Why Haven't You Enlisted?

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Why haven't you enlisted in the cause of liberty?

Umm, because I've seen how our crazy ass president thinks, and I'm not going to fight to "liberate" the people of Iraq, or any other damn country for that matter, unless they pose a direct threat to the people of the United States. Sorry. Those people that gave their lives fighting for us did so that we could live in freedom, not so that we could just go and give our lives fighting for someone else's freedom. If the Iraqis, or whoever else wants freedom, let them fight for it the same way our ancestors did. To twist around that old quote a bit, young Americans shouldn't be doing what young Iraqis should be doing for themselves. If they want freedom, let them be the ones to fight for it.

Grady Philpott:

I have been listening since 9/11 and I never thought that Iraq was attacked solely because of WMDs.

Yes, it WAS the main reason, UNTIL they found none, then they picked a bunch of other reasons that were also wildly off the mark. You haven't been listening too well, it would appear.

Wars are terribly hard to fight and extremely easy to criticize. I have very well honed critical skills.

Haha, says who? You?

enlisted in the United States Marine Corps at age seventeen because I love my country and I would not be deprived the honor of serving in a war to defend the cause of freedom, not to mention the defining event of my generation. I have never regretted it.

Well then you are the only Vietnam veteran who I have ever met who "never regretted it". The only. I don't know what that says about you, but I don't know what capacity you were in Nam as.

Secondly, the Vietnam War was NOT defending the cause of freedom (if it was, would the US have pulled out and let the communists win?). That you still seem to think that it was tells me that either you weren't really IN Vietnam, or you were a pencilpusher who never actually got to see what was actually going on.

I believe it far more than your claim of being in the 99th percentile of MENSA! ROFLMAO, that is rich.

For future reference, "Credentials" are usually backed up, not just a list of imaginary positions and accreditations.

Did you know I invented gravity? I swear.


If you are indeed over 40 years old, I'm saddened that you'd be so blind and reluctant to admit even the tiniest bit of the truth, and that you're obviously so easily duped by your own government.

And that you'd look back on the Vietnam War, one of the DARKEST periods in contemporary American history, as something to be proud of, is even more disheartening.

jako

Have you heard of General Giap?
He was the commander of all NVA forces by his account the Vietnamese were loosing from Tet on...the Viet Cong were spent by the end of Tet the NVA was being bleed white. Giap himself state if the US returned to unrestricted bombing the North would have collapsed. Can you name one battle the US lost in Vietnam? Vietnam was lost because the left in America did not have the will to win let alone fight and they sapped the will from those that did. Slacker hippies won the war that Giap's army could not. Hippies beat the US military politially where nobody could by force of arms.

Originally posted by Jakomo
Grady Philpott:

I have been listening since 9/11 and I never thought that Iraq was attacked solely because of WMDs.

Yes, it WAS the main reason, UNTIL they found none, then they picked a bunch of other reasons that were also wildly off the mark. You haven't been listening too well, it would appear.

Wars are terribly hard to fight and extremely easy to criticize. I have very well honed critical skills.

Haha, says who? You?

enlisted in the United States Marine Corps at age seventeen because I love my country and I would not be deprived the honor of serving in a war to defend the cause of freedom, not to mention the defining event of my generation. I have never regretted it.

Well then you are the only Vietnam veteran who I have ever met who "never regretted it". The only. I don't know what that says about you, but I don't know what capacity you were in Nam as.

Secondly, the Vietnam War was NOT defending the cause of freedom (if it was, would the US have pulled out and let the communists win?). That you still seem to think that it was tells me that either you weren't really IN Vietnam, or you were a pencilpusher who never actually got to see what was actually going on.

I believe it far more than your claim of being in the 99th percentile of MENSA! ROFLMAO, that is rich.

For future reference, "Credentials" are usually backed up, not just a list of imaginary positions and accreditations.

Did you know I invented gravity? I swear.


If you are indeed over 40 years old, I'm saddened that you'd be so blind and reluctant to admit even the tiniest bit of the truth, and that you're obviously so easily duped by your own government.

And that you'd look back on the Vietnam War, one of the DARKEST periods in contemporary American history, as something to be proud of, is even more disheartening.

jako

In your dreams, Adolph. I'll keep talking and writing until such time as I can no longer do so. My kind will never die out, because we are "born-again." "A conservative is a liberal who was mugged last night."

I've heard "men" like you rationalize their cowardice for forty years and you can't fool me.

For someone who has never been in the army, you sure seem to know a lot about it and those who would defend national service. The army can get you in shape. The one thing they can't do is issue you a backbone.

I did not try to subvert the war upon my return, nor did I throw my medals away nor did I march in protest to the war.
There was no reason to do so, unless you were a communist and a traitor to your nation.

......I have come to the conclusion that many of these people aren't willing to die for anything in any war. I've heard all these excuses before and they are just the rationalizations of the spinally challenged.

this is all trolling.
you talk of fighting for freedom, yet you continually talk about duty in the same breath. that's oxymoronic. people who don't agree with the ruling party ARE NOT TRAITORS. people who disagree that any war is unjust ARE NOT COWARDS. not wanting to die for any reason is COMPLETELY RATIONAL.

are all the people who join militias cowards and traitors? it takes greater courage to stand up against the goliath of corporate fascism, armed with nothing but truth, than it does to drop a bomb on a village from an airplane. it takes more strength of character to stand against popular opinion, than to simlpy go with the flow. it takes more courage to stand up against a worldwide shadow government of pure evil, then it does to join the most equipped fighting force in the world.
who's the bravest kid on the street? the one who joins a gang, or the one who stands alone? the one who succumbs to peer pressure, or the independent, who follows only his conscience?
you have called all people like me 'spineless traitor cowards'. in fact, the opposite is true. it takes great courage to say 'no' in a country who's john wayne leader has stated, 'you're either with us, or against us'. disagree with king george, and you are 'with' the terrorists. go team orwell.

and, mister learned, i would like to add that there is effectively no difference between extreme fascism and extreme socialism. we don't need to pretend we don't recognise the patterns because they're 'new'.

[edit on 18-10-2004 by billybob]

No, Viet Nam was lost because we found out that they weren't fighting a conventional war. Their combat tactics were nothing short of shocking to Americans. We'd never seen anything like it before, and we sure as hell hadn't planned on that type of combat. We had no idea what we were walking into, or what we were even doing there. Most vets will tell you that it was nothing but a cluster f**k. I found it strange that they never even discussed Viet Nam in high school history, back when I was in school. We avoided the topic, entirely. It was never even mentioned. Has that changed yet?

[edit on 18-10-2004 by Damned]

My CO was from Havard when I was in the Corps. My Bn Co was from Yale. The officers of all branches are wellrepresnted by the best schools in the nation. Where you work how many Ivy Leagers are there? The units I was in during my tenure in the Corp were ethnicly and ecomically diverse. I do however find many suburban white kids who think they are too cool or to smart for the military, they work in the fast food industry now (most with advanced degrees in uselessness).

I neither glamorise nor do I have "anger issues" I served in Corp. Marine Detachment USS KittyHawk, W/2/5, W/2/9. My MOS was 0351. I think those that would not serve if called cowardly. I think those that take but do not give back a burden. Does everybody need to give back by being in the military? (Frankly, there are many here the likes of which I would be loathe to serve with) No! but do something useful.

You would not last the 1st 5 minutes on Parris Island. The phrase attitude is everything means something there and reguardless of your condition you would not pass muster.

Originally posted by Jakomo
Apollyon:

These men, soldiers fought for many things love of country, belief in purpose etc. This is what it means to be a soldier ...you fight for (or against) something with greater purpose than love of money or desire to kill.

Haha, good one. Is that why so many Yale and Harvard grads are in the Army? Why so many kids of rich backgrounds pack the military? Look at the racial and social makeup of your own Armed Forces and get back to me. This is not just true in the USA but in most developed nations with armies and no draft.

To say soldiers follow you imply they follow blindly this is far from the truth soldiers follow and lead because of what they believe in sometimes its is as simple as they believe in each other and the desire that they all survive. A soldier is not politic he doesn't create the policy of a nation, he does that in his role as a citizen through the electoral process or if need be revolution. The obedience of a soldier is not created by breaking him in basic a broken man will run under pressure but by reforging him in new image.

? Have you ever been in the Army? They have to "break you down to build you up". A soldier is traditionally a drone. Here's your mission, get it done, follow orders, don't ask questions. If you are disobedient you will either be courtmartialed or shot.

People who glamorize the army either haven't been in it or have some anger issues.


A doctor is more of a hero to me than any soldier. Both are just doing their jobs, one is saving lives, the other is taking them.

THE ONLY EXCEPTION I can really make is WWII, where it really WAS a war against an evil empire. Where soldiers really WERE saving the world.

Such criticism from your third party observations is simply sad and usually but not always leveled by one who aspired to wear the uniform but was found wanting.

Whatever. I never aspired to wear the uniform, and could totally join the army if I wanted, I'm in great shape, and always have been. I didn't want to because I don't think it's the highest calling to join your country's army. If you love you country, be active socially and politically instead of joining the Armed Forces.






[edit on 15-10-2004 by Jakomo]

I've heard "men" like you rationalize their cowardice for forty years and you can't fool me.

so your calling me a coward as well? a man- no thats not right sorry. a teenager who has supported the services practically all his life. you call us cowards for not joining up straight away but frankly i call YOU the coward. every soldier ,sailor,airman and marine i have spoken too has told me that the services is a fantastic thing but is not the route for every one. never once have i seen one service man or woman try to call us cowards for not signing up.

For someone who has never been in the army, you sure seem to know a lot about it and those who would defend national service. The army can get you in shape. The one thing they can't do is issue you a backbone.

so what he knows a bit about the army? big deal i know a bit about the navy big deal. so what it gets you in shape and teaches you many things like leadership and teamwork and trust. just cause you were in the services doesnt give you the reason to call people cowards. that is one reason why many people dont join up. services are not for everyone.

I did not try to subvert the war upon my return, nor did I throw my medals away nor did I march in protest to the war.
There was no reason to do so, unless you were a communist and a traitor to your nation.

there is nothing wrong with comunism. dont be arogant try and exsplore the enemy see what makes them tick. i would if i was there, frankly sending troops to die worthlessly is the highest crime in the military. sending soldiers to die is not a good task but it sometimes must be done, what makes it diffrent from murder is that they were doing something WORTH dieing for.

......I have come to the conclusion that many of these people aren't willing to die for anything in any war. I've heard all these excuses before and they are just the rationalizations of the spinally challenged.

spinnally challanged? is that what you call it?
being afraid of death? if you say "oh i was not afraid at all" then you didnt serve , you didnt fight and you were never a damm soldier.
so what thier not prepared to die? big deal they have familes,friends, obligations etc
it is a great honour to serve in the military and takes courage to go into a battle and fight. thats why they tell you "its not for everyone" or did you forget that?
you may think what you want but you will not change your few , will not be respected by real troops or by the people you want to listne.

Where has ANY form of Marxism ever worked?
How are you going to convert the capitalist nations to Marxism?

Originally posted by Loki
Let me go ahead and get you started, cargo.

GradyPhilpott, my right wing polar opposite.

You're an older person, with plenty of education under your belt;
I'm a young person, just beginning my higher education career.

You're a mouthpiece for the right wing;
I'm a mouthpiece for the left.

You're a Vietnam veteran;
I am a pacifist violently opposed to war.

You're a rabid supporter of McCarthyism, a practice that was thought to have died out ( I guess not... );
I'm a Marxist...yeah, that's right. A Marxist.

And the final, most important one.

You exemplify a type of person that is on the way out the door. They are simply dying out, because there are not enough young to take their places. I like to refer to this type of person as the 'Educated Republican'. Republicans do not generally tend to educate themselves anymore, they let their parents, teachers, friends, neighbors, coworkers, and bosses do their thinking for them. I'll give you this, Grady. I respect you, because you have education, and have learned politics for yourself, and support the Republican party.

But you yourself must notice that your breed is a dying one. These are the days when children are taught not to question, and accept the preconceptions of their parents, and grandparents.

These are also the days when children go out to libraries, and read books. They spend $.50 of their lunch money to buy the newspaper.

Maybe this isn't done all over the place. I know that I did it. I also know that if I hadn't gone out, and taught myself about politics, that I would end up as a fierce conservative. I was raised in that type of household. I think that it is safe to say ( PERSONAL OPINION ALERT! ) that the more uneducated ( And no, I don't mean educated in a public school...I mean that the child has worked to educate him/herself ) the populace becomes, the more right-leaning it becomes. We must work to correct this problem, so that children can come to their own solution based on the facts and their opinions, and not by what they see on TV, or hear from their parents.

But, let me meander right up to my point. I'm feeling a little windbaggy today.

YOU Grady, are beginning to lose your perspective on the world today. It's no longer a world of 'US' and 'Them'. We are a global community, and need to start acting that way. I have resigned to the fact that the war in Iraq must be finished. However, manhandling and forcefully persuading our allies to join us in this war is not the way we can do this anymore. By the same token, we cannot hope to bear the burden of 100% of the cost of the war.

We need men who will reason with our allies, and make them see what needs to be done. Alot of Republicans can agree that Kerry could argue the birds out of a tree. Maybe this is the way we need to go. I think Kerry has a much better chance at bringing the world together than does Bush. Frankly, he would have a hard time of convincing me that the sun will come up in the east tomorrow.

The world is changing, Grady. Mass accumulation of arms and military power won't solve anything in the future. It will only cause more of the same. If we are to do anything progressive, we must downscale global arms, and end senseless conflict.

Then why are Chinese forces in Tibet?

Originally posted by zcheng
Invade and ocuppy a sovereign country is illegal. It is easy to see how US people will react to foreign troops staying in US and engaging in indiscrimate killing of civilians and steal resources. US has lost the heart and mind of Iraqi people. The mission is doomed to fail.

It is impossible to win a guerilla war, when the guerillas are the people and receive full support of the people. Guerillas has all the time, while for invaders it cost huge money and life to maintain the occupation and stealing of oil. See:

New video from Iraq: Military vehicle was hit
www.iraq-war.ru...

[edit on 18-10-2004 by Apollyon]

Originally posted by Apollyon
Then why are Chinese forces in Tibet?

umm dude who is this directed to cause i dont see who it is directed to?

I've been out of school for 20+ years and my oldest son (a freshman) hasn't gotten to that part of history yet. The War in Vietnam was lost politialy not militarilly (sp) can you name one battle US forces lost?

Originally posted by Damned
No, Viet Nam was lost because we found out that they weren't fighting a conventional war. Their combat tactics were nothing short of shocking to Americans. We'd never seen anything like it before, and we sure as hell hadn't planned on that type of combat. We had no idea what we were walking into, or what we were even doing there. Most vets will tell you that it was nothing but a cluster f**k. I found it strange that they never even discussed Viet Nam in high school history, back when I was in school. We avoided the topic, entirely. It was never even mentioned. Has that changed yet?

[edit on 18-10-2004 by Damned]

sorry if it wasn't clear I edited my post to clarify.

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by Apollyon
Then why are Chinese forces in Tibet?

umm dude who is this directed to cause i dont see who it is directed to?

Originally posted by Apollyon
Then why are Chinese forces in Tibet?
[edit on 18-10-2004 by Apollyon]

Why should PLA leave Tibet? Tibet is a province of China. Do you ask US forces to leave Hawaii? This is a absurd question.

Everyone agree that Iraq is a sovereign nation, not a province of US, so US troops should leave, if Iraqi people do not like you.

Originally posted by devilwasp
you may think what you want but you will not change your few , will not be respected by real troops or by the people you want to listne.

Well said devilwasp. Most true heroes in the military joined for personal beliefs to fight for what they feel is right. Then you also have those who join and use their record as some kind of an ego boost--maybe they weren't loved enough as children. Whatever the case, these guys feel they need to boast about their service for the rest of their lives in an attempt to fulfill their empty lives (i.e. bragging about your service record on the internet and calling people names because they never joined up).

And I also agree with you, no man has ever gone to war without feeling scared about something. Those who join up for their ego or because they think they will like war do not do too well. Anyone who actually enjoys killing people, or who glorifies their combat experience, has some serious issues. War is supposed to be the last resort to solve any problem, and it is unfortunate whenever anyone goes to war. But sometimes it is necessary, and those who are actually fighting should be out there because they believe in the cause.

Plenty of people don't want to join up because of their family, religious beliefs, or they morally disagree with what is going on. There shouldn't be anything wrong with this. It is funny that the same "soldier" claiming we are all cowards is saying that he is out there protecting our freedom....in a free nation, we can choose whether or not we want to join the military. Lots of people do volunteer work or join the police or fire department and make a big difference in the country. Almost everyone contributes to the country in some way though, and to insult others for not risking their lives for politicians is just stupid, and undermines the rights that the soldiers are trying to protect.

Anyway, after viewing Grady's "Homosexual Manifestoes" thread, he can simply be dismissed as a radical right lunatic...

Originally posted by Shoktek
Anyway, after viewing Grady's "Homosexual Manifestoes" thread, he can simply be dismissed as a radical right lunatic...

Don't try to assuage your feelings of inadequacy by deriding those who have defended your freedom. Your friend and hero, John Kerry, is the one who has put his Vietnam service at the forefront of the the American psyche.

Because of John Kerry, for thirty years America couldn't care less about about Vietnam Veterans and now because of John Kerry, the anti-war crowd is inisisting that his service qualifies him for the office of the President. Of course, service was of little consequence in 1992 when Bill Clinton ran for office.

You, Shoktek, are the one with the empty, meaningless life, because you have nothing of consequence that you can point to as being contributory to your freedom, hence your attacks on those who are proud of their contributions.

And, if your verbal skills were above second standard deviation below the mean you would have understood the intent of my post regarding Homosexual Manifestoes, as it is clearly stated, instead of labeling me with one of you baseless labels.

You are as honorable as your other hero, the dead drug-addict.

[edit on 04/10/18 by GradyPhilpott]

I appreciate some of the anger about former service people calling others here the likes of "coward"

Perhaps it is thier own anger about insulting generalisations about service people coming from some of you on the other side.....a sort of rebounding scatter gun effect so to speak.

Anyhooos....

In 1917 and 1918 the overwhelming majority of Australian diggers on the Western Front voted against Conscription in two National referenda on that issue. Thier vote led that of the civilians back home.

They either did not wished service forced upon thier countrymen and/or did not wish to have someone fight alongside them who did not wish to be there. This is not a supposition, this is the view drawn from the archives held by the Australia War Memorial, Canberra.

I call no one who in good conscience can't serve a coward.

The United States, like Australia, is under no direct threat of falling to an enemy. That is the only grounds for expecting someone to go into the military against thier will.

A tiny new Australia did it in 1911 for its peace time militia because we were woefully undermanned and isolated, and for its wartime militia in 1939 and again in 1941 when there was a direct threat of invasion by Japan until after Coral Sea and Midway.

If the US Government cannot or will not attract more recruits to the colours by improving thier pay, conditions, benefits and other incentives, and cannot sustain the tempo of operations they are engaged in, then they should seriously reconsider what is going on.

That said I support the war if for no other reason than an extremist terrorist state in Iraq that does not negotiate its OTT goals and plans attacks like 9/11 and Madrid is not an acceptable option.

To ZCheng,

OT

You have been brought up to beleive that Tibet is nothing more than a provience of the PRC in much the same way as the people in Indonesia who have threatened Australia over supporting East Timor Independence.

Both were independent nations until they were invaded by thier neighbours (China and Indonesia) on the basis of a false legitimisation for annexation, both of which were resisted.

In Indonesia, events and circumstances have not allowed her to retain its grip on East Timor after 25 years of occupation by a developing non nuclear state. Indonesian muslim extremists accuse Australia of helping steal a muslim provence from them (we led the UN Peace Enforcers in) despite the fact over 90% of East Timorese saw themselves as Independent Roman Catholics.

The PRC act of aggression was much older (late 40s early 50s), geographically isolated and more fraught with difficulties to counter in the Cold War period. So they are entrenched.

The PRC is fortunate that it doesnt face Madhists, or a figure head like Bin Laden....instead you have people who are following the lead of thier Religious Leader (not the China installed one) Dali Lama.

No offence is intended to you, but the case is well documented in the outside world.

[edit on 18-10-2004 by craigandrew]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

You, Shoktek, are the one with the empty, meaningless life, because you have nothing of consequence that you can point to as being contributory to your freedom, hence your attacks on those who are proud of their contributions.

[edit on 04/10/18 by GradyPhilpott]

so loveing your family and your country isnt controbuting?

so everyone is to join the services to live a meaning ful life?

so playig his taxes doesnt contrubute EVEN though the fact that paying taxes gives your goverment money to spend on its military which supplies the weapons,wags,supplies and varios other things to the soldiers that fight for the freedom of thier country. so in effect your saying that everyone should be in the military to be able to enjoy freedom.

the fact that many men who hate violence have joined the services and have won many medal saving other men points out that not all soldier are war supportive.

i ask you this what did you do in the srvices that says you deserve your freedom ? did you fight on the frontline?

I'd just like to throw this out there for people on both sides of this issue to consider.

I'm grateful to all those who have ever felt, and feel, the need to place their lives in jeopardy to defend my way of life. I really am. And I respect their choice to do so. I'm grateful for their sacrifice in hours, injury, and all too often, death. I'm supportive of their choices, and their sacrifice.

However, I'm also opposed to war, and I feel that the taking of a human life is something I could never do. I know many (most even) people disagree, and I respect that as well. I'm just saying this to demonstrate that gratitude and respect for those who make those enormous sacrifices, and opposition to war, are not mutualy exclusive. They can coexist within a person.

Another thing I'd like to say is if I were given the choice between death and the taking of a human life by my hand, I would readily give my life for my beliefs. I say this to demonstrate that opposition to violence and a willingness to sacrifice one's life or wellbeing for what they believe in, are also not mutualy exclusive.

I think people on both dies of this debate should consider this. Much respect to all views expressed thusfar, whether I agree with them or not.

OT

You probably heard this.disagree with it.love it. I dont care.Well I suppose I do actually. But it is history. Literally. And I don't mean to try and teach people how to suck eggs.

Tet gutted the VC and crippled the NVA in 1968. It was a massive gamble on the Norths part that even if they lost it would break the political will of the US, spark mass protest at home, and drive away the RSVNs allies.

The sub plot was they could also replace the killed off local VC leadership with cadres of thier own, because there was a feeling of different goals.

Giap and other senior NV freely admitted it.

America responded exactly as planned. Yes it was a G war and total traumatising to Americans used to flag waving wlecomes by the local populace, but it was a war the US Military was on the verge of winning on the battlefield.

The point was moot. The US Military may not have lost a battle, but the US Government lost the most important one (rightly or wrongly) the battle for the hearts and minds, the trust and the support the American people, and with it the war. It doesnt matter who won the battles, when its the other guys flag that flies over the battleground at the end of the day.

And it crippled you, and still does because you all argue over comparisions to Vietnam, and spend your time blaming each other for the war and the way it turned out, without even giving credit for NV calling it right strategically. They had you pegged politically. It is the same in Australia (we are wary of properly arming our defence force lest we offend our neighbours) and even in countries that did not send troops there (UK) it frightens the crap out of them.

The NVs surviving leadership admit the resumption of the bombing campaign in 1972 brought them back tothe negotiation table with more moderate demands.

They rebuilt thier NVA and supplemented VC forces in the lull as America gradually pulled out.

The US Air support was crucial in allowing RSVN to survive at that time.

But Americans didnt fufill Nixons pithy little promise of "Peace with Honor"
The self rightous left and the embarrassed right abandoned the RSVN at the very time political and social reforms were starting to take effect.

Capitol Hill cut off the Souths military aid, and the White House washed thier hands of the country, and the US spent the next decade and a half punishing an impoverished rural agrarian state for beating them.

Thats neither an encouragement for freinds or an argument against creating enemies.

Some Australians (myself included) appreciate the likelyhood of the claim that dictorial communism failed to spread because of Vietnam. We were fighting Communist backed groups in Malaya and and Borneo in the region, when we were fighting in Vietnam.

I know the arguments that there was never a risk, and the argument has sometimes been made that the fact it never spread after Vietnam demonstrates there was no threat. Who would invite that sort of conflict down on thier heads. Malaysia and Indonesia did not make it to Tiger economy status by letting it happen to them (even if they have had a rough time of it the last decade) and we found ourselves no longer isolated and facing a hostile Indonesia.

The argument is like saying flyspray doesnt work because there are no flies about.