If support then why not serve? - Page 4

Kerostasis · 08-01-2007, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steeler

I don't see how you would think I'm conflating the two. I will say that the standards for "success" are so shifting and dependent on one's personal politics that judging both the importance and probability of it is entirely subjective.

There is also the added wrinkle of determining whether or not the current path we take is actually getting us closer to your definition of success. It is possible to believe that a form of success is possible in Iraq AND that withdrawing troops is the wisest course of action to achieving that success.

Certainly, defining success and determining the path with the best probability of success are both tricky questions that we probably will not all agree on. However, given that you acknowledge opinions differ on how best to acheive success, is it not reasonable that the pundit arguing at home could consider his political contributions more useful towards that success than his physical contributions were he to enlist? How then is he a hypocrite?

Steeler · 08-02-2007, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerostasis

... is it not reasonable that the pundit arguing at home could consider his political contributions more useful towards that success than his physical contributions were he to enlist? How then is he a hypocrite?

If made by a pundit of age and physical means, I consider that line of reasoning to be an excuse for inaction. In this very thread, people have linked to commentators and journalists, such as Micheal Yon, who both serve or have served and still have the opportunity to effect political discourse. If anything, their willingness to place their own lives and health in jeopardy elevates their reporting above the normal chatter.

**leejo** · 08-02-2007, 03:47 PM

FWIW I do think that this is a time when men and women of age and ability should serve. This is why in 2002, at the ripe old age of 33, I attempted to enlist in the Army, spending a week at MEPS in San Antonio and countless hours chasing down 17-year-old unpaid parking tickets before finding out that an old back injury dq'd me. But this was a personal decision I made, and I certainly do not judge people who make a different personal decision. Had I been married with children then, as I am now, I doubt I would have felt free to do as I pleased in this regard.

I think everyone of age and ability should ask themselves why they aren't serving in the military. I wish I had, and many of the finest people I know did, or do serve. Each person's answer is his or hers alone, IMO, and none of my business, just as my answer is none of yours.

This thread seems less about encouraging people to serve and more about character assassination. Last year we endured the Kerry-inspired discussion about whether or not soldiers are stupid. Now this? Now those who don't serve are jerks? Why not cut to the chase and submit that those who disagree with you are evil, fools, or both?

To SERVE is to subordinate one's welfare and opinions. If anyone truly supports service, then his or her opinion on a particular mission is irrelevant. Folks seem to be discussing HELPING here. I imagine that enlisting in the military to HELP is a very bad idea: they seem to require much more commitment than that, and of course once the contract is signed the only out is to go AWOL or convince everyone you're a conscientious objector. Personally, I like the guys who gripe about the war but still do their jobs: it's the soldier's age-old duty to fight, and age-old right to gripe.

It seems to me that sniping at people who do not enlist in a war you do not support neither serves nor helps. It seems to me that if you claim that such people are hypocrites, you had better be wearing a uniform or have some medals in a closet. Otherwise, what does that make you?

But if it makes you feel better about yourself then go for it, I guess.

**TheSkudDestroyer** · 08-03-2007, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hambergler

OK, but how many people are buying this stuff from legitimate sources. Most people are getting this stuff from gas stations, and the millions of websites out there. I'm not sure if the Pakistani guy running my gas station is sending any money to the USO.

:-/

Because Pakistanis cant possibly be upstanding americans?

Hambergler · 08-03-2007, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSkudDestroyer

:-/

Because Pakistanis cant possibly be upstanding americans?

In this instance, The likelihood of a gas station being a "legitimate source" where funds are being donated to the USO is very low in IMO. Especially one that is run by someone who is a not an American.

So if you went to Pakistan to run a gas station, you would volunteer money to the Pakistani military?

Steeler · 08-03-2007, 10:01 AM

At one point there was one company selling yellow ribbon magnets on behalf of the USO, but 99% of the others out there are just selling them for profit, regardless of whether or not they are Pakistani.

**USN_Squid** · 08-03-2007, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFatKidDeath

I agree with the majority opinion of those currently serving in the military:

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

Now, that's an old poll. I'd be curious to see where those numbers stand now.

This poll just came out today.

Kerostasis · 08-03-2007, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by USN_Squid

This poll just came out today.

I think the only thing we learn from that poll is that we don't agree on anything. For example:

Quote:

Those with military ties are split over setting a timeline for withdrawal – 48% would favor withdrawal but 50% would oppose such a plan. There is a similar split when asked if the U.S. should begin the phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of the year – 50% agree while 46% disagree.

The military seems to be split pretty much down the middle. Numbers for the rest of America are slightly more disfavorable towards the war, but just as polarized--and Congress is still hovering around a 3% approval rating for its handling of the war. The President at least snags 24%.

Steeler · 08-03-2007, 11:33 AM

When the numbers get that low, really nobody has any flags to wave.

**CingularDuality** · 08-03-2007, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leejo

FWIW I do think that this is a time when men and women of age and ability should serve. This is why in 2002, at the ripe old age of 33, I attempted to enlist in the Army, spending a week at MEPS in San Antonio and countless hours chasing down 17-year-old unpaid parking tickets before finding out that an old back injury dq'd me. But this was a personal decision I made, and I certainly do not judge people who make a different personal decision. Had I been married with children then, as I am now, I doubt I would have felt free to do as I pleased in this regard.

I think everyone of age and ability should ask themselves why they aren't serving in the military. I wish I had, and many of the finest people I know did, or do serve. Each person's answer is his or hers alone, IMO, and none of my business, just as my answer is none of yours.

This thread seems less about encouraging people to serve and more about character assassination. Last year we endured the Kerry-inspired discussion about whether or not soldiers are stupid. Now this? Now those who don't serve are jerks? Why not cut to the chase and submit that those who disagree with you are evil, fools, or both?

To SERVE is to subordinate one's welfare and opinions. If anyone truly supports service, then his or her opinion on a particular mission is irrelevant. Folks seem to be discussing HELPING here. I imagine that enlisting in the military to HELP is a very bad idea: they seem to require much more commitment than that, and of course once the contract is signed the only out is to go AWOL or convince everyone you're a conscientious objector. Personally, I like the guys who gripe about the war but still do their jobs: it's the soldier's age-old duty to fight, and age-old right to gripe.

It seems to me that sniping at people who do not enlist in a war you do not support neither serves nor helps. It seems to me that if you claim that such people are hypocrites, you had better be wearing a uniform or have some medals in a closet. Otherwise, what does that make you?

But if it makes you feel better about yourself then go for it, I guess.

Hehehe...

It looks like we:

TheFatKidDeath · 08-03-2007, 04:50 PM

This get's to FatCobra's original question:

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/200...mo/index1.html

**El_Gringo_Grande** · 08-03-2007, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

Then again, maybe Heinlein was on to something... I still grapple with the concept of citizenship only being granted to those that have served in the Armed Forces. It does have a certain appeal...

Heinlein had it backwards in my opinion.

Service should not be a requirement for citizenship. Service, of some sort, should be required of all citizens.

As Leejo said, service is submitting the self to something larger. Good service is when you know your submittal will better many others. That the larger, in turn, serves the needs of it members. If we all had to submit ourselves to that "something larger" I would bet most would work really hard to ensure that larger entity was worth submitting to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leejo

It seems to me that sniping at people who do not enlist in a war you do not support neither serves nor helps.

For me personally it is not the fact they decide not to enlist that I find offensive.

It is the fact that many of that "type" will just as easily condemn those that speak out against the war as un-patriotic. Some even suggest that doing this is actually aiding the terrorists. I have personally heard some say "if you don't support the war then go to some other country".

So in those peoples minds they have decided that their level of support is the standard to be measured by and anything below their standard borders on criminal. They have set the standards by which we all should live up to.

That is why I find this video so amusing. It points out the fact that there is no set standard of support. That you can look at many of the staunch supporters and claim they do not really support the war. And their own reactions kinda play into this.

Funny stuff.

**sordavie** · 08-03-2007, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hambergler

In this instance, The likelihood of a gas station being a "legitimate source" where funds are being donated to the USO is very low in IMO. Especially one that is run by someone who is a not an American.

So if you went to Pakistan to run a gas station, you would volunteer money to the Pakistani military?

Wow...

**CingularDuality** · 08-03-2007, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hambergler

In this instance, The likelihood of a gas station being a "legitimate source" where funds are being donated to the USO is very low in IMO. Especially one that is run by someone who is a not an American.

So if you went to Pakistan to run a gas station, you would volunteer money to the Pakistani military?

I missed this the last time I hit this thread.

This is the most ignorant thing I've read in a long time. What makes you think that the man behind the counter with the accent hasn't worked his whole life to live the American dream? Every day I see people like YOU that take their citizenship for granted, and every day I see people that have worked (or are working) their ass off just to become a US Citizen. The folks that have naturalized from countries that we consider to be terrorist nations are often the most vocal supporters of the US Armed Forces that I've ever met. They KNOW what it's like in those countries and they know what needs to be done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Gringo_Grande

Heinlein had it backwards in my opinion.

Service should not be a requirement for citizenship. Service, of some sort, should be required of all citizens.

As Leejo said, service is submitting the self to something larger. Good service is when you know your submittal will better many others. That the larger, in turn, serves the needs of it members. If we all had to submit ourselves to that "something larger" I would bet most would work really hard to ensure that larger entity was worth submitting to.

What would be their motivation? We're living amongst people that think that Paris Hilton's stay in jail was a tragic injustice, and you think that people will just volunteer to contribute to society? It's not like the Peace Corps is turning people down left and right because they have too many volunteers...

It's exactly this fact, that so many Americans simply don't think of anything but themselves most of the time, that makes me think Heinlein's idea has merit.

FatCobra · 08-03-2007, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFatKidDeath

This get's to FatCobra's original question:

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/200...mo/index1.html

You saying that if you support the war, you should serve?

08-02-2007, 03:47 PM	#48 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,683	Re: If support then why not serve? FWIW I do think that this is a time when men and women of age and ability should serve. This is why in 2002, at the ripe old age of 33, I attempted to enlist in the Army, spending a week at MEPS in San Antonio and countless hours chasing down 17-year-old unpaid parking tickets before finding out that an old back injury dq'd me. But this was a personal decision I made, and I certainly do not judge people who make a different personal decision. Had I been married with children then, as I am now, I doubt I would have felt free to do as I pleased in this regard. I think everyone of age and ability should ask themselves why they aren't serving in the military. I wish I had, and many of the finest people I know did, or do serve. Each person's answer is his or hers alone, IMO, and none of my business, just as my answer is none of yours. This thread seems less about encouraging people to serve and more about character assassination. Last year we endured the Kerry-inspired discussion about whether or not soldiers are stupid. Now this? Now those who don't serve are jerks? Why not cut to the chase and submit that those who disagree with you are evil, fools, or both? To SERVE is to subordinate one's welfare and opinions. If anyone truly supports service, then his or her opinion on a particular mission is irrelevant. Folks seem to be discussing HELPING here. I imagine that enlisting in the military to HELP is a very bad idea: they seem to require much more commitment than that, and of course once the contract is signed the only out is to go AWOL or convince everyone you're a conscientious objector. Personally, I like the guys who gripe about the war but still do their jobs: it's the soldier's age-old duty to fight, and age-old right to gripe. It seems to me that sniping at people who do not enlist in a war you do not support neither serves nor helps. It seems to me that if you claim that such people are hypocrites, you had better be wearing a uniform or have some medals in a closet. Otherwise, what does that make you? But if it makes you feel better about yourself then go for it, I guess. Last edited by leejo; 08-02-2007 at 04:38 PM.

08-03-2007, 10:01 AM	#51 (permalink)
Steeler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Age: 30 Posts: 2,952	Re: If support then why not serve? At one point there was one company selling yellow ribbon magnets on behalf of the USO, but 99% of the others out there are just selling them for profit, regardless of whether or not they are Pakistani. __________________

08-03-2007, 11:33 AM	#54 (permalink)
Steeler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Age: 30 Posts: 2,952	Re: If support then why not serve? When the numbers get that low, really nobody has any flags to wave. __________________

08-03-2007, 04:50 PM	#56 (permalink)
TheFatKidDeath Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Santa Monica, CA Age: 39 Posts: 2,713	Re: If support then why not serve? This get's to FatCobra's original question: http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/200...mo/index1.html __________________ \|TG-9th\| TheFatKidDeath "Born to Party, Forced to Work." http://www.theonion.com/content/node/55640 - Check me out on The Onion http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...ssfully_avoids - I'm on the local news!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links