"They Died For Your Right To..."

[.Shane.]

The story isn't true, naturally. It's one of those right-wing chain emails like "The Christian Student versus the Atheist Professor" (I'm sure you've read various versions) in which the leftist antagonist receives a satisfying comeuppance.

YES! If anyone wants one of these written, I'm just your man!

For the low low price of $20, I will write you one in 30 minutes or so. Just answer the following:

Chain letter is to be sent to:
A. Fellow Rush fans
B. Fellow Air America fans

Chain letter should involve which of the following
A. Marine
B. God-fearing American patriot
C. Kindly grandmother
D. America hating homosexuals
E. Kittens
F. Spineless liberal
G. Frothing conservative
H. Minister
I. Angry teenager w/ emo haircut
J. World Bank protester
K. Limbless veteran
L. Pregnant welfare mother

Said event should take place in:
A. Hospital
B. Funeral of fallen soldier
C. Armed forces recruitment center
D. church
E. public high school
F. "Happy Days" style diner
G. godless liberal campus

Chain mail should contain which object(s):
A. US flag
B. bible
C. copy of the Declaration of Independene
D. copy of the US Constitution
E. prosthetic arm/leg
F. wheelchair
G. copy of Communist Manifesto

I'll have to work on the questionairre.

 

[garric]

I don't see what the point of this whole thing is. You're posting a fake story, to a forum that has about 500 liberals to one conservative, in an attempt to say how all of these things are stupid/hipocritical. Wouldn't it be easier for you to go into a cave and say all of your feelings out loud and listen to your own echo? It would serve the same purpose.

 

[.Shane.]

But, what do you think of the subtext of the story, that soldiers are due extra veneration and authority because they served?

...

What do you think about the rhetorical tactic that "Soldiers died so you could be antiAmerican/criticize the President/post things I disagree with," etc.?

TBH, you could've made this thread w/out posting that ******** chain letter. As you can see, people are nitpicking the story more than discussing the broader ideas you're getting at.

That aside, I think we overdo it. Serving is voluntary. Just like working in the Fire Department, the Forest Service, or at the Taco Bell drive thru.

Additionally, I'm willing to bet many, maybe even most, people who serve don't do so out of "patriotism" but for all the benefits that are passed out to entice people to enlist. Remember that cook who was captured in the first few days of the war? She seemed shocked that anything like that could possibly happen to her.

Also, servicepeople get tons of benefits that no one else gets. I'm not begrugding them these. My point is, a lot is already done to honor their service or reward them, regardless if their motivation to serve is altruistic or selfish.

Lastly, I find it funny that people who's entire livelihood is derived from sucking at the government teet can so often be so rabidly anti-government. They're quite happy to go to school on the GI Bill, get housing vouchers, free medical care, etc... but somehow its like a breeding ground for anti-government paranoids. The hypocricy and whining gets old.

ROFL, I wonder what would happen if I whined about the "conservative bias of the military" like so many others incessantly whine about the "liberal media". Oh, wait, I know, Toby Keith (or Kieth if you like) would put a boot in my ass.

I also wonder if people will accuse me of things that I didn't come anywhere near saying in this post... hmm..

 

[Kosez]

Why is it that the people who defend the troops the most and claim the highger ground regarding their sacrifice for the common good are also the same people willing to send them to war the fastest?

Most "Support our Troops" folks will send their companion to death without thinking about it twice. That's bizarre.

Yap, people are warmongers. They love wars, they just don't want to fight in them. But that is still much better than people that love wars and are willing to fight in them. Apparently history has not teached us nothing.

And yes, professor was a moral winner!

 

[sysyphus]

I don't see what the point of this whole thing is. You're posting a fake story, to a forum that has about 500 liberals to one conservative, in an attempt to say how all of these things are stupid/hipocritical. Wouldn't it be easier for you to go into a cave and say all of your feelings out loud and listen to your own echo? It would serve the same purpose.

The fact that this thread has drawn 23 posts so far (not including yours) shows that people are interested to discuss the topic. If you don't like it or find it useful then fine, don't read or post in it, but obviously other people do.

Retort the point if you like, but since it's obvious people are interested it seems to me you're the one making the pointless post.

 

[IglooDame]

Lastly, I find it funny that people who's entire livelihood is derived from sucking at the government teet can so often be so rabidly anti-government. They're quite happy to go to school on the GI Bill, get housing vouchers, free medical care, etc... but somehow its like a breeding ground for anti-government paranoids. The hypocricy and whining gets old.

The military is a breeding ground for anti-government paranoids?

 

[.Shane.]

The military is a breeding ground for anti-government paranoids?

I very much think so.

From my personal interactions w/ people who serve all the way down to well known public events, its seems that a commonality of people who are rabidly anti-government is that they are much more likely to have served.

Now, I acknowledge that this is purely opinion based on largely anectodotal evidence. I would be very curious to read any studies on the subject, however.

Also, my comment does imply that there's a causitive effect. Upon reflection, I think it could be correlative, just like the perception of media bias to the left.

Just curious, igloo, of your opinion of my other comments. Would you, for example, agree that the military swings right?

 

[IglooDame]

I very much think so.

From my personal interactions w/ people who serve all the way down to well known public events, its seems that a commonality of people who are rabidly anti-government is that they are much more likely to have served.

Now, I acknowledge that this is purely opinion based on largely anectodotal evidence. I would be very curious to read any studies on the subject, however.

Also, my comment does imply that there's a causitive effect. Upon reflection, I think it could be correlative, just like the perception of media bias to the left.

Just curious, igloo, of your opinion of my other comments. Would you, for example, agree that the military swings right?

I'd say that a solid two-thirds, if not more, of military members are Republicanish/conservatives.

That aside, I think we overdo it. Serving is voluntary. Just like working in the Fire Department, the Forest Service, or at the Taco Bell drive thru.

True, though volunteering to get shot at is a far cry from volunteering to ask "want fries with that" incessantly.

Additionally, I'm willing to bet many, maybe even most, people who serve don't do so out of "patriotism" but for all the benefits that are passed out to entice people to enlist. Remember that cook who was captured in the first few days of the war? She seemed shocked that anything like that could possibly happen to her.

I've never seen any very good numbers, and have seen other examples of similar "I never expected to actually be in combat" types in the active duty, reserves, and Guard components. But it's the same as for police - some do it to help people out, some do it because it pays the bills, and some do it because they're psychotic or tin-pot dictators. I can say that having helped run a MEPS for three years (where applicants become recruits and get shipped off to boot camp), my own sense was that the percentages were 60/40/1 and we tried hard to keep that last number down.

Also, servicepeople get tons of benefits that no one else gets. I'm not begrugding them these. My point is, a lot is already done to honor their service or reward them, regardless if their motivation to serve is altruistic or selfish.

The military folks also keep seeing surveys saying that their benefits are in some cases roughly equal to what civilian jobs of equivalent qualifications and experience command. On the other hand, there are junior enlisted that are below the poverty line that get sent overseas into hot areas for six months out of every 18 or 24. Having full medical/dental, cheap life insurance, 20yr retirement and such does little for those folks.

ROFL, I wonder what would happen if I whined about the "conservative bias of the military" like so many others incessantly whine about the "liberal media". Oh, wait, I know, Toby Keith (or Kieth if you like) would put a boot in my ass.

I know what you mean, but the military's conservative bias wouldn't seem to affect anyone, would it? It is like saying that most Hispanics are Catholic, or most doctors make a lot of money, or most lawyers are... ummm... familiar with the law. The media's bias is a factor because they're informing the Hispanics, doctors, lawyers, and military about what is going on in the world, and their bias gets communicated because their job is to communicate.

 

[garric]

Why is it that the people who defend the troops the most and claim the highger ground regarding their sacrifice for the common good are also the same people willing to send them to war the fastest?

Most "Support our Troops" folks will send their companion to death without thinking about it twice. That's bizarre.

************************************************************

You are not sending the soldiers to die, you are sending them to do their duty and what's right. It's a sacrifice. Much like the Americans sacrificed to save Europe from getting overrun by the Germans.

 

[IglooDame]

It is difficult for the French to understand honor and duty, and fighting the real fight.

Hang on while I come up with some sort of generalized slur regarding Russians, please.

You are not sending the soldiers to die, you are sending them to do their duty and what's right. It's a sacrifice. Much like the Americans sacrificed to save Europe from getting overrun by the Germans.

Americans also sacrificed to save America because a Nazi Europe would join with an Imperial Japan and threaten America itself.

 

[downtown]

It is difficult for the French to understand honor and duty, and fighting the real fight.

You are not sending the soldiers to die, you are sending them to do their duty and what's right. It's a sacrifice. Much like the Americans sacrificed to save Europe from getting overrun by the Germans.

Or what the French sacrificed so America could be her own country

 

[garric]

Hang on while I come up with some sort of generalized slur regarding Russians, please.



Americans also sacrificed to save America because a Nazi Europe would join with an Imperial Japan and threaten America itself.

The Americans could have as easily just defeated the Japanese and forgot about Europe.

Or they could have defended Britain until peace was signed, and then went home.

Or what the French sacrificed so America could be her own country

Different kind of French, it was the French monarchy acting out to curb England's power to balance the power.

 

[downtown]

Fine. Then the French sacrifices in WWI, Korea and Gulf War I...although I find this "different kind of French" bussiness total bull.

at any rate, i'll have my thoughts to the OP soon

 

[IglooDame]

The Americans could have as easily just defeated the Japanese and forgot about Europe.

Or they could have defended Britain until peace was signed, and then went home.

I'd recommend taking these two little gems into CFC's history forum, in order to avoid massive threadjacking.

 

[sysyphus]

You are not sending the soldiers to die, you are sending them to do their duty and what's right. It's a sacrifice.

Indeed it is a sacrifice, therefore it is every citizen's duty in a democracy to ensure that they are only called upon to make said sacrifice for a good reason.

The fact that the powers that be have started a war doesn't mean it's a good one.

 

[El_Machinae]

Every time I see this thread title, I want to yell out

"to paaaaaarTY!"

 

[Godwynn]

Every time I see this thread title, I want to yell out

"to paaaaaarTY!"

Isn't that Fight for your Right?

 

[Paradigne]

This is shocking!! Another right winger supporting violence to suppress freedom of speech? Who could have seen it coming?

I am all for freedom of speech. But not in the classroom. Students cannot state opinions contradicting proffesors for fear of failing, why should a math teacher be able to rant on politics?

 

[Perfection]

A soldier may be willing to do for his country, but that's not his duty. The soldier's duty is to kill for his country. Never forget that soldiers are killers.

 

[sysyphus]

A soldier may be willing to do for his country, but that's not his duty. The soldier's duty is to kill for his country. Never forget that soldiers are killers.

Not necessarily true. Soldiers also perform humanitarian tasks, especially in situations where it is too dangerous for civilians to do so, or to help civillian forces with logistics.

In Canada, they can even be asked to shovel snow!