Blogger asks College GOP why they do not enlist for Iraq

[Seakony]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

For the same reasons extremists don't put flags on the coffins of the dead...

HuH

[roni]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Why not ask liberals why they all don't have white flags hanging in front of their house? Silly little blogger man wants some publicity, and CNN only too happy to oblige.

I can answer that question: Those are hankys and they are out there for your whining, crying, sniveling conservative neighbors, who have not had much to smile about lately

Harry Potter is coming after them with his magical, two-core wand

[Cosmo]

Bush had the dead troops shipped via cargo and without flags on their coffins...

Originally Posted by Seakony

HuH

[horizon200]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

Bush had the dead troops shipped via cargo and without flags on their coffins...

Cos...way off base! Bush did NOT have anyone shipped via cargo! Another example of someone blowing a story way out of proportion. Our military airlift system is not equipped to carry the caskets of our fallen around the United States. The most expediant method was to use scheduled carriers. Reality needs to be applied here....where were they supposed to be loaded? In first class, coach? We now have amulti million dollar contract with a civilian carrier to fly the fallen home to their place of rest. There they are met by the honor guard from the nearest military installation...which is also an additional duty BTW...not their primary job.

Everyday, I watch a dignified transfer of our fallen heroes. They are treated with the utmost respect both coming from the theater and when they are returned home.

[Cosmo]

There was a story on this out of DFW, the coffin was in cargo. Isn't it true that the caskets weren't draped with a flag, as not to draw attention...

Originally Posted by horizon200

Cos...way off base! Bush did NOT have anyone shipped via cargo! Another example of someone blowing a story way out of proportion. Our military airlift system is not equipped to carry the caskets of our fallen around the United States. The most expediant method was to use scheduled carriers. Reality needs to be applied here....where were they supposed to be loaded? In first class, coach? We now have amulti million dollar contract with a civilian carrier to fly the fallen home to their place of rest. There they are met by the honor guard from the nearest military installation...which is also an additional duty BTW...not their primary job.

Everyday, I watch a dignified transfer of our fallen heroes. They are treated with the utmost respect both coming from the theater and when they are returned home.

[MikeW]

If I were 18 when 9/11 occurred, I would have joined to help destroy Osama.

But the mission changed a few years later. If I were 18 and we were invading Iraq, no I wouldn't have joined.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by Seakony

It's not. It's giving back to your country...who seems to do more of that??? Conservatives or liberals? anybody got a link?

Why yes, I do. Here's an interesting article addressing the fact that military service has less to do with one's political orientation, and more to do with economic class.

"Likewise, in 2003 only slightly more than 1 percent of members of Congress had a child serving. This is not a Democrat-versus-Republican issue. It is a class issue. Small-town, religious, and middle-class Democrats or Republicans are more likely to have someone in the military in their extended social group than wealthy partisans of either party living in big cities."

Those Who Serve by Kathy Roth-Douquet and Frank Schaeffer (printable version)

[ElvisP]

To me serving in the military is not and should not be about politics. I have served with many democrats and many republicans...we did not serve to further our political ideology...we served because of something bigger than all of us. A calling to serve the country. We may not have agreed with all the decisions made for us, but we served anyway. It's hard to put into words...you have to experience it.

It is a great honor to serve in the military indeed, when there are honorable fights. This has never been one, not for freedom, not for self preservation, not for retaliation to 9/11. I have no clue as why my nephews are there. The 'enemy' was invented by us. The arrogance of Sadam hardly justifies the killings ours and theirs. This was a war to show a lesson if someone ever tries again, but the lesson was taken beyond what it should have been. We went in, we got the guy and we should have pulled out a long time ago. Those people can only be ruled Sadam's style. We knew that b4 Sadam was hanged, but to give him his job back was a little embarrassing.
Now, I'm all for fighting for your country to protect our kind, the last war worth fighting for was WWII. No, I would not give my life for my country when my country is wrong. For my family, yep, if my family's not a bunch of bullies. Serving in the military with honor must be quite a challenge if you are not allowed to think for yourself. If you are given the order to kill women and children, would you still not question what you are fighting for?
Let's keep the dems, reps, libs, and cons out of the issue and concentrate on the problem. This war has to end and it will be ended by everyone. You may attack my point of view, that is the purpose of a discussion. But when you start attacking a whole group of people based on party affiliation, the point is lost.

I will be proud to see my only son serve in the military, even if I was to lose him (God forbid), but if he's sent to a war like the last 5 wars, I'll advise him to quit with his head held high. And if he doesn't, I'll kick his ass and pull him anyway. He's 2x as smart as I am, thank god, so I doubt he'll need my advise. I'm raising him to understand right from wrong and to read between the lines.

This is a good example of that book they made us read back in the 7th grade "The Lottery".

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by ElvisP

It is a great honor to serve in the military indeed, when there are honorable fights. This has never been one, not for freedom, not for self preservation, not for retaliation to 9/11. I have no clue as why my nephews are there. The 'enemy' was invented by us. The arrogance of Sadam hardly justifies the killings ours and theirs. This was a war to show a lesson if someone ever tries again, but the lesson was taken beyond what it should have been. We went in, we got the guy and we should have pulled out a long time ago. Those people can only be ruled Sadam's style. We knew that b4 Sadam was hanged, but to give him his job back was a little embarrassing.
Now, I'm all for fighting for your country to protect our kind, the last war worth fighting for was WWII. No, I would not give my life for my country when my country is wrong. For my family, yep, if my family's not a bunch of bullies. Serving in the military with honor must be quite a challenge if you are not allowed to think for yourself. If you are given the order to kill women and children, would you still not question what you are fighting for?
Let's keep the dems, reps, libs, and cons out of the issue and concentrate on the problem. This war has to end and it will be ended by everyone. You may attack my point of view, that is the purpose of a discussion. But when you start attacking a whole group of people based on party affiliation, the point is lost.

I will be proud to see my only son serve in the military, even if I was to lose him (God forbid), but if he's sent to a war like the last 5 wars, I'll advise him to quit with his head held high. And if he doesn't, I'll kick his ass and pull him anyway. He's 2x as smart as I am, thank god, so I doubt he'll need my advise. I'm raising him to understand right from wrong and to read between the lines.

This is a good example of that book they made us read back in the 7th grade "The Lottery".

I completely understand your frustration..my son in law just got back safely from Afghanistan....but I must say...it is definately an honorable act to serve in the military...honorable fight or not......

[Seakony]

I still can't figure out why we fought in Korea and Viet Nam.....what did they have to do with us again? Wasn't it Johnson that really started to send in the troops after Kennedy died?.....and that was not even declared a war...it was a police action.

[roni]

Originally Posted by Seakony

I still can't figure out why we fought in Korea and Viet Nam.....what did they have to do with us again? Wasn't it Johnson that really started to send in the troops after Kennedy died?.....and that was not even declared a war...it was a police action.

Troops first went in under Eisenhower- to Vietnam - it really accelerated under Johnson and it was pretty much his war then. Cambodia and Laos were pretty much Nixon's.

[Seakony]

Originally Posted by roni

Troops first went in under Eisenhower- to Vietnam - it really accelerated under Johnson and it was pretty much his war then. Cambodia and Laos were pretty much Nixon's.

But what was the reason for sending the ADVISORS in the first place? What did viet nam and Korea do to us? were they a threat to us? Did we get bad info that they were harboring WMDs?

[Seakony]

this is interesting... a few early docs.
The Viet Nam Wars
The Viet Nam Wars
The Viet Nam Wars

[roni]

Originally Posted by Seakony

But what was the reason for sending the ADVISORS in the first place? What did viet nam and Korea do to us? were they a threat to us? Did we get bad info that they were harboring WMDs?

It was near the beginning of the cold war, Ho was a commie. Diem called off the 1956 election because it was clear Ho would win. The USA teamed up with Diem. We fought many proxy wars with the Soviets - some on now familiar ground, Afghanistan, where people we supported financially during the Afghan-Soviet War are not Taliban and Al-Quaeda trying to kill all of us.

It is my opinion that we would have been better off supporting the Ho Chi Minh's and Fidel Castro's and Salvador Allende's and João Gourlart instead of fighting them or supporting their overthrow. There are more than an equal number who I think we would have been better off not supporting, Somaza, for example, in Nicaragua.

[ElvisP]

Originally Posted by Seakony

But what was the reason for sending the ADVISORS in the first place? What did viet nam and Korea d
o to us? were they a threat to us? Did we get bad info that they were harboring WMDs?

It was a territorial war. The commies were taking all of Eastern Europe and Asia. We needed a piece of land to plant some WMD in case sh*t hit the fan. We force the South Viets into a war they didn't even want. The 'advisors' were not engaging but were right next to the SV troops making sure they didn't miss. We needed an excuse to fight them, when they didn't give us one, we went in anyways. Much like the way we took half of Mexico. The History channel has it all on DVD. I got every big war in history on DVD. My boy will be able to distinguish a good from a bad war b4 he volunteers (I hope).