Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Leave The Military Alone!  
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2531 times:

Many do not agree with the war on Iraq, there is much discussion about this and everyone is entitled to have their opinion, but recently I was disappointed and angered by the behaviour of the anti-war lobby in their targetting of our military as they left Australia bound for the Gulf.

People need to remember that these people are at the beck and call of the government. If the Government makes a stupid decision there is nothing our military can do, they must go along with it. They comitted themselves to the country and they go without argument, they do not deserve the hatred, and spite of those who would protest the war, they are simply doing the job they signed up for.

Leave them alone!




ADG


41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2517 times:

Well said, ADG .

User currently offlineKROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2481 times:

I agree, well said ADG. Just the other day, I was discussing the treatment or view of the military from the regular civilians...mostly those who never served, and fail to see that Joe Average Soldier, Marine, Seaman, or Airman is just doing his job, and not actually calling out for war, and no matter what, we should support them, becuase it is them that keep us free, and living the life we have all grown so acustomed too.

User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2470 times:

Does this only apply to the Australian military, ADG?

LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2472 times:

Here, here!!!!!! Very well said ADG!!

If you don't like the pending war on Iraq, protest the government! Not the men and women of the military.


User currently offlineJetService From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4798 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2472 times:

ADG, great to hear that. Agreed 100%!!!!


"Shaddap you!"
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13191 posts, RR: 77
Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2456 times:

While we've only had CND types displaying anti-war banners as ships leave harbour, lack of public support must be a concern;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2687819.stm


User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2424 times:

ADG, I 100% agree with you. Very very well said. I am so glad you made this post.

I for one am one of those who is 100% against the war on Iraq. I do not put one bit of blame on the United States Military. Why? Because the military just takes orders, that's it. They are not the ones who decide whether to go to war or not. It's the politicians in Washington D.C. who decide that.

Again, very well said ADG.  Smile

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2409 times:

For once ADG, I agree 100% with you!

B4e-Forever New Frontiers


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8232 posts, RR: 23
Reply 9, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2402 times:

Amen! If you aren't one of em, don't critisize. God bless the military!


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2402 times:

ADG, you may want to sit down to avoid a coronary, but I agree with you 1000%. Like you-and apparently many others here-I see the distinction between the people that are sent in harms way and those that send them there.

I have said many times in the last week or twot that, as things stand, I am not for an attack on Iraq, because I don't think a case has been made. Yet once that decision is made, I can still make my displeasure known to those who send our men in women in arms, but I will unreservedly support the men and woman in uniform, and will support their mission, even while disagreeing with them being sent.

That was one of the mistakes of Vietnam-too many anti-war protestors took their anger out on those sent to fight a war that wasn't popular. It wasn't their fault, but it was the fault of the leaders who sent them. I hope everyone remembers if there's a "this time around" in the near future.

Good job, ADG.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2386 times:

Wow!

ADG I am impressed. You have made you first steps into a larger world of understanding.


Excuse me while go outside and check the alignment of the planets.


That is the problem with leftist punks like those protesting, they end up blaming those that have no control or say over the situation. It is absolutely infuriating.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 2382 times:

Can't believe I'm agreeing with you, ADG. I think I'll go back to bed - I don't think I feel so good.  Big grin

We must remember that the anti-war protesters fall into three camps:

1) Those people who have actually thought carefully about the issues, and have specific set of reasoned arguments on why a war should not be fought in this particular case.

2) Those who have not thought about it at all, but are simply against war in any way, shape or form. To them ANY solution (including surrender) is better than war.

3) The hangers on. The guys who tag along hoping to get into the pants of some peace-girl. She: (sucking on a joint) "Gee, wouldn't it be swell if we all just loved one another?" He: "You wanna start with me?" Kinda sixties, I know. But it does happen. Anyway, consider these folks as the filler material. They're just out there for a good time and a party.

I can understand those in the first group. I can understand the third group. But it is the second group that really twists my guts.

Charles


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 2373 times:

By the way, I feel that the approximate breakdown of the anti-war folks into the three groups I described above is approx:

1) less than 5%
2) 60-70%
3) 30-40%


User currently offlinePHX-LJU From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 2380 times:

I disagree with you, Cfalk; the first group has to be bigger than 5%.

I, for one, believe that the war against Iraq is inappropriate at this time, but I do not oppose war in general; there have been plenty of justified wars throughout history, including the past decade. I just beleve that there has to be a damn good reason to start an armed conflict (which should always be a final resort), and I don't see that now, even though I have, in fact, thought the issue through very carefully.

In my experience, many other people fall into your Number 1 category, and not just in relation to this conflict.


User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2359 times:

L-188,

With all these people in agreement, it saddens me that you have to inject sarcasm into the discussion.

I agree with charles figures. I too am against the war in Iraq but tend to ask why people don't want a war rather than simply agreeing with them. Generally you get nothing out of them but "it's bad", or "america is evil". No substance to their anti-war stand. It's quite sickening. It doesn't matter what side you take as long as you have clear cut reasons for doing so.

Regardless, there is no reason to take out their disgust at a political decision on those who are simply doing their job.

Leave the Military alone!




ADG


User currently offlineILOVEA340 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 2100 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

I totaly agree. I hate the military but not the average soldier. I hate the military planners and the President who in the end has the say (yes hate is a strong word, but those are my feelings)

User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2350 times:

1) Those people who have actually thought carefully about the issues, and have specific set of reasoned arguments on why a war should not be fought in this particular case.

2) Those who have not thought about it at all, but are simply against war in any way, shape or form. To them ANY solution (including surrender) is better than war.

3) The hangers on. The guys who tag along hoping to get into the pants of some peace-girl. She: (sucking on a joint) "Gee, wouldn't it be swell if we all just loved one another?" He: "You wanna start with me?" Kinda sixties, I know. But it does happen. Anyway, consider these folks as the filler material. They're just out there for a good time and a party.


That's brilliant! And I agree with your figures as well. I have a few friends who go to these anti-war protests. One of them fits into the 5% group, and the others fit into categories 2 and 3 nicely. A few just toe the "war sucks" or "America is evil" line because they're not too bright or they're incapable of forming any sort of independent rational thought. The others just go to bone some chick or hook up a blunt and that's it. Sure, they chant the slogans, but their real motives speak for themselves. Most of the anti-war protesters I know are hardcore drug users (but not the one in the 5% category. She's an administrator at a nursing home here and I have a ton of respect for her). Not to put them all in that category, but it would not surprise me if a lot of them fit the stoner description.

Other than that, I agree with ADG's original post to the "T".


User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8705 posts, RR: 43
Reply 18, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2327 times:

Thanks, ADG! That's a good way to describe at whom criticism has to be aimed. The men in the F-XXs are not the ones to blame for war, those are the ones in Washington and before all the one in Bagdad.

Cfalk, I can't figure what of your groups I fit in. I'm generally against war, but I do consider defence against beligerent leaders justifiable, to say the least. It's just the whole idea of war and armed conflicts that disgusts me. If only everybody knew how to sit down and talk...
As for the possible war in Iraq, my opinion has definitely been formed by arguments. This opinion of mine would change fast if new substantial arguments in favour of war came up.
So I guess I'm standing between groups number one and two.

aloges



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinePacificjourney From New Zealand, joined Jul 2001, 2732 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2325 times:

As much as I hate to be the odd one out ... surely it is not as simple as that. Certainly in a modern democracy service people are instruments of policy more than they are instigators of policy and as such bear less responsiblity for unpopular actions than they are often accused of having.

That said, someone dropped the bomb/pulled the trigger or whatever and must take at least some responsibilty for what they do. The concept of being admonished of responsibilty because you were only following orders was well and truely debunked at Nuremburg and rightly so.

Politicians bear ultimate but not sole responsibilty !



" Help, help ... I'm being oppressed ... "
User currently offlineHamfist From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 614 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2301 times:

As an active military-type, I have found rare occasion to agree with pacificjourney.

Military officers are well versed in their chain of command and the importance of following orders. The military commander (at every level) must ask him/herself if an order received qualifies as a lawful order. Most officers will tell you they ask themselves if an order is illegal, immoral or unethical. Should it fail to qualify against any of these three criteria, there is a basis for not following an order.

That said, any officer with a basic level of common sense knows we don't live in a perfect world. There will be times when an unlawful order will be executed, yet will go unpunished. There will also be times when the decision NOT to follow an unlawful order will cause a commander suffer repercussions. Shouldn't happen, but hey...that's life!

Now, in reference to the theme of this thread, it's safe to say that military commanders cannot determine whether we go to war. On that level, you truly can't blame the military if we do enter conflict with Iraq.



User currently offlinePacificjourney From New Zealand, joined Jul 2001, 2732 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2301 times:

Come on Ham, not the 'shit happens' defense please.

Ultimately individuals are responsible for what they do or don't do. Some arguement can of course be made about how they (military people) find themselves in situations where such decisions are required (sent under orders) but the buck must stop somewhere.



" Help, help ... I'm being oppressed ... "
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2285 times:

Pacificjourney, I think you are definitely the "odd man out" in almost any subject like this. Of course, you'd be the one to go spit on the soldier, returning home to family and home, wouldn't you? The soldiers do know the risk, and yes, following orders, as Neuremberg showed us, is not a defense for one's actions, but again, if soldiers conduct themselve accordingly, and simply do their duty, they don't need to be spit on by the likes of you.

User currently offlineHamfist From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 614 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2291 times:

PacificJourney,

At what point did I attempt to defend anything? I was simply stating the reality of command decisions. If you look at the history of conflict, there are commanders who have made hideously unethical decisions and nothing ever happened to them and there have been commanders who have found themselves in a situation where they declined to be involved in less than honorable intentions and were subsequently replaced with a different person who was more willing to "follow the leader". The latter happened a few times in the Clinton years.

I'm not defending those who make bad decisions and I am well aware the unlimited liability applied to every decision officers make.


User currently offlineTwaneedsnohelp From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2267 times:

While I also am impressed with ADG's reasoned statements, I sense a great deal of hypocrisy on her part.

The same ADG beckoning the world to respect the military because they are just following orders is also the same woman who has used these forums time and time again to rail mercilessly against the Israeli army, never once minding that they "are at the beck and call of the government" and "they do not deserve the hatred".

So while ADG can celebrate her little love fest in this thread, I still have serious reservations about her credibility.

TNNH


25 MD-90 : I still like this poem, although it sends PJ into a horrible rage to read it. The Soldier It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedo
26 ADG : TNNH, ROFL .. .another pathetic attempt to start a flame war? Not today little boy .. not today... ADG
27 Stratofish : Well, I wasn´t there and I have not seen how they protested, but don´t you think it has more of a symbolic character if someone protests when the fl
28 Hamfist : Stratofish, I hope that brain vomit made your head fell a little better! Let's see if I heard you correctly...you don't like anyone who voluntarily ch
29 Stratofish : 1. I knew I would be in for some bashing, but your first sentence is barely worth reading. 2. We simply have a different opinion about what´s an hono
30 Alpha 1 : While I also am impressed with ADG's reasoned statements, I sense a great deal of hypocrisy on her part. I do not, TNNH. ADG and I rarely agree, but I
31 Pacificjourney : Alpha1, no one is spitting on anyone. I have actually worn a uniform myself for 6 years but am able to be objective. Sorry to interupt your little lov
32 Alpha 1 : You often espouse the idea of personal responsibility on here but what, put on a uniform and it no longer applies ? Absolutely not, PJ. If a soldier k
33 ADG : That time is for family. Those young men/women may not come back, this may be the last time their families see them, do you think you'd like to be far
34 MD-90 : I suppose it does. I think anyone who would actually try to burn Old Glory (here's a hint: it doesn't burn very well) is scum, but it's not illegal no
35 Twaneedsnohelp : .. not today... Thats fine. Just another day your sincerity remains highly suspect by myself and many others. ta ta woman, TNNH
36 Post contains images ADG : TNNH, I notice nobody bit at this or your other attempt at flamebait, you're losing it TNNH ... but then, not only do those who agree with me on subje
37 Twaneedsnohelp : So son, I guess not today becomes not anyday Even better hypocrite.
38 Post contains images Jwenting : Well said Bron. You know we don't often agree (and we may not on whether going out there is a good decision or not ) but I fully support you if you sa
39 LH423 : TNNH: I generally don't agree with your view on Israël, but I'm not here to make enemies with anyone so I keep my mouth shut, but I find a distinct d
40 Twaneedsnohelp : LH423: I care not wheather you agree or disagree with my views on Israel. The point is not about Israel. The point is that Ms. ADG here is preaching a
41 ADG : Actually LH423, What TNNH really means is that he doesn't like me because I don't agree with his incessant rantings on israel so therefore whatever I
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Media Leave The Airlines Alone posted Tue Jan 8 2002 03:07:34 by Tguman
What Branch Of The Military Are You? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 23:09:19 by Gkirk
There Are Truly Beautiful Girls In The Military! posted Thu Oct 19 2006 02:30:41 by Alberchico
Do (or Should) Civilians Control The Military? posted Sat Oct 7 2006 00:00:08 by Connies4ever
The Future Of The Military-Industrial Complex posted Tue Jun 20 2006 20:09:31 by Tbar220
Gallas To Leave The Scum! posted Fri May 12 2006 14:04:54 by Matt72033
DL Supports The Military posted Tue Dec 20 2005 20:57:27 by Skibum9
Would You Join The Military If You Could Go Back? posted Sat Nov 12 2005 01:59:48 by Greasespot
Gays In The Military, UK Style posted Sun Aug 28 2005 03:30:07 by WhiteHatter
Who's In The Military? posted Tue Jun 21 2005 17:28:44 by Greyhound