wow who asked Brian Stann about "killing generations of people"?

[That Idiot Tibor**]

No one comes close to the US.

In the entire history of the world.

Lol wut?

 

[Donny White]

Stock answer: "Because you either support the troops, or you support the terrorists."

Real answer: It creates jobs for many Americans and lowers the population in the hub of the world's fastest growing religion and economy.

 

[Oedad]

One can look forward with glee that within 20 years the US will no longer be the worlds leading military power. Payback time.

Am i doing it right?

 

[electricfuneral]

My guess is rogan.

 

[Rockman14]

Thought it might be Siyar (where is this guy btw) but if its mark hunt then yea....he does not strike me as the smartest person out there so it was probably better to not even explain to him.

 

[That Idiot Tibor**]

Brian Stann "This isn't the place to talk about it"

Hmm... seems like Earth to me.

So a weigh-in is a great place to discuss it because it's on earth?

It's not a one sentence answer.

 

[Shogun Rising]

No, that's BS!

If people like Stann never joined to begin with, who would they have to send over there to do their dirty work?
All of this, "I'm just serving my country" narrative is just being irresponsible to say the least. These people can think for themselves and should have to answer for their actions.

This is short-sightedness.

The American military furthers a giant and sweeping marketing campaign that appeals to poorly educated 18-20 year olds with little economic opportunities, locks them into a contract that is not easily broken even if they do realize they don't like what they signed up for—especially because they are poorly educated and don't always consider all their options, and the UCMJ is a separate system of laws designed to pressure and control military personnel with strict codes of conduct and severe punishments. It's not even like being a cop. You're under an entirely different system of law.

When you're deciding things like this, you have to take into account propaganda, economic realities, and just human nature in general.

A guy guiding a drone is contractually obligated to do what he's told, and deserting active duty is some serious shit. If intelligence says a target is a military threat, and command orders him to take out the target, then legally he pretty much has to do it unless he can prove on the spot the guy's not a credible target—good luck with that.

The real pieces of shit are almost always the shot-callers. The politicians and their corporate employers. Also the higher ups in the DoD who are in league with arms manufacturers who strictly guard their increasing budgets by always wanting to start new shit with someone—like how they quickly and all of a sudden changed their stance on the drug war and wanted to go to Colombia after the Cold War when people wanted to cut their budget.

 

[juza]

Colton Smith

 

[Tallguy76]

Yeah, how stupid to think that someone who intentionality joined the military might possibly consider the merit of the actions they undertake.

It honestly staggers my mind to read posts like this. "to even attempt to answer it"? That's the definition of psychopathic reasoning. Truly scary, that anyone would think this way.

Have you spoken to many veterans? They understand the individual and collective toil of war more than the politicians, pundits, chicken hawks, peacenicks or internet commentors. You are trying to place a narrow black and white value (soldiers are bad) on a very complex situation, in a historically volatile region of the world and in the end your world view is no more well thought out or nuanced than the "America, fuck yeah" crowd. This is coming from someone who believes we had no reason whatsoever to invade Iraq.....but we did have interests in the region. There is and was a real problem in Afghanistan but we used to wrong tools for the wrong job. We turned what should have been a joint intelligence/special forces operation into a conventional land war and occupation.

Regardless of how you feel fighting is written into our DNA and as long as we have limited resources we are going to need people willing to fight. That is why its's important to have good leadership to decide when and where to use force. Soldiers are just blunt force objects of the state the wields them and when they are misused they are the ones that pay the deepest price. Whether you believe these people are heroes is up to debate but what isn't up for debate is that many of these people have heroic qualities and sacrifice more (voluntarily or not) than pundits ever will.

 

[pridewwe]

Why doesn

 

[CorporateTool]

This is short-sightedness.

The American military furthers a giant and sweeping marketing campaign that appeals to poorly educated 18-20 year olds with little economic opportunities, locks them into a contract that is not easily broken even if they do realize they don't like what they signed up for

 

[Diet Otsuka]

I salute Brian Stann.
He killed enemies of worldwide freedom. Good for him.

 

[Fedor2000]

Im thinking it was a real man who would beat Brian Stanns ass in a fight with no weapons.. That's why he was bold enough to ask that question. Im guessing Mark Hunt!

 

[cungfu]

It's safe to say it was Mark Hunt.
During the weigh-in line, they would be right next to each other (co-main and main).

 

[kaunman24]

Just following orders rarely stands as a sufficient defence.

I didn't know Stann was on trial here? What does he need to defend? To whom does he owe an explanation?

Chain of command idea? Just because you were given orders by someone, those orders are beyond criticizing?

Wyat about the use your fucking head idea? Or the think about it before you blindly enlist to blow people up idea?

Uh, in the miltary, it kind of does. Its called insubordination. Kind of a big deal. If you want to question the orders...oh i dunno...question the people who gave them. Why is that a hard concept?

Did I miss the part where Stann went rouge and slaughtered villages without provocation?

Lol who cares if he's just following orders?

Anyone who signs up to kill over 100,000 innocent people should be to justify it.

I'm sure he killed 100,000 civilians; just as the pre-registration brochure promised.

Ignorance is no excuse. Drunk drivers don't think to themselves," better jump in the truck and mow down a family! " but when they do, their initial motives and ignorance do not change what they've done.

Yea, Brian Stann, widely regarded as the most respected person in the UFC willingly signed up to murder people in cold blood.

 

[Shogun Rising]

It's weird seeing a person discuss a complex sociopolitical issue with any degree of nuance or sensitivity on the internet, let alone on sherdog.

Thanks, homie.

Also you hear people talking about military personnel like as soon as you sign up you're off fighting Predator in the jungle.

I was a motor T mechanic in the Marine Corps. I had one good buddy in infantry, another that worked on dashboard instruments in helicopters, another who worked on refrigerators, and another who worked in admin and made sure dudes got their paychecks.

 

[Justa Fight Fan]

Stann did nothing wrong.

 

[eiyuu]

Nice to see the attitudes of the 60s protesters calling the troops "BABY KILLERS" lives on in this thread . . . NOT

 

[Count Zero]

I think estimates are around 600,000 people.

About 500,000, aprox 200,000 civilian, 5000 US troops, 180 British.

I thought that was how many died - directly or indirectly - because of the war, and not how many were killed ?

 

[Sigmafight]

this. He's just a cog in a massive machine. Very imbecilic to think he should be the one to even attempt to answer it.

But he was asked about his opinion on it?

Stann does not have any personal opinions on things? Or is he not allowed to answer, or be asked about what he thinks?