I joined the army. I got sent to Bosnia, but to be honest I did'nt have a clue what was going on out there, I got to ride around in land rovers and carry a rifle and pistol about with me.
Later, I was going through a hard time, so I accepted a recall to go to Iraq. Got a few quid, got 2 medals which are now secured.
I used to get very angry with conscientious objectors. I knew one, who was petrified of going into an operational theatre. He came out with a story, but he didn't want to go Iraq, he didn't want go Afghan or Kosovo. He didn't even want to go to Germany. I really disrespected him as a person, not necessarily because he was a coward, but because he took the Queen's shilling and was happy taking the money and then came out with a sob story.
Tbf, I transferred that to a lot of people, people who may have thought it through and would have been happy going to war.
However, should a soldier be allowed to object? I don't think they should pick where they go, but I do think they need to observe their own conduct. If they sign on, then they are accepting they may die in service.
I think it depends on the capacity in which they serve. I've been a conscript and a soldier in my country's army. In conscription, we were offered to either train as soldiers (one year) or civil service (one year and a half) if you didnt want to join a combat unit. (You could also get a medical deferment).
But the US and UK militarys are voluntary as far as I know. So if you take the pay, you really shouldn't be the one to decide in what capacity you serve. that should be decided by the higher-ups. You can always not take the pay and quit if you find the work unlikable like every other job in the world.
To be honest, it also depends on the country. I know in my country Id only be used to defend our borders. When I got posted abroad, it was because I volunteered to do so. If you serve in the US or Uk you have to know that you'll probably be sent somewhere dangerous to push your country's interests abroad.