• Prunebutt ( Prunebutt@slrpnk.net ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        3 months ago

        As militaries are a tool of states to protect their sovereign power: That’s not what militaries do, though.

        I don’t want to die for a state. Even if that state is being challenged in it’s sovereignity.

        • Of course depending on a defensive war, but often times you’re not fighting for the state, but your loved ones. Like on a smaller scale nearly everyone would defend the people close to them from harm, for example trying to stop a rapist from abusing your wife/sister/daughter of course not limited to women. Rape can be used against men as well.

          In a defensive war the goal of states sovereignty and you defending your loved ones can align.

          • Prunebutt ( Prunebutt@slrpnk.net ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            but often times you’re not fighting for the state, but your loved ones.

            If I’m part of a state’s army, I’m fighting for the militaristic goals of that state. That state only has an interest in my “loved ones” insofar as it’s the population they require to achieve their political aims. My loved ones aren’t benefactors of the state. That’s just state propagana.

            Your rape example has little in common from militaristic conflict that it’s simply a non-sequitur.

            In a defensive war the goal of states sovereignty and you defending your loved ones can align.

            I think you misunderstand what wars are to a state: In war, two or more states fight for their interest by destroying an opponents people and resources by destroying their own people an resources. I’m not a resource that’s willing to be used up.

    • Rich_Benzina ( Rich_Benzina@feddit.it ) Banned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think every army that had to defend their home country would have preferred doing other things, and until 2022 i honestly tought that invasions were a thing of the past, at least in Europe. Russia showed otherwise, now i think that being capable of defending yourself is important. You dont have to have a ginormous army like the US but you have to be enough of a threat that somebody would think twice before attacking.

      • Grail ( Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        I live in Australia and until 2024 I thought we don’t need an army, we’re so far from any threats. But now I think we need to build drone bombers so we can drone strike some IDF bases.

        • Omnipitaph ( Omnipitaph@reddthat.com ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          I agree with you. The rest of this comment may seem to imply otherwise, but two things can be true at the same time.

          There is celebration to be had in not being genocided by successfully overcoming an invading force though. There is celebration to be had when you’ve eliminated a threat to your family’s lives.

          If someone wants to play stupid games, let them win stupid prizes. I don’t agree with murder, but killing in self-defense, even at scale, is reasonable. I would even go as far as to say it is good to live a longer, safer life. As far as “good” and “bad” are just projections of human’s fear of discomfort and suffering, and desire for pleasure and comfort.

          It is good to live, it is bad to die. If soldiers didn’t want to die, they wouldn’t go to war. They made their choices. Its a weird use of free-will in my opinion, but its an option.