It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by crgintx
You cannot paint all wealthy people as neo-con's who support the war.
Originally posted by grover
I will say thanks this time Zappa BUT, and I know I will get a ration of poop for this, but it has always kinda bugged me when people thank me for my military service. I did not do anything especially noble, I was paid, recieved educational and other benefits and a 30% disability now for a very messed up knee injured while in. In short I was compensated for my service i.e. it was a job.
Originally posted by grover I object to military personal being called heroes (or sports figures even more so) unless they do something above and beyond the call of duty, for the very same reasons.
Originally posted by groverThere is nothing noble about war and nothing especially noble spending your youth preparing for it. There is nothing noble obeying an order to go to war, considering the club called the Military Code of Justice they hold over your head, and its penalties if you do not comply.
Originally posted by groverFor the majority of our service people, in combat or not, it is a job, a way to get ahead, even for the lifers and like I said unless they do something above and beyond the call of duty, they are not heroes. That word should be saved for the truly heroic, like the off duty first responders who rushed to the World Trade Center, even though they didn't have, and died.
Originally posted by groverThis is not to disparage our military personal, but a statement of facts, or at the very least, how I see it and it is not to say there are not noble or heroic acts in war, there are, but htey are individual cases...for the rest, its just a job.
Originally posted by df1
Originally posted by crgintx
You cannot paint all wealthy people as neo-con's who support the war.
This is not an issue of ideology. The children of the wealthy have more opportunities available than the children of the middle class and the poor so they are less likely to choose the military as a career or as a means to get financial assistance for education. I make no judgement one way or the other as to whether this is desireable. However I would conjecture that of the 40k deserters that very few are wealthy because those with power and money have other means to get out of military service.
The best solution would be to allow folks in the military the ability to resign just like with any other job.
[edit on 7-8-2006 by df1]
Originally posted by grover
The seperation to Church and State is enunciated in the Bill of Rights which is the preamble to the constitution so yes it is in the constitution... to say otherwise is splitting hairs.
Originally posted by Pyros
Your premise is based upon the assumption that military servce is viewed as undesirable by those of the "upper class".
ABC News
In all, about 1 percent of U.S. representatives and senators have a child in uniform. And the Capitol building is no different from other places where the leadership class in this country gathers — no different from the boardrooms, newsrooms, ivory towers and penthouses of our nation.
Originally posted by grover
Zappa if you go to my list of most recent threads and scroll down you will see one entitled "A History of Seperation of Church and State". I Think if you read it carefully you would find it very interesting.
Originally posted by grover
It could be because we don't like a spoiled sport ruining the chance to have a perfectly good argument.
Originally posted by Kachina
But how do you throw the Commander-in -Chief of the world's largest military into jail, into the defendant's box beside Saddam?
Originally posted by stanstheman
Originally posted by iori_komei
I think the military should be more of a voluntary thing, if you want to fight, you fight, if you don't, you don't.
Then we'd be France.
Originally posted by PapaHomer
Hey, what do you have against Hu Jintao? Suddenly, you're against the Chinese as well as the US? Do you even know how to research something before you say it? If not, just go away. This is a forum for rational debate, not the ravings of an unbalanced person. To sum up, stop..... think..... then post.
Originally posted by zappafan1
2) There were no insurgents in Iraq before we invaded them. It is a shame you are too ignorant to understand that.
3) If we have to tell you, you'd never understand.
REPLY: No insurgents in Iraq? Ever hear of the Baathist fighters? They've been there since Saddam came into power.
"...something to be said about a president who used his daddy's political connections to dodge the Vietnam draft but doesn't think twice about sending legitimate soldiers to die in his own modern day Vietnam. (in this) modern day Vietnam.
REPLY: Not even close to being the same. I was in VN, I went as an adviser to Iraq.... big difference. Bush served in the NG, which many people did; no shame there. He didn't go to Canada, like many of the cowards did, and still do.
You people who think this war is great and the soldiers who fight it are heroes should put on a uniform and request a deploying unit for your first duty station.
REPLY: Been there, done that. I'd do it again, but my age will not allow me to do so.
Grover........ I agree with you on the "heroes" issue, most definately about the first responders to 9-11.