After reading another text I go back to one of the main questions that we are supposed to be asking ourselves throughout this course, which is whether war is a necessary cause? I personally believe that there is always another solution to the problem at hand other than war but that is only my view on the matter.
I feel that Slaughterhouse-Five provides a great deal of insight regarding the aftermath of war. From reading the text I was able to gain a further understanding on some of the problems soldiers face when they return home post-war. Some of these problems are re-adjusting to modern day society and even some soldiers returning home with major psychological problems. The majority of these psychological problems were, like Will wrote about in his blog and we talked about in our last class, diagnosed as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). When thinking about some of the problems that soldiers even face when they return from war it further questions whether war is a worthwhile cause. Are the potential detrimental results worth the potential gain? It really begins to question what a soldiers life is truly worth.
If the reason for war is not truly justifiable then is it really necessary to sacrifice the lives of the people involved in the war? I believe an important question to ask is that if a soldier does not agree with the cause for which they are risking their life, do you really want them fighting for you? It is important to understand that the military takes as many willing soldiers as possible, due to the fact that the greater the number of forces they have the stronger the military will be. But still is it worth having a soldier who is just there to fight even though he is opposed to the cause?
I would love to hear how you all feel about some of the questions I have proposed and whether you agree with my stance on some of them.
9 comments:
i think your last question is the most interesting and relevant for me. i have an older brother who is a bit of a pacifist, but certainly of draft age. He rants regularly about the fact that when boys turn 18, they are still required to register for the draft. i can't help agree with how ridiculous this is, for several reasons.
First, why do men have to register but women don't? i don't think that's right; if something threatens our nation enough to require my brother and my best friends, why am i not strong enough to go with them? Second, and more importantly, the idea of the draft not only bothers me, it appalls me. Forcing someone to risk their life for a cause they aren't behind is cruel, and not only that, it's dangerous. if i were a commanding officer, i certainly wouldn't want men (or women) at my back if i couldn't trust them.
I would not want soldiers fighting for me if they did not believe in the causes of a country. But, I think people must understand that when they register for the military, conflicts may arise with which they don't agree with, and they must fight anyways. They can't back out of duty without consequences. Because you can elect to fight in the military, people should be prepared for that. This is certainly a problem with the draft. And, as Sam points out in his post, this is largely in part to our loss during the Vietnam War. The draft is not effective with many soldiers' morale-- even though it can add to numbers. But I don't think the number of soldiers you have counts for everything. Its not quantity, its quality...most of the time.
Most wars are not absolutely justifiable, yet they sometimes have to be fought in order to determine if they really are justified are not. I don't think its necessary to sacrifice lives, but nowadays, you sign up for fighting. If your on the opposing side, you may not sign up, but sometimes wars have to be fought and you get caught on the wrong side. I don't think any country or anyone can prepare for that.
Morale and the desire to serve is very important when dealing with war. I think some of the greatness with our military service is that it is voluntary. Essentially, those serving either want to or they have chosen that option. However, when there is a draft, I believe that soldiers are more upset about being forced to fight than the actual fighting itself. I know that if I was drafted to fight in Afghanistan or Iraq, I would be pissed because I would be forced to do so. If I am going to risk my life, I want to have a burning desire to defend an ideal my nation upholds. If I didn't believe the reasons for war were just, I think I, and soldiers like me, would be hurting the armed forces, and therefore the country, in the end.
I feel that unless citizens all of a sudden stop volunteering to be soldiers and commit themselves to war the United States will never have another draft again. I agree with Tess that the fact that when boys turn 18 they must register is quite ridiculous, if it were optional that would be better but then the only ones who would register would be the ones who wished to volunteer in the first place. So really the US is forced to keep the policy the way it is unless a better idea is brought forward.
For the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think it is important to understand that all of our servicemen are volunteers. At least to some extent they should believe in the cause they have signed up to support. But of course there are soldiers who sign up because there really aren't any alternatives for them. In relation to the draft, I think it is necessary. The draft is put into action as a last resort for the armed forces and I support it 100%. If you have any respect for your country and the people living in it, when your draft card is chosen, you better fight.
I really think you presented some very interesting questions and this is by far your strongest post.
The duty of a soldier is to serve his country and that is it. Regardless of his opinions and ideas about the reasons and justifications for war, his duty is simply to follow the commands of his superior and serve his country as an American soldier. It is the duty of a soldier to differentiate his feelings and ideas from his duty and role. The more a person questions the intentions of his country, the more difficult it becomes to willingly fight and defend one's country. Soldiers often pay a large price for their service in the form of terminally ill diseases and mental trauma, but these are just some the costs of war. Very few people desire to risk their lives in war, but selfless individuals understand that someone has to stand up and take charge defending their country. Soldiers understand their role in society and perceive their work as necessary work.
I agree that war is avoidable and perhaps even not entirely necessary. I disagree however that war should be avoided at all costs. In the words of H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. "Any soldier worth his salt should be anti-war, and yet there are still things worth fighting for." Which I believe is true. Sometimes its better to war than to give up and die.
I can't really say I'd like a soldier fighting for me and my country if he doesn't completely agree with what he's ordered to do, but some soldiers think of it differently. Some soldiers don't fight for a cause, some take it as an occupation. They realize they might have to do something to don't want to but they signed up for a job and they have to complete their objective.
Is war worth it? I don't believe it is.
- Before I get into things I would like to say that Tess: I never knew that women didn't have to register for the draft, that is really interesting and obviously very sexist of the U.S. government.
Back to the beginning - I do not think war is worth the amount of lives lost. If humans weren't just so inherently barbaric, there could an alternative to war. Maybe a game of chess? I know you probably scoff or laugh at that alternative but it would be perfectly efficient and no lives would be lost.
But is war for the good? Yes it resolves issues and such, but without it would we reach overpopulation in many countries across the world much quicker?
Post a Comment