Well that's a troubling thought.

You should join me in four years in the Peace Corps SG :o

I know a couple people doing Peace Corps. I think its two year stints, not four

I think he means that he won't be going to the peace core until 4 years are past.

^

Do mean Marine corps ROTC or Marine Corps reserves (they are different things). For ROTC find a MROTC at a college you want and apply if the school accepts you you sign up for the program and go from there (hardest part is college acceptance) for reserves call a recruiter

reserves. I finished my 4 year degree 2 years ago

Does it matter? With stop-loss, etc. you could get stuck in a warzone indefinitely either way.

@JECE - it does matter. Two different systems for entry. I'd call your local recruiter SG. Since I assume you have out thought Ito this and realize combat is an option I won't get into that but if you want a less likely chance of hitting combat look into National Guard (only army and air force have it). If you don't want combat at all I suggest the police academy because military means a chance to fight and die.

Goose, if you leave to go into the service, who will hand out your webdip points?

Do you trust the government with your life? Would you be willing to sacrifice your life in its service?

Do people actually think that those of us who consider service haven't asked ourselves these quesions?

They've been sending the National Guard into warzones as well – and I'm not talking about humanitarian missions. A big reason why the response to Katrina was such a disaster was because the National Guard had to be flown in from Iraq.

I just didn't realize how many, wow. Here's a quote from Monday in the governnment's own Voice of America:
"More than half of all Guard members have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan – sometimes multiple times – as well as other foreign locations, according to John Goheen, spokesman for the National Guard Association."
http://www.voanews.com/content/national-guard-deployments-for-civil-unrest-ferguson-missouri/2417956.html

Tolstoy is missing what I consider to be a more important question - Are you willing to follow your orders almost blindly, regardless of the probable consequences? When you're told to 'bomb here' or 'shell there', when your actions may (and perhaps will) cause the deaths of babies, children and innocents, are you willing to have that stain upon you? I'm sure you all think you've "considered" it, but there's considering it and there's considering it.

And there is a difference between being willing to sacrifice your life in the service of the government in a necessary war, and sacrificing your life for some nigh arbitrary fuck up thousands of miles from home, and for no good reason. Because sign up and you are signing up to fight whatever, whether it's fighting off an invasion, or killing kids in Vietnam.

I have already considered it. I made my decision I am training to become an officer in the United States Army. I know that I will be faced with hard decisions in my life as an officer. I know I will be putting my life on the line as an officer. I know that I am not there now and most of you aren't either. No one who has never had to make the choice between following orders and following themselves can ever rightfully speak on it. The people who volunteer their lives to service to any nation are performing a service for that nation that none can match. The oldest profession is seen as prostitution, but before women sold themselves for resources , men waged war on other men. You don't have to like the government or trust the government to be a soldier. I don't trust a lot of parts of our government. I don't like how a lot of parts of it run, but I am willing to die for this country and what it stands for. I am willing to fight to protect my home an security interests. I think sandgoose should make sure he is serious about this first but if he is then I say HOOAH.

@JECE - while true that the national guard can e deployed to combat it is a much more less likely possibility. Reserves deploy more often than national guard and active are first. Either way if you sign up not expecting combat you are ignorant and blind.

Except you're not dying for your country. Noone in your country wants you to go and die, and the country isn't at stake. You're dying for a) nothing, b) selfish motives or c) political leverage. I thought you were more intelligent than this Byron.

I am. We live in a globalized economy and political world. Unrest in The middle eat leads to increased prices in goods and decreased long term security. Those are things that if left untreated become a problem that citizens like you will bitch about later. The federal government is caught in a catch 22 at all times. Please don't insult my intelligence that is a slippery slope

"The people who volunteer their lives to service to any nation are performing a service for that nation that none can match."

This is a dangerous sentiment that leads to some very smart boy and girls flying over seas and perpetuating killing, war, and conflict.

So here's my question. By your logic, am I wasteing my life and time by joining the military?

I don't know you.

If any of my friends said that they wanted to join the military, yes, I would tell them it was a waste of their talents. I'd rather see them build, create, and care for people.

Now I want to add before I'm plastered up here as a cold blooded killer. I have a knack for dissolving conflict I've done it throughout high school while an army cadet. I am going to college for a double major in international relations and foreign language with minors in military science and history. My goal is to become a foreign areas officer which is the armies liaison to another country. I would help the army understand that nation and it's people to prevent conflict in the long term.

I hope your ability to resolve conflict IRL is better than your ability to resolve conflict in Diplomacy. <3

Yes much better I choose to be a prick on here because I can lol.

I hope you don't think I'm trying to characterize you as a cold blooded killer. I'm certainly not. As I said, I don't know you. But people I have met in the army certainly don't fit that description either.

What I'm suggesting is that you - whatever your talents are - can likely contribute to society in a better way that supporting the government with their war.

If fewer people were willing "volunteer their lives to service to any nation [or religion]" and believed that there were, in fact, better ways of "performing a service for that nation", then I think we'd all be better off.

@yonni, do you feel the need for any military at all?

I'm conflicted on it. At the very least, I'm strongly convicted that America could use less military.

Thought about Marines, finally went Army, reasons:

Army faces less cuts, Army offers more opportunities (size), Army offers better benefits (ever hear "being a Marine is the benefit?" that's fine - except when you're 15 years in and have kids you want more for them).

The real selling point for me, is that yes, the standard Marines trumps the standard Army in hard corps ness - but then you get in to Rangers. And Green Beret. And a hundred other avenues.

Tracking?

The Army pans out as the best option in a climate like this for nearly every situation. You want to be a bull dog? Trust me, there are programs.

SOURCE: I'm a Veteran, Army, former NCO, Officer in Training