<strong>fallacies abound, as is often the case in leftist rhetoric, not that the peace marche is neccessarily leftist, but SJO is, so there. Anyway, fallacy abounds, as it also does when the commisars of the right speak their mind, but for now let us focus on what's presented from the unshaven pitt groupies.
Does war scar? Yes. But whom does it scar? WW2 vets came home and went to work, raised families, paid taxes and built a country up. Vietnam vets came home bought Harley's and rumbled drugs and hookers across middle america. Gulf war vets came home and went to the couch or the street corner?
I think it may have something to do with who joins the army in the first place. I would have to see the vets in question to really say if we're talking about people scarred by war exactly or people who went to war because they were already scarred by society?
A poor boy who fights Uncle Sams wars because he hasn't any other options, comes home and still finds himself without options is going to feel very very dissolusioned. I believe other factors besides hard learned appreciation of pacifism is at issue.
Excuse me for my incoherence, I'm wont to bable in these fora, I'll restate.
Soldiers do not often return home to protest war, they protest, but whatever they may call it, they really protest their unsatisfactory stake in civilian life.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A lot of this has to do with why those wars were fought. WWII vets came home to a hero's welcome because that was generally recognised as an honourable conflict ( for a good reason ). The others have reasons that are a little hazy to just plain wrong.
This is not to say that these people who fought for their country deserved this treatment. It's just why. For WWII there were no doubts. When they left everybody was behind them.
It's those wars with the other agenda. If we fight a war in Iraq it'll be much the same.
I think ( unlike some of the more gung ho armchair generals here ) most of them who have been in combat would agree war is hell and to be avoided if you can.
More than that are already OVER THERE aboard ships, submarines, aircraft, etc etc. Which is where I'll be in a few months, on the USS ENTERPRISE.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think he was talking about gathering of their own free will. Not because they signed up and were ordered to.
<strong>What of the many war veterans who are for war?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Didn't you hear? They don't count.
Lefties can't count, as groverat pointed out, but that's different.
Why should we assume that veterans can't be misguided and/or ignorant of the current situation? Nobody who's ever been in combat (this is different from "veterans" in general) will wish it upon anyone else. That's only rational. But are these folks qualified to evaluate the danger to the nation and world and speak out on it? Their opinion is nothing more than that, no more valuable than my opinion.
And pointing out the demographics of the homeless population would seem to weaken the Left's argument here.
I think this shows that even veterans can be used by politicians for propaganda purposes. That's what these protests are -- a political anti-Bush lovefest.
I know 4 war vets on a very close, personal level. All 4 are pro-war. I know about 10 (not including the previous 4) on a less personal level. All 10 of them are pro-war. I have never met a war vet who is against the war. I know 8 current soldiers, all pro-war.
Think of how many war vets were in San Francisco at the time. Now think of how many were protesting. Hmmm.
It's idiotic to even imply that war vets in general are against the war. Even thought I believe it I won't try to convince anyone that war vets are for the war.
Using SJO's silly and inane argument we should all be pro war because I don't think you get a more horrific war experience than my grandfather in WWII and he's wanted to regulate on Saddam since the mid-1990s. Will I use that to advance my pro-war position? No, I'm not dense enough to believe that such anecdotal evidence is valid.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right. It's anecdotal (really) that none of the dozens of vets or active duty personnel that I keep in touch with are anti-war. It's also anecdotal that all of the thinking professionals I know (business leaders, ministers, educators, etc.) are also not anti-war.
As for the military being over there, they all volunteered because they thought the mission was worthwhile. This mission hasn't suddenly changed -- the showdown in the Gulf has been building for many years now. They all voted with their feet on this one.
Nobody is ever PRO-WAR. And those of us who think the demonstrations are stupid don't have time to protest the protests. We're too busy working and keeping the country rolling.
I think this shows that even veterans can be used by politicians for propaganda purposes. That's what these protests are -- a political anti-Bush lovefest.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure if this refers to my post, it could. I haven't been the clearest lately, so I wonder if my rambling registers as anything more coherent than ramblings. Anyway, if you are refering to me, yes, I agree. What I wrote, I meant in a completely apolitical way. Sure protesting war vets means something, but just what it really means is up in the air, for better or worse.
I'm not sure if this refers to my post</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nope, not you specifically. Your post about civilian life for vets was a good one, but overstates the role of the discontented veterans. Regardless of the war they fought in, the "rebel without a clue" contingent of vets remains a fringe group. Everything should be done to help them with health care and psychological adaptation, because they're vets. But the overwhelming majority of vets, and the overwhelming majority of combat vets (much smaller group) return to civilian life and do well, raise families, etc. Do they bear a lot of pain? Sure, for the rest of their lives. But the fact is that most "common" soldiers come home and put it behind them, or use their experiences to teach about the dangers of unchecked aggression and the weakness of political "solutions."
Oh I know, I tend to think out loud and not really organize my thoughts when I post. I still have to get work done most days, so when I post (too often)* I don't organize my words or weight my argumenst properly. I'd like to pretend it's experimental but it's really just the chaos of the way I think and the inability of my fingers to keep up.
* though not experimental in any way, this is a nice double entendre to the apositive (too often). Fun little things like that pop up in web discussion, I always look out for them.
As for you Mr Finboy, a Steinbeck fan such as yourself should have a more pitious spirit, iThink. Though perhaps pity is just a kind of moral narcism that builds the nurse at the expense of the patient.
actually lifting sanctions would give the oil dollars to iraq, then russia, then france....i don't think we have rights to iraqs oil except to buy it...unless we attack and claim the fields....g
ps...we have already claimed oil rich cities in northern iraq as off limits to turkey and the kurds if we attack....we will control those cities and oil fields according to our government...g
[quote] Nobody is ever PRO-WAR. And those of us who think the demonstrations are stupid don't have time to protest the protests. We're too busy working and keeping the country rolling. <hr></blockquote>
you may not agree with the demonstrations, but to think demonstrations are stupid is to be somewhat un-american....demonstrations are about freedom and the american way....
all the people i know at the demonstrations are hard working americans who pay lots of taxes and help this country be as strong as it can...hell, my family thinks i keep the economy running just with my home theater and computer addiction....and i have two teenage daughters who love to shop....
i wonder if cities like hosting demonstrations?? lots of people traveling, eating in town, buying gas....hell, we need more demonstrations to give this economy a kickstart....if you love your country you will go out and demonstrate and throw some dollars at the cities that need it right now....g
ps...some people are pro-war...they are called insane mostly....also, people become more pro-war as they age past the age of service....or so it seems.....g
<strong>actually lifting sanctions would give the oil dollars to iraq, then russia, then france....i don't think we have rights to iraqs oil except to buy it...unless we attack and claim the fields....g
[quote]<strong>Then why did you ask about the vets that are for the war?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because, as is her wont, SJO was blowing one side way out of proportion, making a broad generalization based on a very small group.
-
jimmac:
[quote]<strong>The others have reasons that are a little hazy to just plain wrong.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know what's funny about that? You have one group that can acknowledge the sometimes shady reasons and treat vets with respect, some that ignore the shady reasons and treat vets with respect and then those who acknowledge the shady reasons and spit on them.
Now, don't think about this too long, who does more to screw with their minds? Hmmmm.
here's a little snippet from an email my brother sent me. gives you a little insight into what's going on in his head during our build up overseas.
he's currently flying out of turkey. sounds like it's cold as hell there right now. not fun.
[quote]Not much to report here in the "war zone. We 're flying evey day but the weather is kicking our butts it so bad this time of year. We end up dumping 50-60 thousand pounds of gas every day into the Med. Makes you want to eat sea food....yum.
We are frozen in place for the time being. The longer this inspection thing drags out the longer we'll be stuck here. I wish we'd get on with it or surrender...I don't much care which one it is. I just don't want to spend any more time with thumbs up you know where waiting for this to play out. <hr></blockquote>
<strong>actually lifting sanctions would give the oil dollars to iraq, then russia, then france....i don't think we have rights to iraqs oil except to buy it...unless we attack and claim the fields....g </strong><hr></blockquote>
Comments
<strong>You think so. I thought it was just so so.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just goes to show you that we can't agree on anything.
<strong>fallacies abound, as is often the case in leftist rhetoric, not that the peace marche is neccessarily leftist, but SJO is, so there. Anyway, fallacy abounds, as it also does when the commisars of the right speak their mind, but for now let us focus on what's presented from the unshaven pitt groupies.
Does war scar? Yes. But whom does it scar? WW2 vets came home and went to work, raised families, paid taxes and built a country up. Vietnam vets came home bought Harley's and rumbled drugs and hookers across middle america. Gulf war vets came home and went to the couch or the street corner?
I think it may have something to do with who joins the army in the first place. I would have to see the vets in question to really say if we're talking about people scarred by war exactly or people who went to war because they were already scarred by society?
A poor boy who fights Uncle Sams wars because he hasn't any other options, comes home and still finds himself without options is going to feel very very dissolusioned. I believe other factors besides hard learned appreciation of pacifism is at issue.
Excuse me for my incoherence, I'm wont to bable in these fora, I'll restate.
Soldiers do not often return home to protest war, they protest, but whatever they may call it, they really protest their unsatisfactory stake in civilian life.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A lot of this has to do with why those wars were fought. WWII vets came home to a hero's welcome because that was generally recognised as an honourable conflict ( for a good reason ). The others have reasons that are a little hazy to just plain wrong.
This is not to say that these people who fought for their country deserved this treatment. It's just why. For WWII there were no doubts. When they left everybody was behind them.
It's those wars with the other agenda. If we fight a war in Iraq it'll be much the same.
I think ( unlike some of the more gung ho armchair generals here ) most of them who have been in combat would agree war is hell and to be avoided if you can.
[ 02-22-2003: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
<strong>
How about gather up 200,000 of them to stage a demonstration in favor of war and we'll talk about them....</strong><hr></blockquote>
More than that are already OVER THERE aboard ships, submarines, aircraft, etc etc. Which is where I'll be in a few months, on the USS ENTERPRISE.
<strong>
More than that are already OVER THERE aboard ships, submarines, aircraft, etc etc. Which is where I'll be in a few months, on the USS ENTERPRISE.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think he was talking about gathering of their own free will. Not because they signed up and were ordered to.
But anyway may you return home safe and sound.
<strong>What of the many war veterans who are for war?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Didn't you hear? They don't count.
Lefties can't count, as groverat pointed out, but that's different.
Why should we assume that veterans can't be misguided and/or ignorant of the current situation? Nobody who's ever been in combat (this is different from "veterans" in general) will wish it upon anyone else. That's only rational. But are these folks qualified to evaluate the danger to the nation and world and speak out on it? Their opinion is nothing more than that, no more valuable than my opinion.
And pointing out the demographics of the homeless population would seem to weaken the Left's argument here.
I think this shows that even veterans can be used by politicians for propaganda purposes. That's what these protests are -- a political anti-Bush lovefest.
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: finboy ]</p>
<strong>
I know 4 war vets on a very close, personal level. All 4 are pro-war. I know about 10 (not including the previous 4) on a less personal level. All 10 of them are pro-war. I have never met a war vet who is against the war. I know 8 current soldiers, all pro-war.
Think of how many war vets were in San Francisco at the time. Now think of how many were protesting. Hmmm.
It's idiotic to even imply that war vets in general are against the war. Even thought I believe it I won't try to convince anyone that war vets are for the war.
Using SJO's silly and inane argument we should all be pro war because I don't think you get a more horrific war experience than my grandfather in WWII and he's wanted to regulate on Saddam since the mid-1990s. Will I use that to advance my pro-war position? No, I'm not dense enough to believe that such anecdotal evidence is valid.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right. It's anecdotal (really) that none of the dozens of vets or active duty personnel that I keep in touch with are anti-war. It's also anecdotal that all of the thinking professionals I know (business leaders, ministers, educators, etc.) are also not anti-war.
As for the military being over there, they all volunteered because they thought the mission was worthwhile. This mission hasn't suddenly changed -- the showdown in the Gulf has been building for many years now. They all voted with their feet on this one.
Nobody is ever PRO-WAR. And those of us who think the demonstrations are stupid don't have time to protest the protests. We're too busy working and keeping the country rolling.
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: finboy ]</p>
<strong>
I think this shows that even veterans can be used by politicians for propaganda purposes. That's what these protests are -- a political anti-Bush lovefest.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not sure if this refers to my post, it could. I haven't been the clearest lately, so I wonder if my rambling registers as anything more coherent than ramblings. Anyway, if you are refering to me, yes, I agree. What I wrote, I meant in a completely apolitical way. Sure protesting war vets means something, but just what it really means is up in the air, for better or worse.
<strong>
I'm not sure if this refers to my post</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nope, not you specifically. Your post about civilian life for vets was a good one, but overstates the role of the discontented veterans. Regardless of the war they fought in, the "rebel without a clue" contingent of vets remains a fringe group. Everything should be done to help them with health care and psychological adaptation, because they're vets. But the overwhelming majority of vets, and the overwhelming majority of combat vets (much smaller group) return to civilian life and do well, raise families, etc. Do they bear a lot of pain? Sure, for the rest of their lives. But the fact is that most "common" soldiers come home and put it behind them, or use their experiences to teach about the dangers of unchecked aggression and the weakness of political "solutions."
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: finboy ]</p>
* though not experimental in any way, this is a nice double entendre to the apositive (too often). Fun little things like that pop up in web discussion, I always look out for them.
As for you Mr Finboy, a Steinbeck fan such as yourself should have a more pitious spirit, iThink. Though perhaps pity is just a kind of moral narcism that builds the nurse at the expense of the patient.
<strong>
Nobody is ever PRO-WAR. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Except Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld. It's the quickest route to the oil dollars I guess.
<strong>
Except Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld. It's the quickest route to the oil dollars I guess.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The quicker cheaper route would be lifting the UN sanctions. So ... you're wrong.
ps...we have already claimed oil rich cities in northern iraq as off limits to turkey and the kurds if we attack....we will control those cities and oil fields according to our government...g
you may not agree with the demonstrations, but to think demonstrations are stupid is to be somewhat un-american....demonstrations are about freedom and the american way....
all the people i know at the demonstrations are hard working americans who pay lots of taxes and help this country be as strong as it can...hell, my family thinks i keep the economy running just with my home theater and computer addiction....and i have two teenage daughters who love to shop....
i wonder if cities like hosting demonstrations?? lots of people traveling, eating in town, buying gas....hell, we need more demonstrations to give this economy a kickstart....if you love your country you will go out and demonstrate and throw some dollars at the cities that need it right now....g
ps...some people are pro-war...they are called insane mostly....also, people become more pro-war as they age past the age of service....or so it seems.....g
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
<strong>actually lifting sanctions would give the oil dollars to iraq, then russia, then france....i don't think we have rights to iraqs oil except to buy it...unless we attack and claim the fields....g
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Global oil market.
[quote]<strong>Then why did you ask about the vets that are for the war?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because, as is her wont, SJO was blowing one side way out of proportion, making a broad generalization based on a very small group.
-
jimmac:
[quote]<strong>The others have reasons that are a little hazy to just plain wrong.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know what's funny about that? You have one group that can acknowledge the sometimes shady reasons and treat vets with respect, some that ignore the shady reasons and treat vets with respect and then those who acknowledge the shady reasons and spit on them.
Now, don't think about this too long, who does more to screw with their minds? Hmmmm.
he's currently flying out of turkey. sounds like it's cold as hell there right now. not fun.
[quote]Not much to report here in the "war zone. We 're flying evey day but the weather is kicking our butts it so bad this time of year. We end up dumping 50-60 thousand pounds of gas every day into the Med. Makes you want to eat sea food....yum.
We are frozen in place for the time being. The longer this inspection thing drags out the longer we'll be stuck here. I wish we'd get on with it or surrender...I don't much care which one it is. I just don't want to spend any more time with thumbs up you know where waiting for this to play out. <hr></blockquote>
i hope your brother stays save and sound....g
<strong>actually lifting sanctions would give the oil dollars to iraq, then russia, then france....i don't think we have rights to iraqs oil except to buy it...unless we attack and claim the fields....g </strong><hr></blockquote>
So ... scott is wrong.