[...]The soldier issue I'm torn on. Soldiers can lay down their arms and walk away at anytime.
Well, yes and no. They CAN lay down their arms in the middle of a fire fight, but they WILL get shot. (Possibly by other soldiers who see this as dereliction of duty.) Which is nobler, laying down your life for your beliefs, or fighting for them? IMHO, they are equal, but some view death as a coward's way out.
HOWEVER, the government makes this difficult for several reasons:
1. To a large degree they brainwash and censor the information the soldiers receive.
While true, ask any soldier in Iraq currently if they think we should be there. Most will say no. That tells me that they're free thinking enough, and bright enough to develop their own conclusions and opinions based on their experience.
2. They charge the soldiers with a military crime if they walk off the battlefield. What's terribly wrong with this is that the military tribunal does not take into account rather the war is popular or not NOR that soldiers own moral or ethical reasons for laying down his/her arms.
Very true. There are reasons for charging them with a crime, and honestly those reason are sound, and I wouldn't wish it differently, but that doesn't make it 'good'. And just imagine the tribunal's task... if they let Soldier A get away with walking off the battlefield, then how can they charge Soldier B who goes AWOL, getting his entire squad killed? What moral ground do they have to stand on? Tough call, imho.
What ends up happening is that the ones who do not feel they are rightfully serving the will of the people with their actions, wait until their contract runs out to leave. Of course, since this has become a common occurrence, the government has restricted their ability to do so by extending their contracts (regardless of the legality and taking advantage of the soldiers ignorance of law). So there's a lot at play here that complicates the issue. However, it is never okay to 'spout very hateful things at soldiers' for any reason. The people that do so should use pamphlets to inform the soldiers. On the otherside of the arguement, though, the ussual rational of those that 'spout very hateful things at solderis' is to strongly reinforce the unpopularity with the war in the hopes that they'll say "enough is enough, this isn't worth the unpopularity I face at home, I'm laying down my weapon and facing my (nobel) consequences like a man." Not to say I agree with it...I'm just saying...
To me, risking your life for any cause, including immoral ones still retains a level of nobility. Now, when it comes to doing a the job of a soldier, on both sides I feel those who fight and die are a higher caliber of humanity then most. They may not be good men, they may not even be decent men; they are men willing to die because they are told to. That takes a special (if not disturbing) mentality, and most of the people I've met who've faced that have been better because of it. They might still not be good or just men, but they're more good, more just then if they'd never had to face death like that. That alone is why I think all soldiers should be treated with honor and respect.
As a side note, I'm also one who says a prayer for our enemy's safety as well as our own soldiers. If the Bush administration wants to call that unAmerican, then I think someone needs to sit down with the constitution, and brush up on his facts.
