The point of public relations slogans like "Support our troops" is that they don't mean anything...
= new reply since forum marked as read
And don't actually read and reflect on the body of OPs.
I appreciate your service, and your own recognition that even while you served that the military wasn't always on the up and up vis a vis the military-industrial complex (which I have further tweaked and called it the "republican-military-industrial complex"
.
But today is another day. There is no reason the US needs a standing army that can wipe out the entire planet many times over. THAT task should ONLY be undertaken by an organization that represents ALL people, not just the chosen few from a land in which it was taken through murder and oppression.
I would cede entire control of the US military to the UN, who will undoubtedly use it for more humanitarian efforts across the world, as to help enforce our progressive message, particularly in the United States. But that if for another post. The point is that one can NOT join our current military without understanding, GOING IN, that they are part of an organization that is owned and operated primarily for the interests of the republicanist/corporate agenda. Pure and simple.
A few points of contention:
Ceding military control to the UN...because it just ain't gonna happen. Canada is far more active in UN operations (especially peacekeeping), with a much smaller military, as are smaller, neutral countries like Ireland and Sweden. None of them have ceded control to the UN, nor are they likely to. The UN does not have its own military force, nor is it likely to. It draws upon contributions from member nations, which we have woefully not contributed a lot to. It is not a formal military alliance, like NATO, or does it have historical defence pacts, such as British Commonwealth countries have (UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand).
I would also contest that the UN represents "all people." Not all countries who belong, or have belonged, to the UN are free nations. North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria and China all belong to the UN. None of those are representative democracies. As well, Pinochet's Chile, Fujimori's Peru (both fascist states that we, unfortunately, propped up) and apartheid-era South Africa all belonged to the UN.
Don't misconstrue. I support the UN in a lot of ways, and I think the John Birch Society is cracked in their view of the UN (among other things), but don't make it something it's not.
"Enforce our progressive message?" It seems to me that there is a bit of cognitive dissonance between the terms "enforce" and "progressive." "Enforce" comes off to me much too closely to the failed "Pax Americana." Progressivism, to me, is a free society moving forward through the will of free people who recognise that we need to help one another, and many times the only way to do that is through "government," which has been reviled by the far right.
Understand the republicanist-corporatist agenda by those enlisting? Even with a Democratic President and SECDEF? As I've said elsewhere, some recruiters I've known are bullshit merchants who only want to make their quota. Mine told me, "You can make what you like out of it...a part-time job (I was Air National Guard) for a few years, or a career (after a while, you can apply for Active Guard Reserve positions, which are full-time). Some decide they don't like it and get out after their enlistment and others make a 20+ year career out of it."
I don't know how it is now, but back when I was in the topic of politics was assiduously avoided.
I also have problems with your "ban the GOP" outlook. Banning other parties is more characteristic of a totalitarian state (including those in the GOP who want to "abolish liberalism" than progressivism. I want to beat them too, but I want to do it honestly.
