Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Starship Bloggers
Posted by: Jon Henke on Thursday, June 09, 2005

I'm just about fed up with people who should know better pulling this kind of nonsense debate tactic...
"most of...the 101st, who don't even think they need to bother to construct excuses for their unwillingness to support their words with deeds"—Atrios/Duncan Black

Unless you're disabled, you have no fucking right encouraging others to die in your stead. If you weren't cowards, you'd be in the military, not whining about Kosovo or some other bullshit. The Army's recruiting isn't getting any better, and they need YOU. Not the kid from Wal Mart, not the ROTC grad. They need war supporters to take this seriously and walk away from their lives to serve their country directly. But that won't happen. Because they are cowards. —Steve Gilliard, via by Majority Report Radio

Refers to weblog authors who are 'very enthusiastic about war, provided someone else fights it'.—Daily Kos
I'm confused. Are they suggesting that we should restrict say on US military policy to members of the US armed forces? That's an, ah, interesting take on democracy.

No, they don't actually believe that. The "101st Fighting Keyboarders" line is simply misdirection. Worse, it's misdirection by people who don't actually subscribe to the principle they suggest with their snark.

But I could be wrong. If so, then perhaps...

  • ...Jesse and Amanda, who are anxious to institute universal health care, will tell us of the deep personal debt they've gone into providing health care coverage for the poor.


  • ...Atrios/Duncan Black, who thinks taxes should be raised on the wealthy, can show us the huge credit card debt he has incurred doing his part before asking others to chip in.


  • ...Kos is laying out his last dime to personally sponsor "free" WiFi internet service in his area, rather than obligating taxpayers to pay for it.


  • ...Matt Yglesias, who thinks we're gonna need a lot more taxes to pay for all the neat stuff we'd like the government to dispense, can tell us of the vow of poverty he's taken, as he donates his every last dime to social programs.


Because certainly, after criticizing other bloggers for being "very enthusiastic about [policy], provided someone else [pays for] it".....certainly, they've already been making that total sacrifice for all the policies they advocate.

UPDATE (Dale): Oh, and by the way, just FYI, I spent 10 years on active duty from 1984-1993, and McQ spent 28 years active/reserve. And McQ was in the real 101st. That's where he got his CIB.

So, by Mr. Black's calcualtion, we can advocate any military policy we damn well please.

Oh, and I don't know about Mr. Black, but I was born and raised in a country where the military is under civilian control, and where civilians, not the military, set policy. So, this chickenhawk thing really pisses me off. When it comes to policy, the role of the military is to provide advice, and otherwise STFU.

If lack of military service makes you incompetent to support military action, it also makes you incompetent to oppose it. Lack of military service works both ways, if that's the argument you wanna make. I reject utterly the contention that military service is required to support or oppose the military policy of the United States.

UPDATE (McQ):
So does this mean you can't have an opinion about politics unless your a politician? Can't talk about medicine unless your a doctor? Can't pontificate about the economy unless you're an economist? Can't review a movie unless you're an actor? If true, it sure is going to get quiet in the blogosphere.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Looks like they struck a nerve.

The right wing seems to be largely IGNORING the recruitment problem. Instead of wasting time talking about Howard Dean, the uberpatriots like Rush and Hannity should be encouraging their able-bodied listeners to sign up and help train Iraqi troops.

Perhaps Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin could take a break from trashing liberals and write columns explaining how much America needs more young men and women to join the military and protect us from the terrorists.

Maybe even the president and/or the VP could make a public appeal for more patriots to join the military and defend freedom! Remember, you’re either with us or with the terrorists! Simply supporting the war isn’t enough when there is a growing recruitment problem.



 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
The right wing seems to be largely IGNORING the recruitment problem.

And this has exactly *what* to do with the subject at hand?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Nevermind all of the absurdities that would be implied by applying these principals to other topics. I wonder if these idiots are up to applying this principal fairly even to the subject at hand. Any guesses as to how the poll would come out if we asked the "should we have gone to war in Iraq" question solely of active members of the military? I expect that Kos et al mean only for active military plus anyone who agrees with Kos should have a say on military deployment, and not the intellectually consistent "active military only" that their argument implies.
 
Written By: Tim Higgins
URL: http://willgolfforfood.blogspot.com
Oops - should have finished reading Dale’s update. What he said.
 
Written By: Tim Higgins
URL: http://willgolfforfood.blogspot.com
I think it’s a fairly decent point. If you support this war, you should be willing to put your life on the line for it. If it isn’t worth that much to you, then perhaps it’s time you reexamine your perspective.
 
Written By: Tony
URL: http://
Tony,

A fairly decent point? All it is is ad hominem. Nothing more. The degree of a person’s attachment to their argument is totally independent of its soundness and validity. This reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend of mine when a proposition came up in my state to legalize some drugs. After stating my argument in support of legalization, her counter-argument consisted of "well, I feel really strongly about this." I don’t give a mouse’s fart how strongly you feel about your position. It’s totally immaterial to the debate.
 
Written By: Tim Higgins
URL: http://willgolfforfood.blogspot.com
Hey! You guys can’t criticize lefties if you aren’t one! Get with the program!
 
Written By: Gerry
URL: http://dalythoughts.com
I’ve made this argument several times; it’s great to see it elsewhere, and condensed.

You can support the fire department by agreeing to pay for better equipment and pay for the firefighters. You don’t have to train and fight fires yourself to prove you don’t want the town to burn down. There are other people, more able-bodied and better-trained, who volunteered to serve and fight so that their fellow-citizens don’t have to. They were free to make (or not make) that choice, and they continue to defend that freedom in their particular manner.
 
Written By: OrneryWP
URL: http://
Damn, not only are you a coward, but a whiny-butt, too. Do you cry if your order at Burger King is screwed up? Jesus H. Christ—there are people receiving body bags every damn day now, coward.
 
Written By: Amanda
URL: http://www.pandagon.net
The right wing seems to be largely IGNORING the recruitment problem.
Actually, I mentioned it just yesterday.
I think it’s a fairly decent point. If you support this war, you should be willing to put your life on the line for it. If it isn’t worth that much to you, then perhaps it’s time you reexamine your perspective.
Does that apply to every government policy, or just the ones you oppose?
Damn, not only are you a coward, but a whiny-butt, too. Do you cry if your order at Burger King is screwed up? Jesus H. Christ—there are people receiving body bags every damn day now, coward.
Ah, so you’ve decided to include non-sequiturs with your personal attacks. If we assume, arguendo, that I’m a coward, there are still my two decidedly non-cowardly co-bloggers who reiterated my point. Do you care to respond to them, or are the personal attacks against me merely an attempt to avoid the substance of my point?

And, please, do tell of your substantial poverty due to providing health care for the poor. I mean, you do believe what you write, don’t you?
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
The right wing seems to be largely IGNORING the recruitment problem.

And this has exactly *what* to do with the subject at hand?

It has everything to do with the subject at hand. The most vocal supporters of the war are paying little to no attention to a situation that could undermine the Iraq enterprise AND reflects growing public rejection of the war. The war’s strongest supporters are too cowardly to deal with this issue and too cowardly to enlist.

It’s typical right wing behavior: ignore the bad news about Iraq. Ignore the fact that more Americans are turning AGAINST the war. Ignore the fact that increasing numbers of parents don’t want to sacrifice their children for a dubious social engineering scheme. Ignore the fact that the military they worship is being damaged by the war they support.

How many times have we heard from the right wing that the survival of America is at stake in the War on Terror and that Iraq is the central front in that war. How often do we hear the refrain, "Support the Troops?" How many times have we heard how righteous and noble the war in Iraq is? Yet these same people want to avoid the harsh realities of the Iraq mess - especially the reality of actually serving in the military. They can’t even bring themselves to blame the liberals for the recruitment problem.
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
Again and again, as in this case with McQ, when I am impressed with the common sense of a writer or speaker (with whom I may agree or disagree) I find out that they are part of the great brotherhood of the airborne.

Hey Robert ... also spent two years with the 82nd Abn Div (1/325) and am a proud grad of the US Army Ranger school. But you’re essentially right ... paratroopers, old and new, seem to be a different breed. You have to be, I suppose, to accept the premise that jumping from a perfectly good airplane while in flight is a "good thing". ;)
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Taxes and the like are one thing, but as I’ve pointed out on my own blog, the better analogy is police and fire:
1. If you are not prepared to walk a beat, or at a minimum to purchase a gun and defend your own home, you are a coward and a hypocrite if you call the police when someone breaks into your house or your car. How dare anyone ask police officers to put their lives in danger and potentially take a bullet for the rest of us, if they are not prepared to do the same? In fact, if you are not yourself prepared to take a bullet for George W. Bush, it is positively immoral and hypocritical for you not to call for an end to the Secret Service.

2. If you are not prepared to run into burning buildings, please do not call the fire department if your house catches fire, or offer encouragement to anyone else who would do so. That would make you a coward and a hypocrite, and nobody wants to see that.

3. For that matter, you are a coward and a hypocrite if you criticize the conduct of policemen, soldiers (such as the Israeli Defense Forces), or prison guards (such as the guards at Abu Ghraib) if you are unwilling to walk a mile in their shoes. How many books have you even read on military interrogation methods, let alone attempted to maintain order and collect intelligence in a prison setting? Certainly, you can not advocate different methods of doing so if you have not volunteered to endure the daily routine of a prison guard.
(Also, isn’t this argument also deeply anti-woman? Few women have served.)
 
Written By: Crank
URL: http://www.baseballcrank.com
It has everything to do with the subject at hand. The most vocal supporters of the war are paying little to no attention to a situation that could undermine the Iraq enterprise AND reflects growing public rejection of the war. The war’s strongest supporters are too cowardly to deal with this issue and too cowardly to enlist.

OK, I’m a very strong supporter of the war, we’ve delt with the recruiting problems on this blog as cited by Jon and I’m retired after 28 years service.

So, your point is incorrect, the exception (me) proving it so.

How many times have we heard how righteous and noble the war in Iraq is? Yet these same people want to avoid the harsh realities of the Iraq mess - especially the reality of actually serving in the military. They can’t even bring themselves to blame the liberals for the recruitment problem.

I have no idea, your hot air notwithstanding, but not actually serving in Iraq does nothing one way or the other about the credibility of their points or opinion.

I would assume its fun to throw the word "coward" around, but I’d ask, have you ever complained about crime? If so, have you recently applied to become a cop? If not, why? Are you a coward?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Jon;

Your first mistake was thinking that Kos, Black and Gillard know better.
What do you expect from a group of people whose reasoning process is: well, it SOUNDS good, so it must be true?
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
The really funny part is when you get these guys to discuss "Starship Troopers" by Robert Heinlein (the book, not the wretched movie). They’ll almost certainly call it fascist, or some such label. That’s funny because it takes their idea to the ultimate conclusion. In that book, only veterans are allowed to vote. You’d think they’d be all in favor of that!
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
I guess I’m the only straight-leg grunt around. Such rarified airborne company I’m keeping these days.

Skillet wants to talk about cowardice - what’s more cowardly than bomb-throwing on a comment thread. I can’t think of anything more sissy than throwing around fighting words when you know you’ll never have to back them up. Quit calling people cowards, coward. I’d gladly hold the camera while Jon batted you around.

The strength of our armed forces is that it is an all-volunteer force, with a professional NCO corps (backbone of the Army and you know that’s true, McQ ;). No one has to serve that doesn’t want to - otherwise we’d end up with an army full of milquetoast whiners like skillet who are good for nothing but walking point with a squeaky boot and a rifle with no firing pin.

Maybe Dale and McQ can write up a permission slip allowing all those who haven’t served to comment on matters military - would that satisfy you? I’ll sign it. It was our service, the service of those who came before us, those serving now, and those who will serve that enshrine your right to piss and moan while drinking Pepsi in your choice of can or bottle, punk. None of us went through all that sweat, blood and misery so YOU could tell us who has the right to speak on a given topic.

Shove it.
 
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://
"OK, I’m a very strong supporter of the war, we’ve delt with the recruiting problems on this blog as cited by Jon and I’m retired after 28 years service.

So, your point is incorrect, the exception (me) proving it so."


Nope. I said "little to no attention" has been paid to the recruitment problem From what I’ve seen you’d fall into the "little" category. My point stands.

Perhaps you could explain why you think there’s a recruitment problem in the first place and why it coincides with the war on Iraq?

How many times have we heard how righteous and noble the war in Iraq is? Yet these same people want to avoid the harsh realities of the Iraq mess - especially the reality of actually serving in the military. They can’t even bring themselves to blame the liberals for the recruitment problem.

"I have no idea, your hot air notwithstanding, but not actually serving in Iraq does nothing one way or the other about the credibility of their points or opinion."


I’m not attacking the credibility of their statements in this context - although I don’t buy into the whole "we’re in a war for our survival" foolishness. I’m attacking their lack of attention to serious issue involving a war they support with vigor. Just like their leader, they avoid bad news about Iraq like the plague. They’ll quickly call people anti-American for not supporting the war but I wonder what they call those parents who don’t want their child to die in that mess?

"I would assume its fun to throw the word "coward" around, but I’d ask, have you ever complained about crime? If so, have you recently applied to become a cop? If not, why? Are you a coward?"

Apples and oranges.
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
"Skillet wants to talk about cowardice - what’s more cowardly than bomb-throwing on a comment thread. I can’t think of anything more sissy than throwing around fighting words when you know you’ll never have to back them up. Quit calling people cowards, coward. I’d gladly hold the camera while Jon batted you around."

You criticize me for throwing bombs while throwing bombs of your own. Gee, what’s that called? I know there’s a term for that...?

Let me throw one more bomb... I hope the recruitment problem gets WORSE!
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
The strength of our armed forces is that it is an all-volunteer force, with a professional NCO corps (backbone of the Army and you know that’s true, McQ ;).

I do. I do indeed. It doesn’t work without ’em.

Professional NCOs have always been the backbone of any military organization and any officer who doesn’t know that, as well as acknowledge it, is just not playing with a full deck.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
To turn this whole thing around, if we can infer that the "101st fighting keyboarders" are cowards for not volunteering to serve, then we can infer that Markos, Duncan and anyone who opposes the war in Iraq opposes freedom and democratic government for the Iraqis, since being successful in Iraq is the best way to achieve those outcomes at present. By not putting aside their objections to the war and joining the military themselves, the moonbat patrol essentially says that freedom and Democracy are good enough for white people but not for arabs.
 
Written By: Tom Ault
URL: http://
Nope. I said "little to no attention" has been paid to the recruitment problem From what I’ve seen you’d fall into the "little" category. My point stands.

For what? So there’s been a recruitment problem. What has that to do with being in favor of the war?

It might surprise you to know that recruitment will ALWAYS go down in times of war. That’s why many countries resort to a draft or have compulsary service. Go figure.

Of course, that has little to do with the validity of the war or the credibility of those who support it and their arguments.

Either their arguments are sound or their not.

I’m not attacking the credibility of their statements in this context...

Then what ARE you attacking?

- although I don’t buy into the whole "we’re in a war for our survival" foolishness.

Speaking of Iraq, who here has made that argument?

I’m attacking their lack of attention to serious issue involving a war they support with vigor.

No you’re not, you calling people cowards based on the canard "if you support the war you should be willing to sign up" and to support that argument you’re using the recruitment problems of the military.

Its a BS argument on its face, and a dishonest one at its base. That’s been pointed out in the article and in the comments many times. You’ve yet to address it.

Just like their leader, they avoid bad news about Iraq like the plague.

Yeah, that’s why we did a week denouncing torture and those who condone it.

They’ll quickly call people anti-American for not supporting the war but I wonder what they call those parents who don’t want their child to die in that mess?

I challenge you to find one single hint of that sort of nonsense from any of the three who blog here. Put away your broad brush. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Apparently you’re unable to address the arguments so you’re reduced to the abominable assertion that "those who support it are cowards if they don’t join up".

Let me throw one more bomb... I hope the recruitment problem gets WORSE!

Of course you do. And if it does, the one’s effected will be those serving in Iraq. But you don’t care, do you? Of course, you will also claim you "support the troops" as well. Fairly typical of those who want to have it both ways while calling others cowards.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Good point, Tom. I classify the "if you support the war, you must join the military" arguments in the same realm as the "objectively pro-Saddam" arguments. They’re just piss-poor argument, and they don’t stand up to scrutiny.

To wit: while the liberals I noted have not impoverished themselves to accomplish the goals they advocate, they are also not "objectively pro-saddam" by opposing the war. Those who suggest otherwise should be reminded that, if they oppose a war on North Korea, fairness dictates that they must be called "objectively pro-Kim Jong-Il".

But that’s an absurd reduction, and people who make it are, themselves, absurd. Meanwhile, people like Amanda, et al, do themselves no intellectual favors by substitituting personal attacks and bullying for policy debate.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
I think it’s a fairly decent point. If you support this war, you should be willing to put your life on the line for it

Hey asshole- I live and work in NYC. There were 2 terror attacks on the WTC, a foiled plot to blow up all the bridges and tunnels in one spree, a Jewish radical was machine gunned down in his car by Islamic crazies on the middle of evening traffic on a major bridge- among other things.

Willing to put my life on the line? My fucking life has been on the line even before Iraq became an issue.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Let me throw one more bomb... I hope the recruitment problem gets WORSE!
LOL! Now we get down to it! That’ll teach Bushitler McChimpy and you right-wing troglodytes!

Sorry to burst your cowardly bubble, skillet, but the recruitment problem is going to get better over time, not worse. Cowards like yourself think that what hurts retention and recruitment is the fact that we’re in a shooting war, which is understandable, since cowards have an aversion to danger. But that’s just not true.

Soldiers (and Marines, airmen, and barnacle-scrapers) understand that deployment is a fact of military service. It’s OPTEMPO that wears you down and makes military life less attractive. As we reduce our committments in Iraq (and we will) as well as Europe and the Pacific Rim, deployment requirements for Guard and Reserve units will cease, and it will ease the burden on active divisions who are cycling through every 18 months to two years. Not that you care, because you are a coward who obviously despises the military.

Of course, if you weren’t such a coward, you would fly to Iraq and tell the troops on the ground how you hope the recruitment problem worsens. Coward.
 
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://
You know, you are completely ignoring the underlying criticism here, which is that we are saying that you don’t take this war seriously and you won’t face up to the fact that the amount of death and destruction it’s created far outstrips any supposed benefits that Iraq is getting.
 
Written By: Amanda
URL: http://www.pandagon.net
“So there’s been a recruitment problem. What has that to do with being in favor of the war?”

How can one support the war and largely ignore a serious issue directly related to the war? I’m going beyond simply saying that supporters of the war should enlist and fight it. I’m pointing out that some of the most vocal right wing supporters – like Limbaugh, Hannity, Malkin, Coulter etc. – don’t want to really deal with this issue. They can’t even bring themselves to lend their widely heard voices to help enlistment.

*****

”It might surprise you to know that recruitment will ALWAYS go down in times of war. That’s why many countries resort to a draft or have compulsary service. Go figure.“

Why is it going down NOW? Just cause that’s the way it always is?

*****

- although I don’t buy into the whole "we’re in a war for our survival" foolishness.

”Speaking of Iraq, who here has made that argument?”


Since I didn’t accuse anyone HERE of making that argument your question is irrelevant.

*****

I’m attacking their lack of attention to serious issue involving a war they support with vigor.

”No you’re not, you calling people cowards based on the canard "if you support the war you should be willing to sign up" and to support that argument you’re using the recruitment problems of the military.”


I’m going beyond simply signing up. See above.

*****

Just like their leader, they avoid bad news about Iraq like the plague.

”Yeah, that’s why we did a week denouncing torture and those who condone it.”


The discussion about Iraq extends beyond your blog and I have not made any accusations specifically about your blog so stop being so defensive.

Right wing supporters of the war constantly avoid or try to minimize the bad news flowing out of Iraq. When they’re not doing that they try to blame everything on the liberals or the phantom liberal media. Bush barely even acknowledges the chaos in Iraq.

*****


They’ll quickly call people anti-American for not supporting the war but I wonder what they call those parents who don’t want their child to die in that mess?

”I challenge you to find one single hint of that sort of nonsense from any of the three who blog here. Put away your broad brush. You don’t know what you’re talking about.”


One more time… the discussion extends beyond your blog. Support for the war extends beyond your blog. Spend 30 seconds on Frontpagemag.com and you’ll see what I’m talking about. I can understand why you would want to distance yourself from the more rabid elements of the right wing.

*****

”Apparently you’re unable to address the arguments so you’re reduced to the abominable assertion that "those who support it are cowards if they don’t join up".

Not just for not siging up… they’re cowards for not even dealing with the issue. They’d rather talk about Howard Dean than address the recruitment problem.

If the project in Iraq is SOOOOOOO vital and SOOOOOO important to US security, the spread of freedom and democracy and the cause of world peace, don’t you think the project’s supporters should be lending a hand to the endeavor? Rush Limbaugh alone could take a little time to encourage his able-bodied listeners to become heroes by joining the military and fighting for freedom! But he doesn’t because to do so he’d first have to deal with the dwindling numbers of people who don’t want to risk their lives in Iraq.

*****

Let me throw one more bomb... I hope the recruitment problem gets WORSE!

”Of course you do. And if it does, the one’s effected will be those serving in Iraq. But you don’t care, do you? Of course, you will also claim you "support the troops" as well. Fairly typical of those who want to have it both ways while calling others cowards.”


I certainly don’t “support the troops” like the perverts at Abu Ghraib or the murderes at Bagram. I don’t support the troops who get off on killing and violence. I don’t support the troops who think they’re fighting Satan.

I do very much support those troops who can see throught the lies coming out of the White House and Pentagon and who know first hand that the war on Iraq was unnecessary, unjustified and immoral.

The supporters of the war seem to think that supporting the troops means keeping them in the hellhole of liberated Iraq engaging in a foolish nation building/social engineering scheme. Hey good soldier, I support you dying in a roadisde bomb attack for… for… um… freedom! And world peace! And democracy!!
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
you don’t take this war seriously and you won’t face up to the fact that the amount of death and destruction it’s created far outstrips any supposed benefits that Iraq is getting.
Your problem is that you’re a nutjob. Supposed benefits? How about the right of self-determination? Property rights? The right to vote for the candidate of your choice? How many deaths or burned buildings during our War for Independence would have tipped it over into "Nah, not worth it" for you?

Excuse me, I forgot who I was talking to. NOTHING is worth the loss of life, right?

Mail me your ATM card and PIN code or I’ll kill you.
 
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://
"Sorry to burst your cowardly bubble, skillet, but the recruitment problem is going to get better over time, not worse. Cowards like yourself think that what hurts retention and recruitment is the fact that we’re in a shooting war, which is understandable, since cowards have an aversion to danger. But that’s just not true."

People like me think that the USA has no business playing global cop or spreading freedom and democracy through unjustified wars.

People like me think that the founders of this country were right to try and limit the activities of the federal government.

People like me see absolutely no justification or permission for the executive branch to engage in nation building and social engineering schemes.

People like me think that America doesn’t need troops sprinkled all around the world and look forward to the day when circumstances FORCE the American government to scale back it’s global cop related activities!

Now, perhaps you could enlighten me as to WHY recruitment is down? Why are parents wanting to sheild their kids from the recruiters? Why aren’t any prominent right wingers encouraging patriots to join up?
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
I certainly don’t “support the troops” like the perverts at Abu Ghraib or the murderes at Bagram. I don’t support the troops who get off on killing and violence. I don’t support the troops who think they’re fighting Satan.

I do very much support those troops who can see throught the lies coming out of the White House and Pentagon and who know first hand that the war on Iraq was unnecessary, unjustified and immoral.


CUCKOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
 
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://
You know, you are completely ignoring the underlying criticism here, which is that we are saying that you don’t take this war seriously and you won’t face up to the fact that the amount of death and destruction it’s created far outstrips any supposed benefits that Iraq is getting.

You could have just said that outright, instead of trying to claim it was your "underlying criticism". This isn’t even close to the point you actually made, which was that people who didn’t volunteer for service shouldn’t be in favor of the war. It sounds to me like you’re backpedalling; you know your original point is bullshit, and you’re trying to claim that you actually meant something else.

And we’ll never know whether the "death and destruction it’s created far outstrips any supposed benefits that Iraq is getting." We can only surmise, since we’ll never know what would have happened had we not attacked. Your use of "supposed" implies that Iraq isn’t getting any actual benefits; please provide support for that assertion.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com/
You know, you are completely ignoring the underlying criticism here, which is that we are saying that you don’t take this war seriously and you won’t face up to the fact that the amount of death and destruction it’s created far outstrips any supposed benefits that Iraq is getting.
Now you’re just changing the subject. Which is not entirely surprising, since the principle you espouse is plainly untenable....especially when confronted by people who actually did do military service. It’s the "101st Keyboarders" nonsense to which I object. You may object to the partisan news filtering that occurs in variors places, but that has nothing to do with an insult levied against "weblog authors who are ’very enthusiastic about war, provided someone else fights it’".

Nothing at all, and your usage of it—while knowing full well you don’t support the principle it suggests—is despicable. Equally as despicable as the "objectively pro-Saddam" bullshit that opponents of the war have objected to so strenuously over the years.

Are supporters of the war more likely to link to positive stories than negative stories? Well, no shit. We’ll all be be equally unsurprised to learn that critics of the war are more likely to link to negative stories than positive stories.

Meanwhile, as to the charge that *I* don’t "take this war seriously", I’d remind you that we’ve spent quite a lot of time on the major problems of torture, inadequate armor, Abu Ghraib, inadequate Geneva Convention processes, and the ongoing issues related to the insurgency.

How many positive stories have you posted with regards to Iraq?

Don’t give me that "you don’t care enough" bullshit. We’ve each taken measure of the facts on the ground, and we’ve each reached different conclusions about realities, priorities and strategies. That’s fine—that’s natural. But spare me this nonsense that you have the crystal ball insight into whether Iraq will end up a success or failure.

Meanwhile, that has nothing at all to do with the "101st" idiocy.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
If the project in Iraq is SOOOOOOO vital and SOOOOOO important to US security, the spread of freedom and democracy and the cause of world peace, don’t you think the project’s supporters should be lending a hand to the endeavor?
If universal health coverage is SOOOOO vital and SOOOOO important to you, don’t you think you should be spending all of your money to cover people before demanding that the rest of us do so? The principle is the same.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
"If universal health coverage is SOOOOO vital and SOOOOO important to you - "

Straw man.

I haven’t said anything about universal health coverage.

 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
I haven’t said anything about universal health coverage.

Then address the principle. If what you say is valid then so is what Jon is saying about universal health care. Or welfare. Or education. Or whatever you’d tout as "important to you".
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
The real principle at work here is simple, it’s called right wing hypocrisy.

The right wingers constantly claim the war is not only justified but essential to the security of America and victory in the so-called War on Terror. Bush even characterizes success in Iraq as leading to world peace! A free Iraq will make America more secure, blahblahblah. Aren’t we special, we’re willing to spend blood and treasure to spread freedom - even though we didn’t have to!

Yet, in the midst of a growing recruitment problems, these same warmongers are silent. How long can the Pentagon keep issuing stop-loss orders? How long can the same troops be recycled in Iraq? Forget siging up, why aren’t prominent war supporters working to help out the military they worship?! Is Ann Coulter to busy attacking liberals to lend her voice to the Army and encourage more people to defend freedom???

You war supporters just need to face the facts: More and more and more and more Americans are turning AGAINST the war in Iraq and THAT is why less and less people want to join the military. It’s an open ended conflict, there is no end in sight, the exit strategy depends entirely upon Iraqis willing to step up and fight and that’s going very slowly. Who can blame a young person for not wanting to risk their life on this dubious enterprise?

I’m confident that anyone who advocates universal health care is prepared to pay more taxes to see it to fruition. The question for you is... what are the supporters of the war in Iraq prepared to do to ensure victory?

The answer appears to be not very much except criticize those against the war.

 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
The real principle at work here is simple, it’s called right wing hypocrisy.

Nice dodge.

As demonstrated by your non-answer, the principle at work is your hypocrisy.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
I didn’t dodge anything. You just don’t like my answer and obviously you can’t respond to anything I’ve said.

But I’ll try again... Beyond criticizing those opposed to the war, what are right wing supporters of the war doing to help the effort particularly in the context of the recruitment issue?
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
People like me think that the USA has no business playing global cop or spreading freedom and democracy through unjustified wars

I agree. Freedom for me, mass graves for them!!

You’re advocating a new style isolationism.

It won’t work in this day and age.

9/11 provided an example of what happens when stagnation and evil is allowed to spread to large portions of the world...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Frankly, I’m not convinced that "the public" needs to do anything to fix the problem. I’ve been saying for a long time that we need to 1) gradually pull back in Iraq, leaving incrementally more security operations to Iraqi forces. They’re not very ready, but they have to start taking small steps. At any rate, whatever our perception of their progress, they will take up more responsibility gradually, and the stress on our military will gradually diminish.

Secondly, we need to continue to incentivize new recruiting. Larger bonuses, etc. Such a move should deal with the problem well enough.

Ultimately, though, I’ve never been convinced that more troops in Iraq = more success. In many ways and places, I think the opposite would obtain.

Meanwhile, do you favor universal health care? And if so, do you propose to turn your entire bank account over to help the needy obtain health insurance? Do you favor higher taxes? Can I assume you’ll go broke before demanding others pay more? Because, you seem awfully concerned that advocates make all the sacrifices.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
I’m confident that anyone who advocates universal health care is prepared to pay more taxes to see it to fruition.
Not good enough! You should be prepared to put yourself through medical school at your own expense and perform medical treatment for free, otherwise you are not committed to the idea of universal health care and a HYPOCRITE. That’s YOUR standard. I think it’s important that my daughter drinks milk - I show my support for that belief by buying milk, not by opening and operating a dairy farm, clown.
The question for you is... what are the supporters of the war in Iraq prepared to do to ensure victory?
What we’ve already done and continue to do, blockhead! Pay our taxes, support and vote for candidates who believe as we do. Clean off your spittle-flecked monitor and READ.
The answer appears to be not very much except criticize those against the war.
Nope, we just do that shit because it’s fun! That’s how I get down, baby!

 
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://
"...it is incumbent upon YOU to offer YOUR solution to the terrorist threat (assuming that you perceive one)."

Sure, there’s a terrorist threat and it’s being blown out of all reasonable proportion in order to do things like... oh, start unnecessary wars without justification.

As far as solutions go... we could start by getting out of the entire Middle East. Stop killing Muslims. Stop occupying their lands. Stop supporting the Taliban-like Saudi royal family. Stop trying to solve the Israel/Palestinian crisis and so on. In other words, we should stop meddling in the affairs of other nations and creating enemies in the process. But I’m not so naive to think that’s going to happen anytime soon.

The American government will continue to meddle around the world and the American people will continue to reap the consequences.
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
I think we need to find out what this guy is doing to ensure our defeat in the war. I mean, he’s obviously against it. But what’s he really doing? Posting on a message board? Protesting in the street?

NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

Man, he doesn’t even have the balls to go to jail for what he believes in. Or he doesn’t have the sack to go to Iraq and fight against us.

In other words, we should stop meddling in the affairs of other nations and creating enemies in the process

Yup, it’s our fault.

And you wonder why your patriotism is questioned...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Sure, there’s a terrorist threat and it’s being blown out of all reasonable proportion

Straight out of the mouth of Michael Moore....

Terrorism? What is this terrorism you speak of? Never heard of it. Must be some sort of overblown boogeyman. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go visit the World Trade Center, I understand the view from the observation deck is wonderful on a day like this.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
I hope the recruitment problem gets WORSE!
...and here, my freinds, we have a direct answer to the point McQ raised in ’ THe Hyperbole meter"

There’s no way to judge this statement than it is flatly Anti-American. We should all regard it as such.


 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
The really funny part is when you get these guys to discuss "Starship Troopers" by Robert Heinlein (the book, not the wretched movie). They’ll almost certainly call it fascist, or some such label. That’s funny because it takes their idea to the ultimate conclusion. In that book, only veterans are allowed to vote. You’d think they’d be all in favor of that!
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
As far as solutions go... we could start by getting out of the entire Middle East. Stop killing Muslims. Stop occupying their lands. Stop supporting the Taliban-like Saudi royal family. Stop trying to solve the Israel/Palestinian crisis and so on.
That’s not a solution. That’s a surrender.

How’s this for a comprimise: we’ll stop occupying their lands when they stop ramming planes into our buildings.
 
Written By: SaveFarris
URL: http://
I don’t quite get this "put your life on the line" stuff. It seems to me that the 3000 people who died in the towers weren’t in the military, neither were the people whose plane went down in Pennsylvania, nor were the people whose plane crashed into the Pentagon.
As far as I can tell, we are all in this war whether we want to be or not. Wearing a uniform is not the only thing that can get you killed. Any American is a target, whether they are in jeans or fatigues. We’re all going to fight this one way or another, regardless of whose in office.
 
Written By: Todd
URL: http://
We’re all going to fight this one way or another, regardless of whose in office.

Of course, some - like Skillet- fight for the other side...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
We are at war. If you support this war against
Islamic fundamentalist terrorists and you are
18-39 you should be laying awake at night
thinking about serving your country in the
military now. In 1942 my grandfather was
40 years old and he joined the Army. I met a man
last week who joined the Army at 16
during WW2 (and later went on to serve as a Ranger
in Korea and then in Special Forces.) We need people
in the military now and if you support this war
and you fit into the eligible age group then why
shouldn’t you be in the military? The big question
that isn’t being asked is why aren’t Bush’s daughters
in the military? If Bush can’t inspire and motivate his
own children to serve their country then why should
anybody else be motivate to serve?

Oh by the way: I’m a libertarian who supports the war
on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan, voted for Bush in 04,
served as an Army infantryman 92-95 with the 25th ID at
Schofield, and I looked into to going back into the
military (National Guard age limits are now 39, I’m
37 and the Navy said you have to be able to serve 20 years
by 55, which I would make due to prior service) but
(and this is for the leftists out there) I’ve experienced
gov’t provided medical care and it is the reason why
I’m still injured and can’t go back into the military now.
 
Written By: phil
URL: http://
So every American age 18-39 should serve in the military?

And just how many people is that, math major? How would we pay for an army that size? And who would run all the businesses while we’re all off in the army? Mexicans?

I have prior service, and I would serve again, but I’m a broke-dick, which is the government’s fault, by the way. Nice try.
We need people
in the military now and if you support this war
and you fit into the eligible age group then why
shouldn’t you be in the military? The big question
that isn’t being asked is why aren’t Bush’s daughters
in the military? If Bush can’t inspire and motivate his
own children to serve their country then why should
anybody else be motivate to serve?


Awfully libertarian of you to be suggesting what committments other people should be making. By the way, since George W. Bush is the COMMANDER IN CHIEF of all our armed services, served in the Vietnam era, has a father who served with distinction in WWII, I’d say the Bush family has contributed their fair amount of service to this country.

Quit posting under aliases, skillet.
 
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://
Hey Jeff, thanks for you congeniality. I never said that ALL people
18-39 should serve in the military. I said people who believe
this war is right should feel an obligation to serve their country.
How is this a radical idea? If the people who support this policy
aren’t willing to serve then who will be?

"Awfully libertarian of you to be suggesting what committments other people should be making."

In a free society I believe I’m allowed to suggest what I want, I’m just not allowed to use coercive power to force people to do what I want. I oppose the draft but I believe that citizens should care enough to volunteer serve their country. I’m in the process of starting my own business, so I’ll be here to run a business.

"I have prior service, and I would serve again, but I’m a broke-dick..."

I’m sorry your dick is broke, perhaps you were using it in a way it wasn’t designed to be used.

"...which is the government’s fault..."

Yeah, uh, you realize there’s been an effort by leftists to impose a government health care system on the American population? The same kind of system that has been a failure in Europe and Canada. Well I’ve experienced the incompetence of the gov’t health care that we have (e.g. VA) and it has made me a pro-free market health care supporter.

"...since George W. Bush is the COMMANDER IN CHIEF of all our armed services, served in the Vietnam era, has a father who served with distinction in WWII, I’d say the Bush family has contributed their fair amount of service to this country."

I thought our ideals were rooted in individualism rather than on who your parents are. So if your ancestors served in the military that means you are exempt from any obligation for public service? You have said that you would serve again and I would too, that would be twice for the both of us, which brings up the legitimate question as to why Bush’s kids apparently don’t feel an obligation to serve even once.
 
Written By: phil
URL: http://
Hey Jeff, thanks for you congeniality.
Anytime.
I never said that ALL people
18-39 should serve in the military. I said people who believe
this war is right should feel an obligation to serve their country.
How is this a radical idea? If the people who support this policy
aren’t willing to serve then who will be?


I get it. And when this conflict is over and we have to fight someone I don’t want to fight I can opt out, right? Should I have told DA "You know, I’m not so much with the hardship tour in Korea - I don’t even think we should be there, but I’ll do a 4 month Intrinsic Action in Kuwait because I’m behind that program." Yeah, that and missing overseas movement will get you a nice brown jumper and some stockade time. Soldiers don’t choose their battles - they fight them. You are all missing the point of military service. I thought Somalia was a bullshit mission, but I volunteered to go - I thought Haiti was a clusterfuck, but I wanted to go because I had buds there. Macedonia, Kosovo - ditto. My brother was there and I thought he was having all the fun. You don’t choose the terms of your service. That’s when you get assholes rolling grenades into officers’ tents at oh dark-thirty.
"I have prior service, and I would serve again, but I’m a broke-dick..."

I’m sorry your dick is broke, perhaps you were using it in a way it wasn’t designed to be used.


You were an 11B for 3 years and you don’t know what a broke-dick is? Sheesh.

 
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://repatriate.blogspot.com
9/11 provided an example of what happens when stagnation and evil is allowed to spread to large portions of the world...

You forgot to mention that poverty and oppression breed terrorism and they hate us for our freedom.
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
"Meanwhile, do you favor universal health care?"

Nope.


"Do you favor higher taxes?"

Nope.
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
I hope the recruitment problem gets WORSE!

...and here, my freinds, we have a direct answer to the point McQ raised in ’ THe Hyperbole meter"

There’s no way to judge this statement than it is flatly Anti-American. We should all regard it as such.


If being pro-American means supporting an unnecessary, immoral and unjustified war, occupation, nation building and social engineering scheme based on a dubious theory that democracy in Iraq will lead to some kind of world peace then I’m definitely anti-American!
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
"How’s this for a comprimise: we’ll stop occupying their lands when they stop ramming planes into our buildings."

And just why did they ram airplanes into buildings? Hmmmmm?

 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
"Terrorism? What is this terrorism you speak of?"

It’s less of a threat to you than automobile accidents but much more dramatic and much easier for politicians to exploit.
 
Written By: skillet
URL: http://
I get it. And when this conflict is over and we have to fight someone I don’t want to fight I can opt out, right?

Yet again, I didn’t say this. Jeff I think your having a discussion with yourself, you keep bringing things up that I didn’t say and then arguing against them.

What I’m talking about is a sense of duty. The call of duty. Shouldn’t citizens in our free republic feel a sense of duty to serve their country? And if citizens aren’t willing to make sacrifices in the service of their country then who will be? There are an awful lot of people who do not feel any sense of duty. Fortunately for us there have been enough who do, including you Jeff. So to get back to my original point: Shouldn’t citizens who support this war feel a sense of duty to serve? And if the answer is "no they shouldn’t feel any sense of duty" then we’ve got some serious problems.
 
Written By: phil
URL: http://
This is another line I just don’t get. The idea that if we knew why they rammed the planes into the towers, that we could repair the problems between us, and all might be well. Let’s say we did spend a ton of money (or something) studying why "they" hate us. What are we supposed to do? Let’s say "they" hate us because we support Israel toooo much! What do we do, drop our support? Have "them" tell us how much support we can give them? What if they hate us because we support the House of Saud too much, or they don’t want us in "their" holy lands, What then? Do we support the oppressive mullahs over the present government? We back one group of Oppressors over a supposed other? We back the group that likes women in beehive suits?
Would there ever really be anyway way other than massive ass kissing to satisfy "these" people?
I can’t see how any reason "these" people could give me that could justify slamming planes into buildings, or there would ever be anything that "We" could do besides becoming an Islamic state that would ever satify "them".
I don’t expect a happy ending anytime soon, unless "we" truly want to do what "they" want us to do. Whatever the hell that is.
 
Written By: Todd
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider