▲ 26 ▼ There's a lot of freedom at first as a soldier to realize that you could put down so much evil in the world until you realize you might actually be putting evil into the world. (discuss.online) submitted 1 year ago by Worthess@discuss.online to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world 29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Derpenheim@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 year ago (5 children) There has never been a time where soldiers were fighting for freedom. They fight for their master. permalink fedilink source hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 year ago (1 child) That's a very cynical view. Their country is their master, if they got invaded, like Ukraine do, then them fighting for their master(or country, if you will) is fighting for freedom. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev -2 points 1 year ago (2 children) Fighting foreign enemies at home doesn't automatically make it a "fight for freedom". Case in point: Taliban vs USA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago Fighting foreign enemies at home doesn't automatically make it a "fight for freedom". Uhh no shit, nuance is important. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) You don't think the Taliban were fighting for their freedom? What were they fighting for then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago Fighting for power first and foremost, but I guess you could go and say it was for the "freedom to rule" permalink fedilink source parent [–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago I mean, there are soldiers fighting for their countries' safety today! They're just not the ones thousands of kilometres away from home (they might be piloting drones on the other side of the world, I guess, lol), of course. permalink fedilink source parent [–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Maybe not in our lifetime, but you're really going to say ww2 wasn't to stop evil? What about the civil war? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) ww2 wasn’t to stop evil? It wasn't, thinking so is a very absurd reduction of many different interests at play over 3 fronts (Africa, Europe, Asia) What about the civil war? Which one? Afghan, Lybian, Syrian, Iraqi, Rwandan, Spanish? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago This guy is defending nazis and slavery permalink fedilink source parent [–] scintilla@kbin.earth 2 points 1 year ago What do you consider a soldier to be? Because I have a feeling you are using a very narrow definition that excludes some of the examples I would make. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Worthess@discuss.online [S] -6 points 1 year ago Interesting.. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 year ago (1 child) That's a very cynical view. Their country is their master, if they got invaded, like Ukraine do, then them fighting for their master(or country, if you will) is fighting for freedom. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev -2 points 1 year ago (2 children) Fighting foreign enemies at home doesn't automatically make it a "fight for freedom". Case in point: Taliban vs USA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago Fighting foreign enemies at home doesn't automatically make it a "fight for freedom". Uhh no shit, nuance is important. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) You don't think the Taliban were fighting for their freedom? What were they fighting for then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago Fighting for power first and foremost, but I guess you could go and say it was for the "freedom to rule" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev -2 points 1 year ago (2 children) Fighting foreign enemies at home doesn't automatically make it a "fight for freedom". Case in point: Taliban vs USA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago Fighting foreign enemies at home doesn't automatically make it a "fight for freedom". Uhh no shit, nuance is important. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) You don't think the Taliban were fighting for their freedom? What were they fighting for then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago Fighting for power first and foremost, but I guess you could go and say it was for the "freedom to rule" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago Fighting foreign enemies at home doesn't automatically make it a "fight for freedom". Uhh no shit, nuance is important. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) You don't think the Taliban were fighting for their freedom? What were they fighting for then? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago Fighting for power first and foremost, but I guess you could go and say it was for the "freedom to rule" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago Fighting for power first and foremost, but I guess you could go and say it was for the "freedom to rule" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago I mean, there are soldiers fighting for their countries' safety today! They're just not the ones thousands of kilometres away from home (they might be piloting drones on the other side of the world, I guess, lol), of course. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Maybe not in our lifetime, but you're really going to say ww2 wasn't to stop evil? What about the civil war? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) ww2 wasn’t to stop evil? It wasn't, thinking so is a very absurd reduction of many different interests at play over 3 fronts (Africa, Europe, Asia) What about the civil war? Which one? Afghan, Lybian, Syrian, Iraqi, Rwandan, Spanish? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago This guy is defending nazis and slavery permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) ww2 wasn’t to stop evil? It wasn't, thinking so is a very absurd reduction of many different interests at play over 3 fronts (Africa, Europe, Asia) What about the civil war? Which one? Afghan, Lybian, Syrian, Iraqi, Rwandan, Spanish? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago This guy is defending nazis and slavery permalink fedilink source parent
[–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago This guy is defending nazis and slavery permalink fedilink source parent
[–] scintilla@kbin.earth 2 points 1 year ago What do you consider a soldier to be? Because I have a feeling you are using a very narrow definition that excludes some of the examples I would make. permalink fedilink source parent