In a Democracy should not the military be Democratic?

Question

In a Democracy should not the military be Democratic?

Should military personnel (soldiers, sailors, etc) be thoroughly informed of the complete details of a proposed war so that an individual, inteligent decision can made, then allowed to vote to participate in the fight? If the majority votes in favor,THAT majority goes to the war, instead .of the participation being arbitrarily dictated by those who would send them and not participate.

Relevant Reading:

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

Answer 1

That's a great idea, why don't you try it and see how effective it is.

Answer 2

No, the military should not be democratic. During war, there needs to be structure, discipline and order. The whole purpose of having and maintaining a chain of command is so to maintain order and so everyone knows where their place is and what teir duties are. When the bombs start exploding and the bulllets start flying is a very bad time for people to decide they "know" more than the people who are getting the whole picture (i.e. battlefield commanders, generals, admirals, commanding officers.) The grunt on the ground does not get the whole picture of the entire battle so can only rely on their superiors knowing what is going on. The only thing the grunt understands is that he is fighting for something more important and higher than himself.

There is a very apt saying that goes something like "we (the military) are here to protect democracy NOT practice it." I have found that junior personnel do not have the training, foresight, or emotional steadfastness to correctly interpret what is happening and comprehend how their little piece fits into the greater puzzle which makes up the battlefield. Now, let me also note that I am not saying that our young men and women are stupid. Far from it. We have the most highly trained and intellectually advanced military force this world has ever known. I am proud to serve with them. However, I can also speak from experience that when I was in the lower ranks, I didn't have a clue about the big picture or all the little pieces working together to get the big picture.

Answer 3

no that is a horrible idea. especially the part about telling the troops the ENTIRE PLAN of operation, the reason that the full and complete objective of any operation is on a need to know basis is that not everyone needs to know. if you tell the soldier on the front line who is most likely to be captured the entire details of the mission then that info is much more likely to end up in the hands of the enemy. also the point of the military is that you receive orders you follow orders, and so on. the guys at the top have earned that right and proven their ability to make the desicions so they get to. and concidering that the Joint Chiefs are all generals or admirals they have been there they have fought and they survived and earned the right to give the orders.

Answer 4

I read this to my husband, the Army Major. His response was "That person is a bloody idiot." So, that's the consensus of the active duty military personnel in my home tonight.

I called by brother-in-law, an enlisted sergeant who has served in Iraq and Afghanistan 3 times. 1 tour in Afghanistan with the Army under operation anaconda, and volunteered for 2 more tours in Iraq with the missions of door to door clearing of the neighborhoods. He's seen it all in war. I called him for his comments:

"It's written by someone who knows jack and sh!! about warfare. It's something that sounds intelligent but is not written by an intelligent person. A lot of people don't understand the costs of going to war vs. if we don't go to war. You would have a crippled military. Bad idea. Democracy needs to end at the army. Soldiers would stop following orders and would be left with an ineffective military. Sounds nice but not feasable." .........THEN HE CALLED BACK AND SAID THIS:...... "Upon closer scrutiny, I don't think this guy knows anything about soldiers at all. Where does he get off thinking we're all pawns? The reinlistment rates are still high! These guys know what they're doing! I know guys who want to go back to Iraq. *I* want to go back to Iraq! I don't appreciate this person thinking I'm some pawn. This is the kind of guy who knows war out of a textbook but has never experienced it for himself. He's a guy who thinks that if you make words big and pretty, it makes him smart. It doesn't. As far as democracy goes, he doesn't understand the trade-offs, being a really weak army. You can't be weak."

Answer 5

It's obvious you have never served in the military! Individuals in the military service are not asked their opinion regarding political or morale issues. Their CO (commanding officer) will make those heady decisions for them.. They aren't asked if they approve of this war or battle before being asked to participate. Know one cares what they think, because this is not what they are paid to do, their job is to kill or be killed. It's rather simple, don't you think?

The military complex is not a democracy, this along with muddy boots is left outside the door. This thing called democracy is left for civilians to worry about; hopefully it won't interfere with tomorrow's battle because that's all these guys are thinking about. Please, don't ask another question like this, it's incredibly stupid!

Answer 6

Democracy in a military would indicate that everyone is on the same playing field - no leaders, officers, or even followers for that matter. As some people have said, that means everyone would be free to do as they pleased. The military is set up to defend democracy, not practice it.

Answer 7

You can't apply the democracy blindly to everything.
Army must have discipline, rules, obey orders, do things without expressing an opinion in the matter and absolute subordination to the superiors.

While it is democratic that one chooses to join the military after joining, these rules and discipline must exist otherwise engagement in a war will be chaotic. Anarchy will rule. Casualty of war will be sky high. Winning the war is next to impossible.

You go to war to win. Not lose.

Answer 8

A military couldn't function properly as a democracy. You'd have chaos. A non-democratic military would wipe em off the face of the planet before they could even get mobilized.

Answer 9

it is marvelous suggestion although there's a clarification why protection rigidity can not be democratic. One is via the fact they elect a sparkling which ability or order of what they might desire to do. in the event that they could be democratic there might come a time whilst their perspectives would desire to dodge their overall performance occasion although the protection rigidity have chosen to flow to conflict 40% would desire to no longer trust it and because they have different perspectives they might no longer cooperate to win the conflict. with the intention to be useful troop , obedience is in many cases necessary. Message would desire to be sparkling to each soldier. Democracy in protection rigidity splits perspectives and would desire to reason confusion.

Answer 10

Emphatically, No. A military cannot operate democratically. Remember, today, the armed forces in this country are all volunteers. You have to sign a contract to obey your commanders. They have to sign a contract to obey the Commander in Chief (The President)
All these Officers who are talking against the president could and would have when I was in the Mil. be tried for treason.
Hisemiester

Answer 11

The USA is not a Democracy, but a REPUBLIC and the US Military is defending the Republic
against ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND
DOMESTIC and are members of all political
Parties, except communist and socialist!!