Quote:
Originally Posted by bjrnfrdnnd
That is an interesting thought. I suppose this is an argument that explains why so many people of lower economic power join the army; in my opinion, it cannot be a moral argument at all. If implicitely states that these persons, by joining the army, hope to better their economic situation at the expense of possible innocent victims (collateral damage). I sincerely hope that most people joining the army, aside from economic motivations, do also think that the army they join is serving a greater good; and if they find that it is not doing so, they should leave the army in spite of the economic consequences. Therefore, I do think that soldiers are responsible for the wars they are leading, and should always be able to defend any given war on a moral basis.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjrnfrdnnd
Not sure why you cite me prior to this post. Is ist because you belong to a well-off family, and still members of the family join the army? No need to convince me that many people join the army _not_ because of economic pressure, but because they _do_ see the greater good the army serves. That was actually my point: I hope that _most_ people follow this reasoning. I got the impression you somehow wanted to morally excuse people who join the army for economic reasons, as if they should be excempted from their duty to justify the things they are doing on a moral basis. I disagreed with that reasoning.
|
you were exploring the thought that military enlistment was heavily weighted by economic need. I was pointing out that indeed it is not. and it was not me that "wanted to morally excuse people wjp join the army for economic reasons"