The Military and Types

[munenori2]

I don't remember where (and I'm too lazy to search it out) but I recall someone saying that the U.S. military has a sort of integral type (someone suggested ESTp if my memory is correct).

The thing is, I've been considering a stint in the Army after I graduate from college (which without going into detail has been rather unexpectedly accelerated), likely in the medical corps. As an INFj, is this a doomed/poorly conceived option in your opinion? Perhaps it might be pertinent to sort of talk about my reasoning in going this route. There are numerous practical benefits that I see (a steady job, student loan forgiveness, practical medical experience towards being say a physician's assistant). I don't kid myself that it would be easy, especially the harshness of boot camp.

In some ways I think that could have some positive aspects even though I know it won't be enjoyable. This prospect of self-growth is probably one of the more significant aspects in my desire to serve. If that turned out to be illusory or false, among other things, then I can also see the next four to six years being hell. Anyway, this probably sounds more like I'm asking for life advice rather than the socionic kind, but I'm pretty much keen to hear what you all have to say on the particulars of my case or the more general aspect of INFj's and the realities of a military career, etc.

[Expat]

I have defended in tye wiki that the integral type of any modern army is ISTj.

I also think that Alpha-Beta sensor types are best suited for the army.

But I would guess - just guess - that the medical corps is something apart, perhaps more Delta as a whole.

[Logos]

I have defended in tye wiki that the integral type of any modern army is ISTj.

I also think that Alpha-Beta sensor types are best suited for the army.

But I would guess - just guess - that the medical corps is something apart, perhaps more Delta as a whole.

But I would not be quick to discount the presence of Gamma in the military.

[Joy]

I would think LSI would be the most likely integral type for the military, but overall I think it's best suited to ST types.

LSI > SLE and LSE > SLI


Personally, I really cannot fathom why anyone would subject themselves to being in the military. However, I know that this is just a failure on my part to understand something that a lot of people apparently do understand.

My EII sister was in the military but was released early for medical stuff.

[mikemex]

From my "inner" knowledge of the Mexican army, I can say that yes, the bulk of the army is beta. However, that betas are numerically the biggest group, it doesn't mean that they are the most powerful or influential group and I tend to think that the most powerful members of the army are actually Deltas.

It is because the Mexican army (and probably any modern army) is structured in a way that prevents betas from going too high in the ladder. This is because the modern army no longer needs a bulk of grunts which use brute force to win a battle, but more educated and intelligent soldiers which use indirect ways to win. So the army puts more and more emphasis in academic education, where intuitives, specially from alpha and delta, are at advantage. There is even a requirement here that to get a rank above officer (colonel, etc.) one needs to have a career (engineer, medic, etc).

I know one INFj general and I tend to believe that most generals are either INFj or ENTj. One thing which is clear to me is that 'p' is a big no-no in the army. It is rare that an ESTp or an ISTj gets to a general rank, at least from my point of view.

[hellothere]

I don't kid myself that it would be easy, especially the harshness of boot camp.

In some ways I think that could have some positive aspects even though I know it won't be enjoyable. This prospect of self-growth is probably one of the more significant aspects in my desire to serve. If that turned out to be illusory or false, among other things, then I can also see the next four to six years being hell.

Even though I, like Joy, do not see the appeal in serving in the military (though like Expat said, maybe the medics are something apart), I can't help but have great admiration for this.

[Wittmont]

No offense at all intended, but I think it is a young boy thinking about his way in life.

There is also the ethical aspect that you will have to come to terms with.

Once you get in they can do what they want with you for the time you are enlisted. It may also be hard to get out even after your enlistment time is supposed to be up. I have not been in the military myself, but as an ethical type I would find it impossible to be part Crimes against Humanity and Crimes against Peace (like the invasion of Iraq). And once you are in your personal opinions don't count for much. You will be held hostage to your hopes of a nice resume. You will have to go along with whatever they say, or your hopes of a nice resume will be totally fucked. A dishonorable discharge is not a good thing to have in your papers for future job reference, and you will lose all your benefit claims etc.

The military is a tool of the state, and if you become a part of that tool you are essentially the tool of a tool and thus expendable. I think you need to be at ease with that idea before you enlist. The military has a job to do, and that is to kill people. The military is very good at it's job. And you will be part of that machine, no matter if you tell yourself you join to save lives. Personally I think the carrot the military dangles is quite rotten. To get to it you have to compromise your own ideals, or at least I would have to. So for me it could not be an option. It is also a tough life, and many soldiers return with health and/or mental problems and quite embittered by their experiences. I think an INFx is likelier to belong to the embittered category than say a more military type such as an ISTj.

You are young and intelligent. Create your own life, and your own path.

/end sermon

♦

[strrrng]

The military has a job to do, and that is to kill people.

no, the job is to maintain order. killing people is a means to that.

in response to the original thread, I don't think you should worry about Se polr. I mean, on a general level it may have effect, but if you have the inner strength to push yourself and take on challenges, you should be fine. I would agree with everyone else that the military is mainly beta, and that ISTj's are the most common. but I always think of ESTj when I see the loud, hard-nosed drill instructor saying "drop and give me 20". Anyway, you should seriously consider it, because, like someone else said, you are expendable, almost like a pawn.

[cracka]

The military has a job to do, and that is to kill people.

No offense at all intended...
But that's just plain stupid. <--I seriously can't put enough of these here.

[munenori2]

No offense at all intended, but I think it is a young boy thinking about his way in life.

There is also the ethical aspect that you will have to come to terms with.

Once you get in they can do what they want with you for the time you are enlisted. It may also be hard to get out even after your enlistment time is supposed to be up. I have not been in the military myself, but as an ethical type I would find it impossible to be part Crimes against Humanity and Crimes against Peace (like the invasion of Iraq). And once you are in your personal opinions don't count for much. You will be held hostage to your hopes of a nice resume. You will have to go along with whatever they say, or your hopes of a nice resume will be totally fucked. A dishonorable discharge is not a good thing to have in your papers for future job reference, and you will lose all your benefit claims etc.

The military is a tool of the state, and if you become a part of that tool you are essentially the tool of a tool and thus expendable. I think you need to be at ease with that idea before you enlist. The military has a job to do, and that is to kill people. The military is very good at it's job. And you will be part of that machine, no matter if you tell yourself you join to save lives. Personally I think the carrot the military dangles is quite rotten. To get to it you have to compromise your own ideals, or at least I would have to. So for me it could not be an option. It is also a tough life, and many soldiers return with health and/or mental problems and quite embittered by their experiences. I think an INFx is likelier to belong to the embittered category than say a more military type such as an ISTj.

You are young and intelligent. Create your own life, and your own path.

/end sermon

♦

No offense taken. I can see why you would say what you have and, to be frank, over the years I've been playing it through my mind those concerns are exactly the ones to which I always return. Still, I can't shake the feeling that there's some good to be found in it all, that there are genuinely good people who need help, or that the blessings I've enjoyed and the people I've grown up with and around are worth safe-guarding. Now I'm absolutely certain that sounds naive, but that's my hope and belief.

Maybe I can't make a difference in changing the way things are done, but I can try. That's all anyone can do really. Also, I do hold to the hope that by the time I'd consider enlisting we'll have a more reasonable commander-in-chief (which is something else I'm waiting on before making a decision), but I do appreciate what you're trying to convey. Thank you.

[Mediator Kam]

Alpha sensors in the military?

That would go over like a lead balloon, trust me.

[Wittmont]

No offense at all intended...
But that's just plain stupid. <--I seriously can't put enough of these here.

Gee, that is actually a direct quote to me from an officer in the US army.

[cracka]

Gee, that is actually a direct quote to me from an officer in the US army.

How did he portray the smilies when he was saying this to you, did he just start rolling his eyes and look like he was having a seizure?

I just can't stand to see someone say something as "wrong" to me, as what I quoted from your post from someone who, as you said, has never been in the military yourself.

[Wittmont]

Well it is a fairly obvious statement is it not? The military kills people, that's its job and they are good at it. FYI, the context was that we were discussing the war in Iraq, I was objecting to the many civilians killed by the US military [the euphemism "collateral damage" is nonsense] and it was in that discussion he made that comment.

[Sabo]

The military has a job to do, and that is to kill people.

rar stoopid the job is to protect your country!!!!!

I was objecting to the many civilians killed by the US military

TERRORIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[munenori2]

...

[Wittmont]

Shit my cover is blown >_<

(sorry heath I'll get out of your thread)

[redbaron]

Alpha sensors in the military?

That would go over like a lead balloon, trust me.

My SEI dad was in the Army for two years. It was a great life (says both my parents--this back in the early 70s) BUT he quit because his commanding officer was an asshole and yelled and swore at him and he just couldn't take it. LOL Sensitive SEI, you know.

[Mediator Kam]

My SEI dad was in the Army for two years. It was a great life (says both my parents--this back in the early 70s) BUT he quit because his commanding officer was an asshole and yelled and swore at him and he just couldn't take it. LOL Sensitive SEI, you know.

I know all about "Sensitive SEI."

I live it man.

[normal]

alpha sensory in my opinion are the typical 'old type' of military, more focused in others aspect of life... what i mean, soldier of previous wars are to my eyes looking more 'human' even after war. Now when i look the military (from my coutnry for example) i see a prototype of 'super-soldier pseudo-robot cacodemon-cyberdemon-doomguy'.
Something like Duke Nukem with Nazi militarism. That because people started to look the military more like a professional 'job'. something similar occours with female in military.

[XoX]

As most men around here spend 6-12 months in the army I can say what my experiences are.

From my friends the type best suited for (our) army is ESTj / LSE. By best suited I mean they seem to go highest and actually like the whole thing. And I didn't see (our) army all that except for the parts where they try to "make boys into men". Most of the time you are learning to be effective in everything you do, learning to do everything on time and according to a plan, learning to organize people to do useful tasks, learning to master useful skills and learning to survive and effectively apply your skills in harsh conditions (like in a freezing dark forest where you have to live and "fight" for two weeks).

For example let's say you have a group of men and your job is to organize them to create a functional communications network for artillery and you have limited time and difficult conditions (e.g. very dark, territory you don't know at all beforehand). ESTjs just rock in this kind of tasks.

I have an ISTj friend too who went pretty high but he didn't particularly like the whole thing. He said he did his best out of duty. And he never considered making a career in the army. Then again at least two ESTjs considered a career there but they said the salary and career potential weren't good enough compared to their alternatives.

Well these are just examples and don't proove much but around here, where army is less concerned with taking over the world, ESTj seems to be very well if not best suited for service. Especially in leading positions. Hardass UDP would be perfect material Perhaps ISTjs in general are very well suited as well. Might depend on the exact job you are doing.

ESTps would probably shine in some areas but they would be greatly bored in some others. I'm sure they all want to be pilots or special forces or something, hah.

I guess one lesson is that there are various different jobs in the army and so various types can shine. But a type that hates organized institutions and hate to take and give orders probably doesn't like the army.

[munenori2]

Very nice input, thanks XoX.

[cracka]

Well it is a fairly obvious statement is it not? The military kills people, that's its job and they are good at it. FYI, the context was that we were discussing the war in Iraq, I was objecting to the many civilians killed by the US military [the euphemism "collateral damage" is nonsense] and it was in that discussion he made that comment.

Joining the military, any branch of it for that matter... is not just about signing up to fight the war in Iraq. All branches of our Military are part of The Department of Defense. These days, people look at our military like they have one purpose and it's to go to Iraq and play around in the desert while shooting innocent people who don't want us there. This may sound ludicrous to some, but that's not really true.

Sure, I think Bush has screwed up in Office, there's no denying that. I agree that there are a few things our military was pushed in to that they may not really belong in. Then again, there are things that they really needed to get into... really, who didn't want something done after 9/11?
Hopefully things will change as soon as we have someone new in office, the shitty part is that they're already going to have the deck stacked against them quite badly, what will make or break them is how they deal with that. But I don't want to get into that too much, since this thread is about the military not Bush. Again, this is the problem with the current way things are in America... people think of the military and then lump that in with Bush screwing up.


As for a person such as Menenori enlisting, do you have anyone around you that's been enlisted before, even for a small amount of time? The best thing to do is just talk to someone about it... not a recruiter... they'll just tell you everything you want to hear. Most people that have served can let you know how you'd "fit in" if they know you on a personal level. As you said though, you already have education in a medical field so that would do nothing but help you in the Army. If you already have a degree and then go into the military you'll usually start out a rank or two up right from the start, so that helps... As you said yourself, the practical medical experience and the self-growth should make it worth it if it's something you really want to pursue. I don't know anyone who's served a small amount of time, in our age group at least (I think you're almost the same age as I am @ 27), that hasn't come out with a good experience as far as "life lessons" and personal development go.

I was never in the military myself but my father was for 21 years before he retired. He was drafted into Vietnam and did a couple tours and then got out right after serving 2 tours in Iraq back in Desert Storm. It was something we talked about after high school and he told me that as long as I did something with myself it would be fine with him. Being an Eagle Scout I would have also went in a couple ranks higher too...lol Since I got to see the "military life" as a kid up until 12 years old when he retired, I knew that I wanted to get through school asap and just get out in the world and make money and the military just didn't fit with my own personal goals, it can be a great stepping stone as far as getting a career and good life started, I just never thought I needed that. I had a degree a couple months after turning 20 and already started a career. Although, if called up via a draft or anything, I'd have no problem and would love to serve my country.

[Creepy-male]

XoX, I agree but I think its possible to consider that many types play many roles in the military.

Consider that essentially in the military you have a leadership that overlooks the tasks of large groups and orchestrates them. This is perdominately an intuitive task, since every detail cannot be considered when making a decision so some are left to lower people on the chain of command. This would suggest its more common for the leadership to be composed of intuitive types, or at the very least suggests leaders are older soldiers who may be beginning to take up a more intuitive job possibly developing the PoLR or something later in life.

Now consider the typical military person, their job is usually more about performing a particular task. For example a pilot will train in peacetime and in war time will be used as an arial weapons platform, bombing the enemy or maintaing air superiority. This isn't so "intuitive" since it involves a single task being performed in the moment, its more down to earth and detailed.

Thats my thoughts on the typing the military.... the overall discipline instilled in the military is very LSI, however this doesn't mean every person is an LSI. One such example is that leaders devleop more LII or LIE traditionally.

------------------------------
Now about the military itself

People in the military usually go many ways...
1) they can get in and serve a particular amount of time, train in a particular skill, and leave exchanging their services for pay and a training in a skill.
2) they get in as a career soldier, but instead of progress higher into the leadership they keep a stable job, and for their service they are awarded the ability to survive in society, not just only with money but the particular things you are taught in the military (discipline etc).
3) you can join the military and pursue a path up the organization to learn leadership, being given the chance to try and coordinate projects and plan strategies and deal with politics.
4) also you can join the military to participate in a war
5) also you can join the military to rise up to the top of the organization and not only learn leadership but practice it
6) they simply want to travel and have adventure
7) they want money for college

most people join for one of these reasons I find....

The military itself though you must remember is an organization where fighting is occuring, its job is to protect the nation. Even medical personel can be affected in war by having to treat wounded soldiers, this is the reason why the military has medical personel. This is why they are offering free training to medical personel in exchange for service, its to fuel their organization. So really the bare-bones truth of military service is that you are contributing to an organization whose goal is to protect the nation in a militant way. That is you are part of a warring and fighting organization, and thats not for everyone. Especially if you are a pacifist. However I could imagine it working out for medic, since they would be only really helping wounded soldiers and not fighting the conflict itself. However still you have to remember the deeper issues of a war, you could be helping a soldier who seconds ago was shot by an innocent person defending themselves from the soldier. At that point it may not seem so noble to be helping that man. Furthermore you may be asked to not give equal treatment to the enemy (afterall in a war the military isn't trying to help the enemy but defeat them) and instead let them die. In that kind of a world it could easily cause questions about the division of human empathy and helping people and the darker side of revenge and hate. A Medic would still be involved in this question of war just as a soldier on the frontlines nervous between shooting at someone or facing possible attack themselves. My advice is stay out of the military if you can't handle being involved in a war, if you can and feel you can help people during such low times by being a medic then go ahead.

[Expat]

alpha sensory in my opinion are the typical 'old type' of military, more focused in others aspect of life... what i mean, soldier of previous wars are to my eyes looking more 'human' even after war. Now when i look the military (from my coutnry for example) i see a prototype of 'super-soldier pseudo-robot cacodemon-cyberdemon-doomguy'.

Yes I think you're right. I haven't really looked at present-day military officers in the US army. As per our discussion on Pinochet, I think that Pinochet himself, along with Franco, and one of Brazil's old military rulers, were all SEI. I think I know (not personally) of one case of a high-ranking SEI in the British military. But yes, those would be the more "old-fashioned", career, sort of military, for whom that life was appealling more due to its peacetime characteristics (steady job, no concerns with food and board, physical activities, etc) - and if you're an officer, with a relatively easy-going life in peacetime.

I don't think that Alphas are generally attracted to, or particularly suited to, the rigors that, say, US marines are supposed to face in training or in the battlefield. Or something like the French Foreign Legion (at least as it used to be).

[Ezra]

We discussed this a while ago.

I don't care what I thought then, I think LSI now.

I'm sure SLEs would get on well in the military (I do fine in the OTC), as I think LSEs would. Even ESIs I think would do well. Basically, it's limited to mainly STs.

It's a shame really, because I think a lot of LIEs would do very well as generals, but would do particularly poorly with general admin, which you have to consider first. There is a great deal more freedom as a strategist, but to prove you are an able strategist, you have to go through the nitty-gritty and the shitty of fieldcraft and frontline tactics, which is a shit idea, because there are a hell of a lot of great minds out there who don't know the first thing about tactics. So, in short, to rise at all in the military ladder, you have to prove that you are skilful in both platoon level tactics/personal admin and in strategy formulating.

I think SLEs might be the ones to rise. Take me. I'm an SLE, but in MBTT, I'm leaning towards ENTJ, which is the perfect leader. Even INTJs are good. I highly doubt they'd be interested in getting their hands dirty in a shitheap. That's not where there talent lies. Therefore, they'll never get to the top, right? Wrong. I for one have enough determination to stick with the shit so I could get to the top and lead. It's just a shame I don't want to pursue a military career. People in society are made for different things. I'm made for something I can't get to unless I can accept that everyone starts at the bottom.

[MysticSonic]

I'm joining the military because I'm poor and don't have any more veins left to donate plasma.

In reality, I'm joining because I need something so contrasting to my personality that it is almost my antithesis in order to grow at this point in my life. That and cash. Then again I plan on participating in the MECEP program that jump starts most enlisted soldier's eventual goal of becoming an officer due to qualifying SAT scores, so they just send me off to college when I'm 20. And, no, I'm not just being duped by a recruiter.

[force my hand]

Personally, I really cannot fathom why anyone would subject themselves to being in the military. However, I know that this is just a failure on my part to understand something that a lot of people apparently do understand.

Do you agree with Wittmont in this regard?

[force my hand]

...

Do you believe that as a civilian, unlike one in the military, you are not a 'tool' of the state who, by extension, commits ethical wrongs against the citizens of the world?

(just trying to assess how far your head is up your ass)

You are young and intelligent. Create your own life, and your own path.

That's what he's doing. Or is it not valid because it doesn't jive with your sensibility?

[Wittmont]

Do you believe that as a civilian, unlike one in the military, you are not a 'tool' of the state who, by extension, commits ethical wrongs against the citizens of the world?

(just trying to assess how far your head is up your ass)



That's what he's doing. Or is it not valid because it doesn't jive with your sensibility?

Well in my view if you join the military you give up your individuality to become part of the military machine.

There is a difference between being a passive part, simply by living, and an active part of some actions in the world. I can make the choice, as an individual, not to be an active member of Crimes against Peace for example. That is a start is it not?

Here is the logic:

Superpowers cannot attack smaller, essentially defenseless nations just because they deem it to be in their own best interest.

Let's take a few examples. The Soviet Union attacked Finland in 1939 just because it decided it was a good idea based on it's defense doctrine at the time. The Finns fought them off and retained independence (ask XoX if the Finns thought Soviet imperialism was ok). After WWII the Soviets invaded Hungary and Czechoslovakia because it deemed it necessary from their strategic point of view. Nazi Germany also attacked and invaded small nations because it served their interests. And now the US has adopted this same mentality. The US has decided it is ok to invade whomever it wants. Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are famously evil for being aggressive imperialist powers, and now the US has chosen to walk the same path with it's invasion of Iraq. I would not want to be part of the Red Army, the Nazi Wehrmacht or the US Military since they are essentially committing the same crime.

It is not a matter of political ideology. It does not matter if you are communist, nazi or a democrat. It is the act of invading someone else, to serve your own agenda, that is evil in itself. There is a reason aggressive warfare is prohibited by international law. If it is ok for the US to invade other nations to suit the US agenda, then by default it is ok for everybody else to invade other nations too if it suits their agenda. It is ok for China to invade Tibet, Pakistan, Vietnam whomever. It is ok for Russia to invade Finland, Poland, the Black Sea countries etc if they so wish.

If you join the military when it is part of an imperialist agenda, you chose to become a willing tool in the hands of those pushing that imperialist agenda. The Soviets, the Nazis and the US are all using the same rationale - their imperialist invasions are necessary for the defense of their nations. They claim they are threatened by an outer enemy and need to be proactive in defense, this is now the US doctrine of "preemptive warfare".

Selling aggressive warfare as a defensive war is the classic tool to get the populace to march along.

Now I am not anti-military as such. I am no pure pacifist. I would join the military to defend my nation against a direct attack by a foreign invasion force. But I will not behave like a Soviet Red Army soldier, or a Waffen SS trooper, or a US soldier in Iraq and put my boot on the neck of other nations as part of an imperialist agenda.

[Creepy-male]

Well in my view if you join the military you give up your individuality to become part of the military machine.

I disagree, people in the military don't give up their individuality. They still have alot of free will to do as they please, as orders are concerned though... you are expected to carry out orders. But thats like any job really, your expected to contribute to the organization. People in the military are no more tools than any other working person. Also consider the fact that following orders isn't all that individuality stripping, especially when you realize people choose to join/serve the organization out of their free will whether it be a job or military service.

[force my hand]

Well in my view if you join the military you give up your individuality to become part of the military machine.

Any interaction within society demands that you give up a measure individuality. The military may take it to a greater extent, but that's not a good reason for a blanket indictment. Being a police officer or doctor requires nearly the same demand on your time, conduct, and personal appearence, but it's unlikely you feel the same about either profession as you do the military (though the violence inherent to policing probably affects your good will towards it).

There is a difference between being a passive part, simply by living, and an active part of some actions in the world. I can make the choice, as an individual, not to be an active member of Crimes against Peace for example. That is a start is it not?

If I were you I wouldn't rely so heavily on the distinction between passive and active choices. For example, there are laws in various jurisdictions that will penalize you for inaction, and laws by and large are based upon ethical principles. Secondly, passive choices can often lead to outcomes that are just as bad as if you were the one pulling the trigger (i.e. people not doing anything when someone is getting beat up on the subway). I don't agree that being passive is 'better' and therefore justified.

(Personally, I believe that very little I do in my life will be graced with ethical immunity, and as a result often take the ironic view that I should choose the unethical actions that have a possibility for a 'better' outcome.)

The fact of the matter is that an ideal of disarmament should not be an expected outcome, and therefore, decisions should not be based upon it. I dislike using 'should', but simple economics shows that in circumstances where no overlying authority exists, situations will degrade to a lower state than if there was some guiding principle - i.e. traffic laws. The same is true for international realism. I can be a solider on the ground in Afghanistan and still be an advocate for peace as it might result from increased international organization and order.

I think, however, your (assumedly) being an American skews this perspective. The basis of your reasoning focuses on the idea of imperialism. In the ideal war there is not just an aggressor, but also a defender so unless you're a dyed-in-the-wool pacifist (which I read that you are not) you must agree at best your argument only goes halfway. For the defender, military might is a benefit even though the 'prisoners dilemma', as it were, still holds. Your argument also ignores the fact that the military has more than the one purpose of killing other human beings.

If you join the military when it is part of an imperialist agenda, you chose to become a willing tool in the hands of those pushing that imperialist agenda. The Soviets, the Nazis and the US are all using the same rationale - their imperialist invasions are necessary for the defense of their nations. They claim they are threatened by an outer enemy and need to be proactive in defense, this is now the US doctrine of "preemptive warfare".

I think it's misdirected to aim your anger at those in uniform, for a couple of reasons. One, many people simply do not care about the moral impact of their choices. I agree this is a bad thing, but nevertheless it is a reflection of reality. You cannot moralize to someone who doesn't give a shit. Secondly, appealing to the soldier is a problem for two reasons: A) it doesn't address the real cause of armed conflict (which is the government, elected by the passive citizens of the nation- i.e. you) and B) it undermines a lawful system of order that can exact a postive influence on the nation (i.e. disaster response).

Now I am not anti-military as such. I am no pure pacifist. I would join the military to defend my nation against a direct attack by a foreign invasion force. But I will not behave like a Soviet Red Army soldier, or a Waffen SS trooper, or a US soldier in Iraq and put my boot on the neck of other nations as part of an imperialist agenda.

Fair enough.

[force my hand]

Fuck it. I'm a goof.

[xyz]

I'd have lots of trouble in the military for one reason, and one reason alone. I hate taking orders from anyone.

[Wittmont]

force my hand: what a gigantic pile of straw men. I'm sorry but I am not even going to touch your arguments as most of them have nothing, or are only tangible at best, to those I am making. Also I am not going to go into a philosophical debate about degrees of this or that, and semantical hairsplitting. I think my views are pretty clear and stand for themselves. You can rationalize your ideas all you want, and embrace a the end justifies the means doctrine for yourself if you wish, I care not one way or the other.

[MysticSonic]

Ahahahahaha.

This is exactly what my uncle tried to tell me when he told me that by joining the military I'd become part of the imperialist machine.

Too bad that you don't understand that you can't dismantle a machine like the military by protests and intellectual diatribes against it. The only thing you do to disrupt it to any extent is to have influence within the machine itself, to join it, and change the situation to as just and humane a thing as possible. So to say that by joining it I am willingly selling my soul to the imperialist agenda is a very, very limited perspective and fucking drips of ivory-tower bullshit.

[munenori2]

Do you have any idea what kind of officer you would be looking into becoming, MysticSonic? Also, I'm with you that any change has to come from within.

[MysticSonic]

I'm looking to make it to Major, which would be amazing. I would cream my pants if I made to to Colonel, but that's highly unlikely as only 3&#37; of Commissioned Officers are in that rank at all times. I already have a year and a half of college under my belt, and in the military I will be going to college full time once I turn 20. Essentially once I am the one in control I will affect orders(that are, of course, under my control) that align with my ethical principles of fairness. My principles are very nebulous though and just come from my inner sense of conviction of when something is right and when something is wrong. I'm not hoping to change the world, mind you, but if I make a little part of it better, if I can affect something for the good, especially something like the military, then I am fulfilled. It's the purpose that I've chosen, and it's the purpose I will pursue, and signing up for the military has not made me nor will it ever make me forget it. Count on it.

[munenori2]

Excellent stuff, good sir!

[strrrng]

Well in my view if you join the military you give up your individuality to become part of the military machine.

you're part of the society machine. it's just less pronounced.