Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bruce511 1352 days ago
There is the false connection linking the Military with People. It is deliberately engineered to prevent criticism of the military.

There is also the idea that the "military" are not to blame for wars, wars are created by politicians not the military. The truth is of course that generals want to go to war because it keeps their budget allocation high.

These myths make it hard to both support Joe who's back from the war, and yet be anti the war in the first place. It's hard to mention that the overall military budget seems like a lot, without sounding like you're anti-joe.

Even something as simple as "thank you for your service" is in some ways a propoganda. To ask an ex serviceman about the point of the Afgan war, to ask them if 100 000 dead Afghans makes up for 3000 on 9/11, to question the logic of signing up to serve in an army currently fighting an unjust war, would seem antagonistic.

To question how Afghanistan is different to Ukraine would be unthinkable. [1]

In truth one can (and should) support veterans, but perhaps can also raise questions about the scale of US military spending, and question the wisdom of having an enormous standing military which needs to get involved in conflicts of dubious value, simply to justify its own existance.

[1] they are of course very different in a lot of ways, but in effect are the same in more ways we'd care to admit.

1 comments

Have you ever actually tried to have such a conversation? You might be surprised at how many veterans feel about their time in Afghanistan or who they think really disrespected their service.
An excellent question.

The short answer is "not a lot" - primarily because I think it's a conversation best had in person, not via forums. It's hard to create the nuance such a discussion would need when typing.

But, perhaps more to the point, it's not veterans that worry me. I suspect (as I think do you) that many are disillusioned with the real outcomes of the war. Just like those who served in Vietnam etc.

No, the people who worry me are the "politicals". Those who see _any_ criticism of the military as being anti-troops. (As noted above, this is expressly the outcome the military-industrial-complex has been working on forever.) And the messaging is so successful that, on either side of the isle, it's basically political suicide to "vote against the military".

While reducing the spending on the military may garner some support from those who have actually served (although I doubt in significant percentages) - it's the blow-back from those not actually in the military (military families, and everyone else) which is most concerning. There are not so supportive as those who are not actually doing any of the work or in any of the danger.