tpaine posted:let me just seriously engage with Troop defense in 2014
there have been like how many civilian casualties of the us army's operations in the last year? i'd guess no more than a dozen. if you want to hate someone, hate the cia dorks killing people with remote-controlled drones. the fact that you're so outspoken in your bizarre fixation with good honest jockish god-fearing soldiers and hardly say a word about the slimeball nerds of the intelligence agencies just proves that your 'moral stance' is nothing more than high school loser resentment
deadken posted:so what exactly do you propose be done? should the united states immediately abolish its armed forces?
that'd be cool
deadken posted:should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran, and just hope the ensuing free-for-all doesn't leave millions of bodies in its wake?
sure, i guess
everybody's going to die anyway.
deadken posted:should it leave impoverished communities across the country without a means of gaining discipline, advancement, and respectability?
what does this mean?
is militant occupation of struggling third world countries really all that impressive? russia seems to do it all the time. are they spreading 'respectability' to the ukraine?
deadken posted:you can oppose the troops all you like but if you don't have a better suggestion for how the us government should defend its interests your moralising is basically useless
i don't care about the interests of the u.s. government.
and even if i did, troops give the u.s. a bad name. they murder, steal, and lie.
also deadken did you miss this post by henry
http://www.rhizzone.net/forum/topic/11897/?page=1#post-222694
deadken posted:so what exactly do you propose be done? should the united states immediately abolish its armed forces? should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran,
unghh keep going, im almost there
deadken posted:so what exactly do you propose be done? should the united states immediately abolish its armed forces?
I have proposed , in the past , that the JDPON should disperse the Amerikkkans throughout the Third World instead of allowing them to remain in occupied North America ,
deadken posted:should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran, and just hope the ensuing free-for-all doesn't leave millions of bodies in its wake?
countries like Russia and Iran do what they have to do to survive in the global system largely run by the US and its allies.
if the US demilitarized there's a small chance the world could descend into a complete anarchy and horror as you say. but personally i think there's a better chance some form of socialism or a more economically egalitarian global order would be allowed to exist w/o having the US empire sabotaging it at every turn. Russia and China certainly are not progressive regimes in any sense, but they're at least willing to support progressive regimes such as those in Venezuela and Bolivia at the same time that they back reactionary states out of self-interest. the US, OTOH, is actively hostile to any regime that upsets the rule of capital.
HenryKrinkle posted:if the US demilitarized there's a small chance the world could descend into a complete anarchy and horror as you say.
this is almost a tautological certainty seeing as how the term 'anarchy' has come to pretty much exclusively refer to any lack of Western totalitarian control and hegemony
u.s. troops like to think of themselves as freedom fighters and peace keepers but they are not
also why do trops hate obummer so much when he is their boss? they have poor work ethic and chain of command comprehension. world is ironic
Edited by AynRandAnCap ()
deadken posted:AynRandAnCap posted:deadken posted:reminder that the modern us military is the most ethical and humane major army probably in all of human history, taking unprecedented steps to reduce civilian casualties in all its operations, building rapport and connections with local people in those countries where it maintains a presence, and working extensively in aid and development projects. obviously any situation in which nervous armed young men are a major factor will have some tragic and regrettable results but it's a testament to the strong institutional ethos of the us military that such incidents have been reduced to a level entirely unknown to previous great powers. where warfare was once conducted almost entirely through sadistic massacres and mass rape, the united states army carries out its operations abroad with precision, conscientiousness, and humility. god bless the us armed forces and all those who serve in them
just like how lethal injection is the most humane form of capital punishment
so what exactly do you propose be done? should the united states immediately abolish its armed forces? should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran, and just hope the ensuing free-for-all doesn't leave millions of bodies in its wake? should it leave impoverished communities across the country without a means of gaining discipline, advancement, and respectability? you can oppose the troops all you like but if you don't have a better suggestion for how the us government should defend its interests your moralising is basically useless
wtf is this liberalism? the proletarian revolution will throw the world into chaos for a century, a bloodbath of class warfare that will objectively not better the lives of its participants it will cut many of them short
HenryKrinkle posted:deadken posted:should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran, and just hope the ensuing free-for-all doesn't leave millions of bodies in its wake?
countries like Russia and Iran do what they have to do to survive in the global system largely run by the US and its allies.
if the US demilitarized there's a small chance the world could descend into a complete anarchy and horror as you say. but personally i think there's a better chance some form of socialism or a more economically egalitarian global order would be allowed to exist w/o having the US empire sabotaging it at every turn. Russia and China certainly are not progressive regimes in any sense, but they're at least willing to support progressive regimes such as those in Venezuela and Bolivia at the same time that they back reactionary states out of self-interest. the US, OTOH, is actively hostile to any regime that upsets the rule of capital.
at the very least leftist regimes likely wouldn't adopt totalitarian measures as quickly or severely absent the pressure of us/eu-backed opposition/insurgent groups posing a constant threat to stability
welp that's my story about how i stuck it to the military industrial complex by making some stupid s-4 clean up my dried pee on a monday morning
AynRandAnCap posted:deadken posted:should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran, and just hope the ensuing free-for-all doesn't leave millions of bodies in its wake?
sure, i guess
everybody's going to die anyway.
this kind of teenage-nihilist attitude seems to be very common among people who for their own private reasons choose to channel their hatred towards those serving in the armed forces. for people constantly complaining about and exaggerating the scale of civilian death tolls, you don't seem to care very much about life.
institutionalism, essentially.
even if all the troops were super nice people on an individual level, it doesn't change the fact that they're essentially armed grunts in one of the largest gangs in history
the same truth is applicable to discourse around the us military, which (vulgar left agitprop notwithstanding) is not arbitrarily designed or constituted -- it does not accidentally consist of rapists and murderers, and while the people who populate it may in fact be individually reprehensible, this is fairly unimportant relative to what outcomes they produce in aggregate
deadken posted:i'd wager rates of convicted theft among serving members of the armed forces overseas is far lower than it is in the united states metropole
of course. it's the whole language and hegemony thing, as evident by your use of the 'convicted' modifer. when a troop steals from an afghani family it's called 'protecting our freedom' instead of theft
the u.s. media and the u.s. government go so far out of their way to defend troops and make them look good. they are the gov equivalent of "too big to fail"
which is fine, i guess, again, i'm sure they're nice people, individually. and sure, the current administration has been doing lots of stuff to scale back civilian casualties and collateral damage. and that's awesome
but i still don't think that it excuses the entire military industrial complex, or the atrocities of war in general.
AynRandAnCap posted:deadken posted:i'd wager rates of convicted theft among serving members of the armed forces overseas is far lower than it is in the united states metropole
of course. it's the whole language and hegemony thing, as evident by your use of the 'convicted' modifer. when a troop steals from an afghani family it's called 'protecting our freedom' instead of theft
the u.s. media and the u.s. government go so far out of their way to defend troops and make them look good. they are the gov equivalent of "too big to fail"
maybe this is because in a country full of office drones, it assistants, service workers, and nebulously defined 'creatives' soldiers actually do real work with their hands that actually produces something valuable - the unparalleled period of peace and prosperity the world has seen since 1945?
AynRandAnCap posted:which is fine, i guess, again, i'm sure they're nice people, individually. and sure, the current administration has been doing lots of stuff to scale back civilian casualties and collateral damage. and that's awesome
but i still don't think that it excuses the entire military industrial complex, or the atrocities of war in general.
of course it doesn't excuse the horrors of war. nobody's claiming it does. but if you're (rightly) worried about the loss of old-growth forests, you don't go about vilifying and demonising individual lumberjacks
deadken posted:of course it doesn't excuse the horrors of war. nobody's claiming it does. but if you're (rightly) worried about the loss of old-growth forests, you don't go about vilifying and demonising individual lumberjacks
i see what you're saying. and i agree. i haven't vilified any individual soldier. in fact, i'm pretty sure i've gone out of my way twice now to clarify the distinction between institutional and individual.
gyrofry posted:the term gang is problematic, undialectical and thoroughly gaey -- primarily used as a means for imperialists to depoliticize movements (e.g. why the western media always referred to the red army f(r)action as the baader-meinhof gang, discourse around crips/bloods/etc).
yeah i felt a little weird using the term gang, but i couldn't think of a better term at the time. imperialism is what i was trying to describe tho. using their own terms against them, or something.
"tremble indignation at every injustice"
peepaw posted:about 10 years ago a friend of mine was stationed at camp lejeune & i went to pick him up so he could visit his folks. it's a pretty big place so it takes a few minutes to drive from the gate to the actual base. anyway as we were heading out of his barracks i had to take a leak real bad so we drove over to an office building he had access to since it was a saturday and nobody would be in there and i used the bathroom in there, spraying pee all over the lowered seat, which i didn't bother cleaning up
welp that's my story about how i stuck it to the military industrial complex by making some stupid s-4 clean up my dried pee on a monday morning
more like Camp Jejune
deadken posted:AynRandAnCap posted:deadken posted:should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran, and just hope the ensuing free-for-all doesn't leave millions of bodies in its wake?
sure, i guess
everybody's going to die anyway.this kind of teenage-nihilist attitude seems to be very common among people who for their own private reasons choose to channel their hatred towards those serving in the armed forces. for people constantly complaining about and exaggerating the scale of civilian death tolls, you don't seem to care very much about life.
haha, you're the same way, except instead you created this weird fetishization of troops to fit your nerdy, idealized notions of ""authenticity."" actually, that's even worse. at least the teenage-nihilist type might actually come into contact with troops, and can possbily relate their pathetic complex to something concrete. more so than scorn, nothing smacks more of "high school loser resentment" than worshiping an abstraction entirely outside of your reality. leave it to an effete, degenerate british dweeb to seriously believe this shit
Bablu posted:troops are his model trains, it's really great
jiroemon1897 posted:deadken posted:AynRandAnCap posted:deadken posted:should we leave global security up to the whims of russia and iran, and just hope the ensuing free-for-all doesn't leave millions of bodies in its wake?
sure, i guess
everybody's going to die anyway.this kind of teenage-nihilist attitude seems to be very common among people who for their own private reasons choose to channel their hatred towards those serving in the armed forces. for people constantly complaining about and exaggerating the scale of civilian death tolls, you don't seem to care very much about life.
haha, you're the same way, except instead you created this weird fetishization of troops to fit your nerdy, idealized notions of ""authenticity."" actually, that's even worse. at least the teenage-nihilist type might actually come into contact with troops, and can possbily relate their pathetic complex to something concrete. more so than scorn, nothing smacks more of "high school loser resentment" than worshiping an abstraction entirely outside of your reality. leave it to an effete, degenerate british dweeb to seriously believe this shit
pwned
Senorah posted:everyone on pg 2 ethered by sam 'CIA' kriss.
there is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge
AynRandAnCap posted:soldiers are comprised of office drones, it assistants, service workers, and creative types. i would wager that, generally speaking, 'troop' as a job type probably contributes far less valuable labor than, say, a janitor or farmhand (who can also be troops)
in strict marxian terms, less than farmhands and more than janitors. of course, when you understand that our high standard of living depends as much on the movement as the reproduction of capital, the essential role of the soldier becomes more apparent
c_man posted:kenald shows us all his reactionary ass and disappears into a haze of "irony" and amphetamines
if it's 'reactionary' to oppose the demonisation of an appreciable sector of the working class for the particular type of work they do then yeah i guess i'm reactionary