're actually making things better or helping them go more smoothly. nixerman

Here is the difference, I think. I see the bad situation as the personal hardships of the soldiers in the execution of their duty, not the blundering of our current administration or the sorry state of the world in general. I could associate every soldier with Bush's policies, but I think that would be wholly unfair. These soldiers are humans, they shouldn't be treated as some abstract representation of American policy. Certainly, none of them are saints, and some may be pure ass hats looking for any Iraqi kill they can add to their stats, but this doesn't invalidate any of their human longings and turmoil. Calling them moral cowards (ascullion) helps nothing but your own self-righteous ego.

I also agree that sending a care package to an organization helping the Iraqis directly is also commendable.
posted by effwerd at 6:11 AM on December 2, 2004

effwerd, thanks for the thoughtful response. A lot of what you say still smells funny to me though.

This entire notion of supporting soldiers just because, regardless of what it is their actual mission is, seems almost evil. Maybe we should also "support" all the young, dumb and poor Muslims that are getting conned into the jihad and send them care packages too? I mean (if I'm reading you correctly) if you're only criteria is that these guys are human beings in a bad situation then you're setting the bar very, very low.

And what you're describing isn't sympathy but pity. It's like being a soldier is a kind of disease that tends to affect the young, dumb and poor. Should soldiers be pitied?

Now, if you really actually support the soldiers that's fine. If you believe what they're doing is just and right and you're praying for their success and their eventual return, I can accept that. This is what it means to really "support our troops" and I'm all for it when it's actually appropriate. In the case of Iraq, though, I don't see how anybody could really feel this way.

I just see a lot of bad guilt going around. And acting out of this guilt is, to me, a moral failing. It amounts to: I know what you're doing is wrong and unjust but I'm going to support you doing it anyways because--well you're a soldier/sacrifice/young&unlucky and I'm sitting comfy and safe. Worse, this attitude is actually disrespectful to real soldiers.
posted by nixerman at 6:48 AM on December 2, 2004

Just make sure you send a parcel for the Iraqi children as well, if you really care to be just.

Based on reading some of the individual's stories and seeing the pictures, a lot of the stuff they get, is given to Iraqi children as well.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 6:49 AM on December 2, 2004

but there are a lot of good kids over there putting asses on the line on my behalf, whether I like it or not.

but even for the hardest core lefties here in the states, those people are doing a job for us (voluntarily, yes) that puts them in harms way instead of us.

one is always sorry to urinate in the warm patriotic pool Americans -- even sane ones like Mr Mathowie -- somehow end up swimming in. but there's no draft in the USA, as you mention, and if you really think invading Iraq and killing Iraqis is a bad idea, well, you can't really attack those who don't feel like sending goodies over to the troops who invaded Iraq and are killing Iraqis right now.

if one'd rather send medical supplies for the Iraqis instead that cigarettes for Falluja's Marlboro Man, well, it's pretty lame to call them ungrateful or unpatriotic.

same for non-Israeli Jews who don't feel like sending pizzas to Israeli soldiers who occupy the West Bank. Israel has a draft, but it's immaterial. it's all about agreeing or not with a war. my country, in one of the many spectacularly bad decisions made by her soon-to-be-kicked-out Prime Minister, sent soldiers over to Southern Iraq. these kids have all my support, but this Christmas I'll be sending money to Médecins Sans Frontières, and to an anti-landmine charity.

many American GI's are kids who basically enlist to get US citizenship, or education or health care, OK. I can't say about US citizenship, but European cowardly surrender pansyass lilylivered nations give the less well-off citizens free education and healthcare without requiring that they go to invade Muslim countries.

since the draft was abolished in the USA, I understand that many good US kids feel guilty when their less well-off brothers and sisters are sent to war. a more democratic solution? reinstate the draft. then the killing -- and dying -- will touch the middle class, as well (Bush-style rich kid types will always dodge the draft, no matter what) .

unpopular wars suck, I know

(and Matt, as karl has pointed out often in the past here, the "spitting on veterans" thing is a post-Vietnam urban legend. I saw First Blood, too, but it wasn't history)
_______

But no, you guys are right, I should be saying "fuck them" and ridiculing them. That'll help things go smoothly.

no, you're free to send the soldiers whatever you want to, including naked pictures of ColdChef. just don't blame those who don't join you. it's lame.

*resumes killing neighborhood puppies*
posted by matteo at 7:44 AM on December 2, 2004

That pisses me of. I'm Canadian too. You are starting to come off an anti-Canadian, Matt. Watch your ass. I'm on your side but a few more comments like you've made today and you are persona non grata.
posted by Cryptical Envelopment at 12:44 AM EST on December

Yeah, Matt. If you don't "watch your ass," you're going to be "persona non grata" on MeFi. I would listen to this guy -- he's been a member for 9 days.
posted by pardonyou? at 8:13 AM on December 2, 2004

There should be no reason to send a package. The taxes should be high enuf to fund the war.

Sending packages is a back door tax.

If my taxes are enough to fund the war, then why is Halliburton getting richer and richer while the troops don't have body armor?
posted by Faint of Butt at 8:28 AM on December 2, 2004

I went to a rich school where probably 85% of the kids could afford to go to college if they wanted. We had recruiters come to our school every day. My senior year I was called at home at least two dozen times by various military recruiters.

Off the top of my head, I can list 8 guys I know really well currently serving in Iraq. Still others are serving in other parts of the world. Each had plenty of options upon graduating high school, but chose the military for a variety of reasons.

So I don't buy the myth that only the poor and optionless join up.

I support my friends in Iraq. I'm sending a package. And thanks for the adoptasniper.org link. I'm sending stuff there too.
posted by b_thinky at 8:37 AM on December 2, 2004

nixerman, I just can't see it as evil. It is very idealistic of you, and I don't mean that in a bad way.

They are human beings that I care about. Not just any human beings in any bad situation. But, in general, yes, I do set my bar very low for those who I will lend my compassion and sympathy. *shrugs*

A difference of opinion for the sympathy/pity thing. I do sympathize with them, not pity them. I can understand the "they're young and naive" argument, I just don't subscribe to it. I see this as a very practical matter.

What you think it "really means to support our troops" is ostensibly subjective. And to each his own.

I think the guilt thing is key to your understanding of this and how that differentiates your opinion from those on the other side. I place the blame for the mess in Iraq solely on the shoulders of our administration and mostly on Rumsfeld. I think you are reading this guilt into other people's comments. I don't hold myself accountable for Rummy's incompetence, just as I don't hold the soldiers on the ground responsible. I don't blame myself for those guys being over there, so I don't feel like I need to do something to make up for it. I just think it's a sweet thing to do for our troops. That's it.
posted by effwerd at 9:09 AM on December 2, 2004

Faint of Butt, shhh, Halliburton would just as soon you don't mention that damning fact. But I'm glad you did.

I read somewhere that Halliburton has lost a third of the property that it was hired to take care of. And all the while they feed soldiers who don't exist, charge $85 for a gallon of gas and laugh, laugh, laugh all the live long day because they've got friends in the highest of places.

America sucks. I'm sick of the same old shit being that we have to watch as these unscrupulous douchebags cart away billions of dollars.

Sending a care package to a soldier on the ground doesn't tell Halliburton that they are loved. It tells the soldier that we're able to remember that he or she is an American and we appreciate the situation that they are in.

You don't support them, fine. Don't support them. I choose to because it makes me feel a little better about the shitty world order we've found ourselves in.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kerry but would have voted for Barney the Purple Kid-Touching Dinosaur if it was between Bush and Barney. Thanks, America, thanks for four more years of daily disgust and embarrassment. And unnecessary death.
posted by fenriq at 9:34 AM on December 2, 2004

No sympathy for the murders. Sorry. If anyone who enlisted in '01 felt 'duped' by this illegal, amoral and illogical war, they can put down their M-16 at any time and face the consequences of court martial and dishonorable discharge, or (more easily) apply for transfer to a non-combat job as a conscientious objector. Or is it just easier to keep following orders and killing innocent people?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 12:32 PM on December 2, 2004

Off the top of my head, I can list 8 guys I know really well currently serving in Iraq. Still others are serving in other parts of the world. Each had plenty of options upon graduating high school, but chose the military for a variety of reasons.

So I don't buy the myth that only the poor and optionless join up.

Sorry, didn't mean to make it sound like that. I seriously did mean they were rumors. I think the potential benefits of military service do mean more to the poorer and optionless, but I agree that many others yet go for entirely other reasons. I guess personal opinion does cloud it a bit, as my friends who have entered the service largely did it for financial reasons.

I was just trying to point out that it's not merely all free will and moral cowardice on their part - even if they sign up out of a sense of duty or whatever reason they have, the motivation is not, in most cases, just to kill people in a legalized human skeet shoot. And I think it immoral in itself to place the blame solely on soldiers when an extensive network exists to actively pitch the service as a social positive in order to seduce people into joining.

Really, I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with sending anyone a care package, be they American or Iraqi. At this point does either action kill more people?
posted by Tikirific at 12:46 PM on December 2, 2004

chocolate bars and tobacco = spotting binocs and graphite.

is there moral equivalence between sending a package that has goodies and sundry items, and a package that has tools that will better enable a soldier to kill more people more efficiently?

the adopt-a-sniper thing bugs me. (and how is it that they don't have those things to begin with?)

on preview, tikirific: maybe.
posted by exlotuseater at 1:47 PM on December 2, 2004

exlotuseater: Oops, I should have specified that I wasn't talking about adopt-a-sniper... it's hard to categorize whether there is a moral equivalence between the two "types" of items you mention - my impulse would be to say that chocolate and pound cake don't really hurt anyone while spotting binocs and graphite can do so. If one is truly committed to not letting anyone be killed, one should be fundamentally be opposed to sending the latter to anyone.

(and how is it that they don't have those things to begin with?)

Actually, I was quite surprised when a friend of mine asked me if I could get him items like web belts and such and mail them to him in Iraq. It seems whatever is standard issue is fairly inadequate due to lack of funding for whatever reason...
(anecdotal. I'm not talking about the morality here, just the odd disparity of "best equipped fighting force" with "home-bought kelvar vests.")
posted by Tikirific at 2:16 PM on December 2, 2004

tetsuo: Naturally, in say 1999 when Clinton was president and this country still believed in multilateral action, you would have been spot on, predicting the rise of neocons through W, September 2001, and the parlaying of national fear into our current cluster of incredible magnitude.

America has been a de facto unilateral power for ages. Don't try and tell me that the NATO operations in Yugoslavia weren't entirely America-driven. American generals hated working with the Europeans, who had outdated equipment and only slowed things down with their quirky tactics and different viewpoints. Don't forget all those other wars, either. None of this new stuff is really surprising. Take some political theory or history classes.

You guys are so above those slugs out there taking it the hard way, surviving through chaos while you sit in your cozy little den of self-satisfaction.

Nobody made them sign-up for war. Taking what the hard way? Life? Nobody made them do that. That's just insanity.

b_thinky: Fuck the soldiers in Iraq. They joined the military and didn't ditch when they found out they were shipping to Iraq. They deserve whatever comes to them.

On that note, fuck all the so-called innocent Iraqis over the age of, say, 13. They were born in a country that the whole world knew would be a war zone sooner or later and didn't leave whent they had at least 13 years to do so. Fuck them. They deserve to die.

And since today is World AIDS day, fuck anyone with AIDS or HIV. They had sex, did drugs, had a tranfusion or did some other act that resulted in their attaining the virus. They deserve it, so fuck them.

Honestly, you're retarded. None of that made any sense. American soldiers signed up for war of their own free will. Children in Iraq did not sign up for anything. Big difference in joining an invasion force and deciding to stay in your rightful homeland. And that AIDS thing is totally off. Do you know what sex education is like in some countries? Do you know how many women get raped in some countries, on a regular basis?

quadog: While you're all posturing anonymously on metafilter maybe take one second to put yourself in a soldier's shoes. If it was your ass over there you'd probably be thrilled to get a surprise package for the holidays.

That's pretty clever, except for that whole "free will" thing. It wouldn't be my ass over there, because I wouldn't sign-up.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 3:49 PM on December 2, 2004

What's with the blatant front page editorializing? Nice links, but seriously.
posted by rafter at 4:17 PM on December 2, 2004

I know for a fact that posters like Kleptophoria, Lupus, fold, Civil, nixerman, and ascullion benefit and are just as responsible for those "tens of thousands of people" murdered as Pfc. Jane and Joe Smith. As am I, you, everyone else reading this, and countless others. But the difference is that those posters have the unmitigated gall to accuse other of "moral cowardice" and say that "Supporting people doing bad things is just shy of doing them yourself," while sparing no self recrimination for their support of this and other injustices.

Smedleyman touched on it briefly, but he's right, if you accuse others of being immoral for supporting bad things, you best be not supporting them yourself, and especially should not be benefiting from them, and you do, as all Americans and Westerners in general do. You support them by paying your taxes, being part of the economic system, and most of all, by not actively fighting against and working to disrupt the governments and economies that create these murders. (I certainly don't mean in some petit bourgeois way like voting or activism, those are both good and proper, but if you really believe what you say, then they are not enough.)

But you don't do that, and in fact, some demand that soldiers take the difficult, dangerous, and life-altering step of becoming a deserter or refusing orders, while they would never, ever do anything like that themselves. (If they would, they would have done so already, and we wouldn't see them here.)

The difference between them and me, is that I realize the blood that is on my hands, and it doesn't make me exceptional or a monster, so I resist passing judgement on wide swaths of people simply because it's comfortable for me to do so and helps keeps my cloak of moral superiority from unraveling like the rag it is. Virtually everyone in the world benefits, is aware of, causes and/or doesn't stop some kind of suffering, but that doesn't make us monsters. I do believe we should try to minimize that, to the best of our ability and conscious, but I while I think I'm a better person then some, I don't condemn others for what I to am guilty of.

Some people in this thread believe that alleviating even a little bit of suffering, even if you don't believe in the orders that sent them there, but because they are basically good people, deserve it. Others are more interested in crying their "moral values" from their high horse*, accusing all and sundry of being murderers, and decrying the evil of people sending care packages. While the first group may be ignorant of the suffering they cause or are responsible for, they at least don't have the accute moral hypocrisy and cowardice exhibited by the second group.

It's not that it's necessarily better to send a package to a soldier then it is to Iraqi civilians, or to poor Appalachians, or whomever, and if you think others are more deserving then soldiers of the limited funds you have to spare, or whatever, it doesn't make you a bad person or a hypocrite or anything like that. It's those who are equally guilty as the soldiers they accuse refusing to see their own responsibility.

*Anyone who takes this as opportunity to say, "That sounds more like the fundys who started this war, haw haw," it's not clever, it already occurred to me, and if that's all you have to say about what I wrote, that depresses me, because it indicates nothing else I wrote was worth commenting on.
posted by Snyder at 5:14 PM on December 2, 2004

Snyder... Did you just say that random people in Belgium or Canada or Italy are somehow benefiting from what American soldiers are doing in Iraq? I think you just did. Wow. And we can't pass any judgement unless we're actively fighting dictatorships around the globe, or something like that? Where are you getting this?

You don't, by chance, have the latest terror alert colour-code status sent straight to your cell phone, do you?

You're totally full of shit. You invalidated the rest of your post with that gibberish. My current state of freedom and liberty has absolutely no connection to Persian Gulf War II, whatsoever. Nice prose and diction, though.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 7:16 PM on December 2, 2004

I know for a fact that posters like Kleptophoria, Lupus, fold, Civil, nixerman, and ascullion benefit and are just as responsible for those "tens of thousands of people" murdered as Pfc. Jane and Joe Smith.

Those of us that oppose the war marched, voted, protested, wrote letters, did everything within our power to stop this bullshit, yet you have the gall to tell us that we're all responsible. Honestly, from the bottom of my heart, go fuck yourself. We did everything but violently overthrow this corrupt regime, yet this whole thing is all our faults, too? Bullshit. Don't drag us into your festering pit of ignorance.

Others are more interested in crying their "moral values" from their high horse*, accusing all and sundry of being murderers

Which is funny, because just the other day I was shooting some kids with my .50 BMG and watching their heads paint my wall, and afterwards while I was raping some of the neighbors' wives, I thought to myself, "Man, I wonder if any of this is a bit hypocritical?"

Oh wait, that wasn't me... that was our great American Soldiers.

But according to you, we're all the same. Even though we haven't actually pulled any triggers, we're all complicit. Is that it? That's brilliant. Really, you should write a book entitled, "I am Shitty as You are Shitty as We are Shitty, Goo Goo Ga Joob."

You could sell it to the soldiers on the front. Go tell them that killing someone's no big deal... that it doesn't change you at all... No, according to Snyder, there's no difference at all between those who have killed and those who support those who kill.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:22 PM on December 2, 2004

kleptophoria: i think the argument that snyder was trying to make is that asking people in the military to quit and go through a dishonorable discharge is a bit too easy to say when the people asking that of them are, to his knowledge, not doing anything similarly unconventional to stop the war (that is to say, protesting with a permit and writing letters to the editor are not on the same scale as ruining your prospects for the future with a dishonorable discharge). this argument is, of course, based on the assumption that you haven't willingly subjected yourself to a big fat black mark on your record in the name of ideology. this may or may not be true.

as far as your assertion that he claimed everyone in the world was benefiting from iraq, i'd direct you back to his text. "Virtually everyone in the world benefits, is aware of, causes and/or doesn't stop some kind of suffering". i believe what he's saying here is that everyone in the WHOLE WORLD sees suffering, sometimes benefits from it (are you in a capitalist economy? do you have a job? congratulations, you're benefiting from the 5% unemployment and poverty rate required for capitalism to work!), and rarely stakes his personal reputation and life on the amelioration of those evils. that is not to say that that's what the soldiers in iraq are doing; it just means that all of us see horrible things and horrible consequences of systems in which we actively participate.

also, i only agree with the argument that we benefit from the soldiers' actions insofar as we need these very people to enlist in some sort of military or national guard for *defense*. that's the only way i can ever think to apply "freedom isn't free" without getting my blood boiling - because believe me, i hate the war as much as any dyed-in-the-wool liberal. if i think about the necessity that some soldiers enlist in order to protect our country from *legitimate* threats, then i don't see how i can fail to have SOME sympathy for the soldiers in iraq right now.

in fact, that's almost the saddest thing about these pointless pre-emptive wars; shit like this makes it SO much less likely that people will ever want to volunteer to defend our country again, after seeing how easy it is for them to send you into a war you don't believe in. see though, i don't believe in a lot of stuff; i don't believe in capitalism, and yet as an american, i am forced to participate in systems which are built on the backs of those who labored for the rich to get richer. i would move but i'm too poor and i don't have a degree. no countries would take me. so in a way, i see the suffering of some of those soldiers (the ones who signed up before they knew what they were getting into, and the ones who have realized the horrors of our invasion and who are now being required to extend their tours of duty) as victims of the same system i am: in order to make their beliefs public and follow their consciences, they have to subject themselves to huge and crippling consequences. someone who is poor and doesn't have great skills doesn't exactly have good prospects coming back to the states with a dishonorable discharge, even if they explain at length that it was an act of conscientious objection. some of these men have families. so i cut them some slack because i figure a lot of them are in the same shitty boat as me: without political and socioeconomic standing, it's very, very hard to make these stands that you seem to consider de rigeur.

also, your ad-hominem about terror alert levels is really uncalled for; if snyder had been arguing the same "support our troops because ... they're our troops!" line that i've seen, maybe it would have made sense. but i think his argument deserves a lot more than you gave it.
posted by pikachulolita at 8:47 PM on December 2, 2004

i should clarify: when i meant "that's almost the saddest thing...", i meant "after all the needless killing and torture of civilians who did nothing wrong at all and are guilty only of being a member of a religion that the good ol' u.s.a. sees fit to persecute".
posted by pikachulolita at 9:03 PM on December 2, 2004

klepto:
America has been a de facto unilateral power for ages. Don't try and tell me that the NATO operations in Yugoslavia weren't entirely America-driven. American generals hated working with the Europeans, who had outdated equipment and only slowed things down with their quirky tactics and different viewpoints. Don't forget all those other wars, either. None of this new stuff is really surprising. Take some political theory or history classes.
My friend, believe me, I have no illusions about the way this country comports itself in the world theater. I know about the secret wars, the “nation-building”, the sneaky things this country does to impose its will. It doesn’t take classes on political theory and history to see the difference between our varying degrees of multilateral effort, (I’m not saying we always worked well or willingly with our allies or the UN, but at least we had an awareness of the necessity of the process), and the aggressive, dangerous, extremely unilateral cowboy nation the US has become. Even with the “need to respond to terrorist aggression toward this country indicated by presence of WMDs”, (please don't misunderstand those quotes as anything other than sarcasm), the divide between those willing to take action in Iraq with support of the world community, and those willing to take action without was fairly significant. Not that’s an indicator of what actions our leaders would do, but in any case it shows a concern for allied support (read approval) of our actions. In short, I agree, we’ve always been as you put it “a de facto unilateral power” in our actions, however, as we were taking the first tentative steps towards being cognizant of the necessity of multilateral action, it was killed by our gung-ho leaders and their campaign of fear. You probably could've predicted the endless covert actions and other nastiness that the US is regularly engaged in, but you're full of shit if you think you could have predicted in 1998 the posture of this government on the international scene..I believe the saying is "hindsight is 20/20". I’ve taken quite a bit of political theory/history as an international relations student, but thanks for the suggestion, it didn’t make you look like a smarmy douchebag at all.

Nobody made them sign-up for war. Taking what the hard way? Life? Nobody made them do that. That's just insanity.
Yes, because of course they all go into the recruiting office stating “I'd like to sign up for some war please”. And no, because I know its coming, enlisting in the military is not tantamount to that statement, what you're aware of when you join is that when all other means have failed it may come to war. For most (I’ll cop, some nutballs do go in wanting to kill), it is a willingness to take arms in defense of your country and its citizens. The oath is to support and defend the constitution of the United States, and to obey the orders of the officers appointed over you. How that willingness is manipulated and misused by the leadership often puts people in situations that they’d really rather not be in, and forces them into unspeakable acts as a means of survival. Any of you who speak in terms of moral courage and free will can go fuck yourselves. You haven’t lived the life, haven’t made the sacrifices, haven’t been disregarded and disdained for doing what you believe is right while getting screwed by your own leaders in the process.

And while I do agree with snyder, that many of you need to get off of your high horses, I can't say I blame anyone except those I already mentioned. Frankly, I just want us out and free from the fear and paranoia as much as anyone here.

Those of us that oppose the war marched, voted, protested, wrote letters, did everything within our power to stop this bullshit..
I thank you all, and believe me while those around me were celebrating on Nov. 3, I was a miserable wreck.
posted by tetsuo at 10:33 PM on December 2, 2004

Not that’s an indicator of what actions our leaders would do

sorry..meant "take" instead of "do".
posted by tetsuo at 10:35 PM on December 2, 2004