View Full Version : What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
HoreTore
11-28-2009, 17:13
While they both consume resources without producing anything at all, the junkie dreams of being able to produce, while the soldier is proud of his position as a worthless consumer.
The defence budget is passed. 35 billion NOK is what we're going to throw out the window next year. 35 billion we could've used for tax cuts instead. 35 billion to fight poverty. 35 billion to roads and infrastructure. 35 billion to give me my high speed railway to Bergen so it would've taken only an hour or two to visit Sigurd's sister. 35 billion to research and education. 35 billion to give the police, nurses and teachers proper pay.
But no, we want to burn our money instead :thumbsdown:
In the News:
The Vikings have returned!
Well one is of use should we need them and the other isn't really of any use at all, I would also like to point out that junks produce CO2.
HoreTore
11-28-2009, 17:31
Well one is of use should we need them
True. I guess junkies can be handy in a pinch, let's say in a painkiller shortage I'm sure they could contribute with some nice stuff....
But I'm sure you agree that most of the time junkies are quite useless, Frags ~;)
Tr
But I'm sure you agree that most of the time junkies are quite useless, Frags ~;)
And that is where soldiers come in, see, perfection. Leave it all to me.
lmao, and how long did it take Hitler to take Norway? Good thing they saved money. :P
HoreTore
11-28-2009, 17:41
And that is where soldiers come in, see, perfection. Leave it all to me.
We won't have any use for our military even in a war, Frags. Unless of course cannon fodder is considered useful....
So no, I place soldiers below junkies on the social ladder. I haven't decided whether they should be placed above or below the A(H1N1) virus yet....
lmao, and how long did it take Hitler to take Norway? Good thing they saved money. :P
Yes, because another continental european war is so likely...
Also, how long did it take Hitler(or the russkies) to take Sweden, if I may ask?
Ja'chyra
11-28-2009, 17:49
It'd be a lot more likely if countrie didn't maintain their armed forces.
And as for the question, soldiers risk their lives in the defence of their country and its ideals whereas junkies only concern is their next hit and which grannie to rob to get it.
HoreTore
11-28-2009, 17:55
It'd be a lot more likely if countrie didn't maintain their armed forces.
And as for the question, soldiers risk their lives in the defence of their country and its ideals whereas junkies only concern is their next hit and which grannie to rob to get it.
Yeah....Because if nobody had a military, everyone would invade each with their....uhm.... Junkie brigades....? :dizzy2:
There is absolutely no reason to die "in defence of Norway", and not a single Norwegian soldier in action today are even remoltely close to defending anyone at all, and as for our ideals, well, they're stomping all over them with their idiotic actions.
There's too much common economic interest in Europe to make war a possibility. And thanks to the EU, we'll all live in the same country soon anyway.
Nobility and soldiers; the lowest of the low.
We won't have any use for our military even in a war, Frags. Unless of course cannon fodder is considered useful....
Nato thingie, don't hurt me if Norway isn't a member I am lazy today. And your army would be very useful in a war unless the bad guys are equally good at being in the snow, or fjords with these cool boats.
Forgetting how you come across as a selfish, disrespectful ingrate, you know what Hore Tore? After WWI everyone thought that there would not be another war in Europe for a looong time. People who want power attack when their enemies militaries are weak. It is a preventive measure more than anything. A good military is so strong that it is never used. Maybe if Norway cut its BS socialist programs it would have more money for things like infrastructure and paying teachers.
HoreTore
11-28-2009, 17:58
Nato thingie, don't hurt me if Norway isn't a member I am lazy today. And your army would be very useful in a war unless the bad guys are equally good at being in the snow, or fjords with these cool boats.
Well Russia is the most likely enemy, aren't they? I kinda remember that Russia is rather cold.... ~;)
Forgetting how you come across as a selfish, disrespectful ingrate, you know what Hore Tore? After WWI everyone thought that there would not be another war in Europe for a looong time. People who want power attack when their enemies militaries are weak. It is a preventive measure more than anything. A good military is so strong that it is never used. Maybe if Norway cut its BS socialist programs it would have more money for things like infrastructure and paying teachers.
:laugh4::laugh4:
I hurt your special spot, didn't I? ~;)
Anyway, I've done my "duty to my country", I've been a soldier, and I have every right to criticize and ridicule the psychopaths who fulfill their sick dreams of killing 5-year olds, while being paid with my bloody tax money.
Also, as for the "socialist programs", well, those are kinda the things I want to pay for instead of bullies with guns. the problem with Norway is that we can't spend more than X ammount or our inflation will go to hell. So if we want to spend more money on something, we really need to cut something else. Like those 35 billions we pay to a military we don't need.
Ja'chyra
11-28-2009, 17:59
Yeah....Because if nobody had a military, everyone would invade each with their....uhm.... Junkie brigades....? :dizzy2:
There is absolutely no reason to die "in defence of Norway", and not a single Norwegian soldier in action today are even remoltely close to defending anyone at all, and as for our ideals, well, they're stomping all over them with their idiotic actions.
There's too much common economic interest in Europe to make war a possibility. And thanks to the EU, we'll all live in the same country soon anyway.
Nobility and soldiers; the lowest of the low.
:no:Can't believe I wasted my time posting the first time, but if you are ever over my way let me know and I'll introduce to my para friend and you two can discuss your opinions.
HoreTore
11-28-2009, 18:04
:no:Can't believe I wasted my time posting the first time, but if you are ever over my way let me know and I'll introduce to my para friend and you two can discuss your opinions.
Ah yes, the british soldiers... I've met a few of those, are there any of them nowadays who are not criminals?
Fine snow camo though, nobody ever saw them when they were dressed in....Black.... :laugh4:
Fine snow camo though, nobody ever saw them when they were dressed in....Black.... :laugh4:
I could make a very obvious joke here.....but..I................wont't
Well Russia is the most likely enemy, aren't they? I kinda remember that Russia is rather cold.... ~;)
:laugh4::laugh4:
I hurt your special spot, didn't I? ~;)
Anyway, I've done my "duty to my country", I've been a soldier, and I have every right to criticize and ridicule the psychopaths who fulfill their sick dreams of killing 5-year olds, while being paid with my bloody tax money.
Also, as for the "socialist programs", well, those are kinda the things I want to pay for instead of bullies with guns. the problem with Norway is that we can't spend more than X ammount or our inflation will go to hell. So if we want to spend more money on something, we really need to cut something else. Like those 35 billions we pay to a military we don't need.
If you can say that soldiers (including some of our members) are the lowest of the low, I might feel entitled to tell you that people like you make me sick to my stomach, so instead, let's just lay off the insults on other members, ok?
Psychopaths who fulfill their sick dreams of killing 5-year olds? Was that your motivation to join the military? If not, then where exactly are you getting that? I am glad that we have a member so smart that he knows the motivations of millions of people. If only we mortals all had your mind reading powers. I suppose you never thought that it could have something to do with wanting to keep their country safe.
While I am sorely tempted to debate this with you I have the feeling that you will just completely ignore logic because your mind is completely made up, and I know that if I talk to you much longer I will be swimming in infraction points.
Ja'chyra
11-28-2009, 18:15
Ah yes, the british soldiers... I've met a few of those, are there any of them nowadays who are not criminals?
Fine snow camo though, nobody ever saw them when they were dressed in....Black.... :laugh4:
What's wrong you? Have a bad experience with a squaddie when you were younger?
You're not worth the infraction points but let's just say I wouldn't be inviting you for a drink. :juggle2:
Posting this to see if you can get any reaction from former career soldiers Tore?
RNoN etc...
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYnvMhxQkLg&feature=fvw)
rory_20_uk
11-28-2009, 18:26
I understand that Norway is a frigid dump whose only redeeming feature is that it floats on oil. Since the need for U-boat pens has passed any other use for the country has long passed.
In the UK with the starting salary of 16k, they get to go to war often without adequate equipment, and some die because of this.
They are not book smart, but they are not idiots. They often know the risks yet they still go and die. Some even die whilst trying to save their friends.
There are many different soldiers, and their motives are bound to differ, in the same way that people undertaking any other job do.
I admire someone who apparently is there for the good of all mankind yet who is prepared to rely on hope to solve conflicts - not contribute money and certainly not place his own life on the line. Some might view this as moral hypocrisy or cowardice, but I am impressed how one can maintain these two points of view simultaneously.
Norway's only real contribution to modern warfare was the term "Quisling", and if you're a representative of the populace I can see why.
~:smoking:
HoreTore, there is nothing wrong with an institute that solely exists for killing people!
...wait, perhaps there is.
I agree though, first and foremost, if any department of the government is lacking funds, cut the Defense funds first. What the heck, millions of euros spend on what, making helictopers sound less loud, while teachers work twice if not triple their shifts?
There's a flaw in that logic. I don't see this obsession with the military. Not at all. Actually, in Vuk's words, the very thought that we actually give people money to go and shoot others makes me, what was it, sick to my stomach.
EDIT: Besides, the Freudian explanation is of course, guns are just penises. In the words of George Carlin, you blow other people (up) because their genitalia are larger than your own. (Saw that brilliant pun? That was vital.)
Oh common don't be so sensitive no free pass for anyone
HoreTore, there is nothing wrong with an institute that solely exists for killing people!
...wait, perhaps there is.
I agree though, first and foremost, if any department of the government is lacking funds, cut the Defense funds first. What the heck, millions of euros spend on what, making helictopers sound less loud, while teachers work twice if not triple their shifts?
There's a flaw in that logic. I don't see this obsession with the military. Not at all. Actually, in Vuk's words, the very thought that we actually give people money to go and shoot others makes me, what was it, sick to my stomach.
EDIT: Besides, the Freudian explanation is of course, guns are just penises. In the words of George Carlin, you blow other people (up) because their genitalia are larger than your own. (Saw that brilliant pun? That was vital.)
As I said, if you want to pay the teachers more, then cut your BS socialist programs and you will be able to afford to. What good does having a well paid teacher do you if you are conquered by Nazi Germany (to use a historical example) and those teachers are then made to teach Eugenics to children?
The military should not exist solely for killing people, it should exist for exactly the opposite reason: saving people. As I said, the best military is one so powerful that it is never used. Better not to have an institution devoted to that though and then have another country come in with a butterknife and take you over, and then draft you into their military anyway, right?
EDIT: And yeah, I agree with you, war ****. War makes me sick too. The sad thing is though, that it is not something that getting rid of your military is going to stop. If anything, that will just make it more likely to happen. It is sick that countries NEED militaries at all, but unfortunately they do, and there is nothing wrong with those who serve.
Think of it like this. If you live in New York, would you always keep your windows open and your doors unlocked when you were away? No, of course not, because someone could steal your stuff. It is sick that you have to worry about that, but making yourself defenseless to it is not going to make it stop happening, it will only drastically increase the chances of it happening.
EDIT 2: And as far as Freudian analogies go, sorry, I refuse to consider them. Freud was a racist, sexist, degenerate scumbag, and would prefer not to think like the likes of him.
As I said, the best military is one so powerful that it is never used. Better not to have an institution devoted to that though and then have another country come in with a butterknife and take you over, and then draft you into their military anyway, right?
But that is M.A.D.ness! :smash:
Norway's only real contribution to modern warfare was the term "Quisling", and if you're a representative of the populace I can see why.
~:smoking:
If he was, the term 'Quisling' wouldn't actually mean anything, would it? ~;)
Sasaki Kojiro
11-28-2009, 19:22
According to google, 35 billion NOK is ~6 billion dollars.
If that's right: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
As I said, if you want to pay the teachers more, then cut your BS socialist programs and you will be able to afford to. What good does having a well paid teacher do you if you are conquered by Nazi Germany (to use a historical example) and those teachers are then made to teach Eugenics to children?
The military should not exist solely for killing people, it should exist for exactly the opposite reason: saving people. As I said, the best military is one so powerful that it is never used. Better not to have an institution devoted to that though and then have another country come in with a butterknife and take you over, and then draft you into their military anyway, right?
Saving people by shooting others. I wonder about the exact difference. People will suffer, whatsoever. Also, the Nazi Germany analogy is worthless, since we are not living in the Europe of 60 years back. I mean, be honest, what European country would attack another at this point? We're not exactly living in a tense area, so to say. Now, if there was a nutjob rightwing political party on the rise (like the PVV here, but that's not suitable for this topic), we're talking about a different situation. At the moment it's simply not feasible.
As I said, if you want to pay the teachers more, then cut your BS socialist programs and you will be able to afford to.
What "BS socialist programs" are you talking about, exactly? Healthcare, public transportation, subsidizing sports clubs, that kind of stuff? Because honestly, I think it's a brilliant idea. You should try it once.
Think of it like this. If you live in New York, would you always keep your windows open and your doors unlocked when you were away? No, of course not, because someone could steal your stuff. It is sick that you have to worry about that, but making yourself defenseless to it is not going to make it stop happening, it will only drastically increase the chances of it happening.
See, the thing is, the Netherlands is incomparable to New York. The Netherlands is comparable to a little house in a friendly village in southern Alabama (save the lynching of black people and the country music, of course).
Strike For The South
11-28-2009, 19:48
You Europeans are lucky we pay for NATO.
I mean I don't mind if you get rid of your militaries if you let us put bases wherever we want.
Crazed Rabbit
11-28-2009, 20:33
Wow, what a giant and ignorant trolling.
CR
Fisherking
11-28-2009, 20:43
The entire Norwegian Armed Forces wouldn’t fill a football stadium even with all their civilian employees.:inquisitive:
I don’t think that it is the money that ticks him off. He is lashing out because he had to spend 6 months or maybe even a year playing army and he may have gotten wet and cold for a few days and got too little sympathy from his leaders....hence he imagines them all to be sick baby killers.
:laugh4:
Wow, what a giant and ignorant trolling.
CR
CR, I thought the same thing.
lol at this entire thread.
While they both consume resources without producing anything at all, the junkie dreams of being able to produce, while the soldier is proud of his position as a worthless consumer.
I'd say that's pretty accurate. However, society glorifies the soldier, and the more he consumes, the "better" a soldier he is. Sometimes they're one and the same; what's cooler than a smoking, whisky drinking soldier with a bandoleer across his chest, a rifle over his soldier, and a dirty foreigner at his feet?
Subotan, HoreTore.
In the future, we should refrain from telling our opinions concerning the armed forums on a forum that is actually named totalwar.org.
The name might suggest there are some people around that like the army.
~Hax
The Stranger
11-28-2009, 22:34
they only like the roman army, and the roman army kicks ass! besides everyone knows the roman (republican) army wasnt paid and after that they werent paid much... so... continue men
Subotan, HoreTore.
In the future, we should refrain from telling our opinions concerning the armed forums on a forum that is actually named totalwar.org.
The name might suggest there are some people around that like the army.
~Hax
I've noticed that, and I was considering setting up a thread to see how many people were soldiers or vets.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
11-28-2009, 23:48
Ah yes, the british soldiers... I've met a few of those, are there any of them nowadays who are not criminals?
I have friends in the British Army, they are good men, some have wives and families; some are now dead.
Your comment is mean spirited and flattly unfair. I think you should apolagise.
I have friends in the British Army, they are good men, some have wives and families; some are now dead.
Your comment is mean spirited and flattly unfair. I think you should apolagise.
Could you imagine the mod's reactions if he made the comments he made about soldiers about a group that it was not politically correct to discriminate against (women, blacks, muslims, liberals, etc)? This thread would be closed instantly and he would have warning points up his nose.
Could you imagine the mod's reactions if he made the comments he made about soldiers about a group that it was not politically correct to discriminate against (women, blacks, muslims, liberals, etc)?
"Liberal Iraqi Muslims are victims of torture and abuse from some British Soldiers"
CHAOS
This thread would be closed instantly and he would have warning points up his nose.
That assumes that he hasn't already had warning points.
The Stranger
11-29-2009, 00:05
what enemies does norway have? :P
Wales.
I think the correct spelling is Whales .. :smash:
...That was the joke...
Mine too :sweatdrop:
And as for the question, soldiers risk their lives in the defence of their country and its ideals whereas junkies only concern is their next hit and which grannie to rob to get it.
Exactly, the soldiers are more worthy than the junkies, and it is the government that wastes them, the soldiers just follow orders, which is why this threads title is a little disrespectful, IMHO :balloon2:
Exactly, the soldiers are more worthy than the junkies, and it is the government that wastes them, the soldiers just follow orders, which is why this threads title is a little disrespectful, IMHO
Society only holds soldiers in high esteem because we all feel guilty at them dying, or are secretly jingoists. Are soldiers any better than that junkie if instead of taking the bag, they kill her grandson instead?
Society only holds soldiers in high esteem because we all feel guilty at them dying, or are secretly jingoists. Are soldiers any better than that junkie if instead of taking the bag, they kill her grandson instead?
I know there's plenty of soldiers that aren't saints, but without them whole nations can be destroyed, i.e: world war 2: if France, Britain, Poland other nations didn't fight, most of us probably would have been exterminated, and many of us not here today.
I'm not saying soldiers are necessarily doing a morally good thing, but sometimes there is no other option. Soldiers are told where to go by governments, they don't say 'Jamaica is a horrid country lets nuke them' That is for the government to decide, and soldiers put there lifes on the line whilst doing there jobs. Even if you don't agree with everything there doing you should at least show respect for them, if you were to undertake a job that risky you wouldn't want to be compared to a junkie. :whip:
I have friends in the British Army, they are good men, some have wives and families; some are now dead.
Your comment is mean spirited and flattly unfair. I think you should apolagise.
I also have friends there, but I think people are a bit overreacting, no matter your motives you have chosen a certain career, from a pacifist point of view I can understand people disagreeing with choosing that line of work.
also has to be said, my mates weren't exactly looking forward to building schools and digging wells part of the mission, they wanted to fight Taliban.
Gregoshi
11-29-2009, 08:47
What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie? I was going to say "A junkie can only shoot up" but I gather the that isn't the answer being sought. :shrug:
According to google, 35 billion NOK is ~6 billion dollars.
If that's right: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
The population of the country is less than 5 million, if they were as populous as the US, then it would be more like 360 billion USD.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-29-2009, 09:51
The population of the country is less than 5 million, if they were as populous as the US, then it would be more like 360 billion USD.
Fair enough, I had no idea norway was that tiny.
I think some of our planes cost six billion though, more depending on how many toilet seats they have. And defense spending is about a trillion all told. And we don't even have socialist taxes :p
Major Robert Dump
11-29-2009, 10:00
What is a junkie? Are those those dirty, oily guys who you talk to when you need an obsolete part for your Gremlin, or somewhere to secretly burn your old tires?
HoreTore
11-29-2009, 10:54
What is a junkie? Are those those dirty, oily guys who you talk to when you need an obsolete part for your Gremlin, or somewhere to secretly burn your old tires?
That would be a hobo, I believe....
I was a professional soldier and I find this funny.:beam:
The difference is you can recover being a junky; you never recover having been a soldier.:no:
The sheer arrogance, the pride, the sense to be better, to be part of an elite (feelings shared by others professions) to be part of a team never really vanish after you take the uniform off.
When I was a soldier we had in France a campaign by anti-militarists stating that soldiers are not aiming at targets in wood but are killing people. They were right. They are right.
Where they and I disagree is sometimes you have to kill.
And they take the superior moral ground because they won’t, and no matter what dangers vulnerable others can face, they still think they are right. They think it is better to let others you don’t know being killed, raped, their houses destroyed and to kill the ones who do this is bad.
Confronted to the reality, like look at Rwanda, Hitler’s Germany, Yugoslavia, theirs answers are basically, it can’t happened any more. Even in this thread it was said.
“If somebody come to kill me and my family, I don’t fight I go to another country”. Well, right, you can flee until the Northern Pole and pretend it is the moral thing to do; some others will have to stop the barbarians.
They also ignore the reality. Did you see how welcome in our countries refugees are welcome? How much warm is the welcome? Did they ever saw a refugee, in the “alternative” accommodations, camps, or shelters? Did they ever think of the smell of tired, wet, hungry, angry, miserable refugees gathered in an icy, smelly, dark hotel corridor in a dark, snowy, extremely cold night? Do they know what is the lost of all you had, not the car, not the work, not even the new washing machine, no, the lost of what makes you, what matters to you. The black and white picture of you parents or grand parents, the diary of your teen-age daughter, your pictures (me and my then girlfriend at the sea side in Toulon) spread on your abandoned and now looted former home…
Do you they even imagine the shame and the despair of grow-up adults loading their parents and their kids in buses with only one plastic bag in each hand, the feeling it gives because you failed to protect them?
No. This is because they speak without knowing, acknowledging the reality, only in theory. They think; they are not.
So, the difference is if some soldiers will do bad things, a junkie will never do good things. A soldier think (if they can, of course) in term of collectively (within a reasonable expectation for himself, but same thing can be said for working in Charities/NGO), the junkie is per definition self-centred and selfish…
HoreTore
11-29-2009, 11:20
Posting this to see if you can get any reaction from former career soldiers Tore?
No, the reason is that I'm rather pissed that even a red government takes pride in increasing the defense budget by 5 billions.
No, the reason is that I'm rather pissed that even a red government takes pride in increasing the defense budget by 5 billions.
If you are in the NATO you must be able to make a fist, a certain percentage of your budget. Most will probably go to r&d anyway, to make cool stuff other will want to buy, katjinggg
What makes me mad is that we send billions to Africa of which 80% ends up on a Swiss bank, now that is a waste of money, and in the end it's funding oppression
Major Robert Dump
11-29-2009, 11:42
I was a professional soldier and I find this funny.:beam:
The difference is you can recover being a junky; you never recover having been a soldier.:no:
The sheer arrogance, the pride, the sense to be better, to be part of an elite (feelings shared by others professions) to be part of a team never really vanish after you take the uniform off.
When I was a soldier we had in France a campaign by anti-militarists stating that soldiers are not aiming at targets in wood but are killing people. They were right. They are right.
Where they and I disagree is sometimes you have to kill.
And they take the superior moral ground because they won’t, and no matter what dangers vulnerable others can face, they still think they are right. They think it is better to let others you don’t know being killed, raped, their houses destroyed and to kill the ones who do this is bad.
Confronted to the reality, like look at Rwanda, Hitler’s Germany, Yugoslavia, theirs answers are basically, it can’t happened any more. Even in this thread it was said.
“If somebody come to kill me and my family, I don’t fight I go to another country”. Well, right, you can flee until the Northern Pole and pretend it is the moral thing to do; some others will have to stop the barbarians.
They also ignore the reality. Did you see how welcome in our countries refugees are welcome? How much warm is the welcome? Did they ever saw a refugee, in the “alternative” accommodations, camps, or shelters? Did they ever think of the smell of tired, wet, hungry, angry, miserable refugees gathered in an icy, smelly, dark hotel corridor in a dark, snowy, extremely cold night? Do they know what is the lost of all you had, not the car, not the work, not even the new washing machine, no, the lost of what makes you, what matters to you. The black and white picture of you parents or grand parents, the diary of your teen-age daughter, your pictures (me and my then girlfriend at the sea side in Toulon) spread on your abandoned and now looted former home…
Do you they even imagine the shame and the despair of grow-up adults loading their parents and their kids in buses with only one plastic bag in each hand, the feeling it gives because you failed to protect them?
No. This is because they speak without knowing, acknowledging the reality, only in theory. They think; they are not.
So, the difference is if some soldiers will do bad things, a junkie will never do good things. A soldier think (if they can, of course) in term of collectively (within a reasonable expectation for himself, but same thing can be said for working in Charities/NGO), the junkie is per definition self-centred and selfish…
Very well said.
Now, I think some of you "defensive" types are mixing up the OPs specific opinion about his military with that of military in general. For example, unless I am missing something, nothing yet has been said to rail the US military, yet US people chime in and act like they are "OMGZ" affronted Glenn Beck style. I realize he made some tacky comments about the UK military in response to others....but really....he is from a small country with different needs, different ideals, and different lifestyles that I for one do not understand -- for example, the idea of involuntary conscription -- which we obviously don't have here in the US. Look at his post from the perspective of his nationality and his country's history and maybe, just maybe, it will fall into context, without the need for all the retarded "cut ur social programs lolz" comments.
Now, if I were in his neck of the woods, I would be for a strong military due to certain religious/immigration considerations I won't mention here because it may get me a warning. But as a US citizen, and a member of the US armed forces, I am not offended by his post in the least.
HoreTore
11-29-2009, 12:19
If you are in the NATO you must be able to make a fist, a certain percentage of your budget.
That's another thing, I want out of NATO. It looks like it works for Sweden, don't see why it shouldn't work for us.
Very well said.
Now, I think some of you "defensive" types are mixing up the OPs specific opinion about his military with that of military in general. For example, unless I am missing something, nothing yet has been said to rail the US military, yet US people chime in and act like they are "OMGZ" affronted Glenn Beck style. I realize he made some tacky comments about the UK military in response to others....but really....he is from a small country with different needs, different ideals, and different lifestyles that I for one do not understand -- for example, the idea of involuntary conscription -- which we obviously don't have here in the US. Look at his post from the perspective of his nationality and his country's history and maybe, just maybe, it will fall into context, without the need for all the retarded "cut ur social programs lolz" comments.
:2thumbsup:
I don't care how you people spend your tax money. But I do care about how my own are spent. And I really don't see the need for a military in Norway; we will be bankrupt if we are to build an army strong enough to deter any attackers, and I'm against wars like the one in Afghanistan.
If we are to get invaded again, if 1940 happens again, then there is still no need for our army. The one we have now is cannon fodder, the only chance we have to make a contribution in WW3 is the same we did in WW2, run to the forests and start a guerrilla war to make the enemy keep a strong garrison here so he can be beaten somewhere else. But why not just skip the part where our army is slaughtered, and go straight for the guerrilla thing? It'll be a lot cheaper, both in terms of money and lives.
Kralizec
11-29-2009, 12:46
Regardless of wether Norway should maintain a military or not, I'm still not seeing why you'd rate a junkie above someone who actually works for a living. In my opinion there are too many civil servants in the Netherlands and several redundant public institutions with nevertheless many employees, but that doesn't mean I think they're worth less then someone who's a financial burden on the whole of society and only produces nuisance and crime :juggle2:
HoreTore
11-29-2009, 12:51
then someone who's a financial burden:
I don't see our soldiers as anything but a financial burden. One costing me 35 billions. And they take pride in their wasteful behaviour, something junkies do not, they dream of the day when they can contribute something to society.
So, the bottom list goes like this:
1. The king and other nobility at the bottom
2. Soldiers
3. Junkies
The single biggest flaw I see in HoreTore's initial argument and, reading through the rest of this thread, one that nobody else seems to have picked up on, is the assumption that members of the armed forces are either fighting or doing nothing.
This ignores the fact that the armed forces of nations also take part in lots of humanitarian activities, along with other necessary tasks such as enforcing international law and acting against non-state actors who would otherwise thrive without their intervention.
A few examples:
1) You say junkies are a drain on society? Well why don't we try to reduce their number by limiting the availability of drugs through drug enforcement (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Royal-Navy-Ship-HMS-Iron-Duke-In-240m-Record-Cocaine-Bust-Off-South-America/Article/200909415393344)?
2) How about trying to secure some of the world's most important trade routes against piracy? Ok, you may argue that delivering aid to Somalia and trying to rebuild the country is a more effective method of preventing piracy, but oh look (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/02/ap/africa/main5492204.shtml), those aid ships need to be escorted against those same pirates (see towards the bottom of that article). I don't suppose it needs to be mentioned that it was a Norwegian warship doing the escorting...
3) I don't suppose I need to mention the role of the a nation's navy in the enforcement of their fishery policy. I'm sure a Norwegian would have no interest in such things as fish products are only Norway's second biggest (http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/policyareas/Fisheries/) export commodity.
Those are just a few examples of what armed forces do other than fight. I can add other links such as the provision of disaster relief to victims of natural disasters such as hurricanes or earthquakes but hopefully you can see my point by now. I could even go into further detail of relatively small acts, such as a ship's crew painting a local schoolhouse or rebuilding the only bridge into a village when they stop off at various places (both things I know Royal Navy vessels have done recently).
Members of the armed forces can and do therefore contribute to society, which is why they are more useful than junkies. If you aren't happy with the role your armed forces take, then that is perhaps a question you should pose to your local politician and campaign for them to take part in even more humanitarian activities, but saying that members of the armed forces of all nations make the same contribution to society as junkies is naive at best...
Banquo's Ghost
11-29-2009, 13:16
As might have been expected, the extraordinary troll presented by the original post has accomplished its aim.
There may well be a point to be made, but this is not the way to do it in this forum.
:closed:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.