That's a no-no in the United States. You simply don't confront the family of any young man or women who has laid down their life for their country, whether you agree with a conflict or not. It's political idiocy, and it's simply disrespectful.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/01/us/po ... .html?_r=0

Is Mr. Trump so thin-skinned that he has to pick a fight with a military family? Honestly, do you want someone who takes offense so easily to be running the strongest military in the world? God knows, Hillary Clinton is no saint, but the world really should be frightened of having this man having such power.

If elected trump will be the worst President ever. The guy acts like an absolute douche. He's not doing it for the country but rather himself. He has no interest in helping anyone.

Honestly, I would not be surprised one bit if he was assassinated within the first 100 days of taking office. Trump isn't even President yet and look at how he has divided the nation

I think it is just shameful what he said! Especially when he said that the mother was quiet because maybe she wasn't allowed to talk. The guy should drop out of the race on that comment alone!

The comments of Trump as to Mr. and Mrs Kahn are insulting that if said by any other person in politics would chase them out of office. To me his hateful and fear-mongering comments for those of the Islamic faith shows his ignorance, his egomania, his insensitivity, his (low) values. I also find is a terrible distraction from other critical issues that need to be discussed this election season.

I contrast Trump's statement to what was obviously a partisan political response to one of his campaign promises - to the response of President George W Bush.

When a reporter pinned him down about the protests and actions of Cindy Sheehan.

President Bush said - I'm paraphrasing from memory - She is a mother who suffered the greatest loss possible - the death of her child. That child was a hero who gave his life for his country. That she chooses to say he died for nothing is her choice. All I can say is that I am so very sorry that her child died, as I am so very sorry for the other deaths of our service men and women, and those injured who still suffer. President Bush never called he a nut case, never called her protest indecent or illegal.
---------
When a father attacked two Marines delivering him the news that his son had died in combat, and poured gasoline over their van and set it on fire - the Marine Corps refused to prosecute, and continued to offer assistance to the family.
----------
During my final few years in the US Navy I had the 'privilege' of notifying two families of a death. Part of the training we receive is to be prepared - so families/ family members will react to the horrible news with attempts of violence. Defuse the situation, use local law enforcement, but always, ALWAYS, treat the family/ family member as you would want some to treat your family.
----------
AGAIN - ALWAYS TREAT FAMILIES OF DECEASED MILITARY PERSONNEL THE SAME WAY YOU WOULD WANT YOUR FAMILY TREATED IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES.

This family has a right to express their opinion of Donald Trump. Yes, it was a political stunt. That doesn't make the Captain's and the family's sacrifice any less real or less painful.

One would hope that a President Trump would show at least as much respect of our fallen military as President's Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Carter do every day.

This is incredibly sad. My heart goes out to this Gold Star family. Most American's are like Trump, they just don't get the sacrifice our young men and women have made for our country even if they returned home safely. However, to go after a family who has made the ultimate sacrifice. NO WORDS. I HAVE NO WORDS. I think i'm going to have to de-friend people on facebook until after this election, because. I just can't understand WHY people are supporting him.

This man represents the party who trumpets constantly about defense and their love of the military and how they will put boots on the ground and go after our enemies and destroy them. Is there anymore that needs to be said? Is there a disconnect with reality? What is wrong with this man? Nobody, nothing is sacred when he starts attacking.

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

I just can't understand WHY people are supporting him.

I read somewhere a response to this very question, so I'll try to paraphrase. It is human nature that when confronted with fear, a person will limit their scope and reduce their critical thinking capacity, just to escape that fear... in other words fight or flight response. The reason why Trump has the support he has is because a lot of Americans, whether consciously or subconsciously, are choosing flight. His proposals are appealing to people because they are so simple and limited in scope. You're afraid of Muslims? No problem, we'll ban them. You''re afraid of Mexicans? No problem, we'll build a wall and keep them out. You're afraid of separation of church and state? No problem, we'll bring back Christmas. It goes on, and on.

Hillis wrote:

That's a no-no in the United States. You simply don't confront the family of any young man or women who has laid down their life for their country, whether you agree with a conflict or not. It's political idiocy, and it's simply disrespectful.
.

One would say that it's a no no but I don't think this is going to hurt him that much. Just look at the things that he has said so far about the military and it has not seemed to have affected him negatively. Which kinda tells you all that reverence Republicans supposedly have for the military and veterans is just a bunch of hot air.

LMP737 wrote:

One would say that it's a no no but I don't think this is going to hurt him that much. Just look at the things that he has said so far about the military and it has not seemed to have affected him negatively. Which kinda tells you all that reverence Republicans supposedly have for the military and veterans is just a bunch of hot air.

Makes you wonder what is left of what Republicans stand for, now that the christian right has sucked up to moral pillar Trump

MaverickM11 wrote:

Makes you wonder what is left of what Republicans stand for, now that the christian right has sucked up to moral pillar Trump

Who knows how many of the future Trump voters actually think that Muslims should´t be part of the US forces, would like them to be stuck in internment camps (because war on terror) or are simply very happy about everyone of "them" that is dead.

best regards
Thomas

Many Muslim Americans have served valiantly in our military, and made the ultimate sacrifice. Captain Khan was one such brave example,

Brave? What's so brave about dying in an useless and destructive war that does nothing good to anybody else but military businesses and corrupt politicians like Hillary Clinton? I would rather call that dumb waste of life. Since Korean war the US hasn't fought a single war for a justified cause, and no heroes have been made in those conflicts.

pvjin wrote:

Many Muslim Americans have served valiantly in our military, and made the ultimate sacrifice. Captain Khan was one such brave example,

Brave? What's so brave about dying in an useless and destructive war that does nothing good to anybody else but military businesses and corrupt politicians like Hillary Clinton? I would rather call that dumb waste of life.

you still have to be brave to face gunfire.

Gruß
Thomas

pvjin wrote:

and corrupt politicians like Hillary Clinton?

We are all well used to your far-right bigoted tendencies by now (what do we expect from a man who idolizes Putin...), but this is uncalled for. Unless you ave served on a war front, you don't get to define what bravery is for a soldier.

And if you think Hillary is the one who profits from the US waging war abroad, then you (unsurprisingly) have a very tenuous grasp on the inner works of American politics and its lobbies...

Then again, what do we expect. Whatever Trump says is gospel, right?

you still have to be brave to face gunfire.

Gruß
Thomas

Brave or dumb. You have to be either of those to do many things that endanger your life. IMO what defines whether it's dumb or brave is whether you are doing it for some good cause, and I fail to see a good cause in wars like Iraq where soldiers certainly weren't fighting for their country's safety, freedom or any BS like that. Perhaps if the US had instead invaded Saudi-Arabia, the main country responsible for 9/11, I would have a different opinion of the 2003 invasion.

We are all well used to your far-right bigoted tendencies by now (what do we expect from a man who idolizes Putin...), but this is uncalled for. Unless you ave served on a war front, you don't get to define what bravery is for a soldier.

Bravery for an unjustified purpose is not worth much to me.

And if you think Hillary is the one who profits from the US waging war abroad, then you (unsurprisingly) have a very tenuous grasp on the inner works of American politics and its lobbies...

She supported the Iraqi invasion and continues to pursue more militaristic and aggressive foreign policy, so I wouldn't be surprised if she actually received some money from US military businesses. Trump on the other hand is a businessman who doesn't want unnecessary wars. A vote for Hillary is a vote for continuation of US imperialism and warmongering.

pvjin wrote:

you still have to be brave to face gunfire.

Gruß
Thomas

Brave or dumb. You have to be either of those to do many things that endanger your life. IMO what defines whether it's dumb or brave is whether you are doing it for some good cause, and I fail to see a good cause in wars like Iraq where soldiers certainly weren't fighting for their country's safety, freedom or any BS like that. Perhaps if the US had instead invaded Saudi-Arabia, the main country responsible for 9/11, I would have a different opinion of the 2003 invasion.

We are all well used to your far-right bigoted tendencies by now (what do we expect from a man who idolizes Putin...), but this is uncalled for. Unless you ave served on a war front, you don't get to define what bravery is for a soldier.

Bravery for an unjustified purpose is not worth much to me.

And if you think Hillary is the one who profits from the US waging war abroad, then you (unsurprisingly) have a very tenuous grasp on the inner works of American politics and its lobbies...

She supported the Iraqi invasion and continues to pursue more militaristic and aggressive foreign policy, so I wouldn't be surprised if she actually received some money from US military businesses. Trump on the other hand is a businessman who doesn't want unnecessary wars. A vote for Hillary is a vote for continuation of US imperialism and warmongering.

In other words: black is white, up is down, wet is dry. This is what it is like to live in opposite land.

pvjin wrote:

Brave or dumb. You have to be either of those to do many things that endanger your life. IMO what defines whether it's dumb or brave is whether you are doing it for some good cause, and I fail to see a good cause in wars like Iraq where soldiers certainly weren't fighting for their country's safety, freedom or any BS like that.

you have any evidence suggesting that he specifically signed up to fight in Iraq? Otherwise your point is pretty moot.

Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die:

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

you still have to be brave to face gunfire.

Gruß
Thomas

Exactly and Trump didn't have the balls to. He chickened out of going to Vietnam. I can't imagine him letting his kids serve in the military.

scbriml wrote:

Hillis wrote:

That's a no-no in the United States.

The man is a clown with zero class.

He is indeed. Remarkably insensitive and I notice his supporters seem to be hiding away after these comments.

President Bush Jnr may have been derided by many, and even me, but there was a decent man there. He would never have responded in this way.

you have any evidence suggesting that he specifically signed up to fight in Iraq? Otherwise your point is pretty moot.

Based on US military's track record since Korean war he could have expected something like that to happen when he joined the military, which isn't compulsory in the US.

Exactly and Trump didn't have the balls to. He chickened out of going to Vietnam. I can't imagine him letting his kids serve in the military.

That was only smart as the entire Vietnam war was only one giant war crime and every American who died there died for nothing. I'm glad good guys eventually won there.

I watched the Khan speech at the DNC, and when it was over I turned to my spouse and said: "That's going to leave a mark". Had Trump handled it correctly it would have been a 24 hour story. Instead, he attacked a dead soldier's family??? Not only did Trump blow this into now a 4 day story, but MILLIONS of voters have now seen this horror show. And MILLIONS of active, retired, and KIA military families. I'm in the ad and PR business (not political), and if we had a CEO client doing this, we'd fire that client.

PacificBeach88 wrote:

I watched the Khan speech at the DNC, and when it was over I turned to my spouse and said: "That's going to leave a mark". Had Trump handled it correctly it would have been a 24 hour story. Instead, he attacked a dead soldier's family??? Not only did Trump blow this into now a 4 day story, but MILLIONS of voters have now seen this horror show. And MILLIONS of active, retired, and KIA military families. I'm in the ad and PR business (not political), and if we had a CEO client doing this, we'd fire that client.

Same thing with the hack of the DNC. Could have been plenty of ammunition against HRC and the DNC; people really doubted the DNC's Russian claims. And then Trump *made* it about Russia with that dumbass press conference in Doral; now it's a month long story. He doesn't have the brain power to understand cause and effect.

MaverickM11 wrote:

Same thing with the hack of the DNC. Could have been plenty of ammunition against HRC and the DNC; people really doubted the DNC's Russian claims. And then Trump *made* it about Russia with that dumbass press conference in Doral; now it's a month long story. He doesn't have the brain power to understand cause and effect.

If Trump wasn't such an ignorant, blowhard, he'd have learned from Bernie Sander's amazing message discipline, even if you don't agree with Bernie. No matter what Bernie was asked, within 10 to 15 seconds of answering, he brought it back to his main talking points.

PacificBeach88 wrote:

I watched the Khan speech at the DNC, and when it was over I turned to my spouse and said: "That's going to leave a mark". Had Trump handled it correctly it would have been a 24 hour story. Instead, he attacked a dead soldier's family??? Not only did Trump blow this into now a 4 day story, but MILLIONS of voters have now seen this horror show. And MILLIONS of active, retired, and KIA military families. I'm in the ad and PR business (not political), and if we had a CEO client doing this, we'd fire that client.

I've had two thoughts since this whole thing went down. First, I still hold out hope he really is punking all of us, and this is yet another attempt to ensure he doesn't win a job he doesn't want. I know that's wishful thinking, but one can hope right? More importantly, I'm reminded of McCarthy. It was McCarthy's decision to take on the Army that was his undoing. I keep wondering if this might not be Trump's "Army-McCarthy moment."

The bigger picture issue is that he's shown, once again, he's absolutely unfit to be President. When asked about the Khans' accusations and his response to them, he asked why he shouldn't defend himself against a personal attack. Any true leader would've sat and thought of the consequences of attacking a dead solider's family, even if that solider's family is Muslim. On the other hand, Trump is so thin-skinned and so prone to childish, school-yard tactics, he just couldn't let it go. For all his bluster, the man is deeply insecure. For god's sake, the Republican party nominated Biff Tannen.

A dead soldiers family shouldn't be treated any different from any other family. The family member made a conscious choice to serve, if they die, tough, it's part of the job description.

I don't get the reverence Americans have for military and first responders, it's comes across as incredibly fake, this issue proves IMO.

Kiwirob wrote:

A dead soldiers family shouldn't be treated any different from any other family. The family member made a conscious choice to serve, if they die, tough, it's part of the job description.

I don't get the reverence Americans have for military and first responders, it's comes across as incredibly fake, this issue proves IMO.

You may not "get it", but it is a very strong sentiment in America. For a family member go to die in a foreign sh**hole for non-Americans, as the world has required of us to keep the world from burning these past 100+ years? Trust me, America has warts, but if Trump wins with a repeat of an America First ideal, Europe will likely burn again.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/27/opinions/ ... hoes-dunn/

Kiwirob wrote:

A dead soldiers family shouldn't be treated any different from any other family. The family member made a conscious choice to serve, if they die, tough, it's part of the job description.

I don't get the reverence Americans have for military and first responders, it's comes across as incredibly fake, this issue proves IMO.

That's beside the point. Look, Trump was given a clear chance to defend himself from accusations of being an Islamophobic bigot, and He could have responded that he respected the sacrifices and never planned to ban all Muslims, accusing the media of twisting his message. And then who knows, the Khan family might even come out as the losers of this story, being accused of politicizing their son's death or the like. Instead, Trump swallowed the bait and made himself seem even more offensive, bigoted, and narcissistic than ever. Ridiculous.

Kiwirob wrote:

A dead soldiers family shouldn't be treated any different from any other family. The family member made a conscious choice to serve, if they die, tough, it's part of the job description.

I don't get the reverence Americans have for military and first responders, it's comes across as incredibly fake, this issue proves IMO.

I'll give you a bit. I think as Americans we get overboard on the hero worship and some folks in the military/first responder community let that go to their heads. Captain Khan did not just simply serve but he made a split second decision to act that ultimately saved the lives of fellow soldiers. I find that admirable and have no problem calling him a hero for what he did.

Mr. and Mrs. Khan's presence and speech at the DNC was a great moment to talk about American exceptionalism and also a wonderful bait for Trump. If Trump was a non-narcissistic non-sociopath person his response would have read something like this. "I want to express my condolences to the Khan family. I read about your son's actions in Iraq and was impressed by his selflessness. I cannot fathom the pain you must feel for the loss of your son." But these words would never come out of his mouth because he is a narcissistic. So when even something is about a mother and father's grief for the loss of their son in the service of his country, it is still about him. It is such a perfect insight into how Trump thinks, and frankly it is really fucking scary.

You may not "get it", but it is a very strong sentiment in America. For a family member go to die in a foreign sh**hole for non-Americans, as the world has required of us to keep the world from burning these past 100+ years? Trust me, America has warts, but if Trump wins with a repeat of an America First ideal, Europe will likely burn again.

I would say you've done pretty damn bad job "keeping the world from burning", considering the fact that US invasion of Iraq pretty much directly caused the rise of ISIS, the refugee crisis and wave of terror in Europe. Support for rebels in Libya and Syria has made things only worse. When will the US learn that exporting democracy to countries that clearly aren't ready for it is a bad bad idea? Or maybe your leaders understand that already, but keep lighting the fire of war just so that American military businesses can make more money.

Europe will burn no matter what as long as western governments continue their crusade against secular dictators in ME and Africa, especially when the EU is weak and lets all the resulting asylum seekers in.

desertjets wrote:

Mr. and Mrs. Khan's presence and speech at the DNC was a great moment to talk about American exceptionalism and also a wonderful bait for Trump. If Trump was a non-narcissistic non-sociopath person his response would have read something like this. "I want to express my condolences to the Khan family. I read about your son's actions in Iraq and was impressed by his selflessness. I cannot fathom the pain you must feel for the loss of your son." But these words would never come out of his mouth because he is a narcissistic. So when even something is about a mother and father's grief for the loss of their son in the service of his country, it is still about him. It is such a perfect insight into how Trump thinks, and frankly it is really fucking scary.

Congrats! A statement like that would have made this a 24 hr. story, not a 4, likely 5+ day story.

desertjets wrote:

If Trump was a non-narcissistic non-sociopath person his response would have read something like this. "I want to express my condolences to the Khan family. I read about your son's actions in Iraq and was impressed by his selflessness. I cannot fathom the pain you must feel for the loss of your son." But these words would never come out of his mouth because he is a narcissistic. So when even something is about a mother and father's grief for the loss of their son in the service of his country, it is still about him. It is such a perfect insight into how Trump thinks, and frankly it is really fucking scary.

Yup, exactly what any PR strategist would have suggested to trump. However he probably decides to ignore all his advisers.

pvjin wrote:

Many Muslim Americans have served valiantly in our military, and made the ultimate sacrifice. Captain Khan was one such brave example,

Brave? What's so brave about dying in an useless and destructive war that does nothing good to anybody else but military businesses and corrupt politicians like Hillary Clinton? I would rather call that dumb waste of life. Since Korean war the US hasn't fought a single war for a justified cause, and no heroes have been made in those conflicts.

Nice of you to question a dead soldier's bravery. It must feel nice to sit in your chair and do that. Captain Khan more than likely disagreed with the Iraq war (as I'm sure his parents did), but he made a commitment to the US military regardless of his personal views on any particular conflict. And when that conflict arose, he kept his commitment. That takes bravery. I'll be the first to admit I don't have the bravery to serve. That decision takes a certain level of courage, and the story behind Captain Khan's death proves his bravery.

Nice of you to question a dead soldier's bravery. It must feel nice to sit in your chair and do that. Captain Khan more than likely disagreed with the Iraq war (as I'm sure his parents did), but he made a commitment to the US military regardless of his personal views on any particular conflict. And when that conflict arose, he kept his commitment. That takes bravery. I'll be the first to admit I don't have the bravery to serve. That decision takes a certain level of courage, and the story behind Captain Khan's death proves his bravery.

I think the ultimate form of bravery is doing what you think is right, not what the society, government or any other institution expects you to do.

pvjin wrote:

Nice of you to question a dead soldier's bravery. It must feel nice to sit in your chair and do that. Captain Khan more than likely disagreed with the Iraq war (as I'm sure his parents did), but he made a commitment to the US military regardless of his personal views on any particular conflict. And when that conflict arose, he kept his commitment. That takes bravery. I'll be the first to admit I don't have the bravery to serve. That decision takes a certain level of courage, and the story behind Captain Khan's death proves his bravery.

I think the ultimate form of bravery is doing what you think is right, not what the society, government or any other institution expects you to do.

Like I said, easy for you to say that comfortably seated in your chair.

Phoenix, AZ-- John McCain issued the following statement today regarding Donald Trump's comments about Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the parents of U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan, who was killed in Iraq in 2004:

"The Republican Party I know and love is the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan.



"I wear a bracelet bearing the name of a fallen hero, Matthew Stanley, which his mother, Lynn, gave me in 2007, at a town hall meeting in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire. His memory and the memory of our great leaders deserve better from me.

"In recent days, Donald Trump disparaged a fallen soldier's parents. He has suggested that the likes of their son should not be allowed in the United States — to say nothing of entering its service. I cannot emphasize enough how deeply I disagree with Mr. Trump's statement. I hope Americans understand that the remarks do not represent the views of our Republican Party, its officers, or candidates.







"Make no mistake: I do not valorize our military out of some unfamiliar instinct. I grew up in a military family, and have my own record of service, and have stayed closely engaged with our armed forces throughout my public career. In the American system, the military has value only inasmuch as it protects and defends the liberties of the people.

"My father was a career naval officer, as was his father. For hundreds of years, every generation of McCains has served the United States in uniform.

"My sons serve today, and I'm proud of them. My youngest served in the war that claimed Captain Khan's life as well as in Afghanistan. I want them to be proud of me. I want to do the right thing by them and their comrades.


Humayun Khan did exactly that — and he did it for all the right reasons. This accomplished young man was not driven to service as a United States Army officer because he was compelled to by any material need. He was inspired as a young man by his reading of Thomas Jefferson — and he wanted to give back to the country that had taken him and his parents in as immigrants when he was only two years old.

"Captain Khan's death in Iraq, on June 8th, 2004, was a shining example of the valor and bravery inculcated into our military. When a suicide bomber accelerated his vehicle toward a facility with hundreds of American soldiers, Captain Khan ordered his subordinates away from the danger.

"Then he ran toward it.

"The suicide bomber, striking prematurely, claimed the life of Captain Khan — and Captain Khan, through his selfless action and sacrifice, saved the lives of hundreds of his brothers and sisters.

"Scripture tells us that 'Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.'

"Captain Humayun Khan of the United States Army showed in his final moments that he was filled and motivated by this love. His name will live forever in American memory, as an example of true American greatness.

"In the end, I am morally bound to speak only to the things that command my allegiance, and to which I have dedicated my life's work: the Republican Party, and more importantly, the United States of America. I will not refrain from doing my utmost by those lights simply because it may benefit others with whom I disagree.


I claim no moral superiority over Donald Trump. I have a long and well-known public and private record for which I will have to answer at the Final Judgment, and I repose my hope in the promise of mercy and the moderation of age. I challenge the nominee to set the example for what our country can and should represent.

"Arizona is watching. It is time for Donald Trump to set the example for our country and the future of the Republican Party. While our Party has bestowed upon him the nomination, it is not accompanied by unfettered license to defame those who are the best among us.

"Lastly, I'd like to say to Mr. and Mrs. Khan: thank you for immigrating to America. We're a better country because of you. And you are certainly right; your son was the best of America, and the memory of his sacrifice will make us a better nation -- and he will never be forgotten."

The words of a true American Hero, one of mine. He maybe a Republican, but he is an American first and foremost. The way it should be, and his distain for Trump is something I agree with more and more. This man paid the price and he realizes that others paid a bigger price. How can this big mouth even utter any kind of judgement about Hero's of the US. He does not come close and he does not even realize it. A sad spectacle.

pvjin wrote:

I think the ultimate form of bravery is doing what you think is right, not what the society, government or any other institution expects you to do.

With all due respect, I don't think you know jack about bravery. Joining the military and possibly dying for your country requires bravery, whether or not you view the war as right or wrong. Vietnam and Iraq may have been misguided conflicts, but that does not diminish from the bravery and gallantry of individual soldiers. Lets just say that with your sympathies for Vladimir Putin, you fit right in with the rest of the Trump crowd.

The more I think about it I am starting to believe the conspiracy theories floating around about Trump being a Democratic operative paving the way for a Hillary victory. No person with this level of education can be this consistently stupid and foolish. There has to something else going on here....

alberchico wrote:

The more I think about it I am starting to believe the conspiracy theories floating around about Trump being a Democratic operative paving the way for a Hillary victory. No person with this level of education can be this consistently stupid and foolish. There has to something else going on here....

Probably just a bet with one of his buddies to see how outlandish stupid he can be, and still get nominated/elected. Much like Cameron and Johnson had just taken their immature boyhood competition all the way to Brexit.

best regards
Thomas

alberchico wrote:

No person with this level of education can be this consistently stupid and foolish. There has to something else going on here....

He is neither stupid nor foolish, he is narcissistic to the extreme.

There is no Trump but Trump.

PacificBeach88 wrote:

You may not "get it", but it is a very strong sentiment in America. For a family member go to die in a foreign sh**hole for non-Americans, as the world has required of us to keep the world from burning these past 100+ years? Trust me, America has warts, but if Trump wins with a repeat of an America First ideal, Europe will likely burn again.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/27/opinions/ ... hoes-dunn/

The serving person made a conscious choice to join the military knowing full well the possible outcome of that choice, so there's no need to treat there family with an special reverence should they pay the ultimate cost.

The world hasn't required the US to keep the world from burning for the past 100 years, the only valid conflicts the US had a right to get involved in are WW2, you were attacked it was impossible not to sit this one out, Korea as it was a UN mission, and Gulf War 1, all the rest were wars fought for politicial idology or some other daft excuse to further America's ambitions.

I doubt Trump will win, even if he does Europe won't burn, there is no threat to Europe, muslim extermism whilst untastefull isn't going to cause WW3, and Russian doesn't have the military strength to overrun Europe, so what will cause Europe to burn?

pvjin wrote:

you still have to be brave to face gunfire.

Gruß
Thomas

Brave or dumb. You have to be either of those to do many things that endanger your life. IMO what defines whether it's dumb or brave is whether you are doing it for some good cause, and I fail to see a good cause in wars like Iraq where soldiers certainly weren't fighting for their country's safety, freedom or any BS like that. Perhaps if the US had instead invaded Saudi-Arabia, the main country responsible for 9/11, I would have a different opinion of the 2003 invasion.

We are all well used to your far-right bigoted tendencies by now (what do we expect from a man who idolizes Putin...), but this is uncalled for. Unless you ave served on a war front, you don't get to define what bravery is for a soldier.

Bravery for an unjustified purpose is not worth much to me.

And if you think Hillary is the one who profits from the US waging war abroad, then you (unsurprisingly) have a very tenuous grasp on the inner works of American politics and its lobbies...

She supported the Iraqi invasion and continues to pursue more militaristic and aggressive foreign policy, so I wouldn't be surprised if she actually received some money from US military businesses. Trump on the other hand is a businessman who doesn't want unnecessary wars. A vote for Hillary is a vote for continuation of US imperialism and warmongering.

When you're in the military, you act under orders. Being sent to war is an order, not volunteering, once you're already in your branch you are in. In the US, if you enlist in the military, you take an oath to defend the Constitution. Part of that oath is to obey orders from superiors. So, if Captain Khan disobeyed orders, went AWOL and/or deserted his post, he could have faced execution. By joining the Army, he had some idea what he was getting into, but no one goes in with the hopes of being deployed to the front lines, much less dying in combat. All good soldiers obey orders within moral reason, be it US, British, Russian, Jordanian, etc... and Khan was no exception. He clearly went above and beyond the call of duty for his country, like many others before him. I'm not a soldier, but I have soldiers in my family and I hold all servicemen and women in high regard. Pvjin, you are definitely not a soldier and you are not in a place to be discounting the actions of Khan. You are a disgrace.

pvjin wrote:

Nice of you to question a dead soldier's bravery. It must feel nice to sit in your chair and do that. Captain Khan more than likely disagreed with the Iraq war (as I'm sure his parents did), but he made a commitment to the US military regardless of his personal views on any particular conflict. And when that conflict arose, he kept his commitment. That takes bravery. I'll be the first to admit I don't have the bravery to serve. That decision takes a certain level of courage, and the story behind Captain Khan's death proves his bravery.

I think the ultimate form of bravery is doing what you think is right, not what the society, government or any other institution expects you to do.

Double edged sword. Lot's of good people have said and done that, as well as ones on the total opposite end of the spectrum.

For example, on the good side, you have Martin Luther King Jr. He had the balls to stand up to extreme adversity that had become so widespread that it was well entrenched into all facets of US politics. His bravery paved the way for the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

On the bad side, you have Vlad Lenin, and we all know how that turned out.

QF29 wrote:

Trump isn't even President yet and look at how he has divided the nation

What concerns me more is the fact that all over the world things are polarising, and Trump is just illustrating a broader problem. People are becoming less interested in consensus in general and the powerful are capitalising on that. This is my real worry. The Austrian election, Brexit vote, and the last several US elections have all had this cliffhanger element.

The upshot is that once the election is over there's half the people left feeling disenfranchised - and this is creating a prevailing mood in society that's just not healthy.

Partisanship is the problem, people get entrenched and less moderate, less open to compromise, less open to working as a team, less able to see or acknowledge any virtues in their "opponent". We worry about extremism, but don't seem to see it in our own political systems. It's almost as though society is bored with moderate behaviour and wants to have some fun with itself, and we all end up living in some awful social experiment. We end up wanting to tear things down rather than just change the bits that don't work, and with the deadlock following the last midterms in the USA we can even bring the work, the duty, of governance to a standstill because somehow our principles override the best interests of the population. Politics should never be more important than the people it governs! If politics truly served the people it would be far more moderate than it is. I've visited the USA, I've lived there for a short time; like everywhere, 98% of the people manage to be decent human beings 98% of the time, how come politics doesn't reflect that?

So we come to this, where the remnants of a family put their pain on public view to a storm of criticism about "how the Dems could do this cynical..." etc. Well, the parents agreed to it, they could have refused but thought they wanted to make a point and, in a sense, give their son's death a purpose after the fact. It's a hot-button issue and I would normally be amazed if someone would come down against it, especially in the USA where there is uncommon reverence for veterans (in Europe we had a vast generation of conscripted veterans that just expected to get on with normal life, we had lots of war, but war was not our calling, so we feel somewhat differently while still respecting their work). And yet Trump responded, and flushed out some unhealthy opinions in his fan-base in the process.

Regardless of opinion about the Dems motives it's the reaction from Trump. It's immoderate, not remotely measured, and certainly not mindful of what sacrifice really is. He trots out a list of sacrifices that are not even sacrifices, yet he's vying for a position where the best incumbents have indeed made their term as POTUS a sacrifice to the welfare of the USA. He just doesn't seem to have a basic grasp of what his work should involve, and I very much doubt whether he has the remotest realistic grasp of what he's volunteering for, which is serving others. I just don't see him as even slightly right for the job.

Fortunately I'm English and spared the problem. I don't have to hold my nose and vote for Clinton, which is sadly the only sensible option now to Sanders-nistas (!) if they want to make any real influence felt at the election. It's a pain to buy into the two-party system but for now we're stuck with it. It's a shame that the choice comes down to two candidates where you're forced to choose the one with the least serious faults and can see virtues in neither.

Mind you, in any system where candidates have to be underhand and nasty top get to the top, you end up having to choose between underhand and nasty people and wonder why things seem so bad! One major virtue of the EU apparatus is that all its politicians are so boring!

TL;DR - ewww, who Trumped?
For non-English readers: Oxford English Dictionary: "Trumped, definition b. To give forth a trumpet-like sound; spec. to break wind audibly (slang or vulgar)."

Donald, I think we're going to have to let you go...

Joining the military and possibly dying for your country requires bravery, whether or not you view the war as right or wrong.

Bravery or sheep mentality. No idea which one it was in this particular case, but fighting for a cause you don't believe in requires some sheep mentality for sure.

All good soldiers obey orders within moral reason, be it US, British, Russian, Jordanian, etc...

Yes, a good soldier is a sheep that obeys orders without questioning them. Personally I'm not sheepish enough to do that, I would only fight for a cause I believe in, not because somebody commands me to. Exactly the reason why I didn't go to army.

I'm not a soldier, but I have soldiers in my family and I hold all servicemen and women in high regard.

Including those that have committed war crimes? And what about firemen and policemen, do you hold them in equally high regard? After all they do much more for ordinary people than soldiers who fight for greedy politicians.

On the bad side, you have Vlad Lenin, and we all know how that turned out.

Well, to be honest Lenin wasn't such a big devil, Stalin was. Let's also remember that the revolution in Russia would have never happened in the first place if the country had been less of a mess, Lenin didn't manage to make it much worse than it was already.

blueflyer wrote:

alberchico wrote:

There is no Trump but Trump.

And Donald is the messenger

pvjin wrote:

Well, to be honest Lenin wasn't such a big devil, Stalin was. Let's also remember that the revolution in Russia would have never happened in the first place if the country had been less of a mess, Lenin didn't manage to make it much worse than it was already.

What exactly did Stalin do wrong? He was a strong leader. If you disobeyed him, you disappeared. Probably not so different from bumping off someone with polonium, right? If that's acceptable, then why is Stalin so evil?

cpd wrote:

pvjin wrote:

Well, to be honest Lenin wasn't such a big devil, Stalin was. Let's also remember that the revolution in Russia would have never happened in the first place if the country had been less of a mess, Lenin didn't manage to make it much worse than it was already.

What exactly did Stalin do wrong? He was a strong leader. If you disobeyed him, you disappeared. Probably not so different from bumping off someone with polonium, right? If that's acceptable, then why is Stalin so evil?

Stalin was paranoid and killed plenty of people who didn't exactly disobey or threaten him, while in modern day Russia you'll be fine as long as you don't criticize the regime too much and harshly.

cpd wrote:

pvjin wrote:

Well, to be honest Lenin wasn't such a big devil, Stalin was. Let's also remember that the revolution in Russia would have never happened in the first place if the country had been less of a mess, Lenin didn't manage to make it much worse than it was already.

What exactly did Stalin do wrong? He was a strong leader. If you disobeyed him, you disappeared. Probably not so different from bumping off someone with polonium, right? If that's acceptable, then why is Stalin so evil?

The difference between Lenin and Stalin really comes down to scope. Lenin was ruthless about opposition to the party, Stalin was ruthless to opposition to him, in the party; he took the pogroms inward and made just about anyone in the country a potential victim. Just give him a pretext. Soviet politics was always especially nasty in that regard, Khrushchev denounced Stalin in his "secret speech" when vying for leadership against Molotov etc, but he himself earned the title of "Butcher of the Ukraine", foisting the blame onto Stalin's influence after the fact.

The Litvinenko affair together with the murder of various journalists and opposition figures indicates that nothing has fundamentally changed either at the top in Russia, or in the mindset of the electorate.

America has to be concerned about some of its own people, those who will doublethink Trump's excesses away as easily as some impressionable Russians may convince themselves that Putin's comical horseback image wasn't photoshopped. The cult of personality is a very dangerous thing; look hard at political rallies, examine the language, see what gets the audience going, try to find historical parallels if necessary or just look objectively at what people are really demanding, and then ask yourself whether you want to be a part of that.

Just today the BBC reported this...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/36952906

...see how quickly appreciation of a person's position can change when she comes to question the integrity of a cult figure. It's nasty. It's the start of a terrible road. Neither choice is great, but I know which one I think is the worst (the one that doesn't heed advisers - crew - which is the only way someone can possibly steer the ship of state (well, assuming it is truly democratic)).