By Ryan Lau | @agorisms
On arid plains across Iraq, Afghanistan, and many nations, troops lay still on burnt sands. Strong sunlight shoots down onto non-moving forms, just yards away, additional infantry attack opposing combatants. Many will not walk away from such an ugly fight, but still, participants roll in as thousands turn to millions. Though a minority may find it a worthy clash, many do not hold such an opinion. Still, skirmish upon skirmish continuously occurs.
Trump’s Appalling Ultimatum
Naturally, an obvious justification is in troops’ minds, though not moral or just. Simply put, Donald Trump and his military bark commands, and poor troops comply. Sadly, so many, as a conclusion to living, slip away from this world. This appalling ultimatum is not distinct to Trump, nor to any prior man of high authority. Nay, it is just a quality of authority of this kind; and thus, such authority may hold no just claim to subsist.
At this day, all of our military groups fight unjust wars across many parts of this world. Most notably, conflict in Syria and Libya sustain through hours and far past. In fact, this full part of our world, spanning Afghanistan to Somalia to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, has had an addition of U.S. troops far past any just and moral amount. Such an amount, to stay at all just or moral, must always fall to nil.
But, U.S. individuals of high authority, both military and not, do not follow this basic logic. As wars only go up in both human and fiscal cost, individuals who must stop inhumanity fall short. Now, diplomacy has a vast following in public opinion; at minimum, such opinions occur towards war in Afghanistan. But, a growing gap holds public inclination and policy conclusion apart.
Military Support for Anti-War Politicians
Fittingly, it is typically troops, both past and today, that support individual politicians who do not favor war. Most notably, Gary Johnson actually was in first in many military polls against Trump and Clinton by a solid margin. In fact, this was an additional 27% in contrast to his support among public polls. Why is this? Simply, Johnson, in contrast to Trump and Clinton, did not favor war. U.S. troops, without a doubt, favor not dying in unjust conflicts. Thus, military individuals show support for anti-war politicians.
Additionally, Ron Paul got donations from troops far surpassing that of any opposing politician in 2012. His $113,739 from troops is colossal against opposing politicians, who got donations totaling around 10% of that. Again, Paul was not in favor of war, and was a harsh critic of continuing unjust war, in particular. As such, military individuals support Paul, Johnson, and additional politicians who will not march troops off to war.
Can Troops Simply Not Comply?
Agonizingly, it is no straightforward task to not comply in a military situation. As soon as an individual signs up for it, a crippling bind falls down. This, naturally, is a command to follow instructions from individuals in positions of authority. Don’t want to kill an opposing human? Sorry, but if a commanding authority instructs such an action, it is mandatory to comply. Think that a particular action is not moral or just? Sorry, but an individual moral compass is no qualm to a commanding authority.
Don’t want to comply anyways, at risk of going back on your oath to follow instructions? Your moral compass is outwardly strong, which is intrinsically fulfilling. Still, atrocious but common disciplinary actions will follow. At minimum, such a moral individual will pay a grand sum, and much of it will go towards continual wars. Probably, that individual may wind up in prison for a backwards, unjust wrong of non-killing. At maximum, such a paragon may find his own, lawful assassination.
Military action is a vicious rotation. Starting with Trump and individuals of high authority, commands flow to troops. Basically, Trump’s commands say: “Hurt if I say, or I will hurt right back”. Killing honor and impartiality, such a command is a colossal thorn in tranquility’s back. Without an ability to not comply, any aspiration for a moral and just military slips away into a dark land of blind authority.
Without a doubt, Trump’s choking grip of authority is difficult to crush, but it is not without its limits. Just as I can affirm such truths without an Anglo-Saxon Idiom’s fifth symbol (following “d” but prior to “f”, I solicit you to hunt for but a singular utilization of that symbol in my composition), his military can find morality through an option not to comply.