117 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Is there any racism in the military in the US?

 

Because I am half-Thai or a "Luk Kreung", we're not allowed to be officers.

 

Just like Indians in British Empire Army.

[Naughty Bear]

Just like Indians in British Empire Army.

I do not know about the history sorry. What happen?

 

It's dangerous for a Luk Kreung to be in the Thai army. We instantly become targets for bullying, racism or just plain abuse from our fellow conscripts or those above us. I get enough unwanted attention as it is just for being a Luk Kreung.

 

I may even be forced to mow someones lawn

 

http://www.thaivisa....pt-abuse/page-2

Modifié par BioWareMod05, 14 juillet 2014 - 12:55 .
profanity/avoiding language filter

[L. Han]

Thai army corrupt here, beatings from those above you, they can even outright kill you if they are too severe. Many crimes go unnoticed in the army and is controlled by corrupt politicians.

 

Conscripts get beaten by rookies who may just be a rank above them.

 

Don't like you? Get sent to the south borders to fight Muslim insurgents.

 

At least you get free food, free place to stay etc. Just got to handle the beatings.

 

I find out if I get conscripted in April. If I volunteer I do 6 months, in education i'm safe,  pick out a red ball then bye bye life for 2 yars then straight to monkhood after.

 

That's about right, I am going to get drafted real soon. I technically failed Cadet but they still want me anyway.

 

I wish I could just sit by and enjoy a different life. I'm tired of soldiers and insurgents on the news everyday.

[Naughty Bear]

That's about right, I am going to get drafted real soon. I technically failed Cadet but they still want me anyway.

 

I wish I could just sit by and enjoy a different life. I'm tired of soldiers and insurgents on the news everyday.

What country will you serve?

[L. Han]

Same as you, Thai army.

 

I was drafted since I was 16, a long time ago and I got called back from overseas.

 

Hell, even the freaking recruitment officer gave me the weird looks. Bitching and complaining about how 'the Thai government is trying to use a western ideology to run the country' despite the fact that the army operates on western standards.

[Naughty Bear]

Same as you, Thai army.

 

I was drafted since I was 16, a long time ago and I got called back from overseas.

 

Hell, even the freaking recruitment officer gave me the weird looks. Bitching and complaining about how 'the Thai government is trying to use a western ideology to run the country' despite the fact that the army operates on western standards.

โชคดีนะครับ 5555

 

[L. Han]

^Mai chok dee rok, chip hai tang hak.

 

Anyway, I prefer to not get down in specific country. This thread was made because I was starting to get concerned over the increasing fevour for nationalism and the military.

 

I'd like to thank you all for keeping the discussion polite!

[Hello!I'mTheDoctor]

Is there any racism in the military in the US?

 

Because I am half-Thai or a "Luk Kreung", we're not allowed to be officers.

 

Racism is gone from the institution itself, but you might run into a few outliers here and there. The big thing the military has a problem with is the role of women, LGBT, and people of varied religions and backgrounds. I work with a lot of people from other branches, civilians, and foreign nationals and servicemen for my job, so it's practically non-existent, but there are plenty of people that feel that people in the military need to fit a certain mold (not be into anything that isn't 'manly', liberal, anti-second amendment, etc.)

[Hello!I'mTheDoctor]

^Mai chok dee rok, chip hai tang hak.

 

Anyway, I prefer to not get down in specific country. This thread was made because I was starting to get concerned over the increasing fevour for nationalism and the military.

 

I'd like to thank you all for keeping the discussion polite!

 

Granted, I'm pro-military in many aspects. I say it with pride when I say that I am a member and leader in the most powerful armed force on Earth. It's not nationalism so much as it is sociopathy.

 

I'm against misinformed and unrestrained nationalism, but I'm not really against people who don't have any empathy. Killers is what we are, and what we do.

[Naughty Bear]

Same as you, Thai army.
 
I was drafted since I was 16, a long time ago and I got called back from overseas.
 
Hell, even the freaking recruitment officer gave me the weird looks. Bitching and complaining about how 'the Thai government is trying to use a western ideology to run the country' despite the fact that the army operates on western standards.

คุณอายุเท่าไหร่ครับ คุณเป็นลูกครึ่งรึเปล่า?

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Killers is what we are, and what we do.

 

[Naughty Bear]

That image ****** scared me.

[SwobyJ]

I had an extensive conversation over drinks last night about Kreya, at a BBQ. Someone just brought up her character out of nowhere and that springboarded an hour of discussion of KOTORII's moral themes. Haha. *almost everyone else there wasn't a gamer and just stared*

[Reynes-of-Castamere]

 

Racism is gone from the institution itself, but you might run into a few outliers here and there. The big thing the military has a problem with is the role of women, LGBT, and people of varied religions and backgrounds. I work with a lot of people from other branches, civilians, and foreign nationals and servicemen for my job, so it's practically non-existent, but there are plenty of people that feel that people in the military need to fit a certain mold (not be into anything that isn't 'manly', liberal, anti-second amendment, etc.)

 

I have to say that the later part of your post is simply false. Our military like most has long had its own "culture" and identity which is what should be a focus, not politic extremes or social justice hogwash. What roles should be open to women is a question caused not by any sort of misogyny but rather questions of ability. For example on average women don't have the upper body strength of men and that is something which needs to be considered for some front-line roles on the ground. Sometimes like with submarines there simply isn't the space to provide adequate facilities for women, although I think the Navy has changed that policy on the SSBNs. I suppose all of the advancements in GPS and computer tech have freed up a lot of space on those boats. Yet rather than these questions being answered honestly you have political pressure from the outside polluting the whole issue.

The whole gay issue was and remains a complete mess. "Don't ask, don't tell" had its flaws for sure but whats going on now is just as broken. Now there is a lot of pressure from the political/cultural left for all sorts of foolish things (that very real slippery slope) and you can already see some double standards when it comes to matters of discipline and acceptable behavior. Military leadership has proven both incapable and spineless in addressing this issue as the should.

Problems over race and religion are for all intents and purposes non-existent now. If anything the military has been trying too hard not to offend any "minority". Look at how the behavior of the Ft. Hood shooter was overlooked prior to the event and the refusal to consider his actions as terrorism. Again, more spineless leadership. The only other issue here comes from atheist types who are offended by every use of the word "God" and think nobody offending their delicate sensibilities is a right of theirs. Yet rather than such behavior being ignored they have packs of blood-sucking lawyers to cause problems.

Honestly I think in modern times our military was at its best back in the 1980s. Since then there has been an ever-increasing intrusion by politics, just use the number of warships named after politicians to gauge this.

[FOBPharaoh]

Where is Liftus when you need him?

[Hello!I'mTheDoctor]

  

I have to say that the later part of your post is simply false. Our military like most has long had its own "culture" and identity which is what should be a focus, not politic extremes or social justice hogwash. What roles should be open to women is a question caused not by any sort of misogyny but rather questions of ability. For example on average women don't have the upper body strength of men and that is something which needs to be considered for some front-line roles on the ground. Sometimes like with submarines there simply isn't the space to provide adequate facilities for women, although I think the Navy has changed that policy on the SSBNs. I suppose all of the advancements in GPS and computer tech have freed up a lot of space on those boats. Yet rather than these questions being answered honestly you have political pressure from the outside polluting the whole issue.

The whole gay issue was and remains a complete mess. "Don't ask, don't tell" had its flaws for sure but whats going on now is just as broken. Now there is a lot of pressure from the political/cultural left for all sorts of foolish things (that very real slippery slope) and you can already see some double standards when it comes to matters of discipline and acceptable behavior. Military leadership has proven both incapable and spineless in addressing this issue as the should.

Problems over race and religion are for all intents and purposes non-existent now. If anything the military has been trying too hard not to offend any "minority". Look at how the behavior of the Ft. Hood shooter was overlooked prior to the event and the refusal to consider his actions as terrorism. Again, more spineless leadership. The only other issue here comes from atheist types who are offended by every use of the word "God" and think nobody offending their delicate sensibilities is a right of theirs. Yet rather than such behavior being ignored they have packs of blood-sucking lawyers to cause problems.

Honestly I think in modern times our military was at its best back in the 1980s. Since then there has been an ever-increasing intrusion by politics, just use the number of warships named after politicians to gauge this.

 

How am I false? You just proved my point right there (and used an ought/should argument, which is a not an empirical based argument). It comes down to a case of personal perspectives and views on what is good and not good, desirable and undesirable. The reason I labeled it as such is because I'm personally disgusted by that aspect of our military culture, and I tend to avoid it whenever possible.

 

I'm not going to go into a big tangent about things here, mainly because I do fall in to at least one of the categories you've labeled for people you don't think are necessarily of a beneficial state for the militay. I for one am one of those atheists in the military who has faced mild discrimination and harassment in the past over my position. I'm not opposed to religion or unit prayer, but I am opposed to it being ingrained into the culture and institution of the military.

 

While I'll agree that there are a lot of problems and flaws with the way politics and the military mingle, I don't think we'd ever agree on what those problems are. This can be pretty polarizing of a topic and is best avoided when it interferes with espirit de corps and internal unit politics.

[Sion1138]

Yeah who determines where and how soldiers are going to fight for their country?

 

Are you certain that these people have pure motives? Are you certain that their judgment is right?

 

Are the interests of your country ethical and honorable in the first place? Do you even question?

 

 

Fighting for one's country does not automatically deserve respect.

[felipejiraya]

I've served two years in the brazilian version of ROTC (which is named CPOR here) and had the chance to be deployed in Haiti in 2009 to aid the UN peacekeeping force. It was a great experience and I've really found respect for all the military who serve and put their lives on the line for their country (or even for protection of other countries).

[Elhanan]

Yeah who determines where and how soldiers are going to fight for their country?
 
Are you certain that these people have pure motives? Are you certain that their judgment is right?
 
Are the interests of your country ethical and honorable in the first place? Do you even question? 
 
Fighting for one's country does not automatically deserve respect.

I knew; do you? Or do you only ask questions of those that oppose your POV?

No; simply enlisting does not deserve respect; that is reserved for those that actually serve.

[Sion1138]

I knew; do you? Or do you only ask questions of those that oppose your POV?

No; simply enlisting does not deserve respect; that is reserved for those that actually serve.

 

You knew what?

 

The official reasons given for the deployment of the United States Army in Iraq for example were proven false.

 

I don't even mean to insinuate that I am categorically against any military intervention or that there could not have been any valid reason to justify this particular one, but if the people making executive decisions demonstrably lied on more than one occasion and not for the first time in history either, then what does a soldier really know?

[Reorte]

I respect the military, rather less the politicians who usually get to send them off to wherever (although I'm not as anti-war as many people).

[mybudgee]

Thanks to the information age and younger people questioning authority, the military in general (esp in the USA) is losing traction in people's minds. So many folks in my parents generation would consider speaking out against the Gov't or military a social sin, you had to totally and utterly trust the powers that be.

This is largely due to the media in my very humble opinion. Many propaganda films were made with actors in the past and the actual atrocities of the men fighting in the trenches were twisted into movie-reel patriotic fantasies.

We are only just beginning to understand the awful truth about war and our base instincts. This is causing much derision and schism amongst our population.

Education and tallking to people who have first hand experience in military life is the only way to form an opinion on this matter, the media is more biased and duplicitous than ever.

[Elhanan]

You knew what?
 
The official reasons given for the deployment of the United States Army in Iraq for example were proven false, so what exactly did you know?
 
I don't even mean to insinuate that I am categorically against any military intervention or that there could not have been any valid reasons to justify this particular one, but if the people making executive decisions demonstrably lied then what is it that you knew?
 
What do soldiers in general know about what goes on on the highest levels of government?

I knew the general chain of command when I served from '75-'82. Have no idea of the current one other than the current CIC.

Official reasons were confirmed by most of the other intel brokers of the world, and then like missing reasons were discovered elsewhere in the time since. As the leader of that regime commonly abused those in his charge and country, I am proud that we were involved in setting many towards freedom.

While I was clueless as to who gave what orders and when, I knew as a soldier and a human being what generally right and wrong. Sadly, things in the media and elsewhere can be rather murky at times, as well as many with conflicting opinions from those that serve.

But here is the thing: those who serve guard and defend the right for opposing opinions. In many places like Iraq, those rights did not exist. You're welcome.

[mybudgee]

Also; if you read history, you will realize that often not only are footsoldiers clueless as to the actual cause of any said conflict, so are high ranking officials. Many times in our collective past there has been bloodshed for something other than what was cried out during battle. Deception is a powerful tool.