Smackle
Member
Registered: 2008-01-16
Posts: 463
http://www.countercurrents.org/willers200410.htm
In 1983, the National Film Board of Canada produced a 57-minute film, "Anybody's Son Will Do". Arguably the best anti-war film ever made, and tailored for public television, it scared the hell out of the U.S. military machine, which has done its best to "disappear" it. For years it has been nearly impossible to find a copy, but some kind soul has posted it on YouTube where it can be seen in six segments.
I am wary of posting this as the site or the videos may have controversial content. If there is any debate that occurs in this thread as a result, I only ask that it be conducted in a civil manner, specifically no flaming. In the event that you find there is bad information or workings of bad logic, please feel free to state it.
Also, this thread may just be largely ignored, so if that is to be the case then I say this:
BILLIE JEAN IS NOT MY LOVER
Short add-on:
"Before You Enlist!" is a quick video on the realities of enlisting.
http://www.bsalert.com/news/2334/Before … ities.html
Last edited by Smackle (2010 April 23, 12:28 pm)
Well, there's anti-war, but I've never been able to construct a mental model of how to create a society (or world) without a military (or some sort of armed, trained force)... short of aliens coming down and zapping away the planet's weapons (and uh, willingness to group together and kill/hurt for power ;p). I'm always open to being convinced, however.
Now all we need is Blackwater, though.
Last edited by nest0r (2010 April 23, 7:05 am)
ファブリス
Administrator
From: Belgium
Registered: 2006-06-14
Posts: 4021
Website
bizarrojosh wrote:
but seriously, army people are usually the scum of the earth. I swear like 80% are the worst people I have ever met in my life. Nuke is of course part of that 20% that are "good people"
I'm guessing most recruits are from uneducated backgrounds (not counting mandatory service, as we had in Belgium until 1994), but for these men, the military service may not be all that bad. It teaches some positive values, which can also be seen in this documentary. Not everything is black and white.
Ultimately we're all responsible for the army and the wars. We're the ones who voted for Bush (even from Europe, we are indirectly responsible through global politics). We're all consciously voting year after year for the same party. We're the ones who point the finger outside, we're the ones who prefer to stick to the mind numbing 9-5 routine, take the sleeping pills, and watch these documentaries, pointing the fingers to the rest of the world, while comfortably eating our bag of chips and kissing our boss's ass. From a larger perspective, we are these guys, they are us. Anything else is delusion.
The army is a group, just like so many others that we identify with. The movie isn't really "anti war", it is just as well "anti nationalism", "anti pack mentality", "anti submission", "anti propaganda", and so on.
So long as you feel pride for being American/<insert whatever country your're from>, there will be an army.
Which always come down to the same thing: work on yourself. The problem seen out there is just intellectual masturbation to make us confident we're alright and the others are wrong. The problem is out there.. so long as it's "out there" there is no real positive change.
Smackle
Member
Registered: 2008-01-16
Posts: 463
What you have to consider is that in America, at least, a lot of people enter the military because they're poor and might not have any other opportunities back home.
This is part two of an eight part miniseries that does hold a bit of anti-war sentiment.
In the early 1980s, the National Film Board of Canada commissioned journalist Gwynne Dyer to create the miniseries War, echoing concerns expressed by the decade's peace movement about the threat of nuclear war. Dyer had previous military experience, and he filmed the miniseries in ten countries and featured six national armies.[1] He approached the Pentagon for permission to film the United States military, which it granted except for conducting interviews with prominent policymakers. Dyer was able to film Marines in boot camp, the United States Sixth Fleet, and US Air Force bases in Germany. The New York Times wrote, "The Pentagon's hesitancy was understandable, considering that the subtitle of War is: A Commentary by Gwynne Dyer. Mr. Dyer holds strong antiwar opinions, happens to know a great deal about the military, and speaks up on camera and in writing."[2]
The miniseries examined warfare, how it had evolved, and what its consequences were. It also examined the challenge of armies' roles in face of total war.[1] Military leaders involved with NATO and the Warsaw Pact were featured in interviews, many of them speaking to Western media for the first time. Officers from different countries talked about how nuclear technology affected their profession and how a conflict between superpowers would likely lead to all-out nuclear war. Dyer argued that this war could only be avoided by eliminating nuclear arsenals.[3]
The miniseries received "great acclaim" globally but was controversial in Canada. One of the episodes, "The Profession of Arms", was nominated for an Academy Award.[1] The series was broadcast to 45 countries.[3]
Also, just to tack this on, here's a very short video called "Before You Enlist!" It's relevant to what I was saying about the poor somewhat.
http://www.bsalert.com/news/2334/Before … ities.html
Last edited by Smackle (2010 April 23, 12:23 pm)
Nukemarine
Member
From: 神奈川
Registered: 2007-07-15
Posts: 2347
Why is my name being bandied about in this thread? On top of that, what is the thread about, that 27 year old video? Pardon me while I not watch something old. The military industrial complex has grown much worse since 1983, so I doubt I'll get much from that.
Still, here's my question for anyone that's against the concept of war entirely (those unable to see the shades of gray): If you are mugged, what's your response? If your answer involves the use of government utilities (police in this case) then you're utilizing on a small scale the concept of the military and war.
As for the other video "Before you enlist", everyone should watch that prior to enlisting. Not saying it's 100% true or that it's not using shoddy documentary tactics. However, I really hate listening to people bitching about how their recruiter lied to them. Personally, I'd rather have people that are in the military that want to be in there. They're less likely to become disillusioned. If that video can get a person to ask the right questions and get the right answers before enlisting then I'm all for it.
PS: As for the 80%, 20% comment, your average military leprechaun is about the same as your average college aged leprechaun. Guys 18 to 25 generally are goblins no matter the job they're doing. Group them into the same location, and you amplify the leprechaun factor. They'll watch porn, think about sex, want to get drunk, get in fights with that guy in the corner giving him the stink-eye, party as late as possible, oversleep as much as they can, do the minimum to get the job done, bitch about the boss behind his back, etc., etc..
ファブリス
Administrator
From: Belgium
Registered: 2006-06-14
Posts: 4021
Website
Nukemarine wrote:
Why is my name being bandied about in this thread?
Because you have "marine" in your username. We're hopeless 
Nukemarine wrote:
Still, here's my question for anyone that's against the concept of war entirely (those unable to see the shades of gray): If you are mugged, what's your response? If your answer involves the use of government utilities (police in this case) then you're utilizing on a small scale the concept of the military and war.
I don't think there is a need for war, in and of itself. But war has been and may be for some time still, a necessity. It's just a symptom of our growing up as the human race. Like children who go through the teenager phase before becoming adults, on the big picture we went through Hiroshima, the Holocaust and so on, and we have yet some "growing up" to do to reach "adulthood".
There are many proponents today of the idea that war does not work. It's pretty easy to observe if one could allow themselves to be objective, there is no utopia or ideal in that. But again that does not require intellect and studies, it requires wisdom.
That said I think we'll always have some sort of army, even a symbolic one. "War" and the "army" aren't the same thing... it's not the army who wants war...
@Legion: rofl, I kind of guessed that (the origin of your name) 
Nukemarine
Member
From: 神奈川
Registered: 2007-07-15
Posts: 2347
I still haven't figured out the point of this thread though. Is it anti-military? Anti-war? anti-recruiting? Could the OP enlighten a bit more so I can figure out how to sarcastically respond.
Deicide (cool nick by the way), there's no need to be offended on behalf of the military. We took an oath (well, the US military did, gotta remember this is an international forum) to support and defend the US Constitution. Unlike many that I work with, that includes supporting the first amendment of that document (and the very important and overlooked 9th amendment). If people want to label a group of tens of millions with a broad stroke, they are free to do so. We in turn are free to respond. If we in the military get a bit too uppity about it, there's always the 2nd amendment to help keep us in check. Man I love shades of gray.
As always, this is Fabrice's house so what he says will ultimately be what goes.
I found the original article interesting not for any ideological standpoint but just that it dealt with an issue I never really gave much thought to before -- in many societies, the dominate moral philosophy says that killing is wrong, and generally people want the citizens to believe that killing is wrong, but then when you're training soldiers, you need to overcome that moral element to a certain extent. If you send soldiers into a battle, you don't want them wavering because they are morally hesitant about killing the enemy.
The article makes the claim that the primary purpose of basic training is to teach conformity and to overcome that moral block against killing, and that other aspects like weapons and athletic training are secondary. I don't know if this is entirely true, but it's an interesting idea.
LegionOfDeicide wrote:
I don't normally get offended. I just find military issues such as this to be a touchy subject. I don't think bodhisamaya's and bizarrojosh comments were necessary. Those two comments in particular are what really offended me.
@Nest0r
"Also, I am offended by your name, DEICIDE? That is highly inappropriate. Clearly you're Satanic."
I think you are joking. But I will inform you about my user name. "Deicide" is a name of a metal band I liked in my rebellious teen years. "Legion" is the name of the second CD that was release by that band. If you are offended though then I apologize?
I don't care, but the point is, running around the Japanese forum with that nickname could be taken as a bold statement* and one with offensive or provocative connotations to those who feel there is a conspicuous cultural discourse about religion, 'God is Dead', 'killing in the name of God', being a missionary vs. seeing organized religion as the opiate of the masses, etc. So it's not like you're against coming onto this forum and positing controversial messages unrelated to Japanese. Just sayin', if you want to condemn a thread in the Community subforum for being offensive and off-topic to Japanese, perhaps you should look at your own diplomacy and appearance first, in this virtual realm.
*Either from a general linguistic standpoint (deity + homicide [or just -cide ;p]) or from this culture-specific one: "Deicide has received considerable controversy relating to their albums and lyrics, which include vehement anti-Christian themes, such as "**** Your God", "Kill the Christian","Behead The Prophet" and "Scars of the Crucifix", among others. Drummer Asheim of Deicide said "The whole point of Satanic music is to blaspheme against the Church", "I don't believe in or worship a devil. Life is short enough without having to waste it doing this whole organised praying, hoping, wishing-type thing on some superior being".[11]"
Last edited by nest0r (2010 April 24, 4:36 pm)
