Senator John McCain - dead at age 81 (1936-2018)

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan

Link?

Last i heard, the standard was 24 hours.

TheRedneck

I think you are correct en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan

Link?

Last i heard, the standard was 24 hours.

TheRedneck

I think you are correct en.wikipedia.org...

Standards and facts have become a bit troublesome.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I think the media has been preparing for John McCain's death for a year. Wall-to-wall coverage on all these Networks. They never said anything remotely nice like this when he was alive.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan

Link?

Last i heard, the standard was 24 hours.

TheRedneck

It varies, but tradition for a Senator is around 5 days, though flag code itself only specifies one day.

a reply to: Aazadan

Somehow that bothers me. Is a Senator worth 5 soldiers' lives?

If there's a standard, there's a standard. McCain should get the standard.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Xcathdra

I think the media has been preparing for John McCain's death for a year. Wall-to-wall coverage on all these Networks. They never said anything remotely nice like this when he was alive.

and given the media frenzy over Trumps response it tells me they still dont care. They are using it for their anti Trump agenda and nothing more.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan

Somehow that bothers me. Is a Senator worth 5 soldiers' lives?

If there's a standard, there's a standard. McCain should get the standard.

TheRedneck

This is going to sound heartless, but soldiers lives aren't worth anything. They literally sign up to become disposable.

I wonder how much of John McCain's stay at the Hanoi Hilton was due to his guilt about the fire he caused and lives that were lost on account of his hot dogging stunt? When he turned down his captor's offer of release, was it really because he felt too guilty to face his family and friends? Did he use his imprisonment as a self emolliating penance for his own sins? Did he feel redeemed and born again when he was welcomed back to the US as a hero?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan

Somehow that bothers me. Is a Senator worth 5 soldiers' lives?

If there's a standard, there's a standard. McCain should get the standard.

TheRedneck

This is going to sound heartless, but soldiers lives aren't worth anything. They literally sign up to become disposable.

It doesn't sound heartless, it sounds stupid.

It's not that their lives aren't worth anything, and I challenge you to get before a group of either disabled veterans or veterans in general and inform them that their lives weren't worth anything. My guess, you'd be lucky to come out alive.

We never enlisted to become disposable nor were we ever disposable. We enlisted to cede a portion of our lives for the greater good and if that meant we'd die trying then so be it...it was that imperative. No Military establishment can survive effectively by throwing meat shields at combatants which is what you're inferring. Eventually sheer numbers decline.

My advice? Stay in college and keep learning, it'll be a long road.

a reply to: Aazadan

This is going to sound heartless, but soldiers lives aren't worth anything. They literally sign up to become disposable.

I agree with alphabetaone above. If one spent years trying to research the single most offensive statement one could possibly place in the fewest possible words, I doubt the result would top what you just posted.

Stick to your coding. Reality seems to be difficult for you.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan

Somehow that bothers me. Is a Senator worth 5 soldiers' lives?

If there's a standard, there's a standard. McCain should get the standard.

TheRedneck

This is going to sound heartless, but soldiers lives aren't worth anything. They literally sign up to become disposable.

It doesn't sound heartless, it sounds stupid.

It's not that their lives aren't worth anything, and I challenge you to get before a group of either disabled veterans or veterans in general and inform them that their lives weren't worth anything. My guess, you'd be lucky to come out alive.

We never enlisted to become disposable nor were we ever disposable. We enlisted to cede a portion of our lives for the greater good and if that meant we'd die trying then so be it...it was that imperative. No Military establishment can survive effectively by throwing meat shields at combatants which is what you're inferring. Eventually sheer numbers decline.

My advice? Stay in college and keep learning, it'll be a long road.

This is nearly the same scolding Pres Trump got from the left when he told the pregnant grieving widow of a fallen soldier "He knew what he signed up for".

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
This is nearly the same scolding Pres Trump got from the left when he told the pregnant grieving widow of a fallen soldier "He knew what he signed up for".

I'm sorry when it comes to dying so that other people may live in peace, I fail to see the relevancy of party line affiliation. It doesn't make the comment acceptable no matter which side you espouse.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
It doesn't sound heartless, it sounds stupid.

It's not that their lives aren't worth anything, and I challenge you to get before a group of either disabled veterans or veterans in general and inform them that their lives weren't worth anything. My guess, you'd be lucky to come out alive.

We never enlisted to become disposable nor were we ever disposable. We enlisted to cede a portion of our lives for the greater good and if that meant we'd die trying then so be it...it was that imperative. No Military establishment can survive effectively by throwing meat shields at combatants which is what you're inferring. Eventually sheer numbers decline.

My advice? Stay in college and keep learning, it'll be a long road.

You trade your blood, sweat, health, and possibly life in exchange for US interests, whatever those interests may be at the time. An inch of soil? That's worth your life. In fact, we might even give away that inch of soil later. Something permanent (your life) is worth something temporary (the whims of government). Soldiers are currency to be expended to secure those goals.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I agree with alphabetaone above. If one spent years trying to research the single most offensive statement one could possibly place in the fewest possible words, I doubt the result would top what you just posted.

Stick to your coding. Reality seems to be difficult for you.

TheRedneck

Kissinger put it better than I could.

"Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy."

Individuals might have hopes, dreams, fears, desires, and so on... but on a state level, that is not what they are. They are tools used to secure ever changing national interests. Nations stand above the petty issues of the people. To a nation, none of what makes a soldier a person matters. The only thing that matters is that they can die to secure an objective. It is a 100% disposable resource, that is meant to be acquired and expended before it ages into ineffectiveness.

a reply to: Aazadan

You, sir, have a very warped and perverted sense of morality.

'Nough said on that.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Aazadan

You trade your blood, sweat, health, and possibly life in exchange for US interests,

No I didn't. I traded my blood, sweat, health protecting the US Constitution and her people. US Interests are transient, US the institution and Democratic Republic is forever..."if we can keep it".

Believe what you like, but your beliefs are in diametric opposition to the reality out in the field which you have ZERO exposure to and ZERO knowledge of...you dont have the luxury of attempting to educate someone who has.

Kindly now

a reply to: alphabetaone

Oh? So what did you do to protect the Constitution? I'm not aware of any wars we've fought in the past 100 years where the opposing sides objective was the overthrow of the US government.

I'm aware of plenty that were waged either for or against us to add or remove influence in foreign nations, but none where the objective was to wipe out the United States, with the possible exception of WW2 after we had already gotten involved.

Edit: To circle around back to the topic, most soldiers eventually stop being soldiers and become people again. There's nothing wrong with taking care of former soldiers, in fact it's even a good policy because it encourages future generations to sign up and be soldiers. McCain pushed hard for taking care of vets and had a lot of success there, but he also understood what it means to be a soldier and that good governance doesn't consider soldiers lives, only their ability to secure objectives.

McCain was a pretty good politician, like I said earlier in the thread, I didn't like him on everything but I liked him enough to vote for him in 2000 and 2008. I always thought he would have made a great President.

a reply to: alphabetaone


You're right. It wasn't acceptable when Trump said it. It wasn't acceptable when Gen Kelly and Sarah Sanders defended it.

Frankly, I don't think the "government" gives 2 #ucks about the life of any of us. We're all just acceptable statistical collateral damage for a greater agenda to "them". (That's a mouthful!)