“All troops are forever irredeemable” is a bad take, as is "troops are basically the same as cops." Troops aren't good, and we should be automatically skeptical of them, but there are real differences.
For troops, the most powerful military on earth uses the most powerful propaganda machine on earth to target kids who are barely shaving for recruitment. That kid has zero firsthand experience with the reality of the imperial war machine, and if they try to quit once they’re in they can get a black mark next to their name that will impede their ability to get housing, education, and employment for the rest of their life. We can’t hold a kid 100% responsible – with no possibility of forgiveness at any point – for their decision under these conditions. That’s totally inconsistent with how leftists should think about culpability and rehabilitation in any other scenario.
Compare this to cops, who generally sign up for pig school in their 20s, who live under the realities of American policing every day, and who can quit at any time with no real repercussions.
“All troops are forever irredeemable” is a bad take,
Pretty sure only we privileged westerners who have to opportunity to have this "debate" may think this and not the Afghan child that saw their family get blown up by a drone, they certainly wouldn't give a fuck if that US soldier is a doctor, some bureaucratic pencil pusher down the chain of command or the war criminal that piloted the drone.
Read the rest of the comment, though. In no other context would leftists find it acceptable to write someone off for the rest of their life, especially if there are significant mitigating circumstances, and even if they were only tangentially linked to direct harm (e.g., some pencil pusher who's spent his entire career at a base in Kansas).
Imagine some 17-year-old was pressured into joining a gang. He just sells drugs, but other members of his gang kill people. If he thinks he's in over his head and tries to leave the gang, they're going to make life pretty hard for him. Should our 17-year-old drug dealer be put to death? Should he be imprisoned for life? Or should we consider the circumstances of how he got in the gang in the first place, and how easy it would have been for him to leave, and what he personally did, and have some avenue for him to redeem himself?
“All troops are forever irredeemable” is a bad take, as is "troops are basically the same as cops." Troops aren't good, and we should be automatically skeptical of them, but there are real differences.
For troops, the most powerful military on earth uses the most powerful propaganda machine on earth to target kids who are barely shaving for recruitment. That kid has zero firsthand experience with the reality of the imperial war machine, and if they try to quit once they’re in they can get a black mark next to their name that will impede their ability to get housing, education, and employment for the rest of their life. We can’t hold a kid 100% responsible – with no possibility of forgiveness at any point – for their decision under these conditions. That’s totally inconsistent with how leftists should think about culpability and rehabilitation in any other scenario.
Compare this to cops, who generally sign up for pig school in their 20s, who live under the realities of American policing every day, and who can quit at any time with no real repercussions.
Pretty sure only we privileged westerners who have to opportunity to have this "debate" may think this and not the Afghan child that saw their family get blown up by a drone, they certainly wouldn't give a fuck if that US soldier is a doctor, some bureaucratic pencil pusher down the chain of command or the war criminal that piloted the drone.
Read the rest of the comment, though. In no other context would leftists find it acceptable to write someone off for the rest of their life, especially if there are significant mitigating circumstances, and even if they were only tangentially linked to direct harm (e.g., some pencil pusher who's spent his entire career at a base in Kansas).
Imagine some 17-year-old was pressured into joining a gang. He just sells drugs, but other members of his gang kill people. If he thinks he's in over his head and tries to leave the gang, they're going to make life pretty hard for him. Should our 17-year-old drug dealer be put to death? Should he be imprisoned for life? Or should we consider the circumstances of how he got in the gang in the first place, and how easy it would have been for him to leave, and what he personally did, and have some avenue for him to redeem himself?