Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Lisa De Pasquale :: Townhall.com Columnist
Are We Hypocrites for Not Enlisting?
by Lisa De Pasquale
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Last week we got another glimpse of the Left’s true feelings about our troops. At a campaign breakfast in Iowa, anti-war Daily Kos diarist Rachel Griffiths asked Mitt Romney why none of his five sons enlisted in the military. It’s a popular form of “gotcha” that the Left likes to play in order to bring out their favorite cat call – Hypocrite! Romney responded, “My sons are all adults and they’ve made decisions about their careers and they’ve chosen not to serve in the military and active duty and I respect their decision in that regard. One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping me get elected because they think I’d be a great president.”

Following his resounding victory at the Iowa straw poll, Romney expounded on his original answer and told Fox News Sunday’s Chris Wallace, “I didn’t mean in any way to compare service in the country with my boys in any way. Service in this country is an extraordinary sacrifice being made by individuals and their families… There’s no comparison. I’m very pleased and proud of my boys and the help they’re doing for their dad, but it’s not service to the country. It’s service for me. And there’s just no comparison there.”

Romney was right to clarify his response. Unlike the Left, he recognizes the courage of service members and their families and acknowledged that serving in the military is a job like no other. Griffith’s implication is that anyone and everyone are qualified to be in the military. The Left doesn’t view them as a skilled group of people, but rather faceless place holders that were duped into joining the military. To be qualified, the Left insists that one must simply be over 18.

At the July 2007 National College Republican Committee Convention, whining wannabe journalist Max Blumenthal asked attendees why they weren’t fighting in Iraq. The college kids in his amateur ambush video fumbled with their words and gave medical excuses like asthma and bad knees. They were young, nervous and in front of a jerk holding a camera. Guilt isn’t necessary. The reality is that most of us wouldn’t make the cut.

Military recruitment was a hot topic when KVI talk radio host Kirby Wilbur broadcasted from the Young America’s Foundation’s national college conference in early August. A military recruiter called into the program to remind listeners that the military is, in fact, an exclusive club. The recruiter estimated that only 1 out of 5 prospective recruits qualify for military service. Most are either physically-challenged, intellectually-challenged or morally-challenged. Or in the case of Max Blumenthal, all three.

Liberals don’t care whether a person is qualified because winning the war isn’t their goal. It’s not about victory for America, it’s about making conservatives pay politically. The military is just another prop in their bag of political tricks. Conservatives are often accused of using the military and patriotic themes to appeal to voters, but at least it’s for an American victory. When the Left supports the military, they do so by carrying signs like this one – “We support the troops when they shoot their officers.”

Liberals’ incessant calls to draft every 18-year-old College Republican is tantamount to the disrespect they have for the military. They demand that every person who supports the war join the military or send their children. If they don’t, they’re hypocrites. This isn’t going to be a winning strategy for the Left. Is every person that wears an AIDS ribbon, but doesn’t go to Africa (as Laura and Jenna Bush did) to help children with HIV/AIDS a hypocrite? Are vice presidents and celebrities that travel in private jets and SUVs while lecturing the little people on the proper amount of toilet paper also hypocrites?

In Treason, Ann Coulter wrote, “Instead of relentlessly attacking the military as immature or testosterone crazed – meaning ‘braver than me’ – liberals might have the good grace to realize they live in a country where big burly men are willing to protect them from bullies.” Thanks to those extraordinary men and women that persevered through the recruitment process and continue to serve, we all enjoy freedoms that we ourselves are not willing or able to fight for.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Lisa De Pasquale is CPAC Director at the American Conservative Union. The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) is the nation’s largest annual gathering of conservatives. For more information, visit www.cpac.org. To read Lisa's blog, visit www.thelotusblog.com

Be the first to read Lisa De Pasquale's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Joe...
Just because Romney and his sons have not served in the military does NOT mean that none of them are prepared to render the ultimated sacrifice!

Additionally none of them offer excuses as to not joining the military...they just chose other routes. I did not serve in the military, but you can bet your liberal boots that if the day came for me to take up arms and lay down my life for this country....me, Mitt Romney and his sons would do it in a heartbeat.

A Patriot is not only defined as someone who joins the military!!!

More on the draft
For those of you who are afraid to serve there is always Canada. Dont worry eventually some low life politician would let you skate.

Military Pay correction to dog judge
The time difference between Iraq and the US doesn't allow me to comment on here in a timely manner, and then there is the little matter of my duties in actually participating int he war...
Wanted to discuss the Pay referenced by dogjudge

he stated "According to that chart an E-9, with 16 years gets about $4,500.00 plus $240.00 combat pay. That's less than $60,000.00/year."

Well he left out several pay supplements that military does get but to be more fair very few make E9 in 16 years so lets assume the rank of MSG (E8) which is more reasonable:
BAse Pay E8 w/16 years 3835.80 a month
Basic Allowance for Subsistance $279.88
basic Allowance for Housing Savannah GA $1429.00 (varies by location of home station I used FT Stewart GA, would be significantly higher if stationed in DC)
Hostile Fire pay $225
Family Separation Pay $250
Plus TDY (SAVE PAY) $100
Totals 6,119.68 a month TAX FREE or $73,436 throw in the tax savings at 20% tax bracket you would make an equivalent $90000 salary in civilian world (90K * 80% you get as take home =72K)

And that is at a pay grade lower then he used and while 90K a year is not "RICH" it is not to shabby to live on in my part of GA.

So at least get simple math straight if you cant get the concept that we serve for MORE then money straight. And all facts in the above statement came from the same PAY chart that dog quoted except the housing allowance i used http://images.military.com/ContenFiles/2007-BAH-with-dependents.pdf makes me wonder if he deliberately left off the info.

MAJOR R.L
P.S I left off special pay such as Airborne, aviation pay etc that can add significantly to Army Pay.

Are We Hypocrites for Not Enlisting?
Are We Hypocrites for Not Enlisting?
The answer: YES!!!!!

The repellent arguement from the Republican leaders is this: I'm for the war, if and only if my family members (sons, grandsons, siblings) are not in the military.

The Democrats understand that it is much, much easier to send somebody else's sons to war than to send your own son. Somebody else's son can fight ... and die ... for a war begun on flawed intelligence, or for the achievement of amorphous strategic goals. My son (say Republican leaders) will be put into harm's way if and only if good intelligence shows that America's very existence as a nation is at stake.

As for the sons of Democrats, well, I don't see why their sons should fight and die in a war that they do not see as necessary. If Republicans believe in this war so much, the Army recruiter will be happy to take their application.

inkling_revival writes:
Wednesday, August, 15, 2007 9:55 PM
"Robert, the vicious liar...
How do guys like you live with yourselves? Honestly, you use principles like they were toilet paper..."
------------------
more than likely, one square at a time! (thereby negating any positive effect :-)

Folks
Good nite and be well

Listen
Simple question. There is a simple answer. No dancing around, no playing. Yes you are a hypocrite.

You can have your own opinion, but....
not your own facts.

RockyJones writes: Wednesday, August, 15, 2007 8:36 PM
"When as a child Jesus went into the Temple and commenced to teach his mother asked him why and he said 'I must be about my Fahter's business'".

Note the word "teach".

As to military members not needing the morale support of the civilians and politicians. I still have in my scrape book the story from my home town news paper detailing my receiving the oath from Adm. Elmo R. Zumwalt. I still have the letters from Assemblyman John E. Thurman and representive B. F. Sisk. I still have the pictures of the Virgina Slims Tennis teams visit, the Bands and beauty queens who visited the many ships I was stationed on.

You forces in the field need and want your support. Keep it up!

What is the standard?
Premise: The President must be willing and able to order our military into harm's way in defense of what they view are the interests of the United States.

The left's principle: Only those who have served or have children serving in the military can order our troops into harms way.

Premise which allows application of the principle: No Democratic candidate except Chris Dodd has ever served in the military and none have children serving in the military.

Conclusion: Chris Dodd is the only Democratic candidate qualified to run for President.

Both Clinton & Obama support having troops in Afghanistan. Since neither has served or has children serving in the military they are chickenhawks! The left should be supporting Duncan Hunter based on their principle since he is the only candidate on either side (to my knowledge) who has both served in the military and has a child serving in the military.

Robert, ANOTHER lie
Robert writes: "If a person who believes that this is a war for the survival of The REpublic can serve but choses not to, then that person is not someone who totally believes what they are saying."

So, if you believe in helping the poor, but don't actually go yourself to the inner city...?

So, if you believe in saving the environment, but continue to drive your car...?

So, if you believe in preaching the gospel, but don't volunteer to missionary service in Asia...?

Robert, you are a liar and a hypocrite.

I don't even know why I bother. Robert doesn't believe a single f***ing word he's writing. He NEVER would make an argument like that if it didn't give him a way to sound morally superior for the moment. And if, next year, the President-elect has never served in the military, and the Left has to defend invading the Sudan to save Darfurians (just for a hypothetical), Robert will be here arguing how military service doesn't matter, because what's right is right. And he won't feel even the slightest tinge of hesitation for arguing PRECISELY the opposite of what he's arguing now. 'Cause that's how liberals do it; I've seen dozens of examples. They're shameless in their hypocricy. It's only words to them.

Robert, the vicious liar
Robert writes: "people who mostly think that the far right college boys are wimps."

Ah, the far right is COLLEGE BOYS. This is as opposed to the far right who are gun-toting, pickup-driving, cousin-raping trailer trash. Except when the far right is rich, capitalist tycoons plotting the sale of America to China. Gotta love how the "far right" is whoever the Left needs to malign at the moment...

Robert, if you're not lying to us about your own government service, you know as well as you know your own name that an enormous majority of military personnel vote Republican. Republicans outnumber Democrats in the military at least 2 to 1, and you know it. That's why Al Gore went to so much trouble to disqualify as many military ballots as he could, back in 2000 when he was attempting to steal the election from the rightfully-elected President.

So, why don't you take your vicious lies and shove them back up where they came from? 'cause the truth is, Republicans contribute far more than Democrats when it comes to sacrifice for the country. Guys like you only know sacrifice for yourselves.

How do guys like you live with yourselves? Honestly, you use principles like they were toilet paper...

Demosthenes writes:
Wednesday, August, 15, 2007 12:24 PM
"Big Black Dog: Really? ..."
============
You "did good" in refuting BBD's GWB & JFK statements. But let's not forget the divinity student, AG, the typist who left the service to enter divinity school...and stayed how long???

MY THANKS to each and every one of you posters who has served our country. My sons both served and I am very proud of them.

Just finished reading this week's Time Mag and Bill Kristol's column emphasized what I have said time and again on various posts. That is, the men and women who are serving our country in Iraq and Afghanistan and other parts of this crazy, mixed-up world, will return home and WILL BECOME THE FUTURE LEADERS OF OUR COUNTRY!

Mark his (and my) words, these patriotic men and women are going to return to America and will become the next GREATEST GENERATION! And I can't wait to get some real leaders in office! Goodbye, Murtha, Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, Durbin et al. Goodbye, the whole lot of you who are trying to destroy our country!

What is "eopardy"
How unfair! Not going in harms way just because you got a good education, a good job and a future that is too important to forgo.

I thank god we are not all well educated and gainfully employed or we would be the best educated and compensated slaves on the face of the earth. My poor weak mind can not find the room to be concerned with the mud some people are stuck in.

To Nee
I have tried twice to go to your link and keep getting a "program is not responding" message. If you can tell me some other way to read it I will gladly do so.

A felony is not a misdemeanor. At the very least, having committed a felony shows hugely poor judgment. I am not comfortable taking such a person and teaching him to shoot, kill, dynamite etc. It's interesting that so many on this thread talk about rehabilitation and second chances; this is not talk I hear on Bill O'Reilly when he talks about sex offenders or on Rush Limbaugh when in the past he has talked about drug offenders.

It seems as if there are a lot of Americans who only feel whole and alive when they are focused on an enemy. They see the world in terms of combat. They see international relations as dominance or submission. They love to own guns, shoot guns, and talk about guns and when they're not doing that they talk about their great love of all things military and about their wish to annihilate, vaporize, subjugate, and control people.

I think this discussion is silly. It should be obvious that few young people of privilege are choosing a military career; think about that. Equally obvious, some who do make that choice are talented and competent individuals. But many are going into the military because life offers them few other options and they are lured by the money. Everyone in the military isn't the patsy of the Neocons, and every kid with a police record who goes into military service doesn't become a saint: it's ridiculous to assume this. Everything that happens isn't absolute and total.


Rocky er.... Robert
You seem to be losing your composure as you are beginning to denegrate rather than give reasons for your views. However, your opinion on having to enlist in order to support the war is ridiculous. I thought you were more of a thinker than that. Turns out your just another whiny, spoiled liberal adolescent.

Rocky
"If a person who believes that this is a war for the survival of The REpublic can serve but choses not to, then that person is not someone who totally believes what they are saying."

That's garbage. That would apply only if their service was absolutely required to save the republic. There are many ways to serve outside of being on the front lines. Not everyone is a warrior. Some simply could not handle it. Those are not the ones you would want covering your a$$ in a combat zone.

LD
You got them again

Military personnel
Liberals continue to show their stupidity and anti-Americanism in spite of thier lying words that would have us believe they actually support our troops in combat zones.

They continuously refer to the leaders of our country as "sending" our young men and women into combat and then compound their ignorance by saying that most of these young people are poor and undeducated.

Our troops are ALL VOLUNTEERS. Period. And because of liberal stupidities I must explain to them that VOLUNTEERS are people who are NOT drafted or forced into the military as part of a punishment for something.

These young VOLUNTEERS ARE THERE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE THERE - GET IT? I know how hard it is for a liberal to understand something as complicated as a VOLUNTEER. But there you have it - THEY ASKED FOR THIS SERVICE AND MOST OF THEM ARE PROBABLY BETTER EDUCATED, OR AT THE VERY LEAST, MORE INTELLIGENT THAN ANY LIBERAL DONKEY JACKASS.

Study the above words carefully dunces. You might actually learn something. But I contradict myself as liberals NEVER learn.

Erudite
"you are effete"

Never been accused of that before. And here I thought we were on the same side.

Rocky
If this is a "nation at war" and it is a "war for our fture" then it is incumbent upon those who believe those things to put them into action.

So it is your belief that it is incumbent only upon those who believe that there is a threat to this country to serve in her defense. That's pretty convenient for all those who fall under the protection of those believers. What if no one believed? Who would protect you then?

The words don't exist...
...to express the depth of the contempt I feel for you, Robert.

Robert recites the tired lie, "..lied/exaggerated about why we went."

Horse manure. Guys like you have been trying VERY VERY VERY hard for years to make the case for this, and have failed at every turn. But that doesn't stop you from repeating the claim, does it? No. There's a word in English to describe men who make accusations for which there exists not the slightest evidence. I believe the word is "liar." If the world were just, Robert, you'd be wearing a sign around your neck with that word on it.

Robert then recites another tired lie: "If Bill Clinton had sent us to Iraq on the phoney explanaitions that this guy used and the war had gone this badly you would be ready to impeach him."

Provably false. He DID send us to war on claims that were a lot less supportable than the FACTS supporting the Iraq war. I still remember the deluge of Milosevich/Hitler comparisons that all arrived within about 2 hours of each other the day the Clintons tried to sell the Balkan incursion. And then -- speaking of managing a war badly -- he refused to allow Americans anywhere near the hot zones, insisting on bombing from far above effective range (thus guaranteeing a greater amount of "collateral damage," but hey, the President doesn't have to pay anything for European lives, right?) all so he wouldn't have to pay any political price for the involvement. Sickening coward. And YOU supported that trash, Robert.

Don't tell me about mismanaged wars or liars. You guys APPLAUDED those things when it was your guy, and you lie like f***ing carpets to make it seems like the Republican is doing what your lying sack of criminal s**t did.

Robert, you epitomize the things about liberals that make me puke. I sure hope there's a hell, 'cause you sorely deserve it.

Erudite
Come on now. Not all Libs are wusses.... Some are the wusses' sisters.

Rocky
College Republicans say nothing at all about this party or the administration. The fact is, very few college students join the military period!! They either join before or after college, not during college. If you had some evidence that more democrat college students were joining than republican college students then you may have a point. (like that would ever happen). Your argument is as intellectually challenged as the ridiculous claim that you cannot support the troops without signing up.

RockyJones
"If Bill Clinton had sent us to Iraq on the phoney explanaitions that this guy used and the war had gone this badly you would be ready to impeach him."

I was ready to impeach him anyway...

Ayana
"Or we can fixate on the word rape and completely bypass the initial point about criminals receiving waivers to service in the military. Oh that's right, overlooking the main point is a republican thing!"

Maybe because the initial point was meaningless and I happen to like exposing lying liberals for the dishonest scum they are. Criminals receiving waivers to service in the military is not anything new. There has always been a waiver process there genius. It was just another hit piece on our military from leftist dirtbags who claim to "Support our Troops".

draft
One of the biggest mistakes made in this country was the ending of the draft. Being in the service is the one time in a person's life that everyone is equal, no rich no poor, no jocks, no nerds. I would say anyone who has been in the military will tell you they learned more, in a common sense way, in that period of time than they could have in equal amounts of time in college. No doubt there would be far fewer liberal democrats these days had the draft continued.

Big Dogg
The U.S military has only lost one major engagement since 1945 and it wasn't lost to the enemy! It was lost to the media and the left in this country. There were still Nazi's running around Germany after they were defeated, doesn't mean they weren't defeated. All of this is also true. It simply depends on your point of view.

I'm calling their bluff
Re: every liberal on this board and elsewhere who is, today, adding to the mindless cacophony about joining the military if you support the war.

It's bunk. Worse, it's HYPOCRITICAL bunk.

1) It's an ad hominem fallacy. If you can't rebut the argument I raise, it doesn't matter if I volunteer for the Peace Corps on MARS, the argument stands.

2) They really don't give a damn. How many liberals cared about Bill Clinton's military record? or Michael Dukakis' military record? Walter Mondale's military record? Jesse Jackson's military record? Clinton, a draft-dodger, ran against a genuine war hero, and leftists all over the country argued "military service doesn't matter." So, now they've changed their minds? Hogwash.

3) Most of the people making the claim have never volunteered for ANYTHING, let alone volunteered for the military. Townhall will not allow me to post the word I think applies to those who insist that *I* volunteer for something, while they themselves don't feel any obligation.

Liberals change principles like I change my underwear, and principles mean less to them than my underwear means to me. They just pick up the nearest useful words and hurl them, and they keep on hurling the ones that actually stick. This is the behavior of principled arguers, it's the behavior of moral slime attempting to use OUR consciences against us.

So my response to any man who insists that I haven't the right to argue for what I believe, simply because I've not served in the military, begins with "blow it" and ends with a reference to their alimentary canal.

Anne
"And what, precisely, is "my ilk"? Or my age? Or my race? Or my educational background? Or my profession? Or my feelings about any person in particular or liberals in general?"

Sorry honey, THers are known to Clinton bash...and since you in your sly way choose to follow suit, I assumed you were apart of the 28%ers. My apologies, I must have missed your contemplation of the Bush girls refusal to service.

apoplectic
"Or she could accuse our men and women who are serving of being rapists and violent criminals.... No, wait that doesn't really help, DOES IT."

Or we can fixate on the word rape and completely bypass the initial point about criminals receiving waivers to service in the military. Oh that's right, overlooking the main point is a republican thing!

Dear Ayana
"Because according to your ilk, all she needs to do is buy a bumpersticker and learn to hate liberals. Yep, that should win the war!"

And what, precisely, is "my ilk"? Or my age? Or my race? Or my educational background? Or my profession? Or my feelings about any person in particular or liberals in general?

so what?
I'm not left or right...but the last four administrations have a lot to answer for since we've had all volunteer military.
I know a lot of gay ex military folks. And a young Marine who is gay found my name on another site and wrote to tell me that he was grateful that I speak out for gay folks.

I implored the gang here to pray for him and to reconsider their words regarding rights and who is fighting bravely for them for YOU, without the benefit of having them fully here.

My friend has been in service for seven years of his life, (he's only 26 years old). He's from Texas, and was recently wounded but he's ok and back on duty.

Now they are considering taking in felons, drop outs and the like, while dismissing highly skilled gay soldiers whose training WE paid for!

What's wrong with this picture?
Ingrates who don't respect gay soldiers, and the fact that Dick Cheney knew from the FIRST Bush administration in 1993 that American lives weren't worth getting rid of Hussein. So what changed? And why is no one demanding to know?

Ayana
Or she could accuse our men and women who are serving of being rapists and violent criminals.... No, wait that doesn't really help, DOES IT.

Anne on a Mouse
"Why aren't all feminists harassing Hillary about why Chelsea never enlisted in the military?"

Because according to your ilk, all she needs to do is buy a bumpersticker and learn to hate liberals. Yep, that should win the war!

More on the draft
For those of you who are afraid to serve there is always Canada. Dont worry eventually some low life politician would let you skate.

Attention All Feminists
Why aren't all feminists harassing Hillary about why Chelsea never enlisted in the military?

Big Dogg
You forgot Panama, but then you are an idiot so we'll let it go.

Gabby
"There are few things more unseemly than warhawks (chicken hawks) who have not served in the military and never embued their male children with a sense of duty to country."

To further expound on that point, it's not just the fact that chickenhawks do not serve this country, it's the fact that they make NO sacrifice to these brave men and women or for our war efforts AT ALL (with the exception of bravely displaying their magnetic bumperstickers). Not through higher taxes or even a slight indignation that our wounded servicemen have to be subjected to cr-- holes such as Walter Reed, insufficient body armor, insufficient number of troops, etc...no no, it's Clinton's fault, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain..or man who sits behind the desk in the Oval Office (but but but but but excuse excuse excuse) Oh, but bring up immigration then there's a whole litany of complaints...Jeez

What's really interesting is that chickenhawks are so quick to point out similarities between WW2 and Iraq, maybe they should pay closer attention to the sacrifices that Americans who did not service in the military made right here at home during WW2....they strangely remain silent when comparing that aspect of the war!

LD
You're getting almost too good at this!!

Funky
"Basic Reading Comprehension - 1st Grdae Level", published by Harper Collins. You should get a copy, it would help you a lot.

I told you, I am against the war because I haven't the courage to stand up against anyone that wishes to hurt me. The Muslims can run rampant in our country, and as long as they don't harm me, I'll do whatever they want. They can slit the throats of children and clean the blade on my tongue for all I care, just so long as they don't cause me any pain.

I am totally a coward and I fully admit it. I would live as a slave and clean out cesspools with my toothbrush rather than don a military uniform and fight a foe. I can admit this over the Internet because you don't know who I am. But in the real world, I carry anti war banners, call our troops idiots, and make statements that declare the Muslims to be the innocent victims of US imperialism. This makes me sound tough and brave while keeping me out of harms way. And I need not worry about the terrorists, people who actually have a pair will stop them.

Bob...
Perhaps the people that have actually been in Iraq see things from a different perspective than those who just read about it in the papers.

Before you call the war and the effort a failure, you might bother to find out things for yourself rather than just read the skewed reports from those with a political axe to grind.

Correction
In my previous post I said "some libs never learn" Should have said, "libs never learn". If they did, they wouldn't be libs.

Vandamm
aggravated assault= violent offenders

burglary and robbery= thieves and crooks

vehicular homicide= murderers

But hey, as long as the guberment has put it's foot down on rapist we can still hold our heads high and applaud our own ethical superiority!

Universal Draft
I went, too old to go again. I think every citizen should serve in some fashion. Say 2 years in Millitary(combat force) or 4 years of support services. Non military could do all kinds of functions that are done today by military personel. I also believe required service is NOT gender specific. If you want all the right of citizenship earn it.

Be a war protester - it's safer.
Opposing the war is a great position to take. It allows one to avoid the danger that is inherent in defending freedom, and it allows a guy to adopt of sense of self-righteousness over those that will actually kill an enemy rather than submit.

The suckers will always step up and shoo away those who have vowed to destroy our way of life. And thank goodness for them, otherwise we freeloaders would be groveling at the feet of any adversary that came forth. But understand that we do not want to admit to anyone, not even ourselves, that we are as cowardly as they come, so we must protest the war in order to throw the critics off of our scent.

So yes, only an imbecile would oppose the effort of those who are battling with an enemy that has sworn to destroy Western society and construct a 12th century theocracy in its place, but sometimes it is better to be known as an imbecile than a coward. And it sure is safer working my keyboard while hidden under my bed than it would be holding a gun in defense against an enemies onslaught.


Chickenhawks - Yes
"I’m also sick and tired of those troops who got sent over there complaining about it. You knew when you joined that there was a possibility that you would have to fight! If you don’t like it, you shouldn’t have joined! Nobody is forced into it these days."

Our troops have an expectation that there will be adult supervision in the White House. Right now we have "lions led by jackasses". Everyone serving in Iraq should read "Fiasco" and see the movie "No End in Sight". Bush and Cheney should both be impeached for treason.

Vandamm
"Once again you only about that one word... how about those thousands of recruits with backgrounds of violent crime? "

What about them? How many of those waivers were for violent crime? How do you know that number is in the thousands? You have no idea do you? Again, you are making up facts!! Some libs never learn.

The draft
Liberal logic at its finest.

Reinstate the draft so we can get more people to oppose the war. Do these clowns have any concept of logic or purpose? Apparently not.

Historically, conscription has existed so countries could fight wars. So naturally the left wants to reinstate the draft so they can prevent us from fighting wars.

They get everything upside, backwards, and/or inside out.

Anything to get out of having to make their case to the American people and convince a majority of them that we should surrender to Islamofascism.

They know they can't do this so they either try to disqualify people ("you can't support the war if you don't volunteer") or pining for the good ol' days when they could gain antipathy for war by pointing to all of the draftees that are/will be killed or maimed.

Great thinkers, these libs.

LostGOP
You don't happen to have a vision problem that suddenly causes you to type in all caps do you? I knew another poster here with that condition!!!

lostGOP
Nobody responding to you? I know why...you have no life and your on permanent ignore.

Vandammit writes:

"And by focusing solely to the word raoist you can conveniently forget thousads of violent criminals and ganagmembers that have been enlisted. Because of lack of recruits. Men like Romney boys."

I can't tell which is thicker, you fingers or your head


LostGOP
MORON"S I DID ENLIST AND I'M WORKING FOR AMERICA AS WE SPEAK, NOT LITTLE REPUG-LICANS PROVING THEY ARE JERKWATER COWARDS.

The boyscouts doesn't qualify!!!

Vandamm
Nothing convenient about it. You used the word rapist. As a former army recruiter, I happen to know that rape was non-waiverable so decided to expose another liberal Bulls&*t LIE!!! If you don't like being exposed, then quit making up facts.

YRMML screams
"MORON"S I DID ENLIST AND I'M WORKING FOR AMERICA AS WE SPEAK, NOT LITTLE REPUG-LICANS PROVING THEY ARE JERKWATER COWARDS."

Collecting the shopping carts at Wal-Mart doesn't exactly qualify you as a true blooded blue collar worker, but it's a start. I'm proud of you, in a very small and insignificant way.

Dog
I never said they joined for wealth. My reply was in response to you thinking that the contactors are making boatloads of money. You forget that many expenses paid for the soldiers are not paid to contractors. Do the troops need more absolutely. Should contactors be paid less? No way. They endure the same hardships and some do actually come away with less. Why? Because for some, this is the only way they can get back into the "service"- so they leave a lucrative job or business to do. I know what the pay scale is for the Army-80k is what MSG K brought home. I also never said anyone joined for the money. We have college educated troops going in as enlisted for crying out loud, when they could garner a commission. And, surely you know Loyal Democrat- who had done a hitch, got out and then left his business in the hands of his wife to go back and serve. From 6 to half. People have done it,are doing it and not for the f-ing money.

WarlordX
I've never seen your posts before, but I like the way you think!

Bormmir's Horn
It's something that I had a (heated) conversation about with some of my coworkers a few days ago. I don't understand people sometimes.

Speaking of smiles, I did find the yellow spine comment funny!

Progressive Liberal
I don't know wether I should dispise you or admire you or both. While I admire your service to your country, I disagree with a few of your points except one.

I believe in two years of mandatory service by all Americans, age 18-20. No deferments. No exceptions. We follow the Swiss model by mandating uniformed military service for every male and medical service for every conscientious objector. For our women and those men with proper high school career track education, the option of serving in AmeriCorps or a Peace Corps type program if they don't opt for military service. This way, we are all engaged by having a physical stake in the future of our nation.

Your contempt should be reserved, not for those who hate war and refuse to participate in it, but for those who promote it and profit from your blood and sacrifice while doing everything they can to screw you and your brothers and sisters in uniform out of their rightful benefits because it might cost these scumbags a few bucks in taxes

You make it sound as if only Conservatives are chickhawks and the only ones actually profiting from war. Well sorry to burst your bubble but I'm sure there are a few liberal die-hards who oppose the war and have never served who are profiting nicely from it.

Sheepdog
USAF Ret 1980-2006



lostGOP
Are you wearing your seatbelt or is that your Nazi uniform poking out of the window?

Hey Dogjudge
All you need to say is what my sister (air force MSgt) sez:

"It isn't my fault you joined the wrong service"

RedHead
Thanks for your service, your post gave me the smiles.

Vandaam
Just verified that in accordance with AR 601-210 dated June 7 2007(This is the enlistment regulation) Rape is still an unwaiverable offense. Looks like another liberal LIE has been exposed.

http://usmilitary.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.usapa.army.mil/pdffiles/r601%5F210.pdf

lostGOP writes
"(sorry for error before, working out of a moving car)"

Ok, now you're starting to scare me, who are you really, Britney Spears?


WAR Explained Continued
As General Sherman so eloquently put it, (paraphrase)'We will never make them love us, but, By God, we will make them fear and obey us.'

As long as Democruds and Republican'ts insist on the ludicrous concept of 'limited response' or equally ridiculous 'limited war' we'll continue to have these little sniping debates. We've lost our so-called international prestige because we've become a paper tiger, all snarl and no bite. A big stick is only a pointer until its used as a club.

As for a draft, I admire the democratic effect that it had on the country, but draftees are generally poor combat troops, hence the morally reprehensible act of 'fragging' their leaders, and REFUSING orders to engage in combat. If there is to be a draft, it must be only for support positions, military or civilian. Representing your country in combat is a privilege reserved for Warriors. And there are too damned few of us. To my brothers in arms, God Bless and Guide you. Our coming tribulations will be many.

WAR Explained
My Bonafides: Enlisted 82d Abn 1961-1964; OCS 1965-1966; 1967 Several Special Forces Groups as a Detachment Commander; Ranger qualified; awarded Combat Infantryman Badge and Purple heart. Retired from the Army Reserve in 1982.

My original opposition to the war in Iraq/Afghanistan is clearly demonstrated by the above posts. I knew the Chickens--t politicians only had the guts to declare war; never enough to prosecute it. And anyone who declares "I support the troops" is full of chickens--t. If you did, we'd have representatives that would ACTUALLY support the troops.

WAR is a criminal enterprise conducted as a diplomatic, political action to achieve and end, usually economic.

There are only two rules to war:
1. Cause the enemy to cease resistance due to overwhelming costs, either economically (ie, USSR), or physically reducing their capacity to resist (Afghan).
2. Don't START it unless you are COMMITTED to WIN. My service in RVN demonstrated our reps have no understanding of these concepts. And BTW, we didn't lose in Viet Nam; we QUIT!


Support
I’m sick of those that say they support our troops but not the mission. You don’t support your local plumber by doing the job yourself. You don’t support your favorite sports team by telling them to stay home on game day. You don’t support the farmer by telling him that farming is exploiting the animals. You don’t support our troops by demanding that they sit at home twiddling their thumbs!

I’m also sick and tired of those troops who got sent over there complaining about it. You knew when you joined that there was a possibility that you would have to fight! If you don’t like it, you shouldn’t have joined! Nobody is forced into it these days.

We have a volunteer military. It is the best in the world! It is only by keeping it volunteer that it will continue to be the best. It is also one of the best training grounds for anybody who wishes to utilize it. If the majority is from poor backgrounds, I say great! When they get out, they’ll have the skills to succeed that they didn’t have going in.

I’ve got more, but I’m ranting now.

By the way,
US Navy bubblehead, 1990-1993

RetMSgt writes:
"I read the articles and nowhere do they state where they got their assertions."

Generally from a mixture of peyote and tequila.

Vandamm
And nowhere on that list is rape. I would also like to know in which states are aggravated assault, burglary, robbery, and vehicular homicide misdemeanors? Something doesn't smell right with that article.

Vandammit
I see you saw the movie, what did you do, sneak in?

Yes... you are a chickenhawk (Part II)
My family has served this country every generation since 1730. Ironically, I, the liberal, joined the Corps while my Chickenhawk Republican brother rah-rahed Reagan and found every excuse not to serve. I despise him and everyone like him who flaps their gums about supporting the war and loving the troops and yet spit on our service people everyday by refusing to serve. They are treasonous pricks and will one day pay for their treachery. For those who served and give them a pass, you too disgrace the memories of those who fought and died to preserve the liberties and profit making potential of these elitist assholes. Your contempt should be reserved, not for those who hate war and refuse to participate in it, but for those who promote it and profit from your blood and sacrifice while doing everything they can to screw you and your brothers and sisters in uniform out of their rightful benefits because it might cost these scumbags a few bucks in taxes. How you can side with them politically is beyond my imagination. They despise you and fear you and you enable their cowardice and profiteering with excuses. Pathetic and disgraceful.

If you don't serve, your opinions are pointless.

War is a racket and the racketeers will one day swing like Stars and Stripes bunting. It is a most patriotic imagery.

Ooh rah.

A Son of Smedley Butler

Yes...you are a chickenhawk
USMCR/3rd ANGLICO
1982-1988
Member of the Marine Corps League and annual contributor to the Marine Corps Heritage Foundation
Grooming both of my daughters for admission to the Naval Academy
Human Rights Activist
Politically as left as you can imagine

Probably moreso thanks to President Reagan illegally funding the overthrow of duly elected governments in Central America by arming terrorists like the Contras, and America's continuous propping up of Third World dictatorships for the sake of economic expediency.

I believe in two years of mandatory service by all Americans, age 18-20. No deferments. No exceptions. We follow the Swiss model by mandating uniformed military service for every male and medical service for every conscientious objector. For our women and those men with proper high school career track education, the option of serving in AmeriCorps or a Peace Corps type program if they don't opt for military service. This way, we are all engaged by having a physical stake in the future of our nation.

Americans, as a rule, are disengaged from the workings of their government and, thus, are easily susceptible to propaganda hatched by self-serving politicians. This is true of both parties. That's why Americans can be frightened to death into supporting wars of choice against people and nations that actually fought proxy wars on our behalf with the likes of Iran and the Soviets. We made Saddam Hussein. We made Osama Bin Laden. We made Manuel Noriega. We made Pervez Musharref. Each of them useful murderers and tin pot despots until they no longer serve our interests. I hope Musharref realizes his fate. He only needs to look at history.


cce1302
Thanks for the nice comments.

I didn't mean to infer that you were making statements about the Guard being stretched thin. Those were mine.

Demosthenes. It was great of you to apologize, but we're all big boys here. He simply demonstrated what he is and what he stands for.

We all get folks on these discussion boards, where we get to a point and sort of say, "Whoa. Perhaps this person will land on earth in the next century. No reason to try and hold a reasonable discussion with them."

Gotta run.

Have a great day.

Political Philosophy
For those who believe the military is or was full of right-wing extremists, compare the poses of Hal D and the rest of us.

Clyde9

LA
I have a nephew there now and I support the war in Iraq. What say you now chickenheart?

cce1302
Just curious...I did a couple of two week deployments in the 90's to Kadena AB. Mostly helping them set up their secure and unsecure networks.

correction:
to send other peoples relatives and NOT themselves to get killed there..

Swift Boat Vets
Where is the evidence that they lied? They saw Kerry in action, they knew what kind of person he was.

Clyde9

The bottom line is...
It is easier for repubs/cons, who support Prez Bush's Iraq War, to to send other peoples relatives or themselves to get killed there and cheer for "victory" because they have no personal stake in it. They have absolutely nothing to lose. That is what defines a "chickenhawk".

SFASU7392
VanDamm gets that crap from the DailyKos folks. They get it from a series of articles from the SF Chronicle and the NY Times. Trustworthy publications that they are. I read the articles and nowhere do they state where they got their assertions.

Volunteered
I do not recall any statement by GWB that he volunteered to change aircraft to serve in Vientam. There was a program where pilots in aircraft not used in Vietnam could volunteer for such service and that GWB did inquire about this program. He did not meet the minimum requirements for that program based on flying time.

The F-102 was tried in SEA, but in a short period of time it was realized that this aircraft which was designed to intercept high altitude bombers and its performance was not satisfactory in the missions it was expected to fly in SEA. Pretty much the same is true for the F-104.

Clyde9

Sheepdog
Yeah, Camp Schwab, Combat Assault Battalion. Dec 2003-Dec2004.

Vandamm
I know it would help you sleep better, but simply wishing that our military was full of rapists and other felons will not make it true.

You are without a doubt the lowest form of human waste in our country. You spew vile hatred about the very people who allow you to live safely in your mom's basement.

I seriously hope you are just a confused and ignorant teenager....if you're older than 25 you are truly a pathetic POS.

Vandamm
I too would like to see your source for the Army enlisting rapists and violent criminals. As a former Army recruiter, I seriously doubt you'll be able to cite a reliable source.

Icedog
I couldn't tell, there hasn't been any math questions today.

SFASU7392
you find it funny?

Boromir's Horn
LostGOP is definitely the poster formerly known as YouRepubsMakeMeLaugh......he must be, it's not possible for two people to be that ignorant.

cce1302
you mentioned that you were in the USMC and one of your assignments was Japan. Was it Okinawa by chance?

clyde9
My dad retired from AD Air Force as a CMSgt
1954-1980. I retired from the AF 6 years AD 20 in the Reserves 1980-2006. I agree with you about George McGovern. I read a book a few years ago that I bought for my dad and he let me read it. I can't remember the authors name or the title of the book but it was about Army Air Corps during World War 2 and George McGovern was mentioned a couple of times. The author wrote the book about D-Day which I read and he has several books about World War 2.

It takes a chicken
to know a chickenhawk!!!

Dogjudge
You said "Don't get me wrong, I am not disparaging the National Guard and the job that they are doing now. It just appears to me that the Guard should be a back up type of group. Once they are put on the front line, aren't you saying that you're military is being stretched thin?"

I don't recall saying anything about how thin you are military is being stretched. All I said was that I respect the guardsmen I served with. And whether or not the NG was an escape from Vietnam, anyone who picks up a rifle or pilots a jet, etc., in readiness to defend his country has my respect.

Unless, like Demosthenes, he carries a chip on his shoulder for those he "leads." Dogjudge, I extend an apology to you and any other enlisted soldiers, Marines, etc. for the lack of class Demosthenes demonstrates toward you. Let me tell you that is not the attitude that we have toward our enlisted men. Attitudes like that in my community hear "you might be in charge, but you ain't leading nobody!" Again, I'm sorry, and don't attribute his attitude to the rest of us. He probably never made it past O-1. Any Marine PFC has more leadership potential in their pinky finger than Demosthenes has in his entire body. Yeah, I know it's a personal attack, but his comment was way out of line.

Big Black Dog
“[Leftists] certainly do NOT hate the military - they hate war - particularly wars of aggression....”

The only wars of aggression leftists hate are those wars fought by the U.S. When other countries act aggressively, the left is silent. How about the various wars between India and Pakistan? The left was silent. Or the Soviet Union’s invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia or Afghanistan? The left was silent. How about the Chinese invasion of Viet Nam back in 1979? The left was silent. How about Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait? The left was silent.

In fact, that last one demonstrates that it’s utterly wrong to say that the left hates wars of aggression, because what the left hated wasn’t the war of aggression, but our rescue of the victims of the war of aggression.

McGovern
" . . . George McGovern oppose war in general, I can't imagine they were in use to the military while they were in there. "

As a South Dakotan, I do not agree with McGovern's current political philosophy.

In his military service as a B-25 bomber pilot in the ETO, he does not need to apologize about his service or personal bravery to anyone.

Clyde9
SD National Guard: Nov 1956 - Jun 1959, Air Force June 1959 - June 1989. Retired CMSgt

to enlist or not to enlist?
if the left wishes to question the patriotism of supporters of the military that did not serve I would direct them to a biography of Thomas Jefferson or John Adams...both revolutionary founding fathers and both presidents of The United States of America and I do believe NEITHER one served in the military of their time. so serving in the military or not does not mean you cannot support the mission or the goal. it is a strawman argument by the left to distract from their disgust that this nation took a stand and showed some backbone and principals...none of which the left has. and yes I did serve in the Army, 1983-1986 so there!

Vandamm
Sorry about your spinal injury, too much yellow?

Radlad
Looking at your post, I cannot tell if you are from the left or the right, as your words are such most everyone will agree with. As my 2:20 post will imply, it's a damn shame how things have come about.

"Chickenhawk" argument intellectually
bankrupt.

Do only teachers have the right to an opinion on matters regarding education?

Only cops, DAs, and judges on matters of criminal law and punishment?

Of course not; the whole idea's absurd on its face. Further, the Founders were quite clear on their intent that the military be subject to civilian authority; the Commander in Chief is the President, an elected politician, and there's no qualification requiring military experience on his part.

Further, the brain-dead who make this argument definitely wouldn't like the outcome if only those with military experience WERE allowed to dictate policy, as the vast majority of vets and active duty personnel are decidedly conservative.

lostGOP
You have a familiar ring, I'm guessing you are a previous poster who let the door hit you where the good Lord split you. Come on, come clean.

Lilly is a Lying XXXX
She claims the military is taking men who have
"a history of aggravated assault, rape, armed robbery, arson, and murder (or even any one of those---your choice---)"
which is nothing but an out and out lie.

The only service this idiot (and the dog boys) provide for America is to make everyone else feel better about themselves

As with Mr. Burns of the Simpsons -- they're evil but they'll die...

Nee
Here's a chart for you.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/2006militarypaytables/2007_Web_Pay_Table.pdf

According to that chart an E-9, with 16 years gets about $4,500.00 plus $240.00 combat pay. That's less than $60,000.00/year.

No one is getting wealthy on that kind of money.

I have no idea what Blackwater and Haliburton folks are making. I'll guarantee one thing. It's a lot more than these folks are making in the military.

Give me one person that you've heard who has quit Blackwater or Haliburton to go into the military because of the money.

Beyond that, it's immaterial. What you're looking at is sort of a back door military.

This is something you're comfortable with?

stedes
"If there were a draft every 18 year old would be able to find Iraq on a map and there would be no support for this war"

Want to know the scary thing. If you ask an 18 year old kid where Iraq is without using a map i'll bet probably 75% would give you the wrong answer.

More liberal stupidity
corbett writes:

"I don't care if you're 95 years old and confined to a wheelchair. If you believe that the nation's survival is at stake, then you have an ABSOLUTE DUTY to go down to the recruiter's office & try to enlist."

If you believe national security is at stake and you are unfit to serve in the military you have a PATRIOTIC duty to stay out of the way of those who are and try to help some other way, like offering your support, morally, substantantively, and/or monetarily.

Or by voting for and donating to candidates who support the military.

Or by going onto TH and other websites where liberal traitors try to undermine our security by spreading their lies, presumptious moral judgments, and ad hominem attacks and dispelling their garbage with facts and morally consistent arguments.

corbett's reference to being "...90 years old and confined to a wheelchair..." is a prime example of the liberal technique of carrying every point to most ridiculous extreme; of putting their ideology above practicality.

Liberals like corbett don't really want 90-year-old invalids going to the recruiting office just to be rejected. They want 90-year-old invalids feeling guilty about having an independent opinion. They want to bully anyone and everyone they can (apparently including aging invalids) because they can't win an honest argument.

wiseone
"Liberals who make the charge of "chickenhawk" are the true cowards.

They not only avoid physical combat, they also avoid real debate"

There is another name for them...Sheep


Really now.
Where did this article come from. Telling herself that barely 20% of the youth in this country would qualify for the military demonstrates her fundamental stupidity. I served, and there was a draft, and the numbers that qualified were over 70%. Last year, 11% of those who enlisted in the Army had to have felonies waived. This year, we struggle to meet our quotas, and the reason we cannot rapidly fill the ranks of the new authorized units - leaving the Army to project that they can only add 7000 per year, is due to the fact that neither Democratic or Republican children want to enlist. And, when the surge ends next spring, we will not have the forces to sustain it at current levels.

There is the very real issue in this country that we are over-extended, and we have no means to add forces when and as we need them. The elite bailed on this war from the beginning which is why their children don't serve. Her defensiveness as to why, and her determination to justify this lack of leadership, only discredits her.

Oops that was For DogJudge
Sorry Lily that was for Dog...but did you read that link?
Last Sentence:A little educating yourself would go a long way, DJ!!!

Jack
Gonna have to sign off here, but here is what you said:

"You wrote that a question about conservative military service 'is never followed by positive, intelligent discussion of war, national defense, or the military's role in American society'

"This is simply untrue. In fact, the reverse is true."

The reverse would be a case in which a question about conservative military is ALWAYS followed by positive, intelligent discussion of war, national defense, or the military's role in society. Perhaps that's not what you meant to signify by referring to "the reverse being true," but it is, in fact, what you implied.

As for Democrats, at the very least, an evaluation of Hillary Clinton's posture in voting to authorize the use of armed force in Iraq, in October 2002, might benefit from the discovery of why Chelsea Clinton is not in the Army. That's IF the question of whether one political faction thinks an individual is a hypocrite is more important than the question of what is the right thing for the United States to be doing.

I don't think it is. I don't think this question is even one of hypocrisy, but even if it were, it's still not the point. If having a child in the armed forces is the only way to establish bona fides in political decisionnmaking about the use of armed force, then there aren't many of us left standing.

Warren
You need to brush up on your American history....your beliefs and thoughts are not new.

Look up the "America First Committee"....other Americans also used to believe we could just stick our head in the sand and the bogeyman would just go away.

Your example of Switzerland is hillarious. The "Great Swiss Army" was able to sit out WWII and be 'neutral' due to the blood and sacrifice of their European neighbors and the US. Do you really believe a Nazi-controlled Europe would have left the "we're not playing" Swiss alone?

Lily
I see you chose to ignore my comments first time around. By chance, Did you go and read that link?
No matter, You are still telling tales out of school.
Common sense tells us most people as civilian contractors go to Iraq is that they have Military experience which fills a void the forces cannot. You think they get paid 5 times more? Think again, sister. The military base pay for soldiers should be higher than it is. But, in essence,what services are rec'd? Health care, housing,clothing, food and a cost of living adjustment in most cases. What does a civilian pay for? Mortgage, private health insurance, dental, precriptions etc...they do not necessarily get Hazardous duty pay like the soldiers. Factor all that and more in and you get a large sum of money, depending on the job. And, where the helll do you think they will spend the rest of the money they earn while they are there? A long time friend came back in May. He has 16 years in as an enlisted man. His effective pay was almost 80k. Why? Can you figure that out? A little educating yourself would go a long way, Lily.

Wiseone
Re Kerry. I have a lot of personal reservations about him but until there are more concrete facts to go by, I prefer to keep them personal. Most vets find it distasteful to do the comparison test about whose service was more valuable or honorable.

A lot of people chose one service over another for a variety of reasons, some noble some not so noble. But for an 18 year old facing their mortality at such a young age, I don't fault them for some strange logic in their thought process. They still joined up and overcame their fears. I was 16 when Viet Nam ended. I know my parents were a little nervous because I was not a model student and not headed for a college deferment. Even now, I remember the thoughts of a 16 year old worrying about circumstances that could well be beyond his control.

Many who had family support who fled to Canada let their fear overcome everything else. While I have very little good to say about that group it was probably a good thing they weren't the buddy in the foxhole one had to rely on. The biggest slap to the Viet Nam vets was seeing those clowns get a pardon five years before the Wall went up in the Nation's capital to honor the 58,000+ who never came home.


Corbett
Until we have a President in office who's willing to remove the civil rights lawyers and libtard journalists from the field of battle, take off the latex gloves when we touch the Queeran, and allow the military the tools to do what they do best, your point is as hollow as your head.

75% disagree with the way this war is being waged. I'm sure you puff up your chest and get your courage from that statistic. But statistics can be misleading. Of those 75% of disgruntled citizens, more than HALF want the war to be accelerated not reduced. That doesn't exactly put you on the side of the majority after all, does it?

Corbett
"But anyone who believes that this war is critical to our national survival and does not at least try to enlist is shirking his or her duty."

That is a cop out and you know it -- we elect our representatives who make decisions about war and peace. Even if the ones we supported were not elected we support the system.
Therefore, citizenship and service don't begin and end with the individual opinion of each and every voter. It begins in that definition of oneself as a citzen and their support of their country's elected leaders is an important part of that. Don't like the policy? Elect new leaders.
By your logic some citizens would never need to serve their country because their individual belief trumps national security and strategy.

And to be fair, when a person claiming to represent conservative opinion, bellows how all lefties are traitors and don't care about their country, it is just as wrong and convoluted as the logic you demonstrated.

I would like to give thanks
to those of you who shared your military credentials on this blog. It's good to see how many have actually experienced the reality of service, which is something that one has to live in order to comprehend the brotherhood of those who share this knowledge. I salute you all.


Lilly and Warren Small
Lilly: You sure must live in a perfect world. I'm sure that everyone there must also be just as perfect as you.
Warren Small: You wouldn't know an enemy if they slapped you. The truth is that no matter what goes on in the world, people like you will sit at home and pretend that people who do bad things are not really out there.

Murtha vs. Kerry
Big Tent,

It is true that Murtha signed up with the Marine Corps and served honorably.

But Kerry only "enlisted" in the NROTC to avoid being drafted into the Army as a grunt. And at the time he 'volunteered' for the Swift Boats they weren't being used in country and they weren't being used in combat.

Both have made deplorable and false public statements about the military after leaving active duty.

I agree with you that the military should be supported, not politicized. When we send these courageous men into battle to defend us this is the least we can do.

Thank you for your service to our country.

Chicken Hawks
Let's be VERY clear about this. If this war is as important as the chicken hawks believe, they have an absolute duty to try to enlist. If the military doesn't think they are qualified, then let the military make that decision. But anyone who believes that this war is critical to our national survival and does not at least try to enlist is shirking his or her duty.

During WWI & WWII, all sorts of people tried to enlist. Men in their 60s tried to enlist. Men who were sick tried to enlist. Men who had large families tried to enlist.

Now we have a generation of so-called conservatives who say that we are in a battle for national survival, but they refuse to enlist. What can you call these people other than shirkers, cowards, and chicken hawks?

I don't care if you're 95 years old and confined to a wheelchair. If you believe that the nation's survival is at stake, then you have an ABSOLUTE DUTY to go down to the recruiter's office & try to enlist.

If you don't believe that the nation's survival is at stake, then you have no business supporting the war. We should not make war for any lesser reason.

Now are any of you chicken hawks going to do your duty? Or will you continue to sit safely on the sidelines while brave men and women risk their lives for something you SAY is important but for which you are not willing to lift a finger?

Dyerje
You wrote:

"Your suggestion that every left-wing question about conservative military service is followed by positive, constructive discussion of war, the military, and society is, however, quite obviously false."

Of course it is false, because I never suggested any such thing. But, to the point. The follow-up you seem to want doesn't develop because that is not the purpose of such interviews and/or such press conferences. It seesm we both agree that there is far too little meaningful, in-depth discussion of any of these issues.

AS to why Republicans are asked about military service while Democrats are not, does that really need explanation. If you are opposed to a war, then not serving is not news. IF you are for a war, then not serving makes news.


Service
One can serve the nation without serving in the military. There are many who do incredible things everyday without ever picking up a weapon and they come from all walks of life. All colors, poor, rich, middle class. It doesn't matter.
Teachers, doctors, firemen, police, all make sacrifices for the good of others. The military is just as professional as the ones I just mentioned. To say that you would deny anyone who's had some sort of tainted past the opportunity to improve their life, means that you don't have a very high regard for people who seek to better themselves through any means possible besides federal handouts and worthless programs.
The key to service is to do it for the right reasons. You have to want to help others. One thing is for sure, anyone who joins the military didn't do it for the money nor the cushy surroundings.
To Toro: USAF 1977-2000

Demo
What is the contempt you display for enlisted troops? I was enlisted and we are not the punks you claim we are. Sir, I have run into many an arrogant officer who for whatever reason looks down on us. As a Sr NCO, me and others like me had to help grow some officer into his job.

I would also say in Iraq and Afghanistan its not just officers in combat its mostly enlisted and mostly enlisted that have been killed and injured.

I never disrespected my commanders be they 2nd LT's or Colonels. I and many I never gave the competent ones unqualified support. I used to be an E-2 and never resented my officers of Cmsgt's they earned their positions. Had I and my other NCO's served under you, you would have had that support, and you would have given us...?

Serving in the Military
From Eisenhower's comments about concerns with the "Military/Industrial Complex" and it's threat to the US, I could see where you could actually make an argument about NOT wanting a President who had served in the military.

Just for thought.

stedes
"If there were a draft.....there would be no support for THIS (my emphasis) war."

If we took your post and replaced the word "Iraq" with Iran, North Korea, China, or Krapistan, it still wouldn't change the point of your post or the disengenious debate methods libs are currently using.

No one wants draftees in their unit, or anyone else who doesn't want to be there.

The draft...
I wonder how many of you would still support this war if Bush brought back the draft? It's a little different when your butts on the line now isn't it.

To serve or not to serve
Like some other posters I'd prefer that the military men and women were not politicized by both parties like they are. I'd rather see more people volunteer but they don't. And as for the standards to qualify.. come on the biggest reason that people are turned down from joining is obesity and very poor physical shape. Getting in is just the first part of a journey.

As far as criticism about Kerry and Murtha go, at least give them the respect for actually serving. Their conduct afterward is an entirely different issue and it is unfair to tie conduct after leaving the service to besmirch what they did years earlier.
I don't like Kerry at all but for reasons very different than unproven speculation on his injuries or decorations. Innocent until proven guilty should be the rule in that case.

USAF
1981-2007

Demosthenes...
... per your response to Lilly...

Doesn't the old adage say... "Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach." The shoe may fit in this instance.

wiseone
Superb post....your description of the modern liberal movement and their infamous "debate" tactics was spot on. Take a bow.

Draft = No War
The Author really dosen't understand the point of challanging war supporters. It is easy to support war when you have no skin in the game and somebody else fights for you.

There is no draft, no war tax, no energy program or conservation, no gas tax. Plenty of gas at reasonable prices, gas guzzling cars, tax cuts and security. Our lives are relatively unchanged. If you are not in the military you are not asked in anyway to support the war. No sacrifices, just a Feel Good "Support the Troops" bumper sticker.

If there were a draft every 18 year old would be able to find Iraq on a map and there would be no support for this war.

This is the point Liberals (as I understand it) are really trying to make.


Wolfgang
re: "If Romney thinks he'll get the votes of veterans or families with serving members of the Armed Forces with his strapping sons hiding on this side of the Atlantic, he must be smoking something very funny."

I think your statement is far off base. I have 21+ years in the military and I have never once heard another military member or their family members use this criteria in making a voting decision.

The men and women in the military just want a politician who will treat us fairly and use us wisely.....the military status of their family members is insignificant.


Demosthenes
"Conduct unbecoming an officer"

Mean anything to you?

"Respect for your fellow officers and the troops who serve under you."

As for comments about AKC judges, yeah that's going to bother me a whole lot. You complain about others and threats, but have no problems with disparaging others left and right.

I finished dealing with bullies, physical and verbal in 1st grade.

Thanks for the insight into your personality.

Lilly
the whole point behind allowing petty criminals (?) into the service is more about acquiring some self-discipline and respect for authority than it is about using munitions. Yes, munitions are part of it too-in the Marines, at least, even the cooks know how to fight. And not all who join actually fight. But you knew that.

Having an older son (who is even now in Iraq) leave for boot camp a month after HS graduation I can tell you we SEE the good things the military has done for him, and by extension, the family and the larger society. Had he not joined up, he might well have "drifted", and right into a situation that would not have demanded his best as the military has done.

My grateful thanks to all who have served or are serving, especially you, Pagan! ;)

Chickensh*t argument
Liberals who make the charge of "chickenhawk" are the true cowards.

They not only avoid physical combat, they also avoid real debate.

Instead of developing their own comprehensive solution to mass murderers and oppressive dictators, liberals make cowardly ad hominem attacks on those who do that have no relevance to the issue and depend on self-serving intellectual constructs of convenience.

The same libs who demand that every illiterate, uninformed, chemicallly dependent bum and/or welfare case that can't even name the VP, let alone his own Senators and rep in Congress must be allowed to vote (without showing ID) have the hypocrisy and arrogance to declare by fiat who may have a voice on war and why.

This is just another arrogant extension of the PC movement that was begun in the 1980's by the left for the specific purpose of stifling opposition to their socialist policies.

Anytime you hear some a-hole attempting to silence someone instead of engaging them in honest debate you can be fairly sure it's some leftist authoritarianist that fears, loathes, and rejects the concept that they should convince the people they are right with fact and logic (aka "democracy") instead of being allowed to order everyone else what they must do, what they must believe, and what they will be allowed to say or think.

dogjudge: Really?
Pretty pathetic missive: but then again most AKC judges have always struck as being somewhat “metro-sexual.” Do you always substitute rational discourse w/ threats of violence? You must be a rather lonely little man.

Bush volunteering is a FACT. Get over it. You obviously have never operated a complicated vehicle or jumped out of an airplane. I have.

As an Academy-educated officer & former glorified “GRUNT”, I actually had access to the esoteric insight that is gained from having to worry about the others under my purview, including said punk E-2/E-3’s who resented my guts for being an officer, in addition worrying about my own sorry skin. YOU have never experienced 1/10th responsibility I had assumed at the time.

Additionally, “Fragging” was primarily endemic to the DRAFTEE past- not today’s professional warrior class. And the victims of said behavior were usually OCS “90-day wonders”. Grow up. In light of such false bravado, it is obvious that you have never served in the military in any real capacity. Warriors don’t convey idle threats.

You Are All Full Of It
Scratch the surface and this article is really just a variation of the "sissyhawk" "praise" of those in uniform. That "praise" really boils down to an attitude of "better them than me but, yes, I value what they are doing." Bushwaa! The Left's critique of Republicans whose kids sit at home or college Republicans who plead asthma or flat feet as excuses to not serve is 100% on the money - it is the identical attitude displayed by the Roman elites in the fourth and fifth centuries when the legions were forced into draconian methods to fill their ranks because the "better people" were simply "too good" to serve. If Romney thinks he'll get the votes of veterans or families with serving members of the Armed Forces with his strapping sons hiding on this side of the Atlantic, he must be smoking something very funny.

The alleged recruiter's statement that only one in five is qualified to be in the current military is also bushwaa. It is a self-serving statement. What the current generation of officers want are pretty boys who would be at home in a Jane Fonda workout video. Unfortunately, prowess on a handball court or in doing squats in a gym doesn't make a person a good soldier. The argument that current recruits have to be mental powerhouses is betrayed by the fact that most of the high-tech gadgetry our military is so enamored over is useless when fighting an urban guerrilla war - an infantryman's war. Aside from the obvious mental defectives, medical basket cases and criminals, probably four out of five of current young people could be trained to be good infantrymen - just put them through a good basic program like the Marines have not entirely abandoned in the interestes of political correctness.

And for the record, I'm no bleeding heart liberal. My bona fides are eleven years service as a U.S. Army infantry officer from 1972 to 1983.

llily
So what are you saying, that John Kerry is a self professed war criminal? Interesting.

Demosthenes
Take it easy man, don't let Dark Poodle get under your skin, he carriers a chip on his shoulder for reasons known only to his imagination. Think that whole "Don't ask, don't tell" thing didn't work out well for him.

As to Kerry, I don't care for his politics one bit and I despise him for dragging fellow veterans into his self created cess pool in front of congress but, as I've said before, without being in his AO I am very reluctant in casting shadows on his service. Some people were there and say one thing, others were there and say another, I wasn't there so don't know. Now if we had some pictures of him, say oh sitting on an AA mount like his sweet heart Jane, well then you'd have something, fact is we don't.

I knew a lot of people who never did anything outstanding other than make it home but were fine human beings, I knew others who were in positions where they truely distingushed themselves and I wouldn't loan them a dollar and expect to see it back.

In short, when we question Kerry's service it's no different than Poodle trashing Bush for being in the guard.

lilly: really?
"To cat trapper
Re "The troops represent our best and brightest": No kidding. I somehow had the idea that convicted felons are not our "best" and that high-school dropouts are not our "brightest". Your standards don't seem very high."

Thank you for painting the entire military w/ the same broad brush. Ironically, your daily posts reflect the pedestrian intellectual capacity of a former member of the female/minority-dominated “Public School Industrial” complex. Obviously you’re not acquainted w/ an anachronism called the “Warrior culture.” Speaking as a minimally franchised, expendable white male, I received a $250K Service Academy scholarship based on the following:
+ “Ivy League” SATs (IQ 150+)
+ All-state athletic honors
+ State Science/Academic Bowl Champion
+ Ability to pass a physical that would challenge most Olympic Athletes.

I graduated w/ a BSEE. I doubt very much that the you or anyone in your immediate family could graduate much less gain admission to my Alma Mater. Years & graduate school(s) later I am a SME in a rather arcane engineering discipline that I helped invent. I have degrees, licenses and certifications in five (5) different engineering disciplines. One credential is held by less than 100 qualified people in the entire world. As a DoD engineer/scientist, I recently earned a multi-M$ science grant. As a reserve officer I was hand-selected to support a rather-elite Joint services unit. I recently was ordered to turn down an Iraq rotation because of my engineering SME status.

Thank you for re-affirming my view that quite a few “public educators” are in fact ignoramuses if not altogether functional-idiots. This view is quite valid, given the fact that “Education majors” have the lowest SAT, ACT & GRE scores of any profession. You have my pity since you obviously enjoy a rather squalid existence on a PS teacher’s pension.

study first!
lisa

first rule of public discourse: read before you think and think before you speak-or write in this case. you made the case against your thesis with all the factual inaccuracies and rhetorical sound bite ideology. you should really read more and take a walk outside in the real world, better yet volunteer in the military and then give a first person account. you may be surprised at what you learn.

Lilly...PS..
... as a matter of fact I do, indeed have very high standards. So high that I almost never allow myself to be pulled into a mundane discussion or arguement by any liberals on any issues, mostly because you do not meet those standards, or the necessary minimum IQ requirement to have a meaninful discussion on any subject.

Now I will think of you twice in the comming months and then I will dismiss you forever. I will think of you when I am eviscerating my first deer of the hunting season and then I will think of you once more while skinning the first bobcat of trapping season. (OK I'll admit that I will probabbly also think of you while collecting his feces for my next "toilet set" to catch his oler brother or father).

To Demosthenes
Re "...fabricated the war crime stories".

What are you saying? That Kerry and the other Vietnam vets who set up camp on the Washington DC Mall and re-enacted war scenes just made it all up? That all reports of atrocities done by US military are lies? That only reports of honorable behavior among our military can possibly be true? That the My Lai Massacre was a liberal invention and Lt Calley was railroaded? That Tim O'Brien's books about the Vietnam War are based on lies? That no Iraqi girl got raped and burned by an American soldier? That her family didn't get killed? That no Vietnamese villages got burned, wholesale, including the little children? That photographers set the fires themselves? That no US soldier has ever avenged himself against a civilian?

There comes a point at which patriotism can become delusion. Beware.

Jack
I won't defend the practice of too many conservatives, of accusing all who contest the GWOT or military spending of being cowards and of not supporting the troops. I have never done that myself. (You could look it up. In fact, I have commented that statements of generic "support for the troops" are politically meaningless from either side of the spectrum.) I do expect the courtesy in return of not being accused of CALLING someone a coward because I disagree with him.

Your suggestion that every left-wing question about conservative military service is followed by positive, constructive discussion of war, the military, and society is, however, quite obviously false. My assertion, BTW, was that members of the media never extend the discussion in this constructive way, when they ask conservatives the question. I have yet to hear one, or hear of one, who has. Perhaps you can provide an example.

Having a volunteer military is a political measure worth discussing and revisiting in the public square. What service in it means about citizens, and means for their bona fides in political debate, is also worth discussing. It is not to provoke such a worthwhile discussion that journalists ask Republicans, but not Democrats, if their children are serving in the military.

dogjudge
Fair Enough! Sorry if I insulted you, that was not my intent! But these were the folks I saw burning draft cards and bragging about it.

To union dude
My husband served in World War II. So did my brother-in-law, a CPO who was blown off the bridge of his ship when it was torpedoed and who was blinded for several years from that event. So did my sister-in-law, a combat nurse. So did my uncle, who came back from the South Pacific so damaged that he spent the rest of his life in a VA hospital. And my folks have served in every American war going back to a pre-Revolutionary militia; three served in the American Revolution. Also, FYI, I believe this country should have compulsory military service like Israel does; I think it teaches personal discipline.

None of which supports the idea that we should now be paying tens of thousands of dollar (of our tax money!) in "bonuses" to lure young people into the military when they often see no other viable options in their lives---or that we should lower recruitment standards to their disgraceful present level. I believe it can be argued that we have created a variant of the mercenary army of the movies: pays well for service and recruits thugs.

Demosthenes
So you would put someone being given the opportunity to learn to fly a multi-million dollar aircraft on the same level as a grunt on the front line?

Bush volunteered for Vietnam? I'm sorry I'm a rather skeptic about various issues. I could be wrong, and I'll apologize if I am, but I have NEVER seen that statement made any time, any place, any where. Care to give me a source?

Kerry. Simple. Nonsense.

O-1 versus E-3. The disgust you show for enlisted personnel is too apparent. Unfortunately you're too biased to realize it. One word for folks such as you. Fragging.

Lilly
the convicts and drop outs of which you speak are not the young men that I have come to know. They are not the young Marines who have sat around my campfire sharing my venison and ale. If they exist they are probabbly the pouges of which I mentioned. Probabbly the sons and daughters of entitlement minded liberals.

Big Black Dog: Really?
“I enlisted in the Airforce the day I turned 18 (actually 17, but they don't let you go until you're 18). …So thanks for the compliment, but just spewing platitudes makes you a hypocrit as well - John Kerry and Al Gore both enlisted and served. Bush hid out in the Texas NG - yet you despise the first two and worship the last...”

So you suffer the same myopia every other punk, “know-it-all” E-3 I had the endure & calibrate as an O-1 right out of the Academy. Making ill-informed statements just characterize you as being another left-wing ignoramus. Like most “enlightened” leftists, you obviously haven’t had enough life-experience and/or personal responsibility IOT form a cogent opinion. Hence, allow me to provide some clarification:

+BUSH: I am no fan of the Bush’s past prosecution of the Iraq War. However, While in the Texas ANG, BUSH qualified to fly the technically challenging F-102: the first “strategic jet fighter” to carry nuclear missiles. The F-102 was apparently one of the most challenging fighters because required the pilot to operate sophisticated interception radar while simultaneous flying said plane. Quite a few student & qualified pilots died attempting to master the F-102. By the time he qualified & volunteered for Vietnam, the USAF shifted to F-104. BUSH is not a physical coward- unlike most of his Democrat detractors.

+KERRY: Kerry has never publicly refuted a single FACT cited by the “Swift Boat Veterans.” Kerry has refused to submit his USN medical records for public review since said records would shed light on “Battle wounds” Senator Kerry supposedly suffered which resulted in three (3) Purple Hearts
Kerry and his fellow “Winter Soldier” veterans did in fact fabricate the “war crime” stories they conveyed during Congressional interviews.

Big Black Dog
Misinterpretation of the written word. It's easy for all of us.

Do I believe personally that Iraq was going to attack the US? Absolutely not.

George W. Bush, however, has predicated this entire war on the fact that Iraq was a danger to the US. We pre-emptively attacked them first, so they wouldn't attack us. I don't agree that was the case, but that's what we were told.

We only go to war for the safety of the country. So from the President's perspective there is no difference between a country actually attacking the US, and one that MIGHT attack the US.

So from that perspective, that's why I was saying that we have been invaded.

To cat trapper
Re "The troops represent our best and brightest": No kidding. I somehow had the idea that convicted felons are not our "best" and that high-school dropouts are not our "brightest". Your standards don't seem very high.

To Doug
Re "What ever happened to the idea of criminal rehabilitation", I am not aware of a rehabilitation program that involves teaching bigger and better use of munitions. Frankly, if a man had a history of aggravated assault, rape, armed robbery, arson, and murder (or even any one of those---your choice---) then benefited by a couple of years of training and experience in how to kill people more efficiently, I would not want him in my community. The political right seems to believe that the experience of combat is a moral epiphany and a purifier of men. I wouldn't bet on that.

AS a Whole..
... the troops are our best and brightest. Many serve out of a sense of honor or duty. I have had MANY young Marines as guests in my home since 9/11. I can recall exactly whjat I was doing when the phone rang. On the other end of the line was my eldest. "Are you watching the news Dad?" he asked. "No" I said. "Turn it on now Dad. Something bad is going on."

I flipped on the set while my son was still on the line. I wondered what could cause him to sound so anxious. He was calling from 29 Palms, a rifleman with Charley Co., 1st Bn., 7th Marines. Just then the 2nd plane hit the WTC. "They think that it is Islamic terroists Dad. All of my Company is in here waqtching on TV. Rest assured, they will be sending us somewhere and we are ready for some retribution."

There would be many sleepless nights for ole' Dad after that. First his unit got deployed to Kuwait. Then came the invasion. I absolutely could not tear myself away from the TV. Afterall they had an imbedded reporter with the 1st Bn. Let me tell all you libturd whiners something you can not fathom the feeling of helplesness until you are lying on the couch at midnight unable to sleep and then Marty Savage comes on CNN and says (with automatic weaponsfire in the background)" I am with Charley Co. who is currently in a firefight at the University here..."

It is not your sons and daughters out there laying there life on the line. It is conservative's sons and daughters laying their lives on the line. It has been my personal experience that the liberals who do join the service are pogues, not combat troops.

supporting the military
The left often whines that they are condemned for not supporting the military simply because they are opposed to war.

We all HATE war!

The reason that the left is accused of not supporting the military is that they continually:

1)demonstrate contempt for the military in word and action
2) They support a draft that the military feels would be damaging
3) They continually spout off that only the poor and ignorant with no choices enter the military
4) They jump on board any accusations against the military before the facts are revealed
5)gutted the military during the Clinton years but refuse to acknowledge the damage that they did
6) hold the UN in higher esteem that our own military
7) treat recruiters with contempt and violence and block them from campuses
8) feel that the surge was a failure before it even was implemented
9) use the war to score political points which is far different than a commander in chief doing what he feels is necessary to win the war

The accusation that the left doesn't support the military has nothing to do with a reasoned opposition of the war [which most people would respect].

Jack
Agreed.

What I'd REALLY like to see as a discussion with conservatives is George W. Bush's private army, Blackwater and others.

Why would anyone serve in the military when they can go to work for Blackwater and get 5X the pay, better benefits, etc.

Given the way that this war is being run, assume we took all of the troops out of Iraq tomorrow. Could Bush simply replace them with Blackwater and keep his war going along?

Do we REALLY want a war to protect our country being fought by a private army? If so, hell why don't we just go to China and pay them to fight our war? Or whatever low bidder we can find?

Not acedemic
In this particular election, I believe the incoming President should have some military, even combat, experience. Whether anyone is hypocritical (all humans are, in some area of their lives) is academic. But the Real World is hard, cold, and unforgiving. So I want a President whose loyalty is to America, in all particulars delineated in the Oath of Office. A person who has seen combat is much more likely to be judicious in his use of force, to count the cost and make certain the cost is justified Victory. So which candidate(s) have combat experience? Important, too, which candidates have offspring in harm's way? McCain and Hunter each have. Hunter's son, Duncan Duane, enlisted in the Marine's in the wake of 9/11. He has served two tours in Iraq, and is serving a tour in Afghanistan even as I write. I believe Mc
Cain has a son in the Naval Academy, and a son in the Marines. Neither Hunter nor McCain was 'too nervous for the service". Check out all other candidates closely, is my advice. I am for Duncan Hunter, as he most nearly fills the bill, on all the issues. Duncan Hunter Is A Straight Arrow. Duncan Hunter Walks The Walk.

Lily
I and my 4 brothers thank you for calling us elitists.Yes we were poor but in our minds service to the country was something we believed in.During thesecond world war our immediate neighborhood lost two young men.Our father died in 1945,but none of my brothers asked to leave the service to help the family.Now I am to old to serve,so all I can do is pray for the troops safety

loco
"We have a volunteer army
These are the warriors of this nation, self selected warriors. However, should we be invaded, I guarantee we will all be warriors."

If you don't understand the STUPIDITY of that statement, I don't know if anyone will be able to explain it to you.

The only reason that we invaded Iraq was for the security of the US so that Iraq wouldn't invade us here. In one sense, WE HAVE BEEN INVADED.

Dyerje
You wrote that a question about conservative military service "is never followed by positive, intelligent discussion of war, national defense, or the military's role in American society"

This is simply untrue. In fact, the reverse is true. If one questions military spending, strategy, etc. one is accused of not supporting the troops, being a coward, etc. etc. etc.

I'd love to have a meaningful conversation on those issues with a conservaitve, but its kind of useless.

If one really...
...wanted to serve, there are well over a hundred jobs in the Army alone that do not require living in the mud or even getting in harm's way.

If one really wanted to serve but fears injury, a cushy procurement job awaits. These troops do things like buy eggs and equipment for their fellow soldiers. There's a job in the military for anyone who wants one.

All competent men should serve in the military for at least 2 years.

cce1302
One of the things that I find EXTREMELY fascinating is Bush's use of the National Guard to fight this conflict.

I realize it's different times, but . . .

During Vietnam, the National Guard was viewed by most simply as a way to avoid having to go into the regular service and possibly having to go to Vietnam. For the Air Force, the nickname was FANG, and believe me, it wasn't a complimentary term.

Because of the volunteer army we've gone from the National Guard being primarily a reserve unit, to being primarily a front line unit.

Don't get me wrong, I am not disparaging the National Guard and the job that they are doing now. It just appears to me that the Guard should be a back up type of group. Once they are put on the front line, aren't you saying that you're military is being stretched thin?

Mormons Are NOT Concientious Objecters
I'm not sure where that came from - many Mormons proudly serve in the military, we have no proscription against it. I can name at least three members of my ward on active duty in Iraq right now. I even recommended to my very disciplined, fitness-fanatic son that he would make a great Marine, but he chose a different occupation. I've never seen anything that accurately documents Romney claimed C.O. status. Those who have mentioned this are probably confusing us with Jehovah's Witnesses or Quakers, and either way, it falls into the internet myth category - it's simply not true.

I did not serve in the military - my draft number was #2 the year I turned 18, ironically the first year the draft ended. I would have served with pride if I had been drafted, but that was not my choice of vocation - architecture was. Having not served, I feel a sense of admiration for those who voluntarily defend our country, and keenly recognize my debt to them. What we must do as citizens to support the troops is elect wise leaders so WHEN (not IF - there are evil people out there in the world, face up to that fact) troops are sent into harm's way, they are provided with the best equipment, the best logistics, and the most flexibility to perform their mission - and most of all, a clear-cut mission. If I have any complaint about Iraq, it is that the military has been at times hobbled by the equipment they were given, were forced at times to fight with one hand behind their backs (political correctness has no place in the field of battle - we're not there to be nice or not hurt feelings), but most of all have seen considerable mission drift, especially when WMD's were not found in the quantities nearly everyone expected (I still fear they were trucked to Syria, and Israel may yet be in for a really bad surprise).

National Guard
Counts as service, whether you like the President or not.
I served beside members of the Iowa National Guard in Iraq and will always have respect for the members of "Ironhawk" as will anybody who followed them through Anbar.
As I stated before, I'm a Marine.

Missing the Point.

In answer to Miss DeP's question: in a word, YES. Those who are gung ho for quick military solutions to problems should be the first to be willing to sign up and do the dirty work. This is especially true when the military already has to lower its standards to meet recruiting goals. With all the gung ho keyboard warriors out there, the military should be turning qualified candidates, all conservatives, away in droves.

The idea that there are all these Republicans sitting around on college campuses who are simply incapable of serving in the military is ludicrous.

Liberal journalists
... won't stop asking this loaded question of GOP candidates (never of Democrats, of course). But we can recognize that they aren't changing the minds and hearts of any voters by asking it.

Asking this question is a public finger-pointing tactic. It reminds me most of the "accusation as entertainment" motif of the workers' collective, or "soviet," meeting. It's pure attack, with no constructive purpose. It is never followed by positive, intelligent discussion of war, national defense, or the military's role in American society. It is followed only by high-fiving among the convinced, at -- according to their lights -- making a political opponent look bad.

I think most people who aren't already in the Democrats' left-wing base see it for what it is.

For toro:

CDR, USN (Ret.)
1983-2004 -- Including IRAQI FREEDOM and ENDURING FREEDOM in my final year of service