Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Young Men Go to War

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 223 posts

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#151

Post by coldtea »

scrrr wrote: post #87

I forgot who said it, but it went like this: "If people recognise the banality of war, there will be no more wars." Of course its not that simple, but we, I suppose especially us techie boys (us because I am one), think that an M1 Abrams tank, a F-15 airplane or a Sig Sauer rifle are, well, cool. We also think uniforms look good. And we dream of being heroes, especially when we are young. It is, of course, nonsense.…

>If people recognise the banality of war, there will be no more wars

It's not that wars are seen as heroic, or religious differences and other such BS.

A lot of modern wars can be explained as the results of colonialism (either traditional or in its current covert form). Larger countries have interests in exploiting less powerful countries, to get control of trade areas, cheap oil and labor, etc. Of course they say the bring "democracy" etc, even when they leave chaos and hell on their way out (plus some profitable contracts for them).

Before the 60s the did it directly, literally enslaving 7/10 of the world in their "colonies". After that they do it by proxy (e.g. by drawing borders in such a way that establish countries and "nations" that will fight between them so that they can more easily control the area, install lackeys in power, etc.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#152

Post by thrownaway122 »

jusssi wrote: post #107
thrownaway122 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Murder yes that's sort of the point. Torture and rape are not required.

Is there a documented case of a war that didn't result in any torture and rape?

I doubt it.

However, a man (or woman) could go to war to defend their country against an aggressor and do so effectively without torturing or raping anyone. However, they pretty much have to be prepared to kill people... Indeed many modern armies will investigate and eventually punish rapists and torturers whilst they giving medals for doing lots of killing...

So 'murder' (or killing people) is a necessary condition for fighting a war. Rape and torture are neither necessary nor sufficient.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#153

Post by zby »

brc wrote: post #148
IgorPartola wrote: post #142

This is pretty interesting. I have always thought of war as a political and economic phenomenon. Why try to get by with what you currently have when you can just take what your neighbor has? In some cases it's just cheaper to go beat someone up and get their lunch money than to earn your own. Junger is saying that war is really emergent behavior: young men are violent, so they are not just willing to go to war, but w…

The truth about Vietnam is that it is an unpopular war now, and towards the end of it, but when American involvement escalated in the beginning, support was pretty widespread. When thinking about war, it's better to exclude ww1 and ww2 from the sample as outliers. Of course they are the default war experience and the worst wars around, but they aren't typical. It's emergent behaviour - it has to be, as it is endemic…

Really spot on. Just one thing - according to Rene Girard religion is a way to control and confine aggression. It controls aggression by aggression in a very dangerous way - but at the core it is a 'social technology' with the goal of limiting the outcomes of conflicts. I believe that theory has a lot of truth in it.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#154

Post by saiya-jin »

gaius wrote: post #147
orbifold wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily in most other developed western countries it carries no prestige to be part of the army outside of certain low income / right wing / uneducated circles. To the point where the majority of university students would never consider dating someone who went to the army. While there was still conscription, if you didn't chose to do alternative civil service, you were in the minority and considered suspect.

To the point where the majority of university students would never consider dating someone who went to the army But they would never consider dating street sweepers or shop workers or manual labourers either, or anyone else they see as beneath their social status as "university students", despite relying on those people every single day of their lives. It's pure class snobbery, and this is why many people hold "stude…

now sir, you got this one wrong. for intellectually based people (let's assume most college people are), dating with somebody you don't have that much to say is meaningless and frustrating experience. same goes for (most) guys too.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#155

Post by lgieron »

cmdkeen wrote: post #115
Htsthbjig wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Before that the first Gulf War was again a successful intervention." Successful? You must be joking or only talk about US and UK side. First Gulf war was a disaster. The US and UK invaded a country and asked the locals to support them, but then they went away. So Saddam took all the people that supported US and UK and simply killed them. First GW only served one purpose, to claim hegemony of the US military on the w…

GW1 militarily was a huge success, Kuwait - a "five feet high nation" in the Lloyd George sense, was defended from aggression from its much bigger, nastier neighbour. The principal of territorial integrity was upheld. The strategic aims were upheld. It was our business, and should be our business. That's the whole point of things like the UN charter - remember there were a series of UN resolutions condemning the inva…

> The principal of territorial integrity was upheld. The strategic aims were upheld.

Let's be honest, the US cares about those only in there's oil or other goodies involved (see the lack of response to the current situation in Ukraine, where there's little to gain and much to lose for the US).

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#156

Post by gaius »

saiya-jin wrote: post #154
gaius wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the point where the majority of university students would never consider dating someone who went to the army But they would never consider dating street sweepers or shop workers or manual labourers either, or anyone else they see as beneath their social status as "university students", despite relying on those people every single day of their lives. It's pure class snobbery, and this is why many people hold "stude…

now sir, you got this one wrong. for intellectually based people (let's assume most college people are), dating with somebody you don't have that much to say is meaningless and frustrating experience. same goes for (most) guys too.

If that is the point the OP is trying to make, then why single out the military? And all that nonsense about the "right wing" (clue: militarism is equally distributed throughout the political spectrum).

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#157

Post by willholloway »

pauleastlund wrote: post #98
antocv wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> us techie boys (us because I am one), think that an M1 Abrams tank, a F-15 airplane or a Sig Sauer rifle are, well, cool. Speak for yourself only. As a child Ive seen artillery in action, MiGs XX dropping bombs close to basement "us techies" were hiding it, those things are not fucking cool. It would be so fun one day for you to experience an F15 dropping its load on your village or an M1 Abrams tank, firing its gu…

I get what you're saying, but your tone here is pretty hostile here and you don't seem to acknowledge that the point you're making is in perfect agreement with the post you're responding to. You quoted him just before he said, "[This] is, of course, nonsense."

The way Americans treat war and violence as entertainment is disturbing to him, as he has been at the other end of it.

I've read an interview of a war correspondent that after witnessing war can no longer enjoy war entertainment, as it is disgusting to him.

I think hostility towards an attitude that takes inflicting death lightly, for entertainment is justified.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#158

Post by treerock »

jacquesm wrote: post #119
pauleastlund wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what you're saying, but your tone here is pretty hostile here and you don't seem to acknowledge that the point you're making is in perfect agreement with the post you're responding to. You quoted him just before he said, "[This] is, of course, nonsense."

Stating something first and then negating it in the same comment is a pretty weird way to make a point.

Basically an oxymoron. Shakespeare loved them [1]

[1] http://kerbev.hubpages.com/hub/shakespeare-oxymorons

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#159

Post by donny554 »

orbifold wrote: post #90
didibus wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The army is the reason young men go to war. That's what I infer from your comment at least. What other institution is so organized, so marketed, so respected, as the army? What other institution will take you in and dedicate the same level of attention and money in guiding you? What other institution does all the above with as low of a barrier to entry? To some extent, the army provides the same benefit as a cult. Th…

Luckily in most other developed western countries it carries no prestige to be part of the army outside of certain low income / right wing / uneducated circles. To the point where the majority of university students would never consider dating someone who went to the army. While there was still conscription, if you didn't chose to do alternative civil service, you were in the minority and considered suspect.

Saying this applies to most developed countries is a big claim. My own personal experience in the few European countries is the opposite, that being in the military was great for picking up girls.

Obviously your own experience differs, but you must be careful in applying that to an entire continent. Not to mention the absurdity of university students looking down on soldiers, many (almost all in my unit) of whom will hold degrees themselves.

Re: Why Young Men Go to War

#160

Post by serge2k »

lentil_soup wrote: post #102
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…

"The recent Philippines disaster saw HMS Illustrious deliver all the spare rice in Singapore in a short space of time along with a number of helicopters as well as fit, motivated, organised and well led teams to assist in disaster relief." Then you can have the same efficient result with a non-military organization. What's so special about them having guns?

The need/want of the US to have their guns all over the planet means they often have people in a position to help.

If they weren't out there defending people/enforcing US interests then they wouldn't be there at all.

Post reply on HN