7 ms·

> the most damaging part of direct combat is watching people that you consider to be family die or be maimed. I've heard from various places over the years (do

by rdtsc 1mo ago

> the most damaging part of direct combat is watching people that you consider to be family die or be maimed. I've heard from various places over the years (documentaries, friends) that soldiers really fight for their comrades at the end of the day. As in when asked "why are you here fighting" if they are in front of a news crews or something where they have to say "we're bringing democracy to ..." they'll just say something like "those fuckers blew my buddy up and I am here to pay them back".

MarkMarine 1mo ago
No one runs into machine gun fire to bring democracy to someone else I can assure you of that.
- breppp 1mo ago
  That's probably false as you can see historically that ideological armies have far better morale and better effectiveness
  - throw310822 1mo ago
    "Bringing democracy" is a very weak ideological motivation. I would rather call it plausible deniability. As in "we're doing this to bring democracy" and people might be left with the doubt that it's true.
    - breppp 1mo ago
      It is a very weak ideological motivation for people who would never enlist in the first place. However, I think people are generally too cynical towards a very real belief system. There are multiple examples of US pushing for democracy against its own interest. Bush with the Hamas Gaza elections, Obama with the Egypt Muslim Brotherhood government and Carter with pre-revolution Iran are such examples
      - yosefk 1mo ago
        Bush knew what he was doing - Hamas has the influence it has because the US wants it to have it. When Trump decided he wants them to release Israeli hostages he forced them to do it rather quickly, all things considered, showing who really controls Hamas. Restraining American "allies" is key to how America understands its interests and Hamas is an excellent lever to pressure Israel, or Hamas-controlled Gaza wouldn't be flooded with American and European money. Similarly, Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood because he did; in Ukraine for instance the same admin supported a coup against the elected government (this is not to say that Russia's actions in Ukraine are "justified", it's just a fact.) Democracy has nothing to do with any of this
        breppp 1mo ago
        > Hamas has the influence it has because the US wants it to have it I doubt this is backed by US intentions and actions historically > Similarly, Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood because he did That seems like a tautology to me, care to expand? I vividly remember Obama throwing his autocrat ally under the bus > in Ukraine for instance the same admin supported a coup The protests in Ukraine hardly seem like a US coup and were organic according to my understanding, but maybe you can point exactly to the US involvement
        leonidasrup 1mo ago
        "In the late 2010s and early 2020s, Israeli officials encouraged Qatar to support Hamas, especially by approving the transfer of large sums of financial aid by Qatar to the organization. Several Israeli intelligence officials have cited Qatari money as a contributing factor to the success of Hamas in leading the October 7 attacks in 2023; Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called the notion that Israel strategically propped up Hamas "ridiculous", and stated that Qatar's aid transfers to the Hamas government had been approved for humanitarian reasons." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas
        1mo ago
Hilliard_Ohiooo 1mo ago
I was in the military and in my experience people that chose to go into war zones, it's optional, are fucked in the head and literally enjoy killing people, I've seen it a dozen times. They want to kill.
- MaxikCZ 1mo ago
  Id recommend anyone to give "Generation Kill" series a watch.
- jki275 1mo ago
  You are absolutely fucking full of shit. I chose to "go into war zones" many times and none of it was to "enjoy killing people".
  - tripzilch 1mo ago
    So, did you? Look what they made you do, right?
    - jki275 1mo ago
      Nobody "made" me do anything.
  - joeywas 1mo ago
    Not sure what military is being discussed. In the US military, you do not choose to go into combat zones. You receive orders to deploy you to a combat zone.
    - jki275 1mo ago
      Sure you do, I did. True, not everyone has such a choice, but I volunteered for the organization I wanted to work for and then I volunteered for multiple deployments I didn't have to go on. Many of us have that choice and make that choice.
  - 0xdeadbeefbabe 1mo ago
akiselev 1mo ago
That's a well studied topic in military history/science called unit cohesion. The saying goes that morale gets the soldiers to the battlefield, cohesion is what keeps them there. In order to withstand the psychological horrors of combat, soldiers need that comradery otherwise they'll run off at the first chance they get. There needs to be some anchor keeping the soldier in the way of danger, whether that's social pressure or years of intense training together. Brett Devereaux has talked about it multiple times on his blog in various different contexts (most recently two weeks ago)[1][2][3]: [1] https://acoup.blog/2026/07/24/collections-pre-modern-armies-for-worldbuilders-part-ivb-cohesion/ https://acoup.blog/2026/07/24/collections-pre-modern-armies-... [2] https://acoup.blog/2022/07/01/collections-total-generalship-commanding-pre-modern-armies-part-iiic-morale-and-cohesion/ https://acoup.blog/2022/07/01/collections-total-generalship-... [3] https://acoup.blog/tag/cohesion/ https://acoup.blog/tag/cohesion/

by rdtsc 1mo ago

MarkMarine 1mo ago

No one runs into machine gun fire to bring democracy to someone else I can assure you of that.

breppp 1mo ago
That's probably false as you can see historically that ideological armies have far better morale and better effectiveness
- throw310822 1mo ago
  "Bringing democracy" is a very weak ideological motivation. I would rather call it plausible deniability. As in "we're doing this to bring democracy" and people might be left with the doubt that it's true.
  - breppp 1mo ago
    It is a very weak ideological motivation for people who would never enlist in the first place. However, I think people are generally too cynical towards a very real belief system. There are multiple examples of US pushing for democracy against its own interest. Bush with the Hamas Gaza elections, Obama with the Egypt Muslim Brotherhood government and Carter with pre-revolution Iran are such examples
    - yosefk 1mo ago
      Bush knew what he was doing - Hamas has the influence it has because the US wants it to have it. When Trump decided he wants them to release Israeli hostages he forced them to do it rather quickly, all things considered, showing who really controls Hamas. Restraining American "allies" is key to how America understands its interests and Hamas is an excellent lever to pressure Israel, or Hamas-controlled Gaza wouldn't be flooded with American and European money. Similarly, Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood because he did; in Ukraine for instance the same admin supported a coup against the elected government (this is not to say that Russia's actions in Ukraine are "justified", it's just a fact.) Democracy has nothing to do with any of this
      - breppp 1mo ago
        > Hamas has the influence it has because the US wants it to have it I doubt this is backed by US intentions and actions historically > Similarly, Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood because he did That seems like a tautology to me, care to expand? I vividly remember Obama throwing his autocrat ally under the bus > in Ukraine for instance the same admin supported a coup The protests in Ukraine hardly seem like a US coup and were organic according to my understanding, but maybe you can point exactly to the US involvement
        leonidasrup 1mo ago
        "In the late 2010s and early 2020s, Israeli officials encouraged Qatar to support Hamas, especially by approving the transfer of large sums of financial aid by Qatar to the organization. Several Israeli intelligence officials have cited Qatari money as a contributing factor to the success of Hamas in leading the October 7 attacks in 2023; Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called the notion that Israel strategically propped up Hamas "ridiculous", and stated that Qatar's aid transfers to the Hamas government had been approved for humanitarian reasons." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas
        1mo ago

Hilliard_Ohiooo 1mo ago

I was in the military and in my experience people that chose to go into war zones, it's optional, are fucked in the head and literally enjoy killing people, I've seen it a dozen times. They want to kill.

MaxikCZ 1mo ago
Id recommend anyone to give "Generation Kill" series a watch.
jki275 1mo ago
You are absolutely fucking full of shit. I chose to "go into war zones" many times and none of it was to "enjoy killing people".
- tripzilch 1mo ago
  So, did you? Look what they made you do, right?
  - jki275 1mo ago
    Nobody "made" me do anything.
- joeywas 1mo ago
  Not sure what military is being discussed. In the US military, you do not choose to go into combat zones. You receive orders to deploy you to a combat zone.
  - jki275 1mo ago
    Sure you do, I did. True, not everyone has such a choice, but I volunteered for the organization I wanted to work for and then I volunteered for multiple deployments I didn't have to go on. Many of us have that choice and make that choice.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 1mo ago

akiselev 1mo ago

That's a well studied topic in military history/science called unit cohesion. The saying goes that morale gets the soldiers to the battlefield, cohesion is what keeps them there. In order to withstand the psychological horrors of combat, soldiers need that comradery otherwise they'll run off at the first chance they get. There needs to be some anchor keeping the soldier in the way of danger, whether that's social pressure or years of intense training together. Brett Devereaux has talked about it multiple times on his blog in various different contexts (most recently two weeks ago)[1][2][3]: [1] https://acoup.blog/2026/07/24/collections-pre-modern-armies-for-worldbuilders-part-ivb-cohesion/ https://acoup.blog/2026/07/24/collections-pre-modern-armies-... [2] https://acoup.blog/2022/07/01/collections-total-generalship-commanding-pre-modern-armies-part-iiic-morale-and-cohesion/ https://acoup.blog/2022/07/01/collections-total-generalship-... [3] https://acoup.blog/tag/cohesion/ https://acoup.blog/tag/cohesion/