主题：【原创】美国人打仗怕死吗？ -- 晨枫
所以不用考虑他们还会包抄或者冲锋，他们要做的是召唤火力，然后去打扫战场，现在这些战场上美国有本钱这样打，而且这样打是合理的，减少伤亡是第一位的。
连最垃圾的小布什也是战斗机飞行员，不是开轰炸机的
人群中总有怕死的和不怕死的，但不怕死不等于有信仰，土匪不怕死，但不能说土匪有信仰。
进一步说，怕死不怕死和能不能打胜仗没有绝对必然的联系。二战中日本人最不怕死了，可结果呢？
所以楼主要想提炼出一篇好文章，还需要进一步理清思路：究竟是探讨怕不怕死的问题，还是有没有信仰的问题，还是别的什么涉及到美军战斗精神保持的问题。
都是开轰炸机的。。。
- -- 系统封号 --。偏要看
- -- 系统封号 --。偏要看
Great point. The following is from a letter of a soldier explaining why joining the army. The time was 2007 when the economy was still rosy,
...I have a number of reasons I wish to join the Army and commit a period of my life to military service. I believe it is the obligation of every patriot to take a turn, as their fathers and grandfathers did before them, in defending the interests and freedoms that we enjoy here in the United States. Once Gen. Schwarzkopf was asked in an interview where his sense of duty came from; he replied “It's the sense of duty that keeps you going sometimes when things get very, very rough. Somebody's got to do it. And if you don't, who will?” I think he worded that perfectly. It is the brave people who stand up when there is a pressing need that deserve the most honors. I am also related to or acquainted with a number of veterans of major conflicts and I admire the courage and pride they get from their time spent serving in the military during their lives.
I believe that I might be provided a chance to bend my will and my intellect into military service I will be a credit to the service. It is my intention to try to be the best soldier and patriot that I can be. I wish to provide by example what excellent things a person can accomplish when they are dedicated to a cause that they believe in and are willing to work hard. I believe the military takes your blood sweat and tears and provides you discipline, strength and pride in return and I would like to be a part of that...
Cannot promise it is perfectly authentic but there seems no point for someone in US faking anything like this.
Regards,
That is some point. However, my overall point is that the rich in US is just as patriotic as all people in this forum.
Anyways, I cannot really find the stuff about casualties by social classes for the whole War on Terror. Fortunately, the Iraq conflict seems to be a trustworthy source of benchmark. Allow me to quote “… At the same time, in these wars the top three deciles by income suffered only 25 percent, 26 percent, and 23 percent of the casualties, respectively…” (the three wars refer to Korea, Vietnam and Iraq) While the numbers do show the top brackets suffer less in the wars than the lower ones by 10%, 10% and 15%, they by all means demonstrate that Americans still have the encourage to sacrifice to some level at war time regardless of social classes.
I am not trying to say I am absolutely right and/or the numbers are 100% accurate. I only provided some information since you asked and “抬杠”is rather not something I fancy. :D If I offended anyone anyhow unintentionally, my apologies.
Good luck and have fun.
Cheers.
- -- 系统封号 --。偏要看
risk，因此土匪，挣功名，搏出身报国报君报雇主都是拿性命当本的买卖，自古皆然。
对命在旦夕的人来说，在没有活路的情况下没有什么怕不怕的问题，狗急了还跳墙呢。
这里不用通常的轻重鸿毛泰山理论，是因为大多数普通人是不是用这套理论指导实践，是个疑问。
这也是美国老百姓对越战中的美国领导阶层不满的重要原因之一。
而是由于利益的倾向，博弈出来的。
如下面河友说的，美国现在的募兵制是越战后实行的。之所以有这个改变，是和不同阶层在越战征兵问题上不同立场和谈判能力决定的。征兵制理论上是各阶层平等的，但是由于各自能力的区别，影响是不同的。对于富裕阶层，有两个办法躲避征兵：一是钻法律空子打擦边球，比如虽然参军但是选择比较安全的部队或者驻地，或者用出国、健康不良证明等等躲避兵役；二是采取合法手段，争取改为募兵制。
而平民阶层，对于征兵制下实际存在的不公平固然不满，而改成募兵制对他们来说实际上也没有什么可见的损失：他们至少可以选择不参军了。
当然，最后的结果就反而是：富裕阶层子弟参军越来越少了，而且过去他们即使能逃避兵役也是非法的，至少是在道德上被鄙视的，而现在，他们在法律上和道义上都洗白了。
所以，征兵制和募兵制在历史上最大的区别，并不是处于优势地位时战斗力的强弱，而是处于逆境时的表现。比如第二次布匿战争时实行公民义务兵的罗马共和国，被消灭了十多个军团依然能征兵再战，士气也未见低落；而到了更强大的帝国时代，在英主屋大维的统治下，条托堡森林损失了三个军团都无力再战——需要指出的是，在第二次布匿战争中，罗马统治阶层同样损失惨重，有四分之一的元老阵亡。征兵制和募兵制在政治上最大的区别，就是能否让不同社会阶层形成一种同为一国人的心理感受。