The Military is the US's Second Largest Religion

I think lately, it's turned into a sort of retroactive propaganda for Iraq. We make everyone who served in a war a hero, it's harder to see the multitude of soldiers in Iraq as kids who just want to go home, which is, from all the conversations have had as of late, what it really has become. It also makes anyone who questions the nobility of their task at hand blasphemous and ugly. It's backdoor demonization of those who don't support the war.

If the military is the US's second largest religion, patriotism is its "Thou shalt not lie with a man as you would a woman."

Bravo. I will also add that I think the government is somewhat complicit in this characterization. By creating equating "soldier" and "hero", it acts as a pre-emptive strike against criticisms of military strategy. So, if you questioned the Iraqi conflict, you were shouted down for "not supporting the troops". I think we've gotten better about this, though.

I remember taking a flight from Atlanta to Miami, and the famous Captain Speaking announced that we had 2 heroes that returned from service in Iraq, and everyone should applaud, which they did. Except a whole bunch of us Canadians, who were quite puzzled by it. To that, another passenger so politely asked us "why we weren't fucking applauding like we should too", to which I had to answer that "it's as fucking unreasonable as applauding at a plane landing. Both are doing the job they we're assigned to. Valuing military service so much as doing it seems to be an thing an American thing, not so much in Canada"

The guy didn't say another word after that.

Thank you, Frank. Seriously, my thoughts exactly, and it's nice to see someone putting the thought into words in such an eloquent manner.

Frank, you can say that because you have been in the military and you know that for the vast majority of the people serving it's just a job. Hell even in World War II the majority of the soldiers never did anything close to heroic, much less now.

In fact being a hero isn't all that good in a modern military. It's much better if everyone does their job well so that heroism won't be necessary.

There are so many kids in this particular area (Fort Hood locality) that need to read that, Frank. I don't know how many people I talk to that are signing up for the sole purpose of "killing some fuckin' towel-heads"...

Those guys are heroes? No thanks.

I guess I'll be the douchebag here and disagree ever so slightly.

As far as I'm concerned, if you risk your life for your country or other people... it makes you a hero. Case closed. Whether its as a soldier, a police officer, or a fire fighter.

When did risking your life become something commendable? I went to high school with guys who risked their lives surfing on farm equipment to impress girls, and in no way were they heroes, much less were they qualified to breed. Nonetheless, these same brainwaves went into the military because they were seriously too dumb (trust me, I saw the test results) to get into college. Just because someone risks their life doesn't mean that their status as a complete fuckwit or murderous asshole is exempt from criticism, and too many people fail to make that distinction, which leads to this bullshit hero ego complex that a lot of murderous assholes and complete fuckwits tend to sport due to the fact that they're wearing a uniform or a badge. I know that's a totally distilled and layman-esque version of what Cobretti said, but come on.

You do like living in the big Neo-Con dream world, do you? How many of these actually risk their lives? By your definition, the retard that made it as a police officer and who's giving you a speeding ticket is one. Why is risking one's life worth being calleda hero?

But feel free to apply the badge to everyone, completely diluting the meaning of it as it goes.

EDIt: Jake beat me to it.

These seem pretty low standards for heroism, as far as I'm concerned. Joining the army doesn't make you a hero. It makes you a soldier. Doing your duty doesn't make you a hero. It just makes you a good soldier.

Note I said risking your life. I didn't say anything about the guy sitting at a desk filing papers for the Army.
Again, look at my statement above. Just because you join the military, it doesn't make you a hero nor just because you join the military does it risk your life. Don't read more into what I said. I said RISK YOUR LIFE.

The guy walking around the streets of Baghdad with potential suicide bombers all around him... that's a hero. Disagree with the policy all you want, it doesn't change the fact he's fighting for something bigger than him.

Same goes for the police officers and the firefighters who died in the towers on 9-11. Or the officers who die trying to stop gang violence. Or the firefighters who save countless people in horrible fires everyday. Get over yourself.

Yeah, cause you know surfing on farm equipment even compares to killing terrorists in Afghanistan. Yeah, you keep thinking that.

I totally understand what you guys mean about this idea of overpraising these people for just doing their job. i.e. people not in Iraq. But, that's it. Their job is inherently more dangerous than yours. They go out there and fight everyday (I don't mean the pencil pushers or the desk jobbers, I mean the infantry a world away.)

Don't hate on these people just because your liberal mind hates on the war and you think the sheer heroism of these people who die and get injured everyday is fuckin' propaganda. Sounds like some people need to go to Walter Reed and see what fuckin' heroism really is.

That makes every member of the insurgency in Iraq a hero too. And me, who put himself in the way of shattered glass to protect someone else during a car accident. And my Uncle Dick, who rescued a man from a propane truck seconds before it exploded, landing him a hospital stay and a good set of burn scars over his back and shoulders. If your definition of hero includes people like me, you've set that bar awfully low.

I think everyone's right when they talk about the overblown adulation of returning soldiers, but that's just one example of worshipping the military. What triggered the thought was the description friends of mine gave of a July 4th parade in New Jersey and all the military hardware that was included in it.

And this, this is just weird.

Spoiler: I work in medical administration. I've helped injured soldiers get the treatment they needed, and I've also helped injured Iraqis get the treatment they needed. I've dealt with cases where Iraqi children lost their entire families because someone thought that their neighborhood needed a carpet-bombing. I've seen guys who were afraid for the well-being of their relationship because they got half of their face blown off by an IED. I have friends who came back from the war injured and mentally fucked up. So save that shit for someone else.

But this idolization of people who risk their lives is just dumb. People risk their lives every day just by getting up in the morning. I could risk my life by walking into traffic. Would walking into traffic NOT make me a retard because I'm risking my life? You're making blanket statements based on the role that someone takes while discounting the fact that they could be a date-rapist or a wife-beater. We should judge the individual as a person, not just because they're draped in a uniform.

Voilà. It's pretty convenient to classify a group with such a broad definition and it's easy to live with, but the reality is something else. I remember working in the States for a few months, and when Black Hawk Down came out, one of my co-workers, who might seriously be Muharulz, said that every one of these soldiers in the movie were heroes. Until someone pointed out that one of them was a convicted child molester. But he didn't care.

So what you're saying is that Pat Tillman and some nut job trying to be Frogger are equated because they assumed risk with their actions?

There is a huge difference between fighting for your country's military and running through traffic. A huge difference.

No need. I'll just call up my friend Paul, who's regarded as a National Hero by some. I regard him as just being terribly unlucky. A nice guy and a good medic who gets a little belligerent when he's had too much beer and who joined the army because 20 years service would have set him up with a nice pension and he wasn't keen on the 9-5, which is an excellent reason to join up. Paul's not a hero, he's just Paul. Call him a hero at this point and he'd probably say something kind then roll his eyes after you'd gone because he's really really sick of being treated special.

I'd probably feel the same way about the worship of entertainers if I were good friends with, say, Geddy Lee. Whose music has moved me far more than any show of military strength ever could.

I don't have a problem with calling folks who engage in voluntary warfare "heroes," so long as we all realize that we're severely diluting the word. It will come to the point where we'll just have to come up with another word for the guy who jumps on a hand grenade.

Nah. not me. I saw BHD on dvd and hated it.

But, anyway, yes, those men were heroes for what they did that day. However, the whole child molester thing would make me wonder about the one guy. Quick question... was he convicted before or after his work in Somalia?

That would be quite an offensive thing to have on your record when joining the military.

Really good post.

I tend to think it also has to do with family. You're right, everyone was involved with WWII in some capacity or another and most everyone grew up listening to stories of their parents or grandparents or some relative serving their country during WWII and of course they don't hear the horror stories of war they mostly hear the brave tales. They hear about how they stormed the beach or they liberated a concentration camp etc... I think this creates a bit of a fairy tale about the military and a certain sense of heroism attached to service due to that familial connection and the tales of bravery. Sure there are people who are joining because they have no choice or because it is a means to an end but by and large people associate joining the military with patriotism and protecting freedom. They didn't come to that conclusion because we're in Iraq, they came to that because their grandpappy fought in the great war and killed those evil Nazi's.

Super...hero?

I would agree but I still think giving props to anyone who went to Iraq and got through it in pretty much one piece is a good thing.

woah...

This, pretty much. My granddad was a Lt. Col. in the Marines during WWII and Korea, and flew quite a few recon and bombing missions. And of course, he absolutely hated when some draft-dodging douchebag at the VFW would congratulate him for being "a hero". But I guess we can just blame that on his liberal mind not being able to separate his dumb bleeding-heart compassion from the places that he helped drop bombs upon.

That doesn't account for how soldiers returning from Vietnam were viewed, though. They were blamed for the Administration's failures, and probably the crimes of other soldiers as well. This time, the Administration beat the population to the punch. They defined patriotism to mean supporting Bush policies and they defined heroism to mean being in the US military. 'Support our Troops' stickers have nothing to do with the second world war.

So, the Marine who threw a puppy off a cliff, the unit who slaughtered an entire neighborhood of men women and children, as retaliation when they drove into an IED, and the fucktards who raped innocent muslim men (who had had actually been fighting against taliban indroctination in Iraq) at Guantonimo with broom handles and knives are heros then?

NICE. FUCKING. HEROS.

No, no, you don't understand! They risked their lives, so it's okay! I mean, come on, what if one of those detainees had forcefully shat out the broomstick back in the soldier's direction, shattering his solar plexus?!? We've got to keep these things in perspective, folks!

After Somalia. And you have terrible taste.

This. This right here is one of the reasons I love Jake. The other being that if I ever said anything bad about him, he'd probably destroy me, because he's Hulk-sized.

A hero ain't nothin' but a sandwich.

It's a word too easily applied nowadays, but it needs to go to the individual, not a group. And I love how Muharulz applies it to the soldiers and not the desk jockeys. That pencil-pusher may be doing something more noble than you think.

As a military member for the past 10 years I get uneasy when people come up to me and heap mounds of praise on me like I'm Sgt York. I'm a mechanic, what I do may have a little more bearing on world events then say the guy down at Jiffy Lube, but we're not that far off from each other.

I agree with the OP, people try to overcompensate by calling anyone with a uniform a hero so they come off as a dick.

Hmm, thank God this thread exists, for I know a gaggle of military assholes who are treated like fucking royalty by everyone around them, despite their overt racism, sexism and oh yeah, of course, homophobia. They're just plain awful people, but I always felt guilty thinking that about them since they went over there.

Still, glad I can say it: I don't care if you wear an apron or a uniform, an asshole's an asshole.

This 4th of July I think it's important we all take a moment to remember and thank the thousands of Blackwater merce-- contrac-- ...heroes risking their lives for our freedom.

The site looks like some mid-90s crap, but damn if those aren't the tales we love hearing about the military.

Even douchebags can perform heroic acts. In fact, many of history's celebrated acts of heroism were performed by absolute douchebags. Some people who are considered heroes did a lot of douchebaggy things. Idolize Thomas Jefferson? He not only owned slaves, he probably impregnated one of them. People are flawed, but capable of extraordinary acts of selfless sacrifice and, yes, heroism.

My brother-in-law (not a douchebag) did a tour in Iraq in the Marines fixing medical equipment in a base hospital in the Green Zone. I don't think he ranks up there with the guys who stormed the beaches at Normandy. But I respect him for volunteering for military service and spending time in a hostile environment (Green Zone or not) when he could have been working in an air conditioned office in Phoenix. There's an element of heroism whenever someone sacrifices his own interests for the benefit of others. We throw that word out too liberally, sure, and for a lot of the reasons Frank brought up in his first post. But it expresses the sentiment that we appreciate those who choose to serve, for whatever reason.

That's mostly due to 9/11 and the hyper sense of patriotism that was associated with it. Remember, people didn't want to get into WWII because of WWI. As with any war, it takes time for the atrocities to fade and for the tales of bravery to sink in. Honestly, we created some serious bad stuff in WWII, Japanese camps, we dropped an atomic bomb (the one and only time in an act of aggression!) not once but twice on civilian populations. Have you read what we required the Japanese to do as part of our occupation?

After Vietnam no one was very happy with the military or had these grandiose views of military people as ultra-patriotic heroes. Really, it took the Gulf War to bring that back and then it sparked back up again after 9/11. Pride really is the deadliest sin.

The point concerning Blackwater is a good one. Those guys go voluntarily, draw a paycheck, and fight for US interests just like the official military does. Are they heroes? Modern PMCs can perform many of the functions of a regular military and are increasingly doing so. What makes them all that different from a regular trooper in the service? But yet, we sit somewhat uncomfortably knowing this war is being waged in a large part by mercenaries. (many of whom are there because they actually do believe in the cause.)

In the end, both groups are paid to kill and sacrifice for this country. They are also rewarded with the satisfaction that they helped to further the agenda of this nation whatever it may be and that should be enough. Wanting to be a hero is kid's stuff and should not be part of their motivation. They are to do the jobs they volunteered to do just as everyone else does.

Nobody cheers for the Hessians. There are no victory parades, yellow ribbons around the oak tree or any of that other nonsense for hired killers. It's a dirty little secret.

I'm assuming (but don't know for sure) that mercs get paid a lot more than enlisted soldiers. It's a safer bet that they are doing it for the money, rather than for love of country or some other noble desire. I don't know that too many people are joining the marines for great pay. College benefits, maybe.

Creeping Militarism does great harm to the Constitution. Mercenaries get paid significantly more than rank and file soldiers: hence, they are almost universally hated by the armed services. (well, the pay along with the PMCs operating under entirely different Rules of Engagement, thereby creating a far more volatile situation for those who have to fight by those rules)

You can respect someone for the choice they made without putting them so high on a pedestal that every move they make is heroic.

No, they are not heroes at all. Just because you are doing an honorable thing by serving your country it doesn't mean you have free reign to do horrible things in our country's name. These people are just as culpable and horrible than those who commit crimes in our country. However, just because there are some bad people in an institution... it doesn't mean that everyone in that institution is bad.

I think what JVC was correct. People do make mistakes and they can make up for them in heroic ways and heroes can commit horrible things that could taint their acts.

For example, the guy who committed child molestation after his heroic acts in Somalia. How was the movie watcher to know that the soldier was a child molester? If he 's watching the movie which depicted (I can't remember if the movie was as faithful to the book, which was faithful to the actual actions of BHD) the actions of this man, why wouldn't he think of him as a hero? If I found out that the guy committed a horrible crime after his service, of course it's going to change my opinion. Sounds like a guy who acted heroically in battle who then committed a horrible crime years later. He would definitely deserve punishment for his crimes.

Benedict Arnold was a hero who committed a horrible crime. So was the Marine who killed his pregnant girlfriend. I certainly wouldn't call them heroes after what they did.

I don't think everyone that serves in the military is a hero, but I do think that risking your life for your country is an admirable thing. It is certainly not a badge of "I can do whatever I want because I'm a hero" badge though.

My opinion was ripped apart despite being similar to most of the posters here. The soldier who jumps on the hand grenade to save people is certainly a hero. Same for the soldier who fights against terrorists in Afghanistan. Same for the police officer who saves people from gang violence. Same for the firefighter who saves the lives of people from horrible fires everyday.

I would even say that Seabass and certainly his uncle could be defined as heroes for their actions. I guess the definition is in the eye of the beholder.

...Pregnant baby?

FIXED

I see your position, Muharalz, it's just moving in an opposite direction. Rather than assume that military service=heroism and acting accordingly (by cheering them, thanking them, idealizing and idolizing them), most of the critical posters here seem to think that military service shouldn't mean anything other than what it obviously is. If someone's a hero, that should speak quietly for itself, and I suspect that the legitimate heroes in the armed services' midst find the whole spectacle a bit unbecoming.

If someone joins the military, knowing he'll be sent in a less-than-honorable conflict (say, Iraq, because, let's face it, conflicts aren't as black and white as they were back in WW2), being ordered around by a less-than-honorable administration, how's "serving the country" is being considered honorable and worthy of the heroic label? Heroic acts can happens everyday, everywhere, and most will never be know. That's it. That's life, even in war. It's a matter of perspective I guess, but you can't equal military service with heroism.

EDIT: And, like posted above, how about Blackwater operatives?

A little tribute to my favorite flag-wavin' forum hero.

Just because there have been some heroic people in an institution does not mean that everyone in that institution is heroic. I think that's the only point Frank was trying to make.

And though many people join the armed services out of patriotism, not the pay, we can't discount the large numbers that join because of the lack of other career opportunities available to them. Recruiters don't hit up the private schools and Ivy leagues. Who knows how many would rather be drawing the Blackwater pay but just don't have the resume yet. (Well, I bet everyone over there would rather be paid more, but how many care who signs their paycheck? Blackwater gets their employees from somewhere.)

Well, as I mentioned above, I don't think military service equates to heroism. But there are plenty of soldiers (like the 150-170,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan) who could be described as heroes because they do risk their lives for their country. People hold high regard for wartime soldiers because they are away from their families, taken to a foreign land, and put into a constant dangerous situation until their flight back home.

If we took to your thinking, then would the soldiers coming back home get the same anger and hatred that our President does? I don't think that's really right. The anger and hatred our Vietnam Veterans received after the war was uncalled for, wrong, and could be attributable to the recent rise of homelessness in this country. Is that right?

As for Blackwater, I hold a similar opinion to JVC. If you're a merc, chances are you're doing it for the money solely or partially. Some mercs get 10 times the amount enlisted soldiers receive. That said, I know you're thinking... people in the military do it for the money as well. Yes, many of our armed forces enlist for financial reasons, but the risk for many of these soldiers outweights the reward. They don't get paid enough money or benefits for the work that they do when compared to mercenaries in Iraq. With these mercenaries, the reward equals or surpasses the risk.

If I was a person with no real love of country and I had the option of taking a low paying job with little risk (retail, manufacturing) or taking a slightly more paying job with very high risk (joining the Marines, which would certainly lead to Iraq or Afghanistan in our current state)... I would probably take the lower paying job. It's safe, you are home to raise a family, etc. etc.

Knowing that there are Americans who do the opposite, at least to me, shows that there is an underlying current of patriotism, love of country, self-sacrifice, or public service in their reasoning for joining the military. To me, that's admirable.