Defending our Military

I was thinking North Korea. He could start a church there, and put a copy of some of his posts on the outside of the building.

 

If the troops follow the corrupt orders they also are corrupt.

 

I'm with you on your approach.

Not intending to cast erroneous assertions of some BB posters, but I'm wondering if some of our BB friends (And I, indeed, consider all the BB community to be my friends and brethren [and "cisterns" too LOL!]) in Christ!) ever spent much time "in the shoes (boots maybe)" of most of the average GI grunts.

(BTW, Many of them may have enlisted because they had little financial/economic/vocationa lprospects elsewhere--but that's a subject for a different forum/thread.)

What, in reality, are these "politicians' pawns" supposed to do? Go AWOL? Tell their commander(s) "I quit"?

It's easy for some of our BB posters to pontificate from their bubble-enclosed ivory tower perspectives, but when the rubber meets the road, I just wonder what alternatives they would opt for if they were in the shoes (boots) of our ground pounders.

Give these average Joe's a break!! It's easy to take a broad brush approach that with one fell swoop you've demeaned these men and women---especially as long as you personally don't have a horse in their race.

(Getting off my soap box now.)

--- ktn4eg --- Retired military veteran (1964-1969 USAF, 1988-2003 TN Air National Guard)

 

Everyone has their right to their opinion, as that is why we defend freedom and liberty. However, a mininal amount of knowledge is required to hold a basic discussion, and at least one in this thread does not possess that. It all comes down to the fact that some serve, and some sit around and flap their jaws about something they are totally clueless about.

 

No, because the Lord already made it clear we must pay taxes, He did, and held no responsibility through payiong the tax for the evil in those who do the corruption. Our military is all volunteer so they are responsible for the actions that take place even if ordered as they have the option to refuse an unjust order.

 

As in this thread, as in all the other threads, you totally misunderstand. The Lord told us that civil authority was placed there by Him, and that we are to obey the law and pay taxes. It just so happens that you live in a country where you can do something about the leadership through the vote, or activisim if you could get up out of your chair. We are to do what the Lord says, not analyze why He allowed who is in office, or the policies they pursue. Usually, we get the leaders we deserve, and if there is corruption in the authority structure, then it is a reflection of us or what we deserve. In this nation, we the people elected them.

Since you never served, never did much anything to affect change to your way of thinking, I really do not see where you have any complaints.

It is like your complaints about the military, degrading them but not serving, or playing Monday morning quarterback when it comes to human suffering and doing nothing to help but criticize.

Do you recall the parable of the Good Samartan? If we were going to put it into a riddle, we could say, why did the Levi priest cross the road? Ring a bell? Ding-a-ling?

Someday, in some shape form or fashion, you are going to be forced to exercise your faith in the real world, maybe in circumstances we can only imagine in foreign lands now, in a manner besides negative and demeaning words coming out of <edited to "your" - LE> mouth.

 

SN, you're fighting a losing battle. FAL's mind is made up; no amount of logic will change it.

Remember: he works for, or has worked for, some civilian corporation that has the same limitations that he puts upon the military -- obey your superiors, or don't. In his case, not obeying would have led to firing and joblessness. I don't know his personal situation--he might have actually stood against what he was ordered to do, and been fired for it--but is now receiving government unemployment. Or he didn't, and he's still employed. He could be disabled, sitting in a wheelchair typing his responses with a pencil because of his infirmity; but the result is the same: He knowingly and willingly abides by the same government regulations, rules, and laws in order to continue receiving a paycheck.

Let him rail against the military all he wants, because he's just as guilty of supporting this "evil government" as those he rails against. And that, my friend, is what's known as "hypocrisy."

So don't let your blood pressure get raised because of him; let it go. When he posts something completely false because of his ignorance, don't respond to him; respond to what he posts, in order to educate others and make sure they don't, through their own ignorance, come to believe that what he says is true.

 

So if we live under a king that says murder all the first born males you will obey, correct? Is that what you are trying to say? You are assuming I have not already exercised my faith and suffered for it. Isn't that a little judgmental without knowledge? Pay no mind ot Don. He is correct about one thing. I do not hold to the things of God by logic. He does that. I hold to them by faith, he needs to do that.

 

You have a good point. This is the same pattern as he used in the threads about depression. I never really questioned the civilian government while serving, just did what I was told, which is pretty much what I did in my civilian jobs. I suppose if I had quit every job that had some element of being corrupt or evil, I would have never worked anywhere very long. We are all sinners. And to date, I do not know of anyone who is perfect except one exception 2000 years ago. Thanks for the post.

 

I've been following this thread, and speaking metaphorically, my tongue is getting sore from being bit.

 

Dont be shy.

 

It's more of an issue of self control. I don't know if I will be able to speak about bitter armchair generals who seem to take every opportunity to deride, accuse, and give vent to their hatred of those who are and those who were in uniform without using the term horse-hockey.

Well, I guess that answers that.

 

You make a disparaging claim that I need to live by faith; it was the same God you and I both profess to love, worship, and follow that said:
Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Would you have disobeyed Saul?

 

Are you related to Fred Phelps?

 

You mean would I have obeyed the Lord who gave the command. Yes. However our military is not under a theocracy and not being lead by men who are directed by God. If they were they would not be celebrating homosexuality, burning bibles and marrying two people of the same gender.

 

No, I meant exactly what I wrote. As you'll recall, Saul was given the proclamation, but passed on different orders to his men. Since you weren't in the room when Saul was given the Lord's message, you only know what Saul passed on to you. And let us not forget that everyone knew Saul was chosen by God to lead the people.

So--would you have disobeyed Saul?

 

You are trying to compare apples with oranges as you usually do when you know you are wrong but want to contiune in your rebellion, but to answer your question I would obey because it was a theocracy. However we are not a theocracy and as Christian's left with making decisions based on the spirit, not blindly following men which is what you seem to be suggesting.

 

Hey--you were the one that brought up Pharoah's command to kill all the first-born. And as you're aware--or should be--Egypt equated their leaders with the gods they worshipped, and thus were a theocracy themselves. You used a theocracy example--but you don't want to let me do the same.

So you admit that you would follow the orders of Saul because it was a theocracy. Does that absolve you of the responsibility of disobeying God, since Saul's orders were not what God commanded?

As for "blindly following men"--you misrepresent me. I and others have told you on several occasions on this board that military members are taught to evaluate all orders for their legality, ethics, and morality. Failure to do so makes the military member just as guilty as the one issuing the orders. I even once upon a time gave you a scenario and explained why your answer was incorrect based on legality and morality.

So please--"blindly following men"? Was it blindly following when, as an E-3, the lieutenant asked me if I understood why he had made the decision he did; and I replied that I figured I'd be in long enough to see more stupid decisions? Was it blindly following when I said "no" to my superiors when they asked me to spend $10 million dollars of US taxpayer money on a computer system for the Afghans that I knew they would never use? Was it blindly following when I said "no" to a job position change that would have required me to sustain instead of fixing a financial system that I had already filed multiple complaints against? Was it blindly following when I instituted requirements in a training system that actually caused people to be removed from the training for not meeting standards, whereas the previous ten years had simply been a "graduate 'em and move on to the next batch" mentality?

I personally think I made the right choices in those and other decisions. Please feel free to explain why you might think differently. The net result, whether we agree that they were the right choice or not, is that my superiors thought we should have spent the $10 million; and that I should have taken the position and simply "gone with the flow"; and that I should have stuck with the status quo and simply turned out cannon fodder. For those reasons--which I remind you were my decisions, knowing full well the consequences and repercussions--it was decided that I am no longer promotable.

"Blindly following." To quote Major Haberzatl, my favorite Blackhawk driver: Whatevah.