4 ms·
Military service in the west is not for defence. Irak, Iran, Syria, Vietnam...
by frodowtf2 6mo ago
Military service in the west is not for defence. Irak, Iran, Syria, Vietnam...
- RandomLensman 6mo agoGermany participated how there?
- einpoklum 6mo agoGermany participated in the NATO military campaign/occupation of Afghanistan, including ground forces, naval activities and special operations units. Its seems a total of 150,000 German soldiers (and police officers?) were deployed overall (not at the same time of course); of them, 62 were killed and 249 wounded: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Armed_Forces_casualties_in_Afghanistan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Armed_Forces_casualties... Germany was also directly involved in the NATO campaign against (former) Yugoslavia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia and finally, Germany hosts large contigents of US forces, including air forces likely involved in the current illegal war against Iran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramstein_Air_Base https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramstein_Air_Base
- RandomLensman 6mo agoIran, Iraq, Syria, Vietnam? Hosting US forces in Germany is participating?
- dudefeliciano 6mo agoyes it is, how is that not obvious?
- samus 6mo agoTo put the number of 150000 total deployes soldiers into perspective, the Bundeswehr contingent in the end had a ceiling of 5350 troops.
- dudefeliciano 6mo ago5350 troops supposed to defend Germany, were instead waging a useless war in Afghanistan. 5350 troops too many.
- watwut 6mo agoGermany was one of the least militarized countries after WWII. They were kind of scared of themselves.
- samus 6mo agoQuite the contrary; up until the end of the Cold War both German states were highly militarized. They were quite happy to be able to roll back a lot of it after the reunification though.
- aleph_minus_one 6mo agoRather: the "victorious" countries of the Second World war were afraid of a re-militarization of Germany. On the other hand, they wanted to re-militarize the Western part of Germany just a little bit so that West Germany could become part of the NATO.
- dogemaster2026 6mo agoIt is for the defense of the American national interests and friend nations: - Iraq: 1) to expel Iraq from Kuwait, and 2) weapons (though this turned out to be mistaken) after the 9/11 attacks - Iran: we don’t need another nuclear nation - Syria: destroy terrorists (ISIS), enforce the red line on chemical weapons, and to protect US troops (when we attacked Iran-supported militias) - Vietnam: to stop the spread of communism and protect neighboring nations
- vasac 6mo agoSo while many of the reasons are questionable (understatement of the year), let’s focus on the last one. After America lost the war in Vietnam, what happened to those neighboring nations? Did they suffer from Vietnamese communists? The only Vietnamese intervention was in Cambodia, and hardly anyone thinks that wasn’t the right thing to do.
- dogemaster2026 6mo agoThe OP said it was not for “defence.” I am arguing the reasons were for the defense of American interests. That is objectively true.
- t-3 6mo agoThat depends greatly on which interests you allow to be defined as "American". The vast majority of American people would have preferred not to be involved in most of our foreign adventures. The rich and powerful thought differently. Is our citizenship determined by the size of our bank accounts?
- dogemaster2026 6mo agoThis is factually incorrect. Here are the estimates for the rates of support for each conflict at the beginning of the conflict: - Iraq (Gulf War): 75-80% - Iraq (2003): 65-76% - Syria: 35-50% - Vietnam: 65-75% - Iran: 42% Alexander Hamilton wrote that governance should involve people with “wisdom to discern” and “virtue to pursue the common good”. The US is not a direct democracy; it is a constitutional republic. The definition of what constitutes American interests is literally whatever the United States federal government says it is. SOURCES: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War - https://news.gallup.com/poll/8212/only-americans-believe-war-over.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/8212/only-americans-believe-war... - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_domestic_reactions_to_the_2011_military_intervention_in_Libya https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_domestic_reactions_to_the_2... - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_United_States_involvement_in_the_Vietnam_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_United_States_in... - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/04/01/iran-war-polls-ground-troops https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/04/01/iran-war-...
- layer8 6mo agoThe German constitution explicitly prohibits starting wars: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html#p0144 https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.h...
- wartywhoa23 6mo agoIt's about time to finally grok that all world's military is only there to wage wars at the whim of the 0.001% under the guise of being defence-only, and that constitutions worth less than toilet paper these days.
- layer8 6mo agoSo what's your proposed solution? Not have a military and just roll over when someone decides to attack you?
- wartywhoa23 6mo agoMy proposed solution is understanding what this scene means: In front of a blood-stained chessboard littered with mutilated chess pieces finely dine two royal couples - black and white - cheering their endgame.
- signatoremo 6mo agoDefense doesn't mean not to start a war. Think about how Vietnam justified their invasion of Cambodia in 1978, or how China started the war with Vietnam the following year, or how Turkey entered Syria, how Pakistan fought the Taliban recently, and of course what Russia did in Ukraine, 2014 and 2022. Wars are messy and have always been. Military actions are to be decided by the governments. Those who have resources are more willingly to use it, west or east.