Urban planning community | #theplannerlife

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 47 of 47

Thread: Banned contractor still wheeling and dealing in Iraq.

  1. #26
    Cyburbian nuovorecord's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    You know, I am not ever going to understand accusations about a President being evil because joining the army involves going to war. That is what the army exists for: to go to war. And people who go to war have nightmares, physical damage (sometimes less obvious than losing a limb but still debilitating) and sometimes even die. Yes, some wars should not have happened. No, I am not "for" the war in Iraq. I have said that repeatedly. My dad was career military. My husband's dad was career military. His grandfather was career military. I simply will not ever understand the huge objection to this. I think civilians are cry-babies who do not adequately appreciate what they have which military personnel suffer to protect with their lives. I don't think I can even discuss this with civilians. American civilians so arrogantly think their safety is some god-given right. I have foreign friends. The security that American civilians so take for granted doesn't exist elsewhere -- and not because of "American Imperialism". The security partly grows out of the enormous wealth we have -- which partly grows out of the fact that no significant war has occured within our borders since the civil war. Countries that get invaded and fight wars on their own soil -- gee, that negatively impacts business and agriculture.
    The military doesn't get to decide who, when and where to fight. Their deployment is the decision of the Commander in Chief and (presumably) Congress. If our troops are deployed somewhere, you can bet I want them "supported" and returned home safely.

    But, it for goddamn sure doesn't make me a cry-baby to call into question the motives of the Commander in Chief and Congress when they send the troops into combat. I am sick to death of our current administration's outright lies regarding what needs to be done in order to secure our nation. I'm not going to belabor all this...it's been done ad nauseum already. But the day we just blindly assume that our leaders have our best interests at heart when they make questionable decisions is the day that we lose our freedoms, our democracy, our nation...without a shot ever having been fired on American soil.
    "There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.

  2. #27
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by nuovorecord
    The military doesn't get to decide who, when and where to fight. Their deployment is the decision of the Commander in Chief and (presumably) Congress. If our troops are deployed somewhere, you can bet I want them "supported" and returned home safely.

    But, it for goddamn sure doesn't make me a cry-baby to call into question the motives of the Commander in Chief and Congress when they send the troops into combat. I am sick to death of our current administration's outright lies regarding what needs to be done in order to secure our nation. I'm not going to belabor all this...it's been done ad nauseum already. But the day we just blindly assume that our leaders have our best interests at heart when they make questionable decisions is the day that we lose our freedoms, our democracy, our nation...without a shot ever having been fired on American soil.
    That wasn't what I said at all. I said I do not understand the tendency to suggest that the President is evil because soldiers die in war, because soldiers risk life and limb. I do not think I have ever argued with anyone for disagreeing with the political motives behind a war I do not think we should be fighting. But jordanb is complaining that "Under Bush, serving in the military means nightmares, lost limbs, and death." Gee, it meant that for my father, who did not serve under Bush. It meant that for my father in law and grandfather in law. It makes me cross-eyed when people see evil in soldiers dying in battle -- they sign on knowing up front that their purpose is to lay their life on the line. No, most civilian jobs don't ask that of you. But it is a given in the military.

    So, comments which sound to my ears like "Oh My God -- Soldiers DIE and LOSE LIMBS and GO TO WAR -- that is so TERRIBLE. They are supposed to be joining the military to See The World WITHOUT risking life and limb" make me think "god, what a cry baby". It sounds utterly ridiculous to me to suggest that the purpose of the military is to provide cheap travel and risk-free adventures for the youth of this country.

  3. #28
    Cyburbian nuovorecord's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    That wasn't what I said at all. I said I do not understand the tendency to suggest that the President is evil because soldiers die in war, because soldiers risk life and limb. I do not think I have ever argued with anyone for disagreeing with the political motives behind a war I do not think we should be fighting. But jordanb is complaining that "Under Bush, serving in the military means nightmares, lost limbs, and death." Gee, it meant that for my father, who did not serve under Bush. It meant that for my father in law and grandfather in law. It makes me cross-eyed when people see evil in soldiers dying in battle -- they sign on knowing up front that their purpose is to lay their life on the line. No, most civilian jobs don't ask that of you. But it is a given in the military.
    War is a horrible, rotten event, that ought to be avoided whenever possible. But sometimes, it's not possible. Some wars are fought for good and just causes. I get that, OK?

    Our current involvement in Iraq is not a good and just cause. Defeating/eliminating/reducing terrorism is a worthy goal. But the war in Iraq isn't accomplishing that at all. Yet people are being slaughtered everyday, for no good reason. There is no way that you can equate the sacrifices made in the Revolutionary War, Civil War, World War II, or any other just war you care to name, with what is going on now in Iraq. No one in a military family wants to think that their loved one is fighting for an unworthy cause. But, in my opinion, that is precisely the situation we're in now. So, do you think the President is NOT evil for creating this mess?
    "There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.

  4. #29
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by nuovorecord
    War is a horrible, rotten event, that ought to be avoided whenever possible. But sometimes, it's not possible. Some wars are fought for good and just causes. I get that, OK?

    Our current involvement in Iraq is not a good and just cause. Defeating/eliminating/reducing terrorism is a worthy goal. But the war in Iraq isn't accomplishing that at all. Yet people are being slaughtered everyday, for no good reason. There is no way that you can equate the sacrifices made in the Revolutionary War, Civil War, World War II, or any other just war you care to name, with what is going on now in Iraq. No one in a military family wants to think that their loved one is fighting for an unworthy cause. But, in my opinion, that is precisely the situation we're in now. So, do you think the President is NOT evil for creating this mess?
    I added some edits:
    So, comments which sound to my ears like "Oh My God -- Soldiers DIE and LOSE LIMBS and GO TO WAR -- that is so TERRIBLE. They are supposed to be joining the military to See The World WITHOUT risking life and limb" make me think "god, what a cry baby". It sounds utterly ridiculous to me to suggest that the purpose of the military is to provide cheap travel and risk-free adventures for the youth of this country.
    Honestly, what part of my constant refrain that I do NOT agree with this war do you not understand? I can say that until I am blue in the face and be attacked as if I am "defending President Bush". I am not. I am ONLY trying to clarify erroneous assumptions that are often made. I do not like discussing politics. I have no desire to talk about President Bush. But I can't stand by and let it go when people say things like a) soldiers are so poorly compensated -- the poor schmuck dying for his country is being paid a pittance of merely a thousand dollars a month and b) Bush is evil because being in the military under him means lost limbs, nightmares, etc.

    If Bush is evil, it is because he sent them over there for the wrong reasons, not because joining the military has serious consequences involving risking life and limb -- for which soldiers in this country are pretty well compensated with the college fund and a huge infrastructure which serves them in a myriad ways (medical benefits, etc). You can talk all day long about how evil Bush is. I won't say one word. But I will be highly likely to comment if you say "Bush is evil BECAUSE (insert oft-stated misinformation about the military itself)". I have no argument at all with your dislike of the war. I do not think I have EVER argued for this war. I don't want to argue about the war at all.

  5. #30
    Cyburbian abrowne's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,584
    As her family has a rich military history, Michelle is (rightly) angry with the sentiment that soldiers shouldn't have to fight and die. We're mixing terms here. War is horrible and we should absolutely only send troops when necessary, but this has nothing to do with the obligation a soldier bears. It is the soldiers that desert or whine about free college education when asked to deploy that Michelle seems to admonish.

    I don't mean to speak for others but it seemed to me that this was getting hopelessly muddled - I do hope I've stated things accurately.

    Back to the point, then - those that profit wrongly from wartime (ie. crooked contractors) and endanger soldiers should be tried under a military court (treason?).

    Further, I feel that possibly my questions about a soldiers salary were taken to be malicious - they were not. I am not a soldier and I know nothing of what one earns. Now I know. This is all. There is nothing behind this other than curiousity.

  6. #31
    Cyburbian nuovorecord's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    I added some edits:

    Honestly, what part of my constant refrain that I do NOT agree with this war do you not understand? I can say that until I am blue in the face and be attacked as if I am "defending President Bush". I am not. I am ONLY trying to clarify erroneous assumptions that are often made. I do not like discussing politics. I have no desire to talk about President Bush. But I can't stand by and let it go when people say things like a) soldiers are so poorly compensated -- the poor schmuck dying for his country is being paid a pittance of merely a thousand dollars a month and b) Bush is evil because being in the military under him means lost limbs, nightmares, etc.

    Bush is evil because he sent them over there for the wrong reasons, not because joining the military has serious consequences involving risking life and limb -- for which soldiers in this country are pretty well compensated with the college fund and a huge infrastructure which serves them in a myriad ways (medical benefits, etc). You can talk all day long about how evil Bush is. I won't say one word. But I will be highly likely to comment if you say "Bush is evil BECAUSE (insert oft-stated misinformation about the military itself)". I have no argument at all with your dislike of the war. I do not think I have EVER argued for this war. I don't want to argue about the war at all.

    I think anyone who signs up for military service has understands that there is the possibility of going into combat. I also think that no one joins the military to get rich. It's when our soliders are losing limbs, life and mental health for an unworthy cause that creates such anger among us civilians. I don't want to see my fellow citizens being used as pawns of an evil President, which is exactly what is happening right now. I don't think we should just idly stand by and accept that as just being part of the "serious consequences" when someone signs up for the military. The purpose of the military is to defend our freedom, not to invade countries in order to establish some neocon "new world order" fantasy and secure access to oil reserves.
    "There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.

  7. #32
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by nuovorecord
    I think anyone who signs up for military service has understands that there is the possibility of going into combat. I also think that no one joins the military to get rich. It's when our soliders are losing limbs, life and mental health for an unworthy cause that creates such anger among us civilians. I don't want to see my fellow citizens being used as pawns of an evil President, which is exactly what is happening right now. I don't think we should just idly stand by and accept that as just being part of the "serious consequences" when someone signs up for the military. The purpose of the military is to defend our freedom, not to invade countries in order to establish some neocon "new world order" fantasy and secure access to oil reserves.
    Look, I think you are completely missing my point -- something I frequently feel is the case when trying to talk to civilians. And if I say that, I am accused of "bias". It is a normal human tendency to want desperately for The Other person to "hear" you and understand you -- often to the point of not hearing them. I am well aware that I do not understand a lot of people who are "different" from me in some fashion -- civilian, foreign, male, etc. But if I say "I feel misunderstood", well, it is just more proof of what a horrid bitch I am.

    So in summary:

    A) I loathe politics and have no desire whatsoever at all to the depths of my soul to discuss this WAR and the POLITICS behind it with anyone on planet earth. Thank you.

    B) I would appreciate it if people in this forum did not assume that I am "For" this war merely because I am married to a soldier -- whom I happen to be divorcing -- and, therefore, unwilling to bad mouth the president in public. My husband is career military, my dad was career military, my immigrant mom is one of the most pro-military people you will ever meet because she likes shopping on base, etc ad nauseum. Active duty military personnel have a legal and moral obligation to BACK their country and their Commander in Chief aka The President of the U.S. You can disagree with the man. You can wish all day long that someone else were in charge. But you have a sworn blood oath to follow his orders and publically disagreeing with him while you are active duty is potentially a treasonable offense. I have been around the military my entire life. It is NOT in my nature to bad-mouth THE PRESIDENT, whatever his current name happens to be. It is alien to me. It is NOT DONE in the culture I come from -- military culture. So I would appreciate it if people here would, out of respect for my husband's personal sacrifice vowing his life and limb and loyalty to his country, NOT ask me to talk bad about the president. I have stated my dislike of this war. I have done so repeatedly. Get the hell off my back. I will not ever publicaly say more about this war than that I do not agree with it.

    If you genuinely appreciate the sacrifices the military makes for you, please understand that is one of them: I will not speak about the particulars of this war or my opinions of Mr. Bush while my husband's life is still sworn to follow the commands of the man everyone here wants me to bad mouth as "proof" that I adequately agree with you. "Loose lips sink ships."

    You are civilian. Chat away about your opionions of Mr. Bush. But please don't make aspersions against my character just because I won't join you.

  8. #33
    Gunfighter Mastiff's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Middle of a Dusty Street
    Posts
    6,477
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    Look, I think you are completely missing my point -- something I frequently feel is the case when trying to talk to civilians.


    You are civilian. Chat away about your opionions of Mr. Bush.


    Just to clarify something... Were you actually in the military? I mean, I'm pretty sure you aren't now, which would make you a civilian, too, but were you on active duty or just part of a military family?
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
    C'mon and get me you twist of fate
    I'm standing right here Mr. Destiny
    If you want to talk well then I'll relate
    If you don't so what cause you don't scare me

  9. #34
    I think you are wrong MZ..... most people DO sign up to see the world travel, get an education, better themselves, or just a ticket to get out of their hometown. I have met very few people who say I'm joining up so I can fight in an unjust war.

  10. #35
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by Mastiff
    Just to clarify something... Were you actually in the military? I mean, I'm pretty sure you aren't now, which would make you a civilian, too, but were you on active duty or just part of a military family?
    lol. No, I have no ever been in the military. I have said the same thing to my husband: that when you talk about "civilians" you are talking about me. He said "No, it's not the same".

    Just to clarify: I made a vow to protect and serve my husband's welfare, in sickness and in health, for richer or for poorer, (etc) 'til death do us part. He then made a vow to serve and protect his country. Through him, my obligation to not speak to certain matters is only slightly less than his. For example, if I were to chat away here daily about when he comes home late from work, when he is unusually crabby and stressed about his job, the specific dates he travels due to his job, where he specifically goes due to his job, etc. I am potentially giving clues to strategy, tactics, etc. of what the military is up to. If you name the MOS of an individual and what state they are going to school in, those two pieces of information can inform someone in the know as to what specialized training he or she is recieving, what unit they are likely in, etc -- and I may not realize which pieces of information would betray that fact because I don't know enough. But there are people who make it their business to know such things. So as a military wife, there are things I really cannot talk about. It potentially puts my husband's life at risk -- and I would not intentionally endanger the life of a total stranger to indulge a desire to chat. I will never understand why people here think I have an obligation to endanger my husband's life just to satisfy their desire to know my personal opinion.

  11. #36
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by Planificador Urbano
    I think you are wrong MZ..... most people DO sign up to see the world travel, get an education, better themselves, or just a ticket to get out of their hometown. I have met very few people who say I'm joining up so I can fight in an unjust war.
    Gee, I have said that same thing recently in another thread. You are turning my statement on its head. I said: I think it is ridiculous to suggest that the purpose of the military is to enable people to see the world, etc. If you join because you want that, great. Just don't be all shocked and offended when you get sent to a war zone. I know some people join the military during a time of peace and they believe they will get out of it with their college money and no harm to themselves. If you achieve that, wonderful. Don't whine to me though if your country actually expects you to go to war. Those great benefits are offered to entice you to offer to risk life and limb. If you aren't actually prepared to fulfill your end of the bargain, I got no sympathy for you.

  12. #37
    Cyburbian abrowne's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,584
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    I will never understand why people here think I have an obligation to endanger my husband's life just to satisfy their desire to know my personal opinion.
    Yes, because we have all been asking for a complete dossier on his behaviour and movements. The entire line of questioning came about because someone questioned your continued derogatory use of the word civilian (and apparently excepting yourself from the definition). At no point did it have anything to do with your husband, or his movements, or anything of that nature.

    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    I said: I think it is ridiculous to suggest that the purpose of the military is to enable people to see the world, etc. If you join because you want that, great. Just don't be all shocked and offended when you get sent to a war zone.

    ...

    Don't whine to me though if your country actually expects you to go to war.
    I don't think anyone is suggesting that the purpose of the military is to provide young people a chance to see the world (regardless of recruitment spin to the contrary). What brings the ire of many new recruits, I think, is that they did not expect to be brought into an unnecessary conflict (looking at history, this was probably an unwarranted expectation). It is not the war or conflict itself, but the nature of it. If a conflict were truly threatening the soil of the USA I don't believe most citizens (nor civilians) would object to serving, and serving proudly.

    I'd like to speak mroe on this... I didn't mean to leave my commenting at this (its a bit blunt) but I've got to be heading out.

  13. #38
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by abrowne
    Yes, because we have all been asking for a complete dossier on his behaviour and movements. The entire line of questioning came about because someone questioned your continued derogatory use of the word civilian (and apparently excepting yourself from the definition). At no point did it have anything to do with your husband, or his movements, or anything of that nature.
    Look, I addressed two very specific things: that the assumption that is very frequently made about the pay of the military is not a complete picture and that I think jordanb's comments are in error: my father, father in law, etc. all served in the military and experienced nightmares, had buddies die in combat, etc. If you want to villify Bush, villify him for why he sent people to war, not for the fact that war happens to be hell. It always has been. However, because I attempted to address those two specific points, I am getting a rash of sh*t about 'defending Bush', etc -- and my attempts to say "I wasn't addressing that and I don't want to" have not been respected at all. And this is not the first time that I have experienced this. Any time I have tried to correct erroneous assumptions about the military itself, I am attacked for assumptions about my political opinions. The fact that I am a military wife circumscribes some of the things I can talk about. Your sarcastic retort here dismisses that basic point.

    don't think anyone is suggesting that the purpose of the military is to provide young people a chance to see the world (regardless of recruitment spin to the contrary). What brings the ire of many new recruits, I think, is that they did not expect to be brought into an unnecessary conflict (looking at history, this was probably an unwarranted expectation). It is not the war or conflict itself, but the nature of it. If a conflict were truly threatening the soil of the USA I don't believe most citizens (nor civilians) would object to serving, and serving proudly.

    I'd like to speak mroe on this... I didn't mean to leave my commenting at this (its a bit blunt) but I've got to be heading out.
    Please explain to me why I am OBLIGATED to badmouth Bush in order to prove to this forum that I disagree with this war. Please further explain to me why I am not allowed to correct erroneous statements about the military itself if I do not desire to be dragged into a discussion about politics. If you can manage that, I would also deeply appreciate an explanation as to why I am a bitch for not wanting to be attacked by SEVERAL people making erroneous assumptions about my intent, etc.

  14. #39
    Cyburbian nuovorecord's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    Look, I think you are completely missing my point -- something I frequently feel is the case when trying to talk to civilians. And if I say that, I am accused of "bias". It is a normal human tendency to want desperately for The Other person to "hear" you and understand you -- often to the point of not hearing them. I am well aware that I do not understand a lot of people who are "different" from me in some fashion -- civilian, foreign, male, etc. But if I say "I feel misunderstood", well, it is just more proof of what a horrid bitch I am.

    So in summary:

    A) I loathe politics and have no desire whatsoever at all to the depths of my soul to discuss this WAR and the POLITICS behind it with anyone on planet earth. Thank you.

    B) I would appreciate it if people in this forum did not assume that I am "For" this war merely because I am married to a soldier -- whom I happen to be divorcing -- and, therefore, unwilling to bad mouth the president in public. My husband is career military, my dad was career military, my immigrant mom is one of the most pro-military people you will ever meet because she likes shopping on base, etc ad nauseum. Active duty military personnel have a legal and moral obligation to BACK their country and their Commander in Chief aka The President of the U.S. You can disagree with the man. You can wish all day long that someone else were in charge. But you have a sworn blood oath to follow his orders and publically disagreeing with him while you are active duty is potentially a treasonable offense. I have been around the military my entire life. It is NOT in my nature to bad-mouth THE PRESIDENT, whatever his current name happens to be. It is alien to me. It is NOT DONE in the culture I come from -- military culture. So I would appreciate it if people here would, out of respect for my husband's personal sacrifice vowing his life and limb and loyalty to his country, NOT ask me to talk bad about the president. I have stated my dislike of this war. I have done so repeatedly. Get the hell off my back. I will not ever publicaly say more about this war than that I do not agree with it.

    If you genuinely appreciate the sacrifices the military makes for you, please understand that is one of them: I will not speak about the particulars of this war or my opinions of Mr. Bush while my husband's life is still sworn to follow the commands of the man everyone here wants me to bad mouth as "proof" that I adequately agree with you. "Loose lips sink ships."

    You are civilian. Chat away about your opionions of Mr. Bush. But please don't make aspersions against my character just because I won't join you.
    To reset what you wrote that I am responding to:

    I simply will not ever understand the huge objection to this. I think civilians are cry-babies who do not adequately appreciate what they have which military personnel suffer to protect with their lives. I don't think I can even discuss this with civilians. American civilians so arrogantly think their safety is some god-given right. I have foreign friends. The security that American civilians so take for granted doesn't exist elsewhere -- and not because of "American Imperialism". The security partly grows out of the enormous wealth we have -- which partly grows out of the fact that no significant war has occured within our borders since the civil war. Countries that get invaded and fight wars on their own soil -- gee, that negatively impacts business and agriculture.
    Civilians who see that their country's leaders are misusing the military are not "cry-babies" and your labeling them as such is not helpful. As of today, most people in this country are not in favor of our troops being in Iraq and want them brought home ASAP. It's not because our soldiers are dying over there; it's because they are dying for an unjust cause.

    Michele, I'm not casting a single aspersion against you, your husband, your family nor anyone else that has ever served in the military. That includes my father (WWII vet), my grandfather (WWI), several uncles (WWII and Korea), even a great, great, great...grandfather (Civil War - Union Army).

    I do understand the military code of honor and the need to follow orders, regardless of whether or not a soldier may personally believe in the justness of those orders.

    My point here is not an anti-military one. Quite the contrary. What I'm against is a government that blatantly takes advantage of the honor instilled in the military over decades of service and sacrifice for the worthy cause of defending our nation. Bush & Co. have perverted that, in my opinion, for their own selfish causes. That perversion, if left unchecked, will ultimately ruin our ability to maintain a strong military and our freedom. My questioning of Bush is my right as a citizen. A right that many have died to defend, and ironically, a right that they give up in the process of defending it. But people who question the government's motives are not cry-babies, and you need to understand that to the same level you wish people to understand the military mindset and code of honor. Maybe this hits too close to home for you to understand my feelings and opinions on the subject, and I apologize if my postings appear to be personal attacks. They most certainly are not. Again, my beef is ultimately with the President, not you.
    "There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.

  15. #40

    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Solano County, California
    Posts
    6,468
    Quote Originally posted by nuovorecord
    To reset what you wrote that I am responding to:



    Civilians who see that their country's leaders are misusing the military are not "cry-babies" and your labeling them as such is not helpful. As of today, most people in this country are not in favor of our troops being in Iraq and want them brought home ASAP. It's not because our soldiers are dying over there; it's because they are dying for an unjust cause.

    Michele, I'm not casting a single aspersion against you, your husband, your family nor anyone else that has ever served in the military. That includes my father (WWII vet), my grandfather (WWI), several uncles (WWII and Korea), even a great, great, great...grandfather (Civil War - Union Army).

    I do understand the military code of honor and the need to follow orders, regardless of whether or not a soldier may personally believe in the justness of those orders.

    My point here is not an anti-military one. Quite the contrary. What I'm against is a government that blatantly takes advantage of the honor instilled in the military over decades of service and sacrifice for the worthy cause of defending our nation. Bush & Co. have perverted that, in my opinion, for their own selfish causes. That perversion, if left unchecked, will ultimately ruin our ability to maintain a strong military and our freedom. My questioning of Bush is my right as a citizen. A right that many have died to defend, and ironically, a right that they give up in the process of defending it. I'm not saying you should believe anything differently and I have never suggested you should bad mouth the president or discuss the war. But people who question the government's motives are not cry-babies, and you need to understand that to the same level you wish people to understand the military mindset and code of honor. Maybe this hits too close to home for you to understand my feelings and opinions on the subject, and I apologize if my postings appear to be personal attacks. They most certainly are not. Again, my beef is ultimately with the President, not you.
    Very well-written.

  16. #41
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by nuovorecord
    My questioning of Bush is my right as a citizen.
    I did not say that. I would appreciate it if you would accept that it wasn't my intent at all.


    A right that many have died to defend, and ironically, a right that they give up in the process of defending it. I'm not saying you should believe anything differently and I have never suggested you should bad mouth the president or discuss the war. But people who question the government's motives are not cry-babies, and you need to understand that to the same level you wish people to understand the military mindset and code of honor. Maybe this hits too close to home for you to understand my feelings and opinions on the subject, and I apologize if my postings appear to be personal attacks. They most certainly are not. Again, my beef is ultimately with the President, not you.
    Thank you. My issue is also not with you but with a pattern of behavior in this forum which makes my life difficult: the fact that if I correct a specific fact about the military itself, people assume I am "defending President Bush" and attempt to drag me into a POLITICAL discussion I want no part of. I have frequently said I don't like politics and don't care to debate it. Out of deference to the off-topic nature of my comments, I removed my five paragraph reply about military compensation last night. I hear erroneous comments about the military "pay" constantly. It is usually a case of comparing apples to oranges. Yet, if I comment that the military has good benefits, suddenly I am some war mongering, pro-Bush psycho who is attacking someone's right to criticize Bush. And it doesn't matter what I say after that.

  17. #42
    Cyburbian nuovorecord's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    I did not say that. I would appreciate it if you would accept that it wasn't my intent at all.


    Thank you. My issue is also not with you but with a pattern of behavior in this forum which makes my life difficult: the fact that if I correct a specific fact about the military itself, people assume I am "defending President Bush" and attempt to drag me into a POLITICAL discussion I want no part of. I have frequently said I don't like politics and don't care to debate it. Out of deference to the off-topic nature of my comments, I removed my five paragraph reply about military compensation last night. I hear erroneous comments about the military "pay" constantly. It is usually a case of comparing apples to oranges. Yet, if I comment that the military has good benefits, suddenly I am some war mongering, pro-Bush psycho who is attacking someone's right to criticize Bush. And it doesn't matter what I say after that.
    I understand. Peace. [hug]
    "There's nothing wrong with America that can't be fixed by what's right with America." - Bill Clinton.

  18. #43
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by nuovorecord
    Civilians who see that their country's leaders are misusing the military are not "cry-babies" and your labeling them as such is not helpful.
    I did not say that. I would appreciate it if you would accept that it wasn't my intent at all.

    A right that many have died to defend, and ironically, a right that they give up in the process of defending it. But people who question the government's motives are not cry-babies, and you need to understand that to the same level you wish people to understand the military mindset and code of honor. Maybe this hits too close to home for you to understand my feelings and opinions on the subject, and I apologize if my postings appear to be personal attacks. They most certainly are not. Again, my beef is ultimately with the President, not you.
    Thank you.
    My issue is also not with you but with a pattern of behavior in this forum which makes my life difficult: the fact that if I correct a specific fact about the military itself, people assume I am "defending President Bush" and attempt to drag me into a POLITICAL discussion I want no part of. I have frequently said I don't like politics and don't care to debate it. Out of deference to the off-topic nature of my comments, I removed my five paragraph reply about military compensation last night. I hear erroneous comments about the military "pay" constantly. It is usually a case of comparing apples to oranges. Yet, if I comment that the military has good benefits, suddenly I am some war mongering, pro-Bush psycho who is attacking someone's right to criticize Bush. And it doesn't matter what I say after that.

    (EDIT: Oops, I did it again. With minor changes, this is the same post Nuovorecord replied to BEFORE this post. Long explanation. Sigh. )

  19. #44
    Cyburbian Richmond Jake's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Working in a Vulnerable Location
    Posts
    17,429
    Y'all need some chill-pills.
    Annoyingly insensitive

  20. #45
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by RichmondJake
    Y'all need some chill-pills.
    Do you have any of those left? Are you offering to share?

  21. #46

    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Solano County, California
    Posts
    6,468
    Quote Originally posted by RichmondJake
    Y'all need some chill-pills.
    Careful Under the new legislation proposed by Wisconsin's Congressman Senseless, we will be required to report you to the DEA and FBI for "pushing"m them "Chill Pills."

    And-do the makers of the Chill Pills support Al Qaeda?

  22. #47
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by BKM
    Careful Under the new legislation proposed by Wisconsin's Congressman Senseless, we will be required to report you to the DEA and FBI for "pushing"m them "Chill Pills."

    And-do the makers of the Chill Pills support Al Qaeda?
    Could you wait until he has hooked me up before you report him? And then look the other way about me?


    Thank you.

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 10
    Last post: 21 Jun 2011, 9:05 AM
  2. Vegemite Banned in US???
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 6
    Last post: 20 May 2009, 8:39 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last post: 12 Aug 2006, 12:02 AM
  4. Have you ever been BANNED?
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 50
    Last post: 25 Sep 2003, 7:49 PM