I am SOOO tired of the "I'm a vet." argument.

Big deal, you're a vet. Somehow your opinion on wars is more valid? It seems to me that the opposite is probably true: you're probably trying to validate your time in the armed services, explain away some horror you committed (or witnessed), or reconcile your conscience in some way. Why in God's name would I take you as a reliable source. I'll look at your facts, figures, professional opinion based on your experience. But I will not bow down to your "sacrifice" or "service."

You've seen the shit, so I'm to take your pacifism more seriously than someone who had greater foresight and CHOSE not to be put in that situation?

You've seen the shit and understand the bravery and bled for your country, so I'm supposed to be thankful because you spilled blood in my name?

I don't buy it from either side. Bring your best argument. I will take into consideration the practical side of your experience within the armed forces within a much larger framework. But I'm not inclined to buy someone's argument or their rhetorical pleadings because they've "been there."

Please note: this post is not wholly with regards to this message board or the posters herein--but it is in some way (see Matcom and Trumad's pissing contest in another post).

to respect than average citizens. I'm not dissing military personel but can't simply being a good citizen count as contributing to the nation as well?

It went something like this.

Matcom (vet): I'm against the war.

Trumad (vet?): You're a vet and you're against the war? I feel sorry for people like you.

Matcom (vet): You're not a vet? Sign up and fight(, asshole).

matcom: I'm against the war

trumad: I'm a vet and you aren't supporting the troops.

matcom: I'm a vet and I disagree with you. Piss off.

Cue flamewar

But I think I got the jist of it.

A lot of embarassed editing on one person's part.

They both pull out the "vet" card--whether on offense or defense. I personally don't give a shit.

I can agree or disagree with either, neither, or both of them based on their reasoned arguments.

I've had a very good time with both posters. Both decent chaps . . . or ladies . . . or transgendered.

You're good you.... you, you're good.... thanks for that one.

If somebody's calling you unpatriotic then hell yes it's time to mention you're a vet.

These are people who go on and on about "support the troops" and "support the vets" and when the vets disagree with them I say stick it in their face.

who was NOT starts to rag on anti-war people to me or in my presence.
:eyes:

My dad's a Vietnam vet and he gets into, let's call them "heated discussions" with the guys he works with. (FWIW, my dad hates Bush and can't wait 'til the day he either leaves or gets booted out of office.) His co-workers go on and on about "don't you support the troops?" or "you're just unpatriotic" or even "you must hate America" whenever they get into it.* In addition to being a 'Nam vet, he was career Navy and none of them ever served at all, and he's not the least bit shy about reminding 'em of that if they start trying to pull that kinda shit.


*The guys he works with believe supporting Bush and believing anything he says regardless of how patently ridiculous it is = patriotism, not supporting Bush or being against the war = get the hell out and move to Canada, hippie!


Edited for clarity.

I'm not asking anyone to be thankful. But if you've seen the blood and smelled the stink you're far less likely to want to do it again-or make somebody else do it.

And I agree with bluejazz, We can take care of ourselves. And Ive never felt being a vet that Ive got the market cornered on wisdom, I don't.

that I am "unpatriotic" for not supporting the president...I love to throw that back in their face.

Besides...I'm a vet and I don't give a rat's ass what anyone else thinks...

n/t

Be careful of what? People may get mad that I voice an opinion?

Please. What were you fighting for again?

"People need to be very careful about what they say, just as they need to be careful about what they do" (Ari Fleischer).

My veteran status does not make my opinion on war more or less valid than anyone else's. It does give me a credible point from which to argue not supporting the war does not mean not supporting the troops.

Since I've been a "troop" and have done so honorably, it doesn't take away from the validity of that argument.

I am not asking anyone to "bow down" although I sometimes wonder at those among us who are the first to look to the military to "kill off" those with whom they disagree, without ever having been closer than a video game to the experience of killing another human being for one's country.

I did not spill blood (mine or anyone else's) during my time in the military, however, if that had been a call, I would have answered.

I will also say, for all your flaming cynicism regarding those who served, soldiers are a most cognizant and reality based community.

When your life could change at the whim of a political or international incident, you develop some level of understanding and, yes, skepticism.

My responses are much more measured than my reaction. But a soldier is nothing if not professional. MKJ

"Since I've been a "troop" and have done so honorably, it doesn't take away from the validity of that argument."
***Great, but even if you served dishonorably, I'd think you could have keen insights (see Bob Kerry).

"I am not asking anyone to "bow down" although I sometimes wonder at those among us who are the first to look to the military to "kill off" those with whom they disagree, without ever having been closer than a video game to the experience of killing another human being for one's country."
***I'd never ask. In fact, I'd prefer you die before an innocent civilian. And I mean YOU, the one who signed up to carry a gun. In fact, I'd prefer that I die before an innocent civilian.

"I will also say, for all your flaming cynicism regarding those who served, soldiers are the most cognizant and reality based community."
***This is a stupid generalization. You can take it back if you like. If they are "reality based," then we get to the heart of their "reality." And I believe they use this as a defense in most war crimes trials.

"My responses are much more measured than my reaction. But a soldier is nothing if not professional."
***This has been my experience.

a truly civilized debate was out of the question.

I will clarify that "reality based" means you don't automatically Rah Rah the CIC, since any decision that individual might make could tear you from all you hold dear.

Interesting that it meant "stupid" and "war crimes" to you. MKJ

Please. You cite my "flaming cynicism regarding those who served." But this is bullshit and precedes your major point. This silly line is a cheap rhetorical trick and hides the major thrust of your argument.

Now to the second part of your quote: "soldiers are a most cognizant and reality based community."

I am happy to admit that I misread your intention (such things do happen on message boards). If you mean to write "reality-based community"--note the in-quotes as a marker of irony--(the tongue-in-cheek version of "those who don't buy this administration's bullshit), then I agree with you very much and rescind my "stupid" comment. You are right: some of those who are fully entrenched in the "reality-based community" are vets.

Please accept my apology.

See I'm civil.

your taking the time to craft a response and do it in a very civil manner.

I rarely mention my vet status, and would never fault anyone for not joining.

However, I do take pride in my service and some of the most intelligent, philosophical and spiritual people I've known in my life were those I met when I was active duty.

Two of them are serving in Iraq right now.

I haven't seen the other thread to which you referred, but reacted solely to your OP.

I'm willing to call this a draw and thank you again for your recognition of my slightly different point of view. MKJ

"However, I do take pride in my service and some of the most intelligent, philosophical and spiritual people I've known in my life were those I met when I was active duty."
***Me too (besides the active duty part). I value their insights tremendously.

"I'm willing to call this a draw and thank you again for your recognition of my slightly different point of view."
***I was never looking for a win, lose, or draw. So how about this: you win.

Thanks for your follow-up post here.

Cheers.

argument.



ithinkmyliverhurts, you have certainly done this in responses to my posts.

Whether Socratic or Machiavellian, you display an appreciation of debate...and you definitely recognize the value of responding with your fellow debater's own words.

So, I now have a win, albeit by default. Somehow, it feels Pyrrhic.

MKJ

so now I'm off to have a glass of wine and watch
TDS...itmlh, I'll look forward to future exchanges with you. :hi:

Cheers.

By the way, I think I'm now 0-715-1 in debates. No offense, but I suck.

Thanks, BleedingHeartPatriot, for understanding the spirit (or at least my spirit) of debate.

being a vet does not make you a better citizen or make you deserving of respect.

Who are trying to figure out what there gonna do with no legs, I know, I see them everyday!

who aren't vets and are also trying to figure out what to do.

Try again.

Just asking...

That seems like a relevant question to me.

Try again yourself.

No dis-respect, I don't think you could possibly converse with me on this subject.

makes you so damn different from me.

Newsflash. I have something on the order of a dozen cousins who have served - including one during Vietnam. My own brother was in the US Navy. I'm pretty close to a lot of veterans. But I guaran-damn-tee you not a one of them thinks that makes them more worthy than other people.

If you're right then you're argument will carry the day. If you're wrong, pulling out your military service to try to browbeat your opponent into submission demeans your actual service as far as I'm concerned.

than any other human being.

I'm a vet and yes, I saw some 'shit' in Grenada and Central America in support of the Contras. I'm not saying vets should not be listened to. They should. But, service does not make vets deserving of more respect than those who did not serve.

That is just my opinion. I don't expect anyone to agree with me just because I'm a vet.

As a matter-of-fact-I see a lot of vets....tons of them when I was putting IV lines in cancer patients....tons of them when I was a bartender(the vets always tipped well,but got extremely drunk).They are the stoic patients who don't ask for pain medicine,even though their hearts are broken.They are the ones cracking jokes at my rehab hospital-always making light of their disabilities.What I DON'T see is a single show on mainstream television covering our veterans,what they have sacrificed and endured...photos of their suffering and strife at the hands of the same government that put them in harm's way,stories of the horrors they had to encounter in the name of the United States.The shit these fighting soldiers had to endure is beyond most of our comprehension.My uncle talks very rarely of being dropped in the middle of the jungle with a buddy in Viet Nam,and being told to eliminate as many VC as possible...about shooting kids and women-because they would throw grenades,of watching his buddy get gut shot and die.About his 20 year battle with drugs and alcohol,trying to kill the pain.There was no such thing as PTSD back then-or at least it wasn't treated.My kid will be a vet someday,but that's beside the point.I will always give Vets kudos for surviving their trauma intact.Who better to advocate against war than someone who has seen the beast up close.

isn't a video game like Bushco believes. Its like asking someone who rides horses well, what do you know? If you never rode, you can hardly speak with authority on the subject. People who advocate war without being warriors are pathetic to me. If you don't learn from those who know the truth, you will never find it.

Screw You, as they used to say.

Participation in a war does in fact give one a somewhat different perspective in which to view world events. Some might call it a more mature perspective. It is a perspective you simply can not have if you haven't had the experience. So if you want to hear all sides of an argument for or against hostilities you should hear from Vets and you should know who is and is not a vet. Otherwise how can you, as a sensible person (who can still go screw him or herself) can better make a judgement as to the validity of their argument?

"Participation in a war does in fact give one a somewhat different perspective in which to view world events."
***Uhhhhh, I never said it didn't. In fact, I said it did. And I said it was valuable.

"Some might call it a more mature perspective."
***I have no idea what this means. Does killing people make you more mature? If that's the case, then women who have had abortions who are now pro-life ought to capture all of our attention. And that ain't gonna fly here at DU.

"It is a perspective you simply can not have if you haven't had the experience."
***Again, I agree. And I take experience into consideration when I'm listening to arguments. Did I not make myself clear on that point?

"So if you want to hear all sides of an argument for or against hostilities you should hear from Vets and you should know who is and is not a vet."
***Did you read my post?

"Otherwise how can you, as a sensible person (who can still go screw him or herself) can better make a judgment as to the validity of their argument?"
***Did you miss the day they covered reading comprehension in basic training? Maybe this explains why our troops have such a hard time following Geneva conventions. D'ohhhhh.

It is just what I've been thinking. Thank heavens for my father who was a WW2 vet who saw combat and instilled in me a hate for war and all it stands for. He rarely talked about his experience, even though I saw the letters to my mother and know he was on the Siegfried line, carried some large gun through the frozen forest and liberated concentration camps. All he ever said to us, his children and his grand children, was war is hell, don't ever go, most people who say they think you should go into the army never fought in the front lines. Now I know others feel differently but I'm glad he had dignity about his service and didn't lean on it his whole life. By the way, my nephew was a navy seal and he doesn't talk about it either. It can be something you do and then you move on from it.

By the way, even though my post count is low, I've been reading here since 2000 and only recently started posting.

I guess it would be that "judge a person by the content of his posts rather than the number of posts" thing again. I don't give a shit about your experience on the board. Just tell me what you think. And show me how you logically got to that point.

but I have seen enough of anyone with a low post count being called out to include the disclaimer. By the way, were you asking for clarification on my post? I'm confused.

I should have used "one" and "one's" instead of "you" and "your." Sorry for the ambiguity.

It could be extended to so many discussions.
Big deal, you're a woman
Big deal, you're gay
Big deal, you're a doctor
Big deal, you're a (fill in the blank)

Why so dismissive of people with a different perspective? Vets speak on war with a more personal perspective. You don't need to stand back without comment when someone says "believe me, I've been there" but don't you think that person may be speaking with more experience or knowledge of the topic? I'm with you on not blindly buying their arguments but do they not deserve a little more weight than those who have no direct experience?

To the credit of posters so far, no one's felt the need to break out the popcorn. Here's hoping this can remain a rational thread.

i'd say. i will listen to a vet about war and their experience any time. any vet. i will also understand when they are protecting self. i will value what they share with me. vets voice is so important for me. there are many vets here that share their stories, or parents of soldiers that are in iraq. i value their voice tremendously. and if it is a right wing vet, not opposing bush or war, i will still listen to what they say, value what they say, and understand where they are coming from

i absolutely value the i am a vet

Where? Please show me.

I said that there may be reasons not to buy the vet. argument hook, line, and sinker. But nowhere do i say I don't value them. I view them with the same skepticism I view other opinions.

Watch: I value the insights that vets can bring to an argument. But I don't necessarily buy them because they come from vets. I'm just not impressed, I guess. Now a DU vet. may be another argument completely. :evilgrin:

Happy?

opening up this thread??? I'll refresh your memory:

"Big deal, you're a vet. Somehow your opinion on wars is more valid? It seems to me that the opposite is probably true: you're probably trying to validate your time in the armed services, explain away some horror you committed (or witnessed), or reconcile your conscience in some way. Why in God's name would I take you as a reliable source."

Hmmm.... seems to me that it seems to you that a vets opinion is less valid. It seems to me that you're wondering "why in God's name" you would take them as a reliable source.

When you say this rhetoric, whether or not they are preceded or followed by a reasoned argument, "why in God's name" do you seem surprised when some people, especially those that have stood in front of bullets for the rest of us, might take some offense?

When I'm at the VA hospital tomorrow taking care of old vets who fought Hitler, I'll be thinking of the lack of perspective some have on these message boards.

I would say, "Uh... yeah."

Imagine saying, "Big deal, you're a woman. Somehow your opinion on abortion is more valid?"

I'm not a vet. I tried to sign up out of high school but didn't clear medically because of asthma-related problems. They'd probably take me today, if they could, though.

But I respect vets. And through their experience of war, they have a perspective that I do not. Many, many vets I know are against this war in Iraq. Why? Because they've been there. Their opinion is, to me, much more valid than these chickenshit chickenhawks'.

They did not choose to be there...So how does your notion apply to them? Above a certain age and most of us were taken against our will to serve or to fight if needed.

You would not trust a vets opionion on war either pro or anti? I am not talking about any vet either, I am talking about a combat vet. Somebody who served for an extended period in a combat zone and in a non support role. That guy has seen it and lived it. There is NO substitute in life for experience and that goes the same for war as it does for anything else in life. You know little about war compared to the guy who lived it. Its not the same as talking about it around the nice and safe coffee table.

This does not mean that the vets opinion on the politics or reasons for war is worth any more then yours is though. Sometimes vets get a little angry because some people think they can thow around peoples lives like they are monopoly money. We should invade here or go there and teach them a lesson, etc. This makes many combat vets uneasy because combat is a terrible thing to behold and when people speak so lightly about it.....

but any vet that thinks their opinion on the idea of war, or the politcs of war is worth more then anybody else is just deluding themselves. Their opinions on the experience of war though is above all others for obvious reasons.

MKJ

He said he hated being in Vietnam, thought it was teribly wrong at the time, but could find no way out of it by then for him. He was also a SAC commander (you know - the guys in charge of pushing "the button").

I also hate the "I'm a vet, so I know why you should support the President now" argument, mainly because it implies all vets are the same way and they all have the same special knowledge that makes them support the President. Yet, somehow, my dad is out on peace marches, writing the Congress about stopping the war and so forth. And he's not anomalous, many many vets are like him.

He tore up his republican Party card when Bush ran the first time(we already knew what a sham he was here in Texas).He is a vocal anti-war spokesman at his local VFW bar(especially after a few-another casualty of the war)

I was in fact drafted into the military at birth -- I had no choice. And I know more about the military that most people --

So when a Vet starts giving me the line about he or she being a Vet and therefore I should shut up -- I reply -- I don't put up with shit like that -- I know the military -- my first breath in my lungs was of military air.

Also there is a very big difference between the branches of military service -- Navy (three distinct branches -- Navy Air, Navy Sea, Navy Submarine), Marines (no comment -- I'm a Navy brat), Army (bad food), Air Force (prissy fool -- I'm a Navy Brat -- Navy Air to be specific).

I know the military is made up of humans -- and humans make mistakes. And officers have their noses so far up the COs butt that they don't know what time of day it is. Major Barnes in M.A.S.H. comes to mind.

Mostly military brats don't have a whole lot of respect for authority -- or we see authority for who they are -- big fat stinking idiots. And vets learned not to think for themselves in the military -- they just followed orders. Military brats grow up watching their dads following orders -- and some dumb ass military fathers think their kids are going to fall in line and follow orders. No DAD I'm a tree hugging, anti war, feminist, liberal . . .

Anyone see the movie the "Great Santini" -- this is a good snap shot of what growing up in the military is like. The military fucks up people's minds -- some people can survive the military and are stronger and perhaps better for that experience. Other's can only claim to know more -- than non Vets.

And then there are the jerks who never served a minute in the military but are now claiming to be Vets -- after running into a number of these sorts (none here at DU) I take claims of being a Vet with a grain of salt. Some were Vets but they never were "in country" and others never did serve.

Review of movie "Great Santini"

http://movies2.nytimes.com/mem/movies/review.html?title1=&title2=Great+Santini%2C+The+(Movie)&reviewer=VINCENT+CANBY&v_id=20769&pdate=19800714

Bull Meechum, who calls himself ''the great Santini'' and feels the acute lack of a major war in which he can fly combat missions (this being 1962), is as outrageous and as impossible as a man can be without being certified insane. As he adores the Marine Corps, which can barely contain his impatience with protocol, his drinking and his practical jokes, he adores the members of his family, whom he treats as if they were recruits selected to undergo especially rigorous commando training.

<snip>

The movie's principal setting is Beaufort, S.C., where Bull Meechum and his family are posted at the Marine Air Station. The film's center is the father-mother-son relationship at the time when Ben is about to turn 18 and becoming ready to assert himself, just as Bull is beginning to feel the first signs of age. A measure of the father's fury, which is matched by Ben's youthful intensity, is captured in one stunning sequence in which the two, goaded on by the other members of the family, play a game of backyard basketball that suddenly becomes as full of menace as a battle in a minefield.

Have a signed certificate from the AF pilots who flew my family overseas when I was one month old. The prissy fool (love that) branch of service.

My Mom tried watching Great Santini with me and my sisters once and when she heard Meechum say 'sports fans' she could watch no more. Too familiar a phrase in our prissy fool branch household.

Really liked the movie. That book is a keeper.

Your post is outstanding.

Thanks DELUSIONAL. You said it all.

Alyce

we had a lot of fun comparing notes about our military background.

My dad was serving in Vietnam at the time -- as was her father.

Canadian military brats have a similar experience to my own.

I had a heck of a time watching the Great Santini -- it took me several times to be able to watch it all the way through. Since I grew up on Naval Air Bases (sounds like an oxymoron) the movie was almost too close to home.

it's a different and very important perspective - it's a first hand perspective.

I also find your tone about "those that choose not to go" extremely arrogant and condescending. Maybe you don't realize that many now serving there DIDN'T sign up for this war or any other. Many signed up simply to make some money for school and maybe serve their state in case of some emergency or natural disaster.

You and I need not bow down before anyone, but we should realize that yes, willing to serve the nation to the point of risking your life is indeed worthy of some respect.

"we should realize that yes, willing to serve the nation to the point of risking your life is indeed worthy of some respect."
***In what way? How? How is my killing another human being worthy of the respect of my family? How would that be living up to the ideals we set in our house? In what way? How is "risking your life" at the risk/expense of killing civilians worthy of respect? How? I really don't get it. This kind of blanket statement is really mind blowing to me. You could qualify it, and I may agree. But I CANNOT agree with this ridiculous and rather absurd generalization.

it's worthy of respect to be willing to die when your country calls on your service?

God knows, I think this war has been one of biggest disasters in this nations' history. But I know that it's absolutely impossible for people to simply refuse service once they have joined. It's certainly different if you're speaking of draftees refusing since I oppose the draft.

I agree, that if someone is joining the military just to get the chance to shoot some "ARabs", then that person in particular is not worthy of much repect. I would even agree that being in the military does not automatically entitle one to more respect than a person serving as a firefighter, a cop, or some other public service.

Not every war is unjustified and in certain situations only force can be the solution (ie WWII). That's why those in uniform deserve some respect, because they are willing to serve - regardless of the politics.

It is not absolutely impossible for people to simply refuse service once they have joined.

jail is a serious option

would not "tire" of the discussion initiated by the veterans, including the unfortunate debate two of our best friends participated in today.

it isn't discussion initiated by vets. They have an important perspective to share. What we're tired of is people who use their veteran status as a rhetoric club to beat people over the head with. Tonight's example, if you missed it, was pretty damn straight-forward.

When people resort to "I'm a veteran, so ____," I'm not suggesting they are reaching the height of rational debate. Nor would I say that people who post on here frequently never have a bad thread or two. I did respond specifically to the point about veterans coming 'round to pacifism late .... as compared to those who were always non-violent, and thus never were in the military. This specific error in thinking is a stumbling block that prevents actual pacifism.

Thus said, my point was merely that we all have errors in thinking, and rather than insult two people who are upset, maybe we could exercise our sense of respect and compassion.

I do understand what you are saying. This is a strange time in our society.

over the Vietnam and Korea wars. Many vets can not face the fact that both of these wars were fought for nothing and millions of people lost their lifes in vain.

and add a bit of expertise that those who have not experienced this will lack...a loss of a parent or child, a divorce, a handicap etc. as a vet I've "seen the elephant" ( a civil war phrase)and hope my comments will add to those who have not....do you owe those who have shed blood in your name???....damn straight!!!, just as you owe your mother for what she's done for you or the teachers that taught you lessons in life... however does that give me a trump card????no. don't let your arrogance write a check that your ass can't cover!

YeeeeeeeeHAWWWWWWWWWWWW.

You got Skynard cranked up?

Dear God, I'm being lecture by the lyrics off a Kenny Rogers album.

your arrogance still astounds me....it's like arguing with my 16 yr. old.

Your point?

Please go and reread my original post. See what points you disagree with specifically. Then call me on them. You'll see that I have no problems admitting when I'm wrong.

Have you read your previous post to me? It's almost satire. It would be brilliant if it weren't so sad.

Be very careful with these kinds of words:
>You've seen the shit and understand the bravery and bled for your country, so I'm supposed to be thankful because you spilled blood in my name?<

First of all let me say that I'm not a Vet and I think I understand what you are trying to say. We all dislike the guys who say "How can you support the troops, but not the conflict." Believe me I know where you are coming from, we have all heard it.

But the words above bother me. I have assumed that you are not a Vet, and all I can say is that "you" do need to be thankful for all of the Vets that fought and died for your country. Even if it was the wrong war.

And "you" need to be thankful for the thousands upon thousands that came back with only half a body or half a soul.
(My father was one of them.)

A lot of us have seen the suffering these guys went through second hand-through our dads,brothers,uncles and..now our sons.Their viewpoint is unique,and they do have an insight that none of us can appreciate.I have to speak out against "anti-vet" rhetoric,because I saw it destroy my uncle when he came home from Nam.( at 21 years of age)

My father never spoke much about his time in the Korean war. He was twenty one years old when he went to fight a war that was never even declared a war.

He was there for about six months, and was assigned to a machine gun squad. (The average life expectancy of a machine gunner in Korea was less than one week.)

He was wounded twice in action. The last was a hand grenade that crippled him. He lost over 75% of his mussel mass on his leg and had over half of his intestines blown out. He spent two years and three months in a VA hospital. He had dozens of surgeries throughout his life including shrapnel removal and skin grafts. (He never complained.)

He never complained, but you could tell that he was always in pain. Thirty years after the war he nearly died, because his intestines had tied them selves in a knot. The doctors were having a very hard time figuring out what the problem was. (He never complained.)

After another twenty years his skin grafts started coming off, and they could not get any of them to take, and he got an infection. Some kind of bug so to speak that ate his skin and his bones, because of the injury to his leg. There was no cure. It was eating all the way up into his pelvis. (He never complained.)

He could never play ball with me or do the normal things fathers do with their sons, but he never complained. You could tell that he wished he could do more things with me and it tore him up inside.

He passed away in 1995.
You are right. You do not owe my father a thing, but a little RESPECT would go a long way!

spilled their blood for us. Just because this war is FUCKED and WRONG doesn't mean the service of people in the military didn't help us. What would have happened if no one stood up to Hitler or did anything about making us free from England or put the country back together? My nephew spent a year in Bosnia. He had to shoot people. They shot at him. He was with the Danes under UN command. He helped stop genocide. Is that somehow an offense to your pacifism? I don't really care but it appears to me that your bitterness over this current debacle leads you to tar all service. My uncles, father and nephews would have other opinions.

Mods should lock this.

So did you just come around to discovering it is flamebait, or has that been your position all along? Do you like to contribute to flamebait? I usually ignore it. Does your responding to and participating in something that you believe is flamebait have anything to do with your posts regarding pacifism and its correlation to military service?

I don't know why you feel the need to try to shut this thread down. Why does it bother you? It's not like I posted once and ran away. heck, I've even offered an apology on a misreading.

Strong rhetoric does not equal flamebait.

Perhaps if if you served in the miltary you would have gotten a stronger backbone. :wow:

And if that line's not comedy, I don't know what is.

but to the larger audience. So when the freepers, l-dotters, LGFers, CUers and other mouth-breathers want to trot out their "This is what those crazy DUers are saying now" type screeds, they are at least left having to say when they actually served in the military, which generally is never. It isn't about us, it isn't about you, it's about putting chickenhawks in their place, and I think it should be encouraged at every turn.

But played in this crowd quite often. Hell, just look at this thread. The thread proves my point. Thread: exhibit A.

You've seen the shit and understand the bravery and bled for your country, so I'm supposed to be thankful because you spilled blood in my name?

I am sure thankful someone stopped hitler and crew. We can argue all day over why the war was fought, etc and so on, but hitler seemed intent on some really evil things. So yeah, I am damn grateful to them.

Big deal, you're a vet. Somehow your opinion on wars is more valid?

It does not make it more valid by default, but it does bring in opinions and observations worth considering more in depth. My dad was a vet but served mainly as a typist and taught conversational english to koreans. He left family and home (was drafted) and spent a lot of time there helping people. He does not like war more than anyone else, and his experience getting close to those in a different culture in war time is interesting to listen to and can be educational - more so to many people then someone who is an armchair philosopher on it all. Does not make either one less valid - but people prefer experience over idealism.

You've seen the shit, so I'm to take your pacifism more seriously than someone who had greater foresight and CHOSE not to be put in that situation?

That is to me, in a sense, like saying why teach about the holocaust and other atrocities because people should just not do bad things so history is not really needed. These vets have seen history and horror and can relate it more emotionally and with more clarity then us on the sidelines. Does not make it more valid or better, but to me it makes more poingant to the masses and myself. Where do you think we get the stories of war horror from, people make em up? No we learn our history from people who have seen the hell - from reporters to civilians to military people.

I get what you are saying, your opinion is not less because someone has not served. I agree with that. I do think though that the direct experience of those who have seen it is very valuable and in some ways more so then what we imagine it could be.

Like my mom dying. I did think about what it would be like the last month in the hospital if she died. But when she did it was way different then what I thought and I have been better able to understand all that some people go through with such a loss on a deeper level. It was always easy to say - well, move on and live your life. Seemed so logical. Truth it is far from easy as that.

"I get what you are saying, your opinion is not less because someone has not served. I agree with that. I do think though that the direct experience of those who have seen it is very valuable and in some ways more so then what we imagine it could be."
***I think a vet's insight is very valuable, especially when it accompanies a solid, tight argument.

"'You've seen the shit and understand the bravery and bled for your country, so I'm supposed to be thankful because you spilled blood in my name?'

"I am sure thankful someone stopped hitler and crew. We can argue all day over why the war was fought, etc and so on, but hitler seemed intent on some really evil things. So yeah, I am damn grateful to them."
***Good point. My generalization here is weak. I need lots of qualifiers. Your point is well taken. Ugh. So glaringly stupid.

So you've been a vet. You know about military discipline, and may have even seen some combat. I still don't believe you when you say killing people is a good thing.

I'm willing to put it to a vote, as long as all the people killed in war can also get a vote. As long as all the survivors who were affected get a a vote.

War is to be avoided at nearly all costs.

It is easy to feel superior and morally elevated when you have never had to make the hard choice, and never faced the dire consequences of inaction in the face of pure evil.

The resistance to Hitler put up by the Soviets, the English, and ultimately the rest of the free world, and the struggle against invasion and suppression conducted by the Vietnamese and now the Iraqis to wanton US aggression required people to risk and commit their lives to face down an aggressive force whose primary goal is to murder them. Those that are willing to do this, at great mortal danger are owed a huge debt by those that never face danger, never experience the horrors, and are free to live their lives under the illusion that no one will line them up against a wall and shoot them, or send bombers to napalm their city.

I am not arguing for unconditional support for the military, because nothing deserves unconditional support. I am arguing for the granting of respect to those that have made huge personal sacrifice, especially when you have made no sacrifice, other than being inconvenienced.

Just asking.

I value the thoughts and opinions of vets. I don't think it's a trump card. In fact, I think they can be too close to the argument at times. However, I find many CLEAR THINKING, ARTICULATE vets to be some of the most convincing rhetoricians out there. I think their experience ADDS to their argument but is NOT the argument in and of itself--ON WHICH EVER SIDE.

You state here that I value the thoughts and opinions of vets

Yet you write:

Big deal, you're a vet. Somehow your opinion on wars is more valid? It seems to me that the opposite is probably true: you're probably trying to validate your time in the armed services, explain away some horror you committed (or witnessed), or reconcile your conscience in some way. Why in God's name would I take you as a reliable source. I'll look at your facts, figures, professional opinion based on your experience. But I will not bow down to your "sacrifice" or "service."

You have an incomprehensible way of establishing that you value thoughts and opinions of vets.

I think I missed the intended tenor with the organization of the post.

In this regard, the final paragraph of the post reads: "I don't buy it from either side. Bring your best argument. I will take into consideration the practical side of your experience within the armed forces within a much larger framework. But I'm not inclined to buy someone's argument or their rhetorical pleadings because they've 'been there.'"

Thanks for bringing this poor organization to light. I meant the paragraph you cited as a real criticism--about the subjective nature of those so close to the topic, about how their views can, in fact, be far less objective because they are so close. But I did push the hyperbole too far. You are right.

And so I will clarify: I value the thoughts and opinions of vets. I don't think it's a trump card. In fact, I think they can be their perspective can be close to the argument at times. However, I find many CLEAR THINKING, ARTICULATE vets to be some of the most convincing rhetoricians out there. I think their experience ADDS to their argument but is NOT the argument in and of itself--ON WHICH EVER SIDE.

Thanks, kcwayne.

"The user has disabled his/her user profile."

Found when I went to visit.

Ah... the COURAGE of convictions, eh???

:rofl::evilgrin::rofl:

Can you explain?

I sense you're making some point, but I'm not sure what it is.

My arguments are less valid because I don't give out personal info.? Why would you want to look any way? Why wouldn't you argue with the posts at hand?

Odd.

I was drafted in 1970. After basic I was shipped off to the War Zone in Washington, D.C. Most of my major action was the Friday and Saturday night fire fights during the Battle Of Georgetown. I participated in several assaults on My Mother's Place, The Crazy Horse, and The Cellar Door. The Mother Of All Battles though was the April/May 1971 anti-war rally and the successful. assault on the Washington Monument Saturday and Sunday. My good friend and confidant Harvey was courageously by my side for every battle.

Seriously, I usually pull out the Vet card on chickenhawks and other repuke friends who have never served. While I never went to Vietnam, many friends were killed or wounded over there. There was always that chance hanging over my head, especially if I had pissed of the wrong officer in a place like Washington, that Vietnam was my next duty station.

For many, being drafted gives you a totally different perspective on military service. You're similar to a wild animal that's been roaming free all it's life and is suddenly captured and placed in a zoo. You're like the African that was captured and put on a slave ship. Your life has been turned upside down, and you have no idea what the future holds.

And, no, being drafted is not like being a African on a slave ship. Are you mad?

And, by the way, rather than being sent off to "the new world," many slaves threw themselves overboard and died. See, they knew they still had free-will even in their horrific predicament.

but it was one of the first things that popped into my head. I went from a free man making $1,000 a month, to a slave working 16 hours a day making $100.00 a month (1970). It's hard to explain to people who have never experienced it.

Opinions of Veterans on this board are never, ever tiresome to me. Their experiences are unique to people who have never been to war and they can share their opinions about what they've learned from that experience all day long here if they want and we have nothing to lose and everything to gain from listening to them and forming our own opinions based on their experiences.

This ranks up there as one of the most repulsive posts I've ever seen on this board. Of course you have the right to say what you want, but that's my opinion.

I'm only posting here on this thread to denounce the OP and make my dissenting voice heard.

"Please note: this post is not wholly with regards to this message board or the posters herein--but it is in some way (see Matcom and Trumad's pissing contest in another post)."

That's all. Please see my exchange with BleedingHeartPatriot.

is when I am talking with a repuke who did not serve. It makes them squirm a little.

There was a time when there was a draft. Unfortunately not everyone got a high number. There were some of us who had limited options. For instance my father was a career officer, fighter pilot, etc. in the USAF. When my draft number came up it was get drafted (and a one way ticket to Viet Nam), join the USAF or USN and hope for the best or go to jail. Canada was not an option despite my disagreeing with the war (or what ever you wanted to call it).

I am disappointed with your lack of empathy toward veterans. Having had relatives in every war since the Revolution through the current stinking war, those who have served, and especially those who sacrificed their lives for us deserve to recognized.

I have a lot of respect for those who served, for those who protested, for those who went to jail instead of serving and to those who felt strongly enough to leave the country.

One last comment: Veterans bring another side to the debate that should be heard as much as those who are not veterans. Don't get your panties in a wade. Try to relax and be more empathetic.

Horrible.

Those who saw it as flamebait are probably correct (though I did not intend it as such). A few posters have named the poor way in which I organized my post. I put the hyperbole at the beginning to frame the rational, logical approach at the end.

Let me restate the thesis: I value the thoughts and opinions of vets. I don't think it's a trump card. In fact, I think they can be too close to the argument at times. However, I find many CLEAR THINKING, ARTICULATE vets to be some of the most convincing rhetoricians out there. I think their experience ADDS to their argument, or possibly DETRACTS from it, but is NOT the argument in and of itself--ON WHICH EVER SIDE.

Sorry to all. I did not intend this as a flamebait post. So I'm a douchebag.

I think most young men go into the military with simplistic notions of country and of good guys and bad guys. That's not their fault, it's just the way things are due to the culture at large, the culture they are surrounded with, male hormones and of course their innocence. They are just out of childhood at 18.

So when they come out of war with an awareness of what a failed concept war itself is, I credit them with a deeper understanding of what that all means than what I have. They've lived and grown through it.

But when they come out of it as, I don't know the word, let's say 'jarheaded' if that's not too offensive a term, as they went in when they were 18, then I discredit them in my mind as having opinions not worthy of much respect and think less of them than non-vets even on military issues.

I also make allowances for some kind of fucked-up that they have to be, on either side. In fact, if you're not fucked up coming out of a war, I'm leery.

About the only "insights" that we can offer is our own personal experiences as young men/women while in the military and how they affected us as individuals. The truth is, that whatever our experiences, we saw very little more than our individual surroundings. We were expendable cannon-fodder for the bosses and as much in the dark as the average citizen about what was going on in the larger sense. In many ways we knew even less, because we were in a controlled environment.

How it affected us individually is as different as the way any powerful experience affects anyone else.

I emerged from my 4 years in the Marines an angry, bitter, anti-authortarian, anti-military, radical with a set of values almost completely the reverse of what the military stands for.

I take no "pride" in it. It raises my hackles when some well-meaning person says, "Thank you, for your service." My "service" consisted of being trained to kill people on command or enable my comrades to do so. How any person can take pride in being a trained murderer of their fellow human beings is beyond my understanding.

As another marine once said, "War is a racket." And, if I may add to Smedly Butler's assessment, the poor dumb suckers who do the killing and dying are no more qualified to send other poor dumb suckers to do the dirty work than any one else.

I'm sympathetic to the current crop of cannon fodder, but I hold them in no greater esteem than anyone else. And, I have only contempt for the "Masters of War" as Bob Dylan (a non-vet) so eloquently named the bastards who engineer the bloodletting and build the monuments that glorify it.

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy.” - Gandhi (Also a non-vet).

Obviously you found the wrong political board for your post.

The Democrat leaders are the war veterans, the Freepers and their Republican leaders are the ones who are draft dodging cowards. Chickenhawks.

This post sounds identical to a lot of the comments from the 'flying 101st keyboard' unit of the right wing war mongers.

The last two Democratic presidential candidates were veterans who served IN Vietnam.

And if you want to demean Al Gores service 'in country' at Vietnam.. just take your 101 laptop and as a 'civilian', and try to take the car ride from the Baghdad airport to the Green Zone. Be sure to bring some money too, it will cost you $10,000 just to have a chance at making the 6 mile drive alive.

The entire Republican leadership in all the branches are draft dodgers.

Like just saying if he is sick of it and everything, go figure :shrug:

you're probably trying to validate your time in the armed services, explain away some horror you committed (or witnessed), or reconcile your conscience in some way.

When I hear Larry Johnson or Jim Marcinkowski talk about the impact of the Plame leak on the CIA, their word carries a little more weight than mine, because they've got experience working there. I appreciated (a great deal) that they were willing to speak out. During their testimony, the last thing that would have occurred to me was "I bet they are mentioning their CIA backgrounds because they need validation."

When people are called to testify against (or for) anything, it's usually because they are experts in some way - which quite often means they have first hand experience. I would expect a doctor who testifies in a malpractice suit about heart surgery to have actually DONE some heart surgery. And I wouldn't assume he's speaking because he is trying to reconcile his conscience.

People have areas of expertise, of experience. It's normal to refer to it if the subject of your expertise comes up.

I haven't seen the thread you were talking about, but in general, I haven't seen any vets on the board here demanding that you "bow down" to them. I don't personally care if you are thankful or not, and I suspect a lot of us feel the same way. I posted in another thread tonight, in fact, that I don't automatically give someone respect based solely on the fact that they're a vet. They have to earn my respect based on their actions just like the next person.

But I have to say the first paragraph of the OP is ... well, on second thought, I don't have to say it, because I can't find a polite way to phrase it. Let's just say your opening statement that a veteran's opinion is less valid than yours as well as your unsolicited psychoanalysis is noted.

This discussion started out badly and went crashing downhill from there.

-Technowitch
DU Moderator