Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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?Originally Posted by HoreTore
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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
This space intentionally left blank.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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
We do not sow.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
I've noticed that, and I was considering setting up a thread to see how many people were soldiers or vets.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.
Hammer, anvil, forge and fire, chase away The Hoofed Liar. Roof and doorway, block and beam, chase The Trickster from our dreams.Vigilance is our shield, that protects us from our squalid past. Knowledge is our weapon, with which we carve a path to an enlightened future.
Everything you need to know about Kadagar_AV:
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
"Liberal Iraqi Muslims are victims of torture and abuse from some British Soldiers"
CHAOS
That assumes that he hasn't already had warning points.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
what enemies does norway have? :P
We do not sow.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
Wales.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
I think the correct spelling is Whales ..
Status Emeritus
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
...That was the joke...
Last edited by Subotan; 11-29-2009 at 00:13.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
Mine too
Status Emeritus
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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?
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.
Last edited by Thermal; 11-29-2009 at 00:40.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.
Last edited by Fragony; 11-29-2009 at 08:36.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.
This space intentionally left blank
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.According to google, 35 billion NOK is ~6 billion dollars.
If that's right:
Last edited by miotas; 11-29-2009 at 09:45.
- Four Horsemen of the Presence
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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?
Baby Quit Your Cryin' Put Your Clown Britches On!!!
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
That would be a hobo, I believe....
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
I was a professional soldier and I find this funny.
The difference is you can recover being a junky; you never recover having been a soldier.
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…
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire.
"I've been in few famous last stands, lad, and they're butcher shops. That's what Blouse's leading you into, mark my words. What'll you lot do then? We've had a few scuffles, but that's not war. Think you'll be man enough to stand, when the metal meets the meat?"
"You did, sarge", said Polly." You said you were in few last stands."
"Yeah, lad. But I was holding the metal"
Sergeant Major Jackrum 10th Light Foot Infantery Regiment "Inns-and-Out"
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
No, the reason is that I'm rather pissed that even a red government takes pride in increasing the defense budget by 5 billions.
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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
Last edited by Fragony; 11-29-2009 at 11:40.
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
Very well said.I was a professional soldier and I find this funny.
The difference is you can recover being a junky; you never recover having been a soldier.
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…
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.
Baby Quit Your Cryin' Put Your Clown Britches On!!!
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.
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.
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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?
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, 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 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...
Re: What's the difference between a soldier and a junkie?
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.
"If there is a sin against life, it consists not so much in despairing as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this one."
Albert Camus "Noces"
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks