This is the second article in a series by Joseph Suh on why he wants to serve in the military. Read the first article, Why I Want to Serve

I left off my first article noting that the United States has been involved in atrocities in its past. However, these should be seen as lessons from history. Although the military industrial complex and other shadowy factors may influence American military involvements, they aren't absolute controllers of US foreign policy today.

Let's take for example, the war in Afghanistan.

Surely, the consequences of this conflict are extraordinarily difficult to deal with but the intent – what the war planners wanted to happen – is a different story.

The US leadership obviously mis-managed the political aspects of the war. They didn't take into account significant aspects of the country, such as how difficult dealing with tribalism and how incompetent the Karzai Administration would be.

Obviously, US national security interests are in play here. From al-Qaeda's attacks on the World Trade Centers in 1993 and 2001 to the 1998 bombings US embassy bombings in Africa, the US should be rightfully worried about terrorists breeding in Afghanistan (and Pakistan; but that, for a later essay).

Those who assert that the US is solely in Afghanistan for the benefit of its military-industrial complex (or any other conspiratorial institution) to rake in the gold have all their work ahead of them.

Not only did the US intervening here directly help the people of Afghanistan by removing the wicked Taliban government (the most recent poll of the Afghans here), but it also makes the US safer (thus satisfying national security interests) by ensuring that concentrations of terrorist cells are eliminated there, not elsewhere.

Moreover, the US ventures out of its way in order to help the people of Afghanistan; whether it be to raise literacy rates, construct brand new schools, or rebuild razed hospitals and health clinics.

Sadly, the war in Afghanistan seems to be stagnant, if not downright failing. The totality of US foreign policy may be lacking. The broad consensus is that case that nation-building is failing as a holistic strategy.

Tactically however, how can soldiers be blamed for building schools? Or providing jobs? Or building roads?

The line between horrible and honorable is leadership: Officers and Non-Commissioned Officers.

An officer leads, develops and exemplifies the moral character of his unit more than any other soldier. The top brass, at any level, can either lead his unit ethically or he can let it slip into moral decay. As an officer, I look back proudly and say that I tried to save more lives than I took. That is why I fought and fight.