Of course you ignore that most join the Army at 18.
Typically, they do so because they have no other options, or marketable skills, beyond their youth and naivete. Decidedly
not an uplifting picture.
I don't intend to judge your entire character from my shallow knowledge of you, but it seems you don't understand citizenship. Even in a representative republic with rights and freedoms, we don't get to individually decide whether this nation will or will not fight a war.
I have a reasonable understanding of my rights and responsibilities, cannon fodder in the name of Draconian occupation is not one of them. As for deciding individually whether this nation should fight a war, last check indicated to me that -- collectively -- most citizens consider this a bad idea, a botched operation and a raging cluster with no end. I don't think such a position can be marginalized as individual.
Whether a few military officers seem intelligent to someone in a completely different line of work is not an indication of how well they can fight or strategize against an enemy.
Perhaps true, but said bezerkers certainly have no further standing then
any of us as to WHETHER they should be fighting or strategizing against an "enemy." There's, also, the current record of suckage that undermines their supposed intelligence: the best we'll possibly get out of this is a Korea-esque diplomatic stalemate. (Which means we lost.)
So perhaps we should be careful in judging what strategy would have been more successful in Iraq or in the War on Terror in general.
Beyond, of course, determining whether we should continue down the money pit.
I dont see the point of giving Ezekiel any further platform.
"Sorry."
I appreciate the comments that serving in the military does not mean being able to second-guess orders, strategy, or policy.
I don't. Frankly, as a leader, I think it is the definitive duty to second guess, point out alternatives, and actually
think.Is there anything else that needs to be said?
That's up to you.