It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Military Misconceptions

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on May, 15 2009 @ 09:58 PM

Originally posted by Mindmelding
I think you have not yet realised what a psychopath is. A psychopath is not an emotionally out of control individual, they actually blend in pretty well.

Except for the following:

Symptoms of psychopathy

# Reckless disregard for the safety of self or others
# Impulse control problems
# Irresponsibility
# Aggressive or violent tendencies, repeated physical fights or assaults on others
# Lack of remorse, indifferent to or rationalizes having hurt or mistreated others
# A sense of extreme entitlement
# Poor judgment, failure to learn from experience
# Inability to distinguish right from wrong

And that's just the ones I know for a fact will get you into trouble in the military. It's not something that someone can turn on and off at will. It is part of who they are and is not something that can be hidden in the situations the troops are placed in. If someone has any of these symptoms, it will be noticed fairly quickly. Likely before they even make it all the way through boot camp.

I would submit not only do they fit in well in them military, because they don't get emotionally riled while going up the hierarchy and submitted to the authority of others

I disagree. Someone who is truly psychopathic is not going to be capable of controlling their impulses long enough to fit in, let alone be promoted several times over.

I have the theory that leadership is psychopathic

Your theory rests on someone who is psychopathic being able to control themselves long enough to make it into a leadership position. The probability of that happening is low enough as to be almost non-existent.

the general personnel is emotionally missguided, because they fail to see not only what the military is, and elitist construct that hurts mankind, but they also fail to see the consequences of their actions, to see that they never solve any problems or defend anyone, mearly add to the elitist created chaos..

Or perhaps you fail to see what the military is. A tool that is intended to be used in defense of the rest of us. And I'd be willing to say most, if not all, members of the military see the consequences of their actions. Some of those consequences they may be proud of and some of them they may not, but they see them alright.

We still would have the minority of psychopaths to deal with. But at least there would not be these massive armed groups controlled by them and basically tricked into serving their selfish goals.

The problem is that the minority can cause a lot of damage if they want to. Taking away our defenses leaves us open to those who would do us harm with no way to protect or defend ourselves. Would you live near a family of tigers and expect them not to eat you because you mean them no harm, or would you make sure you had protection to scare them off or kill them if they came slinking around trying to make a meal of you?

This is not the ravings of a stoned hippy, this is pacifism based on a scientific theory, ponerology, which explains the psychological motivations of elitist powermongers that control most organizations, including the military.

It's also a relatively new theory that hasn't really been tested much. In the case of the military, a psychopath is not going to have the self-control necessary to rise to the top.

Don't bait me again please, it results in verbatious discharge

I suffer from that myself..

Bait... Bait, bait...

edit: Didn't realize my quote tags were messed up. Oops!

[edit on 16-5-2009 by Jenna]

posted on May, 15 2009 @ 11:36 PM

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by BrainPower

Could you please expand on what the oath keepers are and how is it accepted by officers, generals, etc...

What i mean by oath keepers is soldiers that understand that they swore first and foremost, defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. For example, the popular theory that martial law will be instated in america and our own troops will be firing on US citizens...That would never happen. Another example is (and i hate to bring this into this thread)....drum roll, gun rights. I am avid in opposing any gun grabbing legislation i see, i encourage other servicemembers to do the same, and furthermore, a lot of them that i talk to about it feel the same. We were guaranteed the right to bear arms and i will defend that constitutional right....but that can be on a TOTALLY different thread!

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 01:30 AM
reply to post by Mindmelding

It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.

It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.

It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.

--Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, USMC

You are living in a fantasy world my friend. Just a simple thank you will suffice.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 04:44 AM
reply to post by AlphaTier

It was the soldier that was repressing all those freedoms in the first place, we have them by default. I don't need to be given anything, I make my own choices in life, as does everyone else. Most people just don't want to face this and realise exactly how responsible they are for what their lives have become.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 04:47 AM
reply to post by Jenna

The wikipedia article on psychopathy dosen't fit the definition used by my sources completely. To better understand what I'm on about I will just link you to a better source than my own interpretations: Here

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 09:07 AM
reply to post by Mindmelding

I used the wiki link because it gathers a lot of sources into one place, but I can use other sources if you like.

Mayo Clinic
Cluster B. These are personality disorders characterized by dramatic, overly emotional thinking or behavior and include:

Antisocial (formerly, sociopathic) personality disorder

* Disregard for others
* Persistent lying or stealing
* Recurring difficulties with the law
* Repeatedly violating the rights of others
* Aggressive, often violent behavior
* Disregard for the safety of self or others

Sociopathy and Psychopathy are used interchangeably.

The Paradox of Psychopathy

Antisocial personality disorder is one of the few mental disorders for which aggressive behavior is a diagnostic criterion. "Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults," is 1 of 7 elective criteria of which 3 are required to establish the diagnosis.


* failure to conform to social norms
* deceitfulness, repeated lying, use of aliases, or manipulation of others
* impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
* irritability and aggressiveness
* reckless disregard for safety of self or others
* consistent irresponsibility
* lack of remorse, indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt or mistreated others

Everywhere I look they use pretty much the same list of symptoms.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 09:27 AM
reply to post by Jenna

It's a longer list than you're selectively posting, even from your own sources, and it all comes down to emotional coldness, lack of empathy due to some sort of physical incapacity or block. You're lost in the middleground that describes little and explains nothing regarding what psychopathy is. For the record I would not trust the mayo clinic to give an accurate representation. The very science needed to profile and identify the psychopaths is in great measure under their control. This is the key tenant of the ponerology theory, psychopaths naturally aspire to positions of authority and control, and network with other psychopaths. Think of it as a psychological profiling for the NWO. For a more accurate and in depth account you need to consider actual ponerology sources, imho.

Somewhere in the genome there is probably a cause or causes for it, and it has been suggested that this why genetics is so important, as our society is ruled by psychopaths for psychopaths, so if they can profile the population so as to recognise "their own" they can use them for positions of authority confident that they will repress the rest of us.

The key is that we are talking about people that are intellectually pretty advanced but with a self serving emotional profile of a 10 year old or younger, completely self absorbed and uninhibited. They can, and do, emulate normal behaviour well enough to position themselves where they want to be, with the added "advantage" of being able to lie, deceive and manipulate to get there. What they cannot do is create and foster healthy group relations, because they are an entropic force in our societies, and, if they succeed in achieving intra species dominance we will fall into a dark age, as they parasitise us back into feudalism and possibly even slavery.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 09:35 AM
reply to post by Mindmelding

I said in my first post listing symptoms that there were more but that those were the ones that will definitely cause someone to be noticed and get in trouble pretty quickly in the military. I didn't think it necessary to post every single symptom when I provided my sources for anyone that wants to look at them. And whether you trust the Mayo Clinic or not, the symptoms they list are the same ones that are listed everywhere else.

Fact is, someone who is truly psychopathic will have too many violent urges that they cannot contain to last long enough in the military to make it to the top.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 10:12 AM
reply to post by Jenna

That's a fact I don't accept, because the whole institution is itself a creation of psychopaths. And indeed they do get noticed. They get recruited for areas like secret service, psy ops, cointelpro, death squads and other deep black "projects", which is a euphemism for psychopathic criminal behaviour.

You see, there is really two militaries. The one for the "normies", for the "sheep", for those who take orders and another one, entirely under the radar, for the type of people any normal person wishes the fortune of avoiding during his or her lifetime. This is why I think most soldiers, which of course are not in the psychopathic minority, are duped and deceived. They do not realise what the military really is and how it fits into the bigger reality.

It's no shame to be deceived. I have, in my past, worked with these personality types in the corporate spheres. After months of familiarity the signs start showing of their true nature and, of course, when they get to where they wanted to go they will backstab at a moments notice without any regret. But it's not easy to see them coming, more often than not we just realise when they are already here. Those that can see auras might have an easier time of it, but sadly I'm not there yet.

That is what is happening to you, military people. Your box is entirely created by psychopaths and you don't see outside it, for the most part. Those that do are usually the veterans, that get thrown in front of the bus when they are not usefull and get a rude awakening. This is perhaps why they are pointed out as potential terrorists so readily (along with the more obvious familiarity with weaopons systems). Again, I say this with no sense of superiority, I have been in the exact same spot, only in civil life with civilian contracts, but regardless, the same spot of victimization, so I understand well what is happening. I think most people, at least a couple of times in their lifetimes, cross paths with a humanoid psychopath, a subset of humans that despite looking like us are the other face of the coin, the night to our day.

Ponerology people. I can't stress it enough, it's a word, which if researched with an open mind and curiosity and not because some stranger on the net told you to, will change your whole outlook on society, yourselves and indeed reality as a whole and will help you understand just how enormous a role simple lieing plays in our whole deck of cards society.

This is one of those threads a person just can't seem to get out of

[edit on 16-5-2009 by Mindmelding]

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 12:17 PM
Bravo on a good thread, friend. Star and flag for you.

I'll be popping in every so often to eyeball and see if you manage to dredge up any of the usual riff raff that comes along whining about us "big bad military types" to give you some support.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 12:22 PM
reply to post by Mindmelding

And it takes more courage to stand for what you believe, for what you know, in the face of overwhelming fource, than to be part of the pack acting on blood lust.

Your post is illogical.

Would joining the military because one stands for the protection of his fellow citizens and the constitution not constitute "standing for what you believe?" Or in your mind does standing for what you believe only apply if it's all sunshine and butterflies?

Just curious.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 12:32 PM
reply to post by Mindmelding

And nobody is going to invade the US, not because of the military, which would be nuked to oblivion in less than 3 hours, but because of the armed civil population.

There is always a better way than militarism. Although I am not against responsible civilians being armed, it's a personal choice.

Again. Illogical.

The entirety of the United States Armed Forces would not be "nuked out of existence in less than 3 hours." I should very much like to see your statistical facts to back that statement up. Assuming we were all to amass into one convenient location and all be standing still when these nukes wiped us all out.

You make another fundamental error. Not only in your argument but in an assumption you make.

You claim the right way is to "choose not to fight." Okay. So why be afraid on an "armed civil population" which you state is something you're not against? You assume these armed civilians would put up a coordinated resistance to a larger force of foreign enemies? I should like to see how a bunch of farm boys with 12 gauges stand up against even an old Russian T-72. Good luck.

A military, whether there is an active war or not is necessary in order to maintain security of a nation.

You cannot provide your facts to your statements, nor can you show reason in your arguments.


An internal oppression force??? You've been watching too much television. Either that or you're paranoid. The national guard wasn't sent to Iraq to "train up to help ""take over""" the US... (I don't understand how we can take over a country we're already in control of?) They were sent out to augment us active duty types who were getting burned out by multitudes of rotations out there. Plus, some of them went on volunteer basis alone. Plus - some of them had jobs and skill sets which were needed out there.

Please think your posts through and provide supporting facts to your statements. It'll help your cause. Thanks.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 12:34 PM
reply to post by Mindmelding

There are no benefits to war. We are living in a civilization that is a shadow of it's potential and we are doing so largely because of the stranglehold the military, through use of resources and through strategic and planned suppression of individual freedoms throughout the globe, has on our entire planet.

Please relate what freedoms the US Military is taking away from the world and the US citizens?

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 01:40 PM
reply to post by Mindmelding

Mindmelding, I give you the respect you are due when I state that your logic and your arguments are those that throughout the millennia originate from one characteristic.

Using technical terminology, non-supported analysis, conjecture, and outright ignorance of your subject matter, your posts clearly indicate you are cursed with that one characteristic.


No big deal, but let's just go right ahead and call it what it is.

I served in the combat arms, and each of my four MOS's were all combat related, so I can't speak from a technical aspect for those who were brilliantly keeping us in the field.

But I do know that in the field, to be a soldier, it takes the greatest of courage to subordinate your own welfare and opportunity to survive, for you brothers in arms.

These men DAILY will risk their own lives to save those of their brothers. Unbelievable acts of selfless courage. Not on occasion.
Every damned day.

I'm glad you aren't in the military. Everything I read in your words indicate that everything in your life is about YOU.

And the military is a team effort, where men will share their last water, food, ammo, or even their last drop of blood for their brothers.

If you think that you have any idea of which you speak - you don't. I'm sorry, but you exhibit zero knowledge of the military, how it works, what it does, what values are universally held, nor what of the caliber of people therein.

Therefore, I regretfully, but not much, disregard your opinion on this topic.

Like listening to a nine-year old arguing the merits of the 1966 Corvette versus the 1966 AC Cobra.

You have no reference point.

[edit on 16-5-2009 by dooper]

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 01:53 PM

Originally posted by Mindmelding
You see, there is really two militaries. The one for the "normies", for the "sheep", for those who take orders and another one, entirely under the radar, for the type of people any normal person wishes the fortune of avoiding during his or her lifetime. This is why I think most soldiers, which of course are not in the psychopathic minority, are duped and deceived. They do not realise what the military really is and how it fits into the bigger reality.

God, how I wish the US would enact a mandatory Armed Service requirement. You would be an awesome candidate for recruitment. =.=

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 02:13 PM
reply to post by dooper

Your post is basically that I am an coward. What I am doing here is trying to keep the braves, out of their own ignorance of the reality of a situation, out of their failure to see past the lies, out of their inability to stand for what is right in the face of hierarchy, from getting themselves killed in the thousands and from killing innocent people possibly in the millions (indirectly). Yes, it's just words. But it's all I have to give, and really all that I think is needed.

Long ago I took an oath to myself that the killing would stop at me. And I will cowardly die by that oath if need be.

[edit on 16-5-2009 by Mindmelding]

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 02:24 PM
reply to post by Mindmelding

My post is that you don't know whereof you speak.

You have no reference point.

I've got some bad news.

The bad guys don't give a damn about folks like you, and they slaughter folks like you by the tens, hundreds, and thousands.

What concerns them most is those guys in uniform, with their sights on him and their fingers on the trigger.

There's a whole bait of folks who due to their evil actually need killing. Not a very good comment on the current state of humanity, but there it is.

Most folks with supposedly high moral standards, are just making excuses for not getting their hands dirty.

So, ever purchase prepared food? Grow your own? Or do you kill, skin, butcher, and process all your own food?

Ever killed, skinned, and butchered your own beef?

Gotta get your hands dirty, a huge gut pile, blood everywhere, and the stench is a bit uncomfortable.

No. You don't process your own beef, you don't raise your own food, and you don't do what is necessary to maintain your food.

You live off the efforts of others in this regard.

Just like you live off the efforts of our soldiers.

Who aren't complaining.

[edit on 16-5-2009 by dooper]

[edit on 16-5-2009 by dooper]

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 02:57 PM

Originally posted by SeekerofGod, how I wish the US would enact a mandatory Armed Service requirement. You would be an awesome candidate for recruitment. =.=

The Selective Service Act set standards to specifically exclude those unfit to carry weapons. Just sayin'.

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 03:08 PM
reply to post by dooper

Ad hominem again, your arguments are focused on my character rather than on the debate, which is military missconceptions which I countered with ponerology as a sociological theory. If you wish to stay on topic I'll respond to the best of my ability, with no ill feelings, if you wish to provoke emotional responses and derail the topic, I would advise you that it's a waste of time. Not that I don't have them, just that I don't let them get in the way of important debates. I'll go out and kick a chair or something later

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 03:15 PM
reply to post by Mindmelding

Well, it's truly a fault of mine.

When I hear someone say something that I know for absolutely certain that is utter, complete, and total BS, the first thing I do is look at the source.

If we're talking about scalar electromagnetics, and I realize the person with all the conceptual ideas has zero knowledge, background, experience, or history in electromagnetics, then I pretty much figure he's talking from his buttcheeks.

If we're talking about catamaran racing, and I find out the speaker is from the Great Gobi Desert, and has never seen a source of water larger than a swimming pool-sized pond, then it's traditionally easy for me to discount their "concepts" on catamaran racing, as they've never been around catamarans.

Just a fault of mine.

You can take your nebulous concepts and discuss them with the unknowing.

The rest of us know better.

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in