>Do US soldiers protect American's freedoms
In the literal sense of securing and advancing the interests of the American people? No. Aside from attempts to make the US stop funding the bellicose policies of right wingers in Israel's government, 99% of these people don't give a flying flip about burgerstan.
>Do they deserve at least some respect for having noble goals, or are they largely choosing to fight for the US out of foolishness?
The two aren't mutually exclusive. Aside from a (significant) minority of psychos and unironic "clash of civilizations" types that are the mirror image of the people they fight, most troops honestly believe they're helping the helpless and fighting the good fight. In practice, any good done is more than squandered by broader geopoliticking the US MIC is engaged in parallel to direct military conflict, as >>25158
Also, as >>25191
said, the west in general, US foremost among them, is absolutely on the "wrong side of history", for having been the overwhelming factor behind the downfall of secularism in the MENA region hotspot, from the loss of the Ottomans in WWI, to stamping out pan-Arabist socialism and democratic republics, to the rise and protection of ultra-fundumentalist Wahhabbi powers such as the Gulf monarchies, and even Saddam's coup and (somewhat) inadvertantly the Iranian revolution.
If the military powers of the world were actually interested in suppressing human rights violations, without the threat of various imperialist ambitions (or the suspicion of them among local populaces) foiling such efforts, the most reliable path would be the use of multinational peacekeeping forces agreed through the UN, including regional forces such as the Arab League and African Union. National militaries, especially in the atomic age, are an anachronism.
This. Remember there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, all of us help support the system, and any leftist action against that must be done in addition to, not instead of, such. Any protestations otherwise are dishonest lifestylism.
This is absolutely true. Every single group US military forces have fought directly (not including collateral damage)
since Vietnam have been absolute bottom of the barrel subhuman garbage. Jihadis, genociders, slavers, drug kingpins, dictators, warlords, etc. In no way were any of them even close to genuine struggles of liberation. Of course, such wars generally occured against the backdrop of having funded such groups, and (with the exception of a few instances, such as the Balkans) typically resulted in a power vacuum that brought even worse groups to power, usually also bankrolled by the US.
Message too long. Click
to view full text.