Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I certainly didn't join for an "attaboy" or a pat on the back. I was from a small town with few opportunities. I got into comm nav, which helped me later get into nextel, which after I got my degree in electrical engineering, got me into T-Mobile, and now I work for AT&T in cellular.
I didn't shoot anyone. I didn't work on aircraft that killed anyone, I was in the 927th ARW out Macdill AFB and never went overseas for long, except for one TDY to Germany.
Most people in the service don't actually go out and kill people. Hell, some guys that joined the Air Force just drove buses.
There were bumper stickers when I was at tech school in Biloxi stating "Clean up Biloxi, shoot an airman" but that was about the worst thing that I had ever seen. I don't think anyone has called me a baby killer
There were bumper stickers when I was at tech school in Biloxi stating "Clean up Biloxi, shoot an airman" but that was about the worst thing that I had ever seen. I don't think anyone has called me a baby killer
They are completely different. In the most simplest terms, patriotism is defensive, nationalism is aggressive. I love what George Orwell said of the two....
"Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality."
The fact that you seem to have such an aggressive policy in regards to the use of the military, I am left to believe that you must be a nationalist. I on the other hand am a patriot.
I think America is the best country in the world, and I am sick and tired of power-hungry warmongers sending our military men to die, and killing hundreds of thousands of foreigners in the process, to protect the interests of these rich **********s. I would rather be poor and free of guilt, than rich with blood on my hands.
Then write your representatives and tell them that you will vote for an antiwar candidate.
Start a antiwar movement group at a local community hall. Invite people, put out fliers, start a movement.
Degrading the military for what our elected officials decide is necessary for national defense is stupid. I don't agree with our foreign engagements, I think we should pull all military troops out of all overseas deployments and let our allies worry about their own nation. I am tired of spending so much money on defense of NATO partners and oil producing nations.
I hate our national defense strategy right now, I am not a Neocon.
They are completely different. In the most simplest terms, patriotism is defensive, nationalism is aggressive. I love what George Orwell said of the two....
"Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality."
The fact that you seem to have such an aggressive policy in regards to the use of the military, I am left to believe that you must be a nationalist. I on the other hand am a patriot.
I think America is the best country in the world, and I am sick and tired of power-hungry warmongers sending our military men to die, and killing hundreds of thousands of foreigners in the process, to protect the interests of these rich **********s. I would rather be poor and free of guilt, than rich with blood on my hands.
Maybe we are misunderstanding what the other is saying. I don't agree with everything the military does. Vietnam, in my opinion, was a mistake. But the way our guys were treated after they came home was a disgrace. The politicians who send the military into combat are the ones who bear the blame. The military is a blunt instrument and should only be used sparingly. Even in the recent case of helping with the Ebola crisis. That is not what the military is for.
Perhaps you did not notice, but Vietnam has been a communist nation since the US left in 1975. Furthermore, more nations fell to communist dictators while Carter was President than any other President since Wilson.
The spread of communism was very real indeed, and thanks to Democrats, we completely lost that war.
So communism spread all over Asia once we left Vietnam?
You're glossing over the fact that they Vietnamese had every right to go communist. It's THEIR country, not yours.
Like I said before, the United States was MORE aggressive than the Soviets post WW2. Most of the homegrown, organic movements towards socialism in Africa and South America had NOTHING to do with the Soviets.
And we lost in Vietnam because we faced a superior enemy on their home soil...not because of "Democrats."
Maybe we are misunderstanding what the other is saying. I don't agree with everything the military does. Vietnam, in my opinion, was a mistake. But the way our guys were treated after they came home was a disgrace. The politicians who send the military into combat are the ones who bear the blame. The military is a blunt instrument and should only be used sparingly. Even in the recent case of helping with the Ebola crisis. That is not what the military is for.
Let me state it in the most simplest terms. If you believe that all young men should do military service, you are a nationalist. If you believe joining a military which hasn't fought a war on US soil in nearly 150 years is patriotic, then you are a nationalist. If you believe that "preserving the union" was worth nearly a million American lives, you are a nationalist. And I HATE with a fiery passion all nationalists.
Nationalism is the most dangerous idea ever concocted, and has led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people. Without nationalism, or at least, without the perverse prerogatives created by aspects of nationalism, such as the entire concept of "national service" whose inevitable outcome is always forced conscription(IE "the draft"), then there wouldn't have even been a Vietnam war to begin with and we wouldn't even be having this stupid conversation.
Just please, stop drinking the government kool-aid. It's bad for you.
I certainly didn't join for an "attaboy" or a pat on the back. I was from a small town with few opportunities. I got into comm nav, which helped me later get into nextel, which after I got my degree in electrical engineering, got me into T-Mobile, and now I work for AT&T in cellular.
I didn't shoot anyone. I didn't work on aircraft that killed anyone, I was in the 927th ARW out Macdill AFB and never went overseas for long, except for one TDY to Germany.
Most people in the service don't actually go out and kill people. Hell, some guys that joined the Air Force just drove buses.
That is certainly true.
Something like only 1 out of 10 in the military see combat. The rest are providing support. Sometimes that support requires being in a combat zone, but most of the time it does not.
My MOS was 1391, a Bulkfuelman, with the 7th Engineer Battalion, 1st Field Service & Support Group, 1st Marine Division. I was trained to make amphibious assaults and set up fuel depots along side with the Navy SeaBees on the beach. However, I ended up fueling helicopters with the MAG-36 at Futenma Air Station on Okinawa.
I also never had to shoot at anyone, and for that I am grateful.
They are completely different. In the most simplest terms, patriotism is defensive, nationalism is aggressive. I love what George Orwell said of the two....
"Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality."
The fact that you seem to have such an aggressive policy in regards to the use of the military, I am left to believe that you must be a nationalist. I on the other hand am a patriot.
I think America is the best country in the world, and I am sick and tired of power-hungry warmongers sending our military men to die, and killing hundreds of thousands of foreigners in the process, to protect the interests of these rich **********s. I would rather be poor and free of guilt, than rich with blood on my hands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Then write your representatives and tell them that you will vote for an antiwar candidate.
Start a antiwar movement group at a local community hall. Invite people, put out fliers, start a movement.
Degrading the military for what our elected officials decide is necessary for national defense is stupid. I don't agree with our foreign engagements, I think we should pull all military troops out of all overseas deployments and let our allies worry about their own nation. I am tired of spending so much money on defense of NATO partners and oil producing nations.
I hate our national defense strategy right now, I am not a Neocon.
It doesn't mean I hate those who served.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toryturner
Maybe we are misunderstanding what the other is saying. I don't agree with everything the military does. Vietnam, in my opinion, was a mistake. But the way our guys were treated after they came home was a disgrace. The politicians who send the military into combat are the ones who bear the blame. The military is a blunt instrument and should only be used sparingly. Even in the recent case of helping with the Ebola crisis. That is not what the military is for.
To the 3 of you, I think there is some common ground here, myself included. I don't hate military people. As I have said, I know people who have served. Some fought, others did not. For those who did, when s*** hit the fan, they did what they had to do to stay alive in a totally f***ed up situation that those at the top put them in. What I do despise is the policies that put our fellow Americans in harms way misusing our military to benefit themselves. Like for instance putting these soldiers in places like Vietnam, or Iraq and then setting rules about who you can or cannot shoot, and being hamstrung by a bunch of bureacratic BS. And think about this... our troops are foreigners to their land, and despite what those people may have thought about their rulers, and more than likely did not have any love for them, a good portion of those people in those countries saw us as invaders. I know for a fact most of us Americans wouldn't like it if it was the other way around. I mean, I don't like a lot of what our politicians in this country are doing these days, but I'll be damned if I want some other country coming here to occupy this nation in trying to "rescue us" or "liberate" us! I'd see that nation as a bunch of invaders as well, and want to fight them!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
