Why Young Men Go to War • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#121

Post by cmdkeen » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 9:56 AM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #112

cmdkeen wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we need weapons to defend others. The USA and UK are in part two of the richest nations in the world because they are physically isolated from threats, we grew, and continue to grow, rich of trade with the rest of the world. The West has the capacity to be heroic and for a brief period at the turn of the millennium was actually doing that. Kosovo and Sierra Leone were examples of successful military intervention f…

I'm not sure that 1 or 2 successful interventions make a heroic period. And the First Gulf War was a farce. What has occurred in Iraq since is directly related and the stationing of troops in Saudi during the conflict had a profound influence on many, including Bin Laden. Intervention is always complex but this was a disaster.

I'd hardly call over a decade of regional stability a farce. It checked any expansionist tendencies of other regional powers. It helped make a very powerful point to Iran who didn't cause any problems with the Straits of Hormuz for a long while after, to Libya who had been invaded Chad only years before etc.

It was the 2003 invasion of Iraq that kicked off the nightmare and heightened regional and global instability. It was that massive miscalculation which hugely multiplied the number of jihadists and gave victories to radical Islamists.

Remember Iran had been chanting death America for years by that point, religious zealots already hated America and the West.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#122

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 9:59 AM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #29

thomasjames wrote: post #5

They join the military for a variety of reasons, which may or may not have involved any feelings about any conflict at hand much less the media. The reason they go to war, however, is because of old men.

> because of old men Erm, Because of old, blood-thirsty politicians. Do not basket all peace-loving old men along with them, please.

All cows are animals, not all animals are cows. Most of the war mongering politicians are in fact old men.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#123

Post by rimantas » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 9:59 AM UTC

jusssi wrote: post #78

Participating a war means participating murder, torture and rape. If that's what it takes to be a man, I'll pass.

I sometimes entertain myself with the thought, that respect for military and disdain for prostitution should be reversed: the job where you are trained to kill effectively is glorified, the job where you give love (physical at least) is frowned upon.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#124

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 10:00 AM UTC

wyager wrote: post #32

Well, 66% of the men in WW2 and 38% of those deployed to Vietnam went to war because the government forced them into the military under threat of imprisonment.

They should have stood their ground then.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#125

Post by morpheous » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 10:01 AM UTC

Not politically correct, but essentially the truth about human nature.

These two statements:

1. “War is so compelling that you can even get a room full of pacifists to pay money to be entertained by it.”"

2. "“My sister is a complete and utter feminist and pacifist,” he explains. “She doesn’t see the irony. She’s participating in this wonderful festival … that’s reenacting a battle. Nobody reenacts the Treaty of Ghent. [It] just isn’t that compelling.”"

I find particularly profound.

Any attempt to "window dress" our base nature, is just that - "Window dressing".

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#126

Post by expertentipp » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 10:04 AM UTC

pestaa wrote: post #100

wyager wrote: post #32

Well, 66% of the men in WW2 and 38% of those deployed to Vietnam went to war because the government forced them into the military under threat of imprisonment.

Well, you can't put millions behind bars.

But you can threaten an individual and everyone else will just mind their own business

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#127

Post by meheleventyone » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 10:05 AM UTC

kristofferR wrote: post #120

meheleventyone wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The science is much less settled on the link between testosterone and personality than you think. Some interesting discussion of it here: http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/cognoculture/testosteron... It's hard to tease out what behaviour is culturally learnt and what is caused by innate biological differences. Folk wisdom about testosterone is just one example. The downside is that these "biotruths" are used as jus…

Sure, but there's a lot of people who basically claim that the massive hormonal and genetical differences between the genders have no impact on personality, behavior and interests.

The evidence from studies into testosterone suggests that those people might actually be right or at least the hormonal differences between the sexes (and between members of the same sex who suffer hormonal imbalances for whatever reason) are not as important in defining personality, behaviour and interests as folk wisdom would hold.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#128

Post by kristofferR » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 10:11 AM UTC

meheleventyone wrote: post #127

kristofferR wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but there's a lot of people who basically claim that the massive hormonal and genetical differences between the genders have no impact on personality, behavior and interests.

The evidence from studies into testosterone suggests that those people might actually be right or at least the hormonal differences between the sexes (and between members of the same sex who suffer hormonal imbalances for whatever reason) are not as important in defining personality, behaviour and interests as folk wisdom would hold.

I've mostly seen the opposite results, that testosterone makes a massive difference.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19175758 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21338606

I'm interested in learning more, can you link to some studies?

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#129

Post by lostlogin » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 10:14 AM UTC

cmdkeen wrote: post #121

lostlogin wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that 1 or 2 successful interventions make a heroic period. And the First Gulf War was a farce. What has occurred in Iraq since is directly related and the stationing of troops in Saudi during the conflict had a profound influence on many, including Bin Laden. Intervention is always complex but this was a disaster.

I'd hardly call over a decade of regional stability a farce. It checked any expansionist tendencies of other regional powers. It helped make a very powerful point to Iran who didn't cause any problems with the Straits of Hormuz for a long while after, to Libya who had been invaded Chad only years before etc. It was the 2003 invasion of Iraq that kicked off the nightmare and heightened regional and global instability.…

Regional stability didn't make for a very good time in Iraq if you were a Kurd, had supported the U.S. in any way or if you wanted to eat. Infant mortality went through the roof and the death toll from coalition bombing civilians was also a problem. Regional stability is a phrase that gets used to justify support for vicious dictatorships that suit foreign powers.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#130

Post by PeterisP » Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 10:33 AM UTC

yequalsx wrote: post #12

AYBABTME wrote: post #4

I went in the army because at the time, I had big dreams and no clear path to them. I thought joining the army and doing a hard training would teach me something about achieving goals. I went to war because I was in the army and wondered what was the point of being in the army if you don't go to war. After doing my training, deploying in Afghanistan was the logical follow up. Why train so hard just to stay home. Afte…

Your second paragraph seems callous to me. Going to war for the sake of not wasting one's hard training, so to speak, is not moral. At least as I look at it. War is horrible and should be avoided at all costs. Sometimes it is justifiable and necessary. War should be a last resort. I wish society had alternate means of accomplishing your first paragraph without resort to the second.

War is horrible and thus starting a war should be avoidable at all costs - it should be a last resort, but this recommendation applies to the politicians and country leaders.

For the trooper, it's entirely differnent - assuming that a war exists already, the choice is about which bodies get sent there, and not wasting your training is a reasonable argument. Once a war exists, joining it usually contributes to it's end; if the other things are somewhat comparable, a shorter war is less horrible to everybody (especially local civilians) than a prolonged war, and you get a shorter war by winning with an overwhelming force.