They join the military for a variety of reasons, which may or may not have involved any feelings about any conflict at hand much less the media. The reason they go to war, however, is because of old men.
This is a typical modernist redaction of the will to violence that is common to young men. Past societies found ways to incorporate, normalize, redirect, celebrate that will - now we pathologize it. This is because we think we can mutate the human condition into something better.
The reason every one of my friends from high school went to war is because they wanted to. Some wanted to serve their country, defend it's freedoms. Some wanted to spill blood. I very nearly went down that path myself, and some nights I wonder why I didn't. Sometimes I think it's not too late. Perhaps they were hypnotized and lack free will, maybe our NJROTC instructors indoctrinated them in a way that didn't have an affect on me. Why is it so pervasive?
I'm young, make a killing writing software - something I've loved doing since a young age - and yet I can't help but think I should enlist (I simply lack the desire to complete my degree, so getting a commission is not a reality). I lust for the thought of besting other young men, I want to win, I want to be the one standing when the dust settles. Maybe it will sate that appetite, maybe it will give me some appreciation for the world that I lack. Who is to say? I don't feel the desire to go out and slay my fellow man, except in that one specific context.
I shared the article because it rang very close the home, and I suspect it would for each and every one of my friends.
My own experience with classmates is quite different, but it sounds like it's a few years prior, so it might already be out of date. Around when my friends and I graduated high school (~1999-2000) the military was seen as a reasonable career path with a primarily deterrent and strategic role, and a fairly low chance of offensive deployment. And the reserves were seen as a last-ditch force that would effectively only be called up if the U.S. or a NATO ally were invaded. Many of my classmates who entered around then signed on for this mission, and didn't agree with subsequent decisions made by the political branches to change their role. The "stop-loss orders" of 2002–03, in which they were not allowed to discharge at their originally agreed discharge date, and the calling up of the reserves for something that did not really fit the prior understanding of how reserves would be used (both done as desperate measures to make up for volunteer numbers absolutely tanking), were particularly unpopular, and at that point many no longer felt like they were still volunteers. I feel myself like I dodged a bullet by not going that path (I had talked to a recruiter in 1999, who painted a fairly appealing story about technical careers in the military).
To this day I feel bad for those who fought in Iraq (2003), because I think many (most?) were duped. Yet that urge remains. Perhaps the years of recruitment tools disguised as video games and the notion of the "warrior" were just far too ingrained in my head, but I entered high school (in fact, I started in middle school in a pre-JROTC program to get a head start over the others) dove head first into the NJROTC program with the intent to get a head start on enlistment. I ate that shit up! Ultimately, after a series of (un)fortunate events, I walked out of high school with a jaded outlook and a full-ride scholarship, so enlistment wasn't in the cards. I don't quite know just what it is that keeps enticing me, maybe it's a desire for a fresh start, maybe I'm a bloodthirsty baby-killer, or maybe it's biological. It's probably a mix of many things, but I can't help but think there is a desire to prove oneself as a man. I'm very introspective, but I just cannot put my finger on what it is.
The ones interested in the "regular" military I remember thinking of it as more like a kind of adult boy scouts: a good place to develop some self-discipline, physical fitness, ability to work closely with teammates, etc., and maybe gain useful skills depending on your specialty. All the while doing some kind of vaguely patriotic duty deterring China simply by existing and maintaining/flexing some advanced technology. But going to an actual hot shooting war wasn't really the goal. The idea was to do your tour of duty, get honorably discharged, and then either get a job, or go to college on the GI bill. Either way a military tour probably would look good on the resume. Some people also had more specific interests, usually having something to do with technology (but maybe this is because of who my friends were), e.g. if you want to work on nuclear-powered ships or advanced jets, the military is where they are. The recruiters really played up the tech angle when visiting my high school, almost downplaying the "military" aspects. I guess they have probably changed their pitch in the intervening years...
Something that just came into my head is that, out of my male friends, all but a two went Army/Marines with one going Air Force and the other going Navy, and my male friend who went Navy wanted to be (and is) a dental tech. A cursory check of Facebook confirms this, and interestingly, of the women I know from school who went into the service, all but one went Navy (the odd woman out went Marines). I think that notion of "Adult Scouts" and a stepping stone still applies to the Navy, Coast Guard, and Air Force to large part, no airmen or sailor is doing night raids in an Afghan village, you might get someone aiming for a Corpsman or a forward observer, and of course SEALs or Pararescue, but those are a small part of those branches.
"wanted to"
The thing about being young is that your perspective is fairly narrow. It takes time and experience for your perspective to broaden. I can tell you that my perspective on the military and its recruitment of young adults has definitely changed over the years.
While it is ultimately their choice, I think it's dishonest to act as if we as a nation don't have recruitment officers inside many high schools in this country for the sole purpose of recruiting these young men and women who don't have the breadth of perspective to really make an informed decision.
Sure, but don't try to weave a narrative around the idea that old men are the only ones eager for war.
>Vietnam
Poor timing, poorly managed, generally a waste of time, and therefore unpopular, yes.
Any examples? Blood sport and dueling comes to mind, though I am skeptical of their desirability. Perhaps the latter might be reinstated as a voluntary contract for consenting adults, but it's treading a fine line.
A different example not centered on violence: carnival.
>though I am skeptical of their desirability. Perhaps the latter might be reinstated as a voluntary contract for consenting adults, but it's treading a fine line.
That's fine, but you need to realize that this viewpoint is about an ideal societal arrangement and doesn't accord with the entire range of human desire.
It's interesting you mention a century ago. Here is a prime example of the good treatment soldiers received back then, on top of the involuntary experimentation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army
Human sacrifice certainly might be an ideal arrangement. Though I'm not sure which meaning of ideal - one of optimal efficiency, or one of opposition to reality. If young men really are so bloodthirsty and violent and this should be celebrated, voluntary blood sport is probably the best bet.
Ultimately, avoidance of gratuitous death is a good thing.
Erm, Because of old, blood-thirsty politicians. Do not basket all peace-loving old men along with them, please.