Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by DroidHost, Oct 9, 2011.
You are beyond ignorant.
There was no disrespect regarding soldiers in my post. What I was trying to say, underprivileged, poor and chance less people have to serve in the US Army to get education and a job. Not bad per se but very bad and sad if you are serving for an invading, occupying country like the US are.
In many cases they have to pay with their lives or come back invalid. That's what I meant by saying "they sell their souls to the us army".
That is pretty much the liberal-elitist view of the military. They assume anyone who joins does so out of a sense of desperation. Its also patently false. I never met anyone during my 10 years of service, enlisted or officer, who joined because they had no other choice. Adventure, travel, patriotism, family tradition; those I've heard. Never desperation.
You seem to be taking a swipe at the US, generally ("Not bad per se but very bad and sad if you are serving for an invading, occupying country like the US are"), and then conflating the opportunities offered military members with a statement about the possibility that they might be injured or killed. Then you drive the point home about this meaning they have sold their souls.
There is so much screwed up and confused here it is difficult to hit all the points. But, I will say, military service does not involve selling your soul. And, if the comment was directed only to those injure or killed, I will say this. Such injuries and death are a horrible price. But, I think it demeans their sacrifice to say that in being injured or killed, they have sold their soul. I have been to Walter Reed Army Medical Center and have seen Soldiers with the most horrific injuries. Multiple amputations, burns over the face and body that would make you want to turn you head. And you know what? I have seen some of the most incredible positive attitudes out of some of these folks. Even those who are struggling with depression and mental injuries and are having a difficult time coping, neither group has "Sold their souls." I think such statements only serves to strip the humanity of these folks. Whether the wars are something you agree with at all or whether there should be different policies is a different matter altogether, one that I think is fair game for comment and discourse (and one that I think should be discussed and debated). But, it strikes me as a disservice to try to say the injured or killed have sold their souls. If you looked these folks in the eye or spoke with them, you find their souls very much intact.
Thinking on this some more, I want to share another story.
At the time, I was serving at Fort Sam Houston, which is the base where Brooke Army Medical Center is located and it is the "home of Army medicine." One morning, I was driving into work, feeling stressed or worried about something. The drive in to work meant passing on a road that ran around a large rectangular area where a running track was located. I remember approaching the track and the sun being quite bright and, as I got closer, seeing these flashes of light coming from the track. At first, I could not figure out what this was. As I got closer, I saw a group of 4-5 Soldiers running, with sunlight reflecting off of their leg prosthetics as they ran. While I felt (and still fee) intense regret that they lost their legs in the first place, seeing these Soldiers muster the courage to get back on the track and run (some of them very fast), made me marvel at their moral strength and put the minor things I was bothered by in perspective. I felt a mixture of admiration for them and shame at my worrying about petty concerns. Again, no one sold their souls there.
I had a friend who "sold his soul", thing is...he got nothing in return other than pride and the respect he earned while putting his life up as a bounty so other families wouldn't have to.
You should ask his mother if he was down to his last resort, I have a feeling with his mother being a multi-millionaire that money was not his motivation for giving his life but if you doubt me, see what it nets you asking her and don't be surprised when she delivers her response in the way I expect she would.
I am honored to have known him in the time he was here and would gladly switch places with him...he is another person no-one knows anything about yet get's callously shoved into the verbal version of what I call observers-group-think. He made a choice so weaker people wouldn't have to.
OCCUPY! REJECT AUTHORITY!OUR SYMBOL:
Someone showed me this that was found on Facebook...
Everyone here should really take the five minutes and listen to what this guy has to say.
The protesters need to grow up was the last sentence of this guy.
Tell it this people:
But, no worry, the future is bright because there are many talented people out to change it for a better.
need to watch that movie.....
WoW! Guess I live in a hotbed of liberalism!
While many cities are sending in the police to clear out the "Occupy" protesters, the Seattle city counsel just voted their support of the protesters.
I saw the whole Occupy come to an end in Oakland, police teared up tents and arrested a bunch of them. Including the leader of the protests. Only to find out on facebook and here that it continues nationwide.
Well, I'm a big supporter of the right to protest and even civil disobedience when properly aimed. Hence my initial support of "occupy", but having followed it and personally witnessed it, I'm turning into a "Fred". I had expected (hoped?) that after two months their message would coalesce into something of real substance, alas I guess it's not to be. Originally I suspected the media was doing it's usual job of only highlighting the fringe and the most outrageous of the protesters. After visiting the site in Seattle, I hate to admit that to me it just seemed to be rabble and hangers-on with no real purpose than to disrupt. Shame.
Sorry to hear, that Grant.
In Europe (well, Holland and what I have seen in Denmark), that's typically the case when there's protests. Like you, I wholly support the idea of protesting, but for some reason it always ends up being one of extremes (far left or far right) that use it. Most other people simply are too busy struggling to keep their heads above water to abandon their source(s) of income in order to go protest.
Hence, whenever protestors are filmed or photographed, it generally shows a not to flattering picture.
How Republicans are being taught to talk about Occupy Wall Street
It's a shame that for all the hype, OWS accomplished absolutely nothing.
And the violence sure doesn't help, a cop (in NYC) was stabbed in the hand on NYE by OWS protesters and things like that are not generating any love for the OWS crowd.
In retrospect, I found my administration for the "tea party" activists going up in comparison. They were equally pissed but instead of standing around and crying about how unfair the world is, they went about changing it. No matter where you sit in the political spectrum, there is no doubt that this shapped the current republican presidential primary race.
I never once thought that something specific was going to come of the Occupy Wall Street protests.
It was Wall Street / Republicans that begged for a specific demand as you can attack specifics.
The strength of OWS was it didn't have specific demands and goals. OWS is the first in a likely series of protests attempting to accomplish something very difficult ... major change to major public structures (government, politics, financial systems).
Keep in mind, these protests went global. Most major cities around the world had an Occupy Wall Street protest. It's a little hard to say they "accomplished" "nothing". I'm pretty sure the Tea Party protests won't be going global.
I think of OWS as the first protest in a series of protests that are democracy's version of the Arab Spring.
OWS also showed the Democrats their political strategy for the 2012.
Democrats: The party of the 99%.
I don't know of many fights where the 99% lost.
I pulled out the most interesting part of the article .. the quote from Frank Luntz.
May you live in Interesting Times [Chinese Proverb]
you should know Arab springs it is about dignity more than democracy ....
they cannot see the rulers play with power here and there ... making false alliances ... with the big companies or even countries ...
the media is **** ! there is nothing real there
they show what the want us to see nothing else ... Arabs or Western media ... these are the real dictatorship of this century
Separate names with a comma.