Saying Goodbye

[Delija]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

First of all, the Bible is not the manual of the United States; the Constitution is.

That's SUPPOSED to be true!

Originally Posted by Etta Place

It galls me that the same people who don't want our government to lift a finger to help people suffering in this country or rebuild failing infrastructure in this country are so eager to see our government doing these same things in other countries. If the government is so corrupt and inept, why do we trust them to do it right somewhere else??

I believe in a "humble" foreign policy, one that doesn't think that we know best how everybody else should run their lives and their countries.

Very nicely stated!!!

Peace,
D.

[jtkratzer]

Originally Posted by Delija

He served six years. If he was "misinformed" then I guess it's safe to say this is a matter of opinion.

He said that most who posted had not served. That was an incorrect assessment. There were others as well.

Originally Posted by Delija

While I believe that (as someone said) JKSwiss was probably having a bad day, and he did go a bit overboard when he reacted to the follow up posts. There was no reason for him to make the personal assertions he made (in a few cases). But it's quite a stretch implying that he was disrespectful of our service men and women.

Calling those members here who had served "chicken hawks" is in my view, disrespectful.

Originally Posted by Delija

I've followed JKSwiss's post for a long time. I paid more attention than normal because I knew he had done what my son was learning to do at the time I first was aware of JKSwiss's military duty. In all those years I never once felt he was in any way not supportive of our military and in particular of the people who served and serve now.

It only takes one post for the first time, right?

Originally Posted by Delija

First off, when JKSwiss enlisted, it was both long after the first Gulf War and long before 9.11, so how could he not "support the war" when there was no war in Iraq nor an attack of 9/11 without a crystal ball? And no Bush administration with a plan to attack and no plan to end the war. Other than the delusion that we'd be welcomed as liberators as we were in Paris in 1944.

I meant in general. There was much talk about children and high school kids...they're old enough to vote and their old enough to enlist. It's a choice. People are still enlisting and joining knowing they will see time overseas and more than likely in combat. I'm going through it right now. It's a choice.

[jtkratzer]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

Excuse me while I go get my red, white and blue pom poms and my bejeweled Old Glory earrings!

Have at it, but can you keep up with the pretty girls on TV?

Originally Posted by Etta Place

First of all, the Bible is not the manual of the United States; the Constitution is.

No, but many of the principles I talked about are common ground for morals in general. Face it, there are more people who follow a Judeo-Christian type faith than any other in our government. Doesn't make it the standard, but it certainly has an influence, but as I said, thou shall not murder and thou shall not steal are pretty straight forward and you shouldn't need a book to tell you that.

Originally Posted by Etta Place

Second, if individuals in the U.S. want to help people in other countries, they can join the Peace Corps. Same goes for the guys and gals who want to join the military to do good works. There are many organizations worldwide that help people in impoverished or war torn countries. I'm sure many of them are helping Iraqi refugees as we speak!!

And those people helping the Iraqis weren't there until there was a relative degree of security. How many times have the UN Peacekeepers been withdrawn due to violence in Africa and around the world? Those organizations generally go in after the dust clears.

Originally Posted by Etta Place

When my tax dollars and those of others go to pay for wars that we don't believe in, that is not me saying, "Oh, I want to help these people." That is my government forcing me to help people or kill people or bomb a country back to the Stone Age.

What's your point? I can say the same about the welfare system here within our borders. I can say the same about government funded housing. I can say the same for food stamps. I can say the same about all the general benefits handed out without any sort of system to ensure that people aren't making a living and lifestyle at my (and your) expense. At least with the war in Iraq, we don't have a Saddam Hussein committing terrible acts violating basically every human right of any person he feels like.

Originally Posted by Etta Place

I say we take care of this country first, get our own house in order, and act as an example for the rest of the world. Maybe then these lame countries would get their act together and not depend on Uncle Sam to help them out of whatever jam they're in. Of course, most of the jams they're in are probably the result of U.S. and other Western countries' exploitation.

Another America-hating comment, no surprise. It's always our fault when natural disasters strike. It's always our fault when civil war in Africa breaks out. It's always our fault when people are oppressed under tyrannical dictatorships. It's always our fault the Cubans haven't been allowed to have cell phones, microwaves, or electric rice cookers until recently. It's always our fault. If you hate the US and western culture so much, go join Al-Qaeda.

Originally Posted by Etta Place

It galls me that the same people who don't want our government to lift a finger to help people suffering in this country or rebuild failing infrastructure in this country are so eager to see our government doing these same things in other countries. If the government is so corrupt and inept, why do we trust them to do it right somewhere else??

I'm tired of the stuff the government is doing here. I don't want our federal government to do anything but repeal all the crap and garbage legislation that has brought this country down.

It galls me that people live in this country and criticize everything about it. It galls me that people want to stay American citizens, but hate this country, its military, its lifestyle, its system of economics, and everything else about it.

Originally Posted by Etta Place

I believe in a "humble" foreign policy, one that doesn't think that we know best how everybody else should run their lives and their countries.

Sure. You probably think Saddam was good for those people. You probably think Che Guevara was great for all the Jews and Catholics. You probably thought Castro was great for freedom and individual liberty.

[Se2002]

Originally Posted by DanTheEldest

In a spirit of full disclosure, I'll admit to not having served. I look back now and wonder why I never did (and I can't really find a good reason), and I don't mind saying it's one of the biggest regrets of my life. My hat's off all the more to those who did, regardless of their political bent.

+1

[one-eyed-fatman]

Well this threads going nicely.

[KEVWYO]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Etta Place
I believe in a "humble" foreign policy, one that doesn't think that we know best how everybody else should run their lives and their countries.

Originally Posted by jtkratzer

Sure. You probably think Saddam was good for those people. You probably think Che Guevara was great for all the Jews and Catholics. You probably thought Castro was great for freedom and individual liberty.

This seems to be a little bit over the top in your reaction .... a bit disingenuous. I don't believe Etta was saying anything close to what you suggest.

Humble foreign policy doesn't mean supporting despots and dictators. It does mean being intelligent enough to know that we (the government) should have war gamed the entire Iraq thing out. They should have "what if'd" it to death. As the SEAL's say it should've been "dirt dived". It's quite obvious that that didn't happen. Humble foreign policy is being smart enough to know that waiting, watching, and seeing in some cases is better for the country than doing an invasion without planning beyond that.

In regards to the OP .... seems that some replys fall into the "freedom isn't free" perspective. I am curious ... would you have the guts to attend a service persons funeral and tell the immediate grieveing family "I am sorry for your loss but freedom isn't free"? What would be your reaction to such a comment if it was your child sealed in the casket?

The OP came from an emotional perspective as best as I can tell. While the words that came with the pic's took the tact of a bull in a china shop I was able to sift throught the crap to understand the general point the OP was trying to make. To draw an analogy from an analogy ... some reply's in this thread seem to be more interested in the broken china and the bull rather than the message.

Knowing what I know now I am trying to figure out what it is that we as a country are still doing in Iraq. Saddam & Son's, Inc. are out of business and there do not appear to be WMD's. So why are we still there that fits into the original justification for being there in the first place? With Afghanistan becoming more dangerous by the month because of a resurging Taliban an al Qaeda why are we not refocusing on that ****ty hole in the ground? (BTW, sending 3000 Marines in is a start but hardly a refocusing. Further, either NATO steps up or they find a new place in a new country less the US to waste time and money).

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by jtkratzer

As much as people want to throw around terms and use them as insults, many are used improperly. Painting with a broad brush with the use of the term "neocon" is just one example.

The original poster was about as misinformed as it gets when it comes to his assessment of the situation, the volunteers who enter the service, where those volunteers come from, their mindset, etc. etc. etc. and he was equally misinformed in his assessment of those who served in the service and what their beliefs would be on the issue and his insulting of us all. His terminology to insult us wasn't even right.

The drivel that spewed from his mouth was typical of the hippie left crowd. It's the same stuff you hear from the numerous democrats who supported the war and were all gung ho until it became politically fashionable to be anti-war.

I think people who don't respect our service men and women are anti-american. You can be anti-war and still be patriotic. You can disagree with the foreign policy and still be patriotic. You cannot, however, insult our troops and be patriotic. If you want to disrespect someone, go after the politicians who are responsible for ordering the military around.

One more thing, if you don't support the war, why join the service?



It not be out of line to have different views, but to use terminology to insult us as clueless, blind, brainwashed followers is wrong. If you say stuff like that, I don't care what the rest of your post includes. I have no respect for people who feel it necessary to insult people for simply having different views.

I don't insult people who have different political views than I do. I simply point out where I believe they're wrong and their views are flawed. When someone insults me over the views I have after we've been debating the issues and facts, I take it as a compliment that I've won the debate because there is no reason to resort to insults unless you don't have anything else left to back your views up.

Yea, pretty much everything you said makes sense.
So why continue the false labeling by calling others, via a broad brush, America-hating idiots ??
It seems you, I and many others had won the argument when the broad painting brush of false accusations started being used by the OP.

ETA: But as I read further, I see you are now painting a picture for/of Etta. Best of luck!! The proper angle to win this argument/discussion is on page 46 of the playbook

[jtkratzer]

Originally Posted by KEVWYO

This seems to be a little bit over the top in your reaction .... a bit disingenuous. I don't believe Etta was saying anything close to what you suggest.

Maybe, maybe not. But her responses are completely predictable and typically anti-American.

Originally Posted by KEVWYO

In regards to the OP .... seems that some replys fall into the "freedom isn't free" perspective. I am curious ... would you have the guts to attend a service persons funeral and tell the immediate grieveing family "I am sorry for your loss but freedom isn't free"? What would be your reaction to such a comment if it was your child sealed in the casket?

That wouldn't be the appropriate time. Most families will mourn the loss of a loved one regardless of whether or not they support the conflict where that loved one gave his/her life. However, of those I've talked to that have lost a loved one, they all understand the concept and after the morning/grieving process has gone on long enough, they are still proud of that loved one and his/her sacrifice.

It would be equally out of line to attend the funeral of someone who died while driving drunk and tell the family, "Stupid bast@rd shouldn't have been drinking!"

Originally Posted by KEVWYO

The OP came from an emotional perspective as best as I can tell. While the words that came with the pic's took the tact of a bull in a china shop I was able to sift throught the crap to understand the general point the OP was trying to make. To draw an analogy from an analogy ... some reply's in this thread seem to be more interested in the broken china and the bull rather than the message.

As I stated, I doubt it's a true before and after picture where the guy the "kid brother" is hugging is ultimately the deceased in the coffin. I would wager it's two selected pictures to create and emotional response. Has this situation happened but yet to be photographed? Maybe, probably, but I find it to be intellectually dishonest to cheat people into feeling an emotion with pictures of something that didn't occur the way it's being portrayed.

You want to evoke an emotional response to the war like this attempt, try this one:

Originally Posted by KEVWYO

Knowing what I know now I am trying to figure out what it is that we as a country are still doing in Iraq. Saddam & Son's, Inc. are out of business and there do not appear to be WMD's. So why are we still there that fits into the original justification for being there in the first place? With Afghanistan becoming more dangerous by the month because of a resurging Taliban an al Qaeda why are we not refocusing on that ****ty hole in the ground? (BTW, sending 3000 Marines in is a start but hardly a refocusing. Further, either NATO steps up or they find a new place in a new country less the US to waste time and money).

I agree, get NATO out and then get out of NATO...the same could be said of the UN...

[jtkratzer]

Originally Posted by AZXD

Yea, pretty much everything you said makes sense.
So why continue the false labeling by calling others, via a broad brush, America-hating idiots ??
It seems you, I and many others had won the argument when the broad painting brush of false accusations started being used by the OP.

The statement wasn't directed at the original poster. It was a response to the question someone posed to LUVMYSIG when he said "one down."

As far as I'm concerned, America-haters can leave the forum. For that matter, they can leave the country. Exactly why I suggest Obama and Clinton, and well, McCain is getting there, I suggest they all find a new country to live it and run for public office who would be more receptive to their Marxist anti-American ideals.

[jtkratzer]

Originally Posted by AZXD

ETA: But as I read further, I see you are now painting a picture for/of Etta. Best of luck!! The proper angle to win this argument/discussion is on page 46 of the playbook

If I remember correctly, that's the ignore function play to the left on 2, right?