[–] [deleted] 8 points 29 points 37 points (+37|-8) ago
[–] rumathlete_1 0 points 9 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago (edited ago)
When my grandpa enlisted in WWII it wasnt just because our nation was attacked it was because he lost 6 friends at pearl harbor and wanted revenge and joined the navy for the fact he would be fighting the japs. He was a kind and loving man to everyone, all religions, and all races, except the Japaneses.
[–] DerpExpress 1 point 12 points 13 points (+13|-1) ago
Why did they remove that?
[–] Alias_Unknown 1 point 2 points 3 points (+3|-1) ago
My guess would be something more along the lines of conscientious objector. They mention religious reasoning as well.
But the article makes it sound like you can instead vow to help out in a non combative role. Which to me seems pretty legit. Not everyone is for for combat, but messengers, orderly's and transport (just to name a few) are all equally valuable roles in a situation that this oath has been envisioned for.
[–] theburntsausage 5 points 6 points 11 points (+11|-5) ago
probly because they cannot be trusted.
[–] forgetmyname 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
something something naturalized citizens no longer have the right to bear arms.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 12 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago
[–] AlphaWookie 3 points -3 points 0 points (+0|-3) ago
It is a faggot that likes smelling farts. Being anti-Americanis all they do.
[–] Mad_Dog91 1 point 7 points 8 points (+8|-1) ago
Power to the people