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.
And your solution to this problem is to make it even less democratic? Also you can vote for whoever you want, they may not have a shot at winning but you still have a CHOICE. What you are suggesting is not allowing people to have choices.....
Right...Korea, Vietnam, Iraq I and II....all purely defensive wars. If the last 60 years is to judge, we are on the offensive way way way more then on the defensive. Also there is no better defensive strategy then diplomacy. And you don't need to be a military man to be a good diplomat.
Willingness to fight doesn't mean anything. There are idiots the world over who are willing to fight but I wouldn't want them to run a lemonade stand let alone a nation. Being that our president is to lead the nation on a variety of issues, mostly diplomatic in nature. A willingness to fight is of no value to the profession whatsoever.
Sometimes running from a fight is what is best for the country in the long run. Vietnam springs to mind immediately. We wanted to display a willingness to fight to our Soviet rivals. Fast forward a decade and 60,000 American dead, hundreds of thousands wounded and maimed, country is in shambles, economy hitting the bricks...all for what? Wanting to look tough....was it worth it? No, it wasn't.
Contrast this with the Iran hostage Crisis. Carters restraint made he look weak to the American people, but he didn't drag us into a brutal land war in Asia either.
Which outcome was better for the American people? I would say the second.
Really? Now that Vietnam is a nearly-free-market country and a strategic ally against China, while Iran remains a radical Islamist theocracy with nuclear ambitions?
I am certainly not minimizing the horrifying death toll in Vietnam, but to argue that the war has had no positive effects decades later, with the Soviet empire a thing of the past, China locked into a trade war (the best kind of war) with the U.S., and Vietnam a producer of quality consumer goods for our market, is an exaggeration.
Really? Now that Vietnam is a nearly-free-market country and a strategic ally against China, while Iran remains a radical Islamist theocracy with nuclear ambitions?
I am certainly not minimizing the horrifying death toll in Vietnam, but to argue that the war has had no positive effects decades later, with the Soviet empire a thing of the past, China locked into a trade war (the best kind of war) with the U.S., and Vietnam a producer of quality consumer goods for our market, is an exaggeration.
My point was to compare the two events in relation to the long term well being of the American people and how having a "willingness to fight" is not by default always a good thing. Not sure how the outcome of said nations decades later has any baring on the discussion whatsoever.
My point was to compare the two events in relation to the long term well being of the American people and how having a "willingness to fight" is not by default always a good thing. Not sure how the outcome of said nations decades later has any baring on the discussion whatsoever.
You raised the issue of US policy in Vietnam and Iran, and I briefly touched in a few which have been beneficial to us, and are direct results of the US military’s actions in Southeast Asia, as well as the continuing strategic threat of fundamentalist Iran, which flourished in the face of American dithering. If you are unable to countenance the bearing of historic outcomes on issues of strategic policy, you should refrain from raising them.
Nope, as a military veteran, I certainly don't think just because someone served in the military, that they should be put on a pedestal and automatically be considered 'heroes' for putting on the uniform. There's no heroism in being stationed stateside or even overseas on a base in a safe area.
I do, however, think that certain members of the military who volunteer and become part of fighting units, like conventional infantry as well as elite special operations forces, SHOULD be put on a pedestal.
Those that volunteer to go through excruciating selection processes just for the chance to become a part of units like Ranger Battalion, SEALs, Delta, Green Berets, PJs, etc, and thrive in them for years, those guys get my utmost respect. Not only are they putting themselves in real danger, so many of their missions are of top secret and will never be known. They truly take the fight to the enemy and are all around bad asses. The kinds of people you want on your side any day, all day.
I was born in 1985, so I wasn't there. However, I don't believe how many Vietnam veterans were spat upon really matters here.
Regardless, if they were not spit upon literally, they certainly were figuratively. At the very least, returning servicemen if not vilified, were certainly not well received. Most tried to slip quietly into a normal pattern and tried to hide the fact they served in Vietnam, to avoid the anger and disdain of many.
As to why they were so mistreated? Simple. They were the convenient scapegoats for a very angry and war weary nation during a most turbulent time in its history. As Bob Dylan sang of the times, “The times, they are a-changin,” and “there’s revolution in the air.”
Sadly, those who served in Vietnam were portrayed as baby killers, psychos, drug addicts and warmongers for many years after. Indeed Hollywood carried on this myth in their movies involving Vietnam veterans.
Scapegoats, they definitely were.
----------------------------------
All these being said, many people today also use modern day military service members as scapegoat because they are angry about the U.S. foreign policy. They are saying now we shouldn't thank the vets for their service because they are not protecting or defending our freedom.
I think these people are super petty. Like I posted earlier, Maybe Our veterans deserve respect for their sacrifices and the best care we can provide for the wounds, visible and internal, that war inevitably imposes. If we feel guilty about our longest wars, perhaps we should direct our focus inward, instead of displacing it onto unknown soldiers.
Well said! I wasn't born yet either but I am interested because my dad did 3 tours there. I kind of remember when he was in the Gulf war/Desert Storm.
Nope, as a military veteran, I certainly don't think just because someone served in the military, that they should be put on a pedestal and automatically be considered 'heroes' for putting on the uniform. There's no heroism in being stationed stateside or even overseas on a base in a safe area.
I do, however, think that certain members of the military who volunteer and become part of fighting units, like conventional infantry as well as elite special operations forces, SHOULD be put on a pedestal.
Those that volunteer to go through excruciating selection processes just for the chance to become a part of units like Ranger Battalion, SEALs, Delta, Green Berets, PJs, etc, and thrive in them for years, those guys get my utmost respect. Not only are they putting themselves in real danger, so many of their missions are of top secret and will never be known. They truly take the fight to the enemy and are all around bad asses. The kinds of people you want on your side any day, all day.
If that's your preference, so be it. I don't want bad asses on my side, I don't want wise asses on my side; I want people who will think. Think about what is best for us first and for others second. People who are wise enough to determine that fighting in the street or fighting in the jungle produces hordes of losers on both sides. I want people who will examine the root cause of the conflict and take steps to eliminate that cause.
If that's your preference, so be it. I don't want bad asses on my side, I don't want wise asses on my side; I want people who will think. Think about what is best for us first and for others second. People who are wise enough to determine that fighting in the street or fighting in the jungle produces hordes of losers on both sides. I want people who will examine the root cause of the conflict and take steps to eliminate that cause.
I equate it with fighting cancer.If you do not destroy it early it will spread and eventually kill you.
If that's your preference, so be it. I don't want bad asses on my side, I don't want wise asses on my side; I want people who will think. Think about what is best for us first and for others second. People who are wise enough to determine that fighting in the street or fighting in the jungle produces hordes of losers on both sides. I want people who will examine the root cause of the conflict and take steps to eliminate that cause.
I'm guessing you don't know too many military personnel, do you?
If that's your preference, so be it. I don't want bad asses on my side, I don't want wise asses on my side; I want people who will think. Think about what is best for us first and for others second. People who are wise enough to determine that fighting in the street or fighting in the jungle produces hordes of losers on both sides. I want people who will examine the root cause of the conflict and take steps to eliminate that cause.
I don't want to put words in that poster's mouth, but I assume he meant, SF people are both hugely intelligent and action-oriented. You want those people (bad asses) on your side. He didn't say something that is contradictory to what you are saying here.
Just my .02
This said, I am not so sure that if I PERSONALLY would put people served in special force on pedestal. I remember I've been put in my place once in the VA hospital by an older veteran because I bragged about my brother and the guy I was dating at the time. (They were Force Recon / MARSOC ) He said, I should be ashamed of myself because NO one person can win the war and hero worship is looked down upon in the military. That is a hard lesson learned by me. LOL The older vet and I became good friends because I realized that every job is important in the military.
I have a friend who was a Motor Vehicle Operator in the Marine Corps, he lost both of his legs. I think he should get the EQUAL respect as everybody else, although he doesn't have the "sexy" job in the military. Hollywood does not usually make movies of a Motor Vehicle Operator, they'd rather make movies based on the stories of special forces.
I also want fellow civilians to understand the job of Combat Engineers who roll over mines before they call out EOD.
They travel the roads KNOWN to be loaded with nothing but IEDs. So Combat Engineers cleared the way.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 08-15-2018 at 08:44 AM..
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.
