Hmmm. This statement implies the country you are fighting for is under threat. If something isn't under threat you can't fight for it, thats the definition of the verb! Fighting for your life, fighting for a marriage, fighting for rights etc - you aren't fighting for any of those things unless there is a threat that they may be taken away. The only war the UK has been involved in over the last 30 years with a driect threat to home soil is the conflict with Northern Ireland. Iraq (Gulf & present), Afghan and Balkans; the opposition in these wars pose no threat to our country, so its a bit rich to say your fighting for it. Yes, the Falklands were invaded but sovereignty and country are different things. Lets also not forget Article 5 of the Washington Treaty - "provide forces needed to respond to a regional crisis or conflict involving a NATO ally who calls for assistance" again; hardly fighting for your country.
OP, personally I think it is disgusting that people are still trained to kill each other in this millenia.
The very purpose of the army is conflict. The mission statements will tell you there is a humanitarian and peace keeping side, but lets see how much love and peace training you do in the initial 6 months of PT and beasting. No, you are going to be a soldier and are trained to kill. Every day you will learn new traits to acheive this and will reach a minimum level of physical fitness to fit that enables you to and is within a quota. The guy in the trench you're taking pot shots at may have a wife and children; could enjoys sociallising with friends and might support Liverpool FC. He will have a favourite colour, food, song and book. He will have treasured memories, in depth thoughts, unique characteristics and ambitious dreams. He could be no different to you, and in a different life your best friend and you have just killed him because you are told to.
The stress from such an event is on a par for your family and friends should be be that guy. How would your mother feel collecting you in a box? How would your wife provide for your children and how do they cope with such tradegy? Or, God-forbid, you are "lucky" enough to only lose a limb, function, ability, sense or a combination and require 24 hour medical attention. All horrific scenarios which are unfortunately all very realistic. No only is the there the physical pain that comes with this but the immense mental strain - the above make up 3 of the top 6 in the Holmes and Rahe stress scale, including number 1 spot death of a spouse.
Furthermore there is reason behind the war - the very reason you are dodging bullets and risking your life and families mental welfare for day in day out. Are you happy with the current reason we are in Iraq? We invaded in 2003 on suscpicion that Saddam held WMD after UN weapons inspectors were gradually denied access to various bases and palaces as they searched. The inspectors were obviously drawing in on where they through the WMDs were held, however were told they had been destroyed. The French and Russian inspectors reported that the "book should be closed" and "relations normalised with Saddam Husien". The Americans disagreed and built a war based on the strategic threat posed by Saddam because of his proven record of aggression and barbarity, his admitted possession of weapons of mass destruction, and the certain knowledge of his programs to build more. 8 years on still no WMDs. Saddam hanged without launching a single warhead. He did have them; lets not forget we sold the weapons to Iraq in the first place - see the whole Arms-to-Iraq embarrasment surounding Matrix Churchill; Project Babylon and the Iraqi supergun; the wareheads seized at Heathrow destined to Iraq; the Guardians scoop on the chlorine factory in Iraq funded by our tax to make mustard gas. So we can safely say he did; but he said they were destroyed and it would appear he was as good as his word. Yes, hindsight is a wonderful thing, however such a decision should have the top people in the country working on it; yet they still thought it best to invade a country illegally (which it certainly was) because they could no longer verify that Iraq was not making weapons of mass destruction. Personally, this is not something I would feel honoured in dying for.
The final thing you should consider is the support available when you leave. Should you be unlucky enough to be honourably discharged and you are left with a disability there will be massive costs involved modifying your accomodation, a carer should you require and the hardships involved with finding other employment. There is also the trauma. Flashbacks of civlians screaming as their homes are destroyed and loved ones killed; the look on your enemys face as you execute him; the defening screams of you best friend whose leg as been ripped from his hip after stepping on an IDE. Where is this country you fought for then? Our un-elected government secured recently secured soliders wages of a certain rank - managing to do so by slashing thousands of jobs as well as decreasing the pension and cutting costs at every opportunity on kit.
Travelling and seeing the world plays a very small part of a very big picture. If this is the reason you are considering it then I would suggest you explore other avenues that enable this possibility, multiple other professions offer such opportunities. And you could of course do it yourself. Many friends of mine have done the travelling thing, some in groups after graduating, others have quit their job and gone it alone, but all have done it on a realtively low budget and come back with great memories and souvenirs - worlds apart from horrific trauma or a folded flag for their NOK.
but that avatar makes me want to punch you 
he looks like a right ****
you spoke sense up until then
