• Great_Leader_Is_Dead
    ·
    10 months ago

    I'm sorry but this is not a good comparison. The Russian Imperial Army and Navy were mostly lower class conscripts fighting in a traditional style with rifles and canons. The US military is all volunteer and uses tactics that rely on air superiority, advanced weaponry and intel gathering. Most people in the US military these days never get into an actual fire fight, or even ever see "the front". If you get recruited these days you're way more likely to get a job moving boxes in some base in Italy, playing Xbox in an air conditioned dorm in your free time, than hunkering down in a ditch with a rifle. I don't see what the left gains from recruiting some guy who piloted a drone while eating Doritos or drove a hummer around Kandahar for a year and maybe got shot at twice, both of whom are getting a full ride scholarship and a cheap home loan when they get out.

    • Alaskaball [comrade/them]M
      ·
      10 months ago

      in some base in Italy

      Theyre more likely to be duty stationed in Germany than Italy

    • Juice [none/use name]
      ·
      10 months ago

      I literally said I wasn't arguing for agitating in the army, just that I've heard good arguments and I could imagine a confluence of historical conditions where it could become possible. My main point is not to jump down people's throats with debate-lordy indignation using examples that are irrelevant.