It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Becoming a Racist: The Unfortunate Side Effect of Serving Your Country?

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Becoming a Racist: The Unfortunate Side Effect of Serving Your Country?

So I saw this on Twitter tonight, granted it's from last week but I did a quick search and I don't think it's been discussed here. I didn't want to put it in the mud pit, but it's not exactly breaking news so I wasn't sure where else to put it. I'm supposed to discuss it... honestly, I'm at a loss for words. I read the article hoping it was just a boneheaded misleading headline, but it's not. This guy actually thinks serving turns some people into white supremacists. All I can say is I saw more racism in my liberal hometown than I ever saw in 13 years in the service. If you haven't served and all you know is what you read from idiots like this you'd think the service is a cesspool of sexism and bigotry. That's not the case. You can't imagine a more respectful and equal work environment. Bigots who join either have their eyes opened or are for the most part weeded out relatively quickly. There are bad cases, of course, like an large group of people, but they are the exception not the rule. Is this bafoon's view representative of a significant percentage of the public or is he just completely out on his own being this ignorant?

Edit: It is Huffington Post, so I guess I shouldn't be too shocked, but #
edit on 23 8 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   

After all, the entire white power and neo-Nazi movement is based on blaming someone else for your problems.


That must be like blaming 'white nationalists' for losing an election.

People that were your voting base until you decide to make scapegoats of them.

Biden.



“I mean these are good people, man!” Mr. Biden exclaimed in an interview on CNN. “These aren’t racists. These aren’t sexists.”


www.nytimes.com...

Dated a nine months ago.

Before all the BULL SNIP.

edit on 23-8-2017 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   
I think you are exaggerating.


But to think that even a small portion of them are returning from duty harboring feelings of such intense anger and disgust toward anyone who isn’t white, leads one to believe the military isn’t doing enough in the area of outreach, post-discharge.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
I always felt sexism was much more prevalent when I served. Never racism though, I'm a white guy though so I don't know what my minority brothers and sisters who served may or may not have experienced during their time. Just that it didn't happen around me.

The military has, for a long time, been someplace where racists and neo-nazi's would go. Of the male population serving, 70% are white. Free combat training for the coming race wars and all that nonsense. I have heard stories of some combat vets having a not so kind view of middle eastern people after their deployments, 'why can't they help themselves? what are we doing there?' That sort of thing.

As to the 'security' in Charlottesville it looked to me like a lot of tacti-cool militia and not representative of any of the armed services as a whole.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

You literally contradicted yourself in 2 paragraphs. You said you didn't see any racism when you served, and then next paragraph you're spouting off the typical baseless talking points about why "some" people join to get their white supremacist training and wind up hating all brown people because of what they see over there, with zero evidence.

What years did you serve that you saw prevalent sexism? I just got out a year ago and we bent over backwards to make it accommodating for women while I was in.
edit on 23 8 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:34 PM
link   
I retired from the USAF in 2011. In my 20 plus years, I only saw race become an issue one time. We had an NCO that didn't show up at work during an exercise. He was found, at the NCO club drinking... Our squadron Chief (Chief Master Sgt) cut the guy a huge break- he didn't call Security Forces to arrest him... instead, he was assigned to weekend duty for one weekend. He filed a discrimination complaint with our base "Social Actions" office, claiming that the weekend duty assignment was handed out because he was black.

When everything was said and done, the NCO that filed the complaint was given his assignment of choice.

We kept our Chief... barely. Every NCO in our squadron had to attend "sensitivity training"... the entire episode was a huge mess. Had the Chief had him arrested, he would have failed the blood test and most likely been Article 15nd or tried by Courts Martial. Our Chief knew that the man had a family... he tried to help him out. Mistake...

I cannot speak for the other Services, but in the USAF (at least during my tenure) racism was a total non-issue, with the exception of the above mentioned incident.

The military doesn't breed racism, in fact, reality is quite the opposite. Under fire, you really don't care what color the man next to you is... you fight as brothers. We all bleed the same color...



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
So then why do they cry, so loudly, about the military not being inclusive enough?
edit on 23-8-2017 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: madmac5150

Did you read the article?

It isn't about the military making people racist.

It is about peoples experiences in combat making some of them racist. If they weren't already, I guess.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
So then why do they cry, so loudly, about the military not being inclusive enough?


Because they can...

Most of the left that whinge about not being included, have obviously never been shot at.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

The people who cry about that are the people like madmac5150 was referencing in his post, who play the race or gender card when they have to be disciplined. And truth be told, people like that are few and far between. Most of the people I served with that weren't straight white males required no special treatment. People who need that don't tend to pick the military for their career choice, but when it does happen they are usually nothing but problems the whole time they're in. Nothing is ever their fault, they think people are out to get them because of their skin color or because they're a woman or whatever. I've seen it with white men too, they just have that persecution complex. Then you have the other side of the coin, the trouble makers, the actual bigots and sexists. But again they were few and far between. We had a saying that the supervisors spend 90% of their time on 10% of their people. 10% is probably a high number, but the point is there are the few who cause the problems, and then there's everyone else. Which ones do you think makes the news?



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Yeah we read the article, and it's a load of nonsense. This stems from a common misconception that intellectuals have about the military, that we're mostly uneducated dumb white hicks who don't know the difference between an Iraqi citizen and the guys who flew the planes on 9/11 and join because we're brainwashed nationalists with 'Merica tattooed on us in 6 places (I'm being hyperbolic here if anyone couldn't figure that out). The concept that the author is talking about, that you can see your buddies get killed by a brown person and wind up hating all brown people. Well newsflash that's not inherent to the military that can happen to anyone. It can even happen to persons of color who are wronged by a single white person at some point in their life. The entire premise of the article is ridiculous.

Someone who is uninformed, like the author, may try to argue that while that can happen to anyone it's more prevalent in the military than it is in the general population. First, I'd ask you to show me some data. Then I'd ask you if you're aware that before we go "over there" we are trained on the ethnic, cultural and religious nuances of the people we will encounter there. Many servicemembers serve alongside Afghans and Iraqis and develop friendships with them. We are trained, if we weren't already aware, that not all Muslims are the same or not all Middle Easterners are the same, etc etc insert group. When a terrorist or insurgent kills a squad member, the reaction isn't that everyone that's the same color as that terrorist is evil.
edit on 23 8 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Wardaddy454

The people who cry about that are the people like madmac5150 was referencing in his post, who play the race or gender card when they have to be disciplined. And truth be told, people like that are few and far between. Most of the people I served with that weren't straight white males required no special treatment. People who need that don't tend to pick the military for their career choice, but when it does happen they are usually nothing but problems the whole time they're in. Nothing is ever their fault, they think people are out to get them because of their skin color or because they're a woman or whatever. I've seen it with white men too, they just have that persecution complex. Then you have the other side of the coin, the trouble makers, the actual bigots and sexists. But again they were few and far between. We had a saying that the supervisors spend 90% of their time on 10% of their people. 10% is probably a high number, but the point is there are the few who cause the problems, and then there's everyone else. Which ones do you think makes the news?



Exactly. That was one incident over a 21 year span. Those of us that have served, especially in combat roles, have a VASTLY different point of view when it comes to race relations. Military rank is colorblind... and, we are all pink on the inside.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
Someone who is uninformed, like the author, may try to argue that while that can happen to anyone it's more prevalent in the military than it is in the general population.

Where was that argument made?


edit on 23-8-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

The phrase "someone may argue..." usually indicates speculation or extrapolation from what's already been said. It's taking the discussion in a new direction, or in this case moving it further along in a direction it was already headed. In that line I wasn't referring to something from the article.

Honestly, how do you think the author came to the conclusion that this was a big enough problem to write about? It's not hard to dissect his train of thought.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

The author never said it was more prevalent, they specifically said that it is a "small portion" so you are right, it shouldn't be hard to dissect but that shouldn't take you were you went, unless it is you reading what you want into it.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

That's actually not what he said. He didn't quantify at all. He said even if it was a small percentage it should be looked at. He didn't say whether it was or wasn't. It's similar to the line as "even if we can save one life". The obvious intent is to save more, that's not quantifying it, it's just stating the bare minimum for it to be a concern, in his eyes. So no I'm not reading what I want into it, I'm reading what's there.
edit on 23 8 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

He never said "if".

It says "But to think that even a small portion of them are returning" which means it is a small amount but even that is bad.

I will give you that the piece is written with the intent that you propose but not in that manner and definitely not close to what madmac5051 had posted, which was the person I asked about reading the article.


edit on 23-8-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:11 PM
link   
PTSD can do that to you. We've seen it with the WW2 and Vietnam vets.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:24 PM
link   
I'm finding that the people most uptight about race and racism in the USA -- the most defensive people -- seem to be the ones who deep down are afraid of what they might find.

A person doesn't need to viciously attack others to defend themselves unless their subconsciously guilty of something.

It's like how a cheater will always go on the offensive and accuse their partner of cheating.

The more uptight, outraged, and hyper-defensive someone is ... and the more they accuse others of something? The higher the likelihood they're guilty of something themselves.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:25 PM
link   
TRUE STORY...

I had a young SrA (Senior Airman) that worked for me on a combat deployment. He and his father are Muslim, his mother a Catholic, and his wife... Jewish. Jihad was a side effect of the holidays, but... they were happy. His family embraced each other, differences aside.

They are far better people, than most of the rest of us...



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join