Fuck the US military!

[infected slut princess]

5,983 sexual assaults on women in 2014. No mention of all the man-on-man rape. And also don't forget about sexual assaults carried out by the occupation troops throughout America's empire.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/03/politics/ ... index.html

Anyone who faps to the military is a jackass.

[Ancient History]

Yeah, they've been stepping up the sexual harassment training we lowly civilians go through, but the way the system is geared military justice is less inclined to favor the victim, their careers tend to falter, superior officers can override the rulings, and the top brass' solutions to systemic abuse tends to be to blame the victims and do stupid shit like implement a buddy system at training academies. It's a serious problem.

Now, the Australians on the other hand...I wish he was ours.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Well, from what I've seen the first order of business would be to reduce the culture of authoritarianism in the military. That might just be impossible with such a large and regimented organization. Probably the second-best thing then would be to empower independent investigators to bring the hammer down on COs -- however, as we can see with the past few weeks in the United States there's a very, very strong tendency for people to go 'shut up and give the men in uniform whatever they want'.

[PhoneLobster]

Now, the Australians on the other hand...I wish he was ours.

In an act of insanity I read a few of the Youtube Comments.

I would now like to reproduce for you my favourite one in full without further comment.

When nations like Australian defence force army, airforce etc. ask for men to join the war proposing them money etc. to go to war using any strategy to fight gor their country like using the words freedom, family, children, rights etc, just to protect the nation only few men currently recruited and for some will join because there is not enough respect for men in this world even in any western country like Australia because of the church.

Men are Expendables 'no body cares for them' even though the nation like the military hypocritically shows off to pay them or even show respect, mourn the dead, injured also those still at war wherever. These western developed countries ruled by their community, religious, political leaders use anything or anybody like celebrities respected by all like men to make the fight just to think they are sacrificing their lives for the right reasons like saying "fight to protect countries of this world liberates democracy, freedom for your rights to against nations against your rights for freedom like Russia, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, China etc.

Unlike decades ago men were conned to fight at any war like in western countries besides the respect the nation does by honoring them fighting at war the community that aren't honoring or show full respect to them neither less to care these men will refuse to fight not care about claiming any money for it but to care about their lives be like back home they are overlooked as guilty by society and court even to the community too as the sinner being falsely accused most of the time just so the victim usually 'woman' be looked as, also known as innocent without proper investigation.

Although if these cases were investigated the accused men in general forever are exposed to the community destroying their respect worse never have a normal life again with peace because of media, social media today the taboo men are looked upon as criminals no matter what they should be condemned. Everyone after don't care destroying his life forever makes them happy even though it is unfair.

... there are no words. NONE I SAY.

edit: Actually there are words. I just read them aloud to someone. I now dare anyone read that quote aloud. Oh. My. God.

[Koumei]

Well, from what I've seen the first order of business would be to reduce the culture of authoritarianism in the military.

I don't think you can reduce authoritarianism in the military. The biggest thing about it is "doing whatever some fuckhead tells you to do regardless of reasons, because he has a fancier star on his shoulder".

[Longes]

Well, from what I've seen the first order of business would be to reduce the culture of authoritarianism in the military.

I don't think you can reduce authoritarianism in the military. The biggest thing about it is "doing whatever some fuckhead tells you to do regardless of reasons, because he has a fancier star on his shoulder".

That's pretty much exactly the point of the military training. Thinking about orders is beyond your competence, so shut up and do what you are told.

[Kaelik]

It should be at least theoretically possible to cultivate a military that efficiently obeys battlefield orders, but does obey the order "cover up my sex crimes" and a command structure that actually punishes people for committing rapes and sexual assaults.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Longes, that's not actually true. Part of military training is in military law. Because while a soldier is required to obey all lawful orders, they are also required to not obey any unlawful orders. Their oath of service literally requires them to think about every order they are given.

edit: to make it clear who I was responding to.

[name_here]

I have never been entirely convinced that the military cannot have an investigative and sentencing body not in the normal chain of command. At least for major crimes like rape.

[Ancient History]

Well, that's what JAG and various other groups are about. The issue isn't so much not having an investigative body, it's that:

1) The procedure is not favorable to the victim. I've had lawyer friends argue with me on this, but the way the complainant can be down-right interrogated as part of proceedings is emotionally nerve-wracking, much more so than civilian courts. That's just a product of military justice. Especially in a warzone, processing rape kits and stuff is just not given a high priority.

2) Making the complaint still has a lot of stigma attached to it. It's a lot better than it was, but it's still something that can fuck you over, especially if the person who raped or harassed you is your immediate boss.

3) The upper brass care more about politics than the troops. That's a real no-brainer; you'll see generals that get busted down in rank, but not thrown out of the service. They'll also hear about stuff going on at the academies and try to implement top-down policies that end up disenfranchising victims and potential victims instead of actually addressing the issue - again, because they care more about being seen to be doing something than fixing it. It's getting better - we're a long way from the Tail Hook scandal - but it can't get better fast enough.

4) Sometimes, superior officers can outright refute the findings of military courts, citing operational need or whatever. That doesn't happen a lot these days, but it can still happen.

[name_here]

As I understand it, those groups do investigations, but the superior officer of the accused has a great deal of control over the actual trial and sentencing.

[Neeeek]

It should be at least theoretically possible to cultivate a military that efficiently obeys battlefield orders, but does obey the order "cover up my sex crimes" and a command structure that actually punishes people for committing rapes and sexual assaults.

My understanding is that coverups come from above, not below, for the most part. There's no illegal orders to refuse in most cases.

[Kaelik]

It should be at least theoretically possible to cultivate a military that efficiently obeys battlefield orders, but does obey the order "cover up my sex crimes" and a command structure that actually punishes people for committing rapes and sexual assaults.

My understanding is that coverups come from above, not below, for the most part. There's no illegal orders to refuse in most cases.

umm... So you think that all those rapes that occur, absolutely no one who is below captain has anything they could say that might help people get convicted? People are obviously sometimes aware of and complicit in these things.

[fectin]

CNN: 4.3 % of women in the military are sexually assaulted.
Also CNN: 20% of women in college in the US are sexually assaulted (http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/12/15/se ... .campuses/)
Also Also CNN: Worldwide: 33% of women are sexually assaulted (http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/20/health/gl ... nce-women/)

So the military rate is a fraction of the rate in a comparable population, which is in turn significantly below the worldwide average.
Assuming you accept their methodology.

[name_here]

You're comparing different numbers. The military number is apparently annually, the college number is before graduation, and the worldwide number is lifetime.

[fectin]

Yes I am. The college and worldwide ones are deliberate misreadings of data anyway, but I missed "in the last year" in the original article.

I have no firsthand knowledge, but have talked with a former NCO who was in charge of investigating these claims for one of the COCOMs. From those discussions, I have the impression that at least a substantial minorrity of those claims are completely groundless, and another, also substantial number that are strongly grounded go unreported. I have no idea which effect is stronger, but have very low confidence that the number reported is accurate.

[Starmaker]

ISP, even accounting for underreporting, wherever they're stationed, "Imperial troops" commit sexual assault way less frequently than the local populace, per person. If you want to be a logically consistent anti-militarist, rape is the worst argument. Go find another horse to ride, drone strikes or something.

On the other hand, the way higher education institutions in the US act like fucking sovereign states (and the local police lets them) handling federal crimes internally is fucked up.

[infected slut princess]

Starfucker, you are a fool.

I mean, even if what you say is true for the sake of argument, so what?

You aren't replacing a part of the the local populace "more frequent rape" with the imperialist "less frequent rape." You are just putting them together. So you get more rather than fewer rapes.

So you're in "Redmonton." The Ruritanians come and conquer you. In the local populace of Redmonton, there is a lot of rape. The Ruritanian imperial forces commit rape at a lower rate than native Redmontonians, but they are still adding new rapes to Redmonton that would not have been there otherwise.

So yeah, I guess if an invader comes to your house and sexually assaults your family (possibly murdering them afterwards), it's dumb to complain because because imperial troops commit sexual assault way less frequently than the local populace, per person.

And there is no reason to want the imperial occupiers to leave, because the extra rape they bring is less than what an imaginary corresponding increase in Redmontonian population would entail.

So keep on fapping to the military, Starfucker! You people make me sick.

[DSMatticus]

ISP, you are very dumb. I don't mean that in the "you believe things that are stupid and terrible" way, though that is also frequently true, but I mean that in the "you are just really fucking dumb" way.

If you have a 1000 people who commit 100 rapes, and you add 100 people who commit 1 rape, then you have a final population of 1100 and a final number of rapes of 101. Because math, you will note that there are less rapes per individual in the 1100 group than the 1000 group. If your goal is "not get raped," you would rather be a member of the combined group than the first. Adding two rapey populations together doesn't just increase the number of rapes, it increases the number of people, and will in fact reduce your likelihood of being raped from the likelihood of the rapier population alone.

You will also note that the military doesn't recruit from a pool of people who otherwise would not exist. Those 100 people are going to exist no matter what the military does with them, and they are going to commit 1 rape* no matter what the military does with them. Indeed, even if the military hadn't recruited them they would still commit that 1 rape.* Even attempting to talk about total rapes in the world, all you're actually really talking about is which parts of the world you'd rather have those extra rapes occur in as a result of adding more people there.

*You could try to make an argument that the military makes people more or less rapey. For example, Abu Ghraib et al happened. We really did torture a bunch of people because reasons, and our torture included forms of sexual assault and rape. But that seems to have less to do with any particular institutional military practice and everything to do with the authorization and encouragement of torture from the Whitehouse and CIA top officials. If you want to talk about war crimes trials for rich assholes who ordered (directly or indirectly) the torture and murder of a bunch of people as part of an effort to give their friends lucrative government contracts, fuck yes.

[Kaelik]

So yeah, I guess if an invader comes to your house and sexually assaults your family (possibly murdering them afterwards),

I like this part, because it could be totally innocent, but it could also be a perfect confirmation that ISP is the other kind of terrible monster he probably also is.

Because he sort of generically assumes that people he is talking to should be worried about people raping their family, because you know, their wife and daughters are their property, and not about raping themselves (because what kind of woman has opinions) or women in general (because who cares what happens to women who aren't the property of men).

[infected slut princess]

DSM you are tragically dumb.

Here is what you are saying:

In Ruritania, about 1 rape occurs per 100 people. A military unit from Ruritania of 100 troops should expect to have 1 rape occur. In Redmonton, there are 1000 people, and 100 rapes will occur. If you take the 100 Ruritanian troops and put them in Redmonton as an imperial occupier, you will get 101 rapes out of 1100 people. But you will get n-100 people in Ruritania and therefore n-1 rapes in Ruritania. So the total rapes in the world is not changing. And you should prefer being in Redmonton post-occupation, rather than pre-occupation.

So what's the problem here?

if you are the 101st rape victim in Redmonton, victimized by an occupying soldier, obviously you prefer the pre-occupation sexual assault situation. So really, you are just hating the 101st rape victim in Redmonton. Who cares if someone who is not raped prefers the post-occupation probability of getting raped? There are still more rape victims in your country than there would have been otherwise.

"But durrgh yuor so dumb there is less raep in teh impeiralial home cuontry to equal it out! fap fap fap" says DMSMAttiucs

No. As you say, it is important "in what parts of the world those rapes occur" because that's related to the fact that the military makes people more rapey. This is the critical thing you Stalinist military fappers don't seem to understand.

You are more likely to rape someone if you are in a foreign land on some mad imperialist crusade than if you are sitting around in your home country being a janitor or an accountant. So you need to think about the victims of the invaded country. Because there will be more rape victims total when you are putting occupation forces in another country than if all those soldiers stayed home (where they would probably just rape each other, according to statistics about military people sexual assaulting each other so much), or better yet got some real jobs that actually contributed to society.

[infected slut princess]

Kaelicker:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmudiyah_killings

If your country is invaded, you should be afraid of people raping and killing your family. I mean, that's war. WAR IS HELL. I don't know what the heck you are talking about with this "women and children are your property" and "women have no opinions" shit. But it wouldn't surprise me if, in addition to being a Stalinist military fapper, you also hated women and children.

[Kaelik]

If your country is invaded, you should be afraid of people raping and killing your family. I mean, that's war. WAR IS HELL.

Alternatively, whether or not your country has been invaded, you should be afraid of people raping women in general, not just in front of their husbands or fathers. Because outside of war, rapes happen, and in many places, disproportionately more than during war. But you don't care about them, because they aren't authoritarian power rapes, or rapes that violate your property interests in women.

Because you are my signature.

[infected slut princess]

Yeah rapes happen in wars and out of wars, and in varying degrees. So what? I think you missed the point. War is going to increase the rape. But I guess with your Disney fairytale view of war, you don't think war entails more rape.

Don't understand the signature reference. Kaelicker gonna Kaelicker? I don't care, I can handle your whiny bitching.

[Kaelik]

Yeah rapes happen in wars and out of wars, and in varying degrees. So what? I think you missed the point. War is going to increase the rape. But I guess with your Disney fairytale view of war, you don't think war entails more rape.

Alternatively, in my Disney Fairytale version of real life, rapes already happen quite a bit, and wars don't necessarily increase that, because there are a lot of conflicting factors, and I don't claim to be able to calculate all of them off each other and determine that of course this one specific factor is the most weighty and so more/less rapes occur.

Don't understand the signature reference. Kaelicker gonna Kaelicker? I don't care, I can handle your whiny bitching.

You mean you can't read? Never would have guessed.