With respect I'd like to ask if you don't have ethical issues. The military forces of USA has been doing pretty bad stuff in the last 50 years, so I have the feeling that you're not saving lifes but rather ruining them. War became such a common thing and nonsense in the US that at this point thatnpeople is not sure if they're at war or not.

You're either very young or naïve or both. Almost everything we do in this world has good/evil direct/indirect consequences. For example, should I blame you for polluting the planet because you are using an electronic device to post naïve comments on the internet that likely gets its energy by producing some sort of pollution? What about the vehicle you drive? What about the slaughters that take place because of your meat consumption? What about the carbon dioxide you breathe out that's toxic in high quantities? How dare you add to our carbon footprint!

In the end good/evil are myths. They are human constructs and they can change depending on time and place. Ethics is not a hard science and your belief that something is good does not make it a fact.

The military can cause a lot of destruction and grief around the world, no doubt, but it can also cause a lot of good and stability. In the real world there will always be "winners" and "losers" An action that benefits you may directly or indirectly hinder someone else.

Our military's mission is to defend our country and that means that sometimes other countries will lose if they decide to engage. Inevitably there will be innocent casualties. This will never ever change. It is an honorable thing to do what we can to minimize it but unrealistic to expect it to ever go away.

You will likely see the world in a different light the older and more experienced you get. You're not a good person. You're not a bad person.

You're just a person.

OPs question was relevant and respectful, your answer is not. Good and evil may be a spectrum/scale rather than discrete categories, but they are not a myth.

OP's comment: "I have the feeling that you're not saving lifes but rather ruining them." was not very considerate either. As a veteran myself, I found that assumption highly offensive considering I was involved in multiple missions were we provided food, shelter and security to many people around the world. OP's comment was very much a naïve one because either he did not know how much good the military provides around the world, or willingly chooses to ignore it and conveniently leave it out of conversations to support his stance.

Also, ethical myths have very real effects on societies, but they are myths nonetheless. That realization may be inconvenient to some and that's fine.

Thank you for your insight and for pointing out the offensive part of my question. Thinking better I'd certainly not have said something like that if we'd be having a face to face conversation.

I never been in the armed forces, but I understand well enough that joining the army is a sacrifice in many ways, including one's agency in respect to those above you to make good and bad decisions in an morally indifferent and complex world that hungers for control (as is human nature). An army could not function and protect if everyone retained their agency. Thus, taking up your (IMO ignorant) moral qualms with the OP instead of your government is NOT respectful and is in poor taste.

The US Military is a huge employer and there are a variety of jobs and roles in the organization. Your comment is like telling employees of a company they should feel ashamed because management cooked the books.

Really depends how blatantly obvious it us the company's cooking the books.

Also, if that bad accounting is leading to the death and torture of humans.

They might be a huge employer but they also murder people. Even if you work in a role that supports murder and doesn't actually do it directly, I'd say that the ethical side is a concern. Certainly not something to be dismissed out of hand, even if you make the decision that you are ok with it.

I am of the opinion that a "well it's far removed from me even though that is what the organisation's main goal is" stance is doing yourself a disservice.

> but they also murder people

Not murder. Unfortunately, people are killed in war. Not the same thing.

Right, and the US military played a central role developing internet. But as a pilot you might be order to drop some bombs.

So, you don't think the US should have a military at all? How does that work in the real world?

Where are you getting that?

Its hard to analyze which way the balance tips if on one side of the balance his job is fulfilling, while on the other side of the balance sophistry gets upvotes. They're almost orthogonal issues.

All in all, if you’re working for US military you cannot make a claim “I save lives and do good ladila”, indirectly you may be ruining many many lives.

I don’t think the US has a good reputation as peace makers, albeit the opposite.

> I don’t think the US has a good reputation as peace makers, albeit the opposite.

Depends on which part of the world are you asking.

I live in Eastern Europe. US military (and NATO, but I am just repeating myself) is currently the only reason why Russian armies are not marching through our streets. Western Europe alone would gladly sacrifice us at any moment.

I understand that if you asked e.g. someone from South America, you could get a dramatically different answer. But I am speaking for myself right now.

Thanks for this response. I'm going to graduate college soon and I've been thinking of trying to join cal fire. I know I want to be in tech, but I don't know if I am ready for it yet. I think I need something more exciting/meaningful while I am still young.

Live life to the fullest, while you still can. Find something that's meaningful to you and do it. There's time for fluff later on.

May I ask how old you have been when you made the transition? And whether you had family or not? Because I learned that this significant change in lifestyle is a lot easier the younger you are and the less other commitments you have. Respect so for becomong an aviator, that definitely isn't the easiest career path.

And I could imagine that a former naval aviator who is also a programmer has a bright future in the defense and aerospace industry if you want.

Years long selection process? I'd love to hear what was involved and why it took so long. That's definitely a pretty drastic switch!

Long story short: Medical waivers; bureaucracy; initial screening and training as well as the peculiar program I was in and my place in it at the time.

Cool! Congratulations on cool job.

I'm jealous. I always wanted to do something like that, but my eyes suck.

What do you mean to sound like? A cool guy who just drops truth bombs? The guy did what he wanted to and he is happy he did it. Sounds like he won to me. Love what you do and you never work a day in your life right?

*Point 3 on meritocracy: The Marine Corps aviation community's entire qualification basis revolves around merit: your ability to plan, brief, and execute complex missions is directly reflected in your placement in the squadron.

Even rank gets thrown out the window to a degree. Our little community in particular (the HMLA) is a meritocracy that is enforced on a tribal level.

I won't say (nor do I care) whether you do or don't sound like a dick but you do sound like you didn't read my post or perhaps didn't appreciate the spirit in which I wrote it.

Point 1 on bureaucracy: Generally agree. Point 2 on the feasibility of changes in career: Wholeheartedly disagree.