While this is a long holiday weekend and the traditional beginning of summer with lots of family, fun, barbecue and swimming, please take a moment to remember those who have fought and died to ensure our continued freedom.
Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost.
– Robert A. Heinlein
Without the sacrifices we honor on Memorial Day, there would not be any other holidays. I wish all Americans understood this.
Some Still Serve — Hundreds of P.O.W.’s known to still be alive in Vietnam.
DC turned its back on all evidence of them , but now we know.
Short Rolling Thunder video tells story.
Yep, you have to fight your domestic tyrants or you will become enslaved. They’ll send you on “foreign adventures” to fight nebulous bugaboos at your own expense to enrich themselves. You will only be permitted to be armed in their service. We better wake up.
I sent a text to all my close friends this morning, “Remember the fallen.”
Interesting tweet from the US Army about serving the other day and ten thousand plus responses from those devastated by loss. To the Army’s credit they didn’t try to delete it and acknowledged it. It would be nice to see our brave treated better medically and not sent in to harm’s way to liberate more cash for the military industrial complex. Billions for BS schemes and vermin, peeling paint and long lines at the VA.
Rudyard knew something about how a nation treats is soldiers. Below is the final stanza from the peom, “Tommy” (nickname for British soldiers).
“You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires, an’ all:
We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow’s Uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.
For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an` Chuck him out, the brute! ”
But it’s ” Saviour of ‘is country ” when the guns begin to shoot; “
I used to spend a great deal of time reading about battles on foreign lands. European, the Pacific Theater, and elsewhere. Because that is what our “education system” wants us to read about.
The “education system” does not want you to read about a time when the government used aircraft to bomb civilians inside the United States. They don’t want you to read about the Athens Tennessee veterans revolt against a tyrannical government in America. Or when returning American black soldiers in the Deacons for Defense and Justice took up arms against the American government in the states where they lived.
The “education system” does however like to talk about the Bonus Army and what happened to them. Only because it’s an opportunity to smear the military and civilian leadership at that time and its Future Leaders, who were responsible for what happened to the Bonus Army. The government was successful in crushing the bonus Army.
However the Athens Tennessee revolt and the Deacons for Defense and Justice were very successful using their own Arms against the government. The “education system” refuses to acknowledge what was going on in these two cases.
The “education system” will not tell you about the Tennessee Athens revolt or the Deacons for Defense and Justice. But the Bundy Ranch standoff is too close to our Collective memory. So the “education system” smears them as being racists. They are not.
The only thing that prevented the American government from driving over civilians at the Bundy Ranch, like they did in Venezuela a couple of weeks ago, is the Second Amendment.
God bless those who fought, and died, to defend this country against all enemies foreign AND domestic.
That bit of domestic government bombing by the Army against miners is something they don’t talk about. That type of violence fueled the response that put dbag psychos like Hoover in power.
Even George Washington’s men killed kids during the Whiskey Rebellion. Not the same intent but yeah still boots on necks.
Actual armed confrontations during the Whiskey Rebellion were rare. The “rebels” had a tendency to scatter when 13,000 armed Federal militiamen showed up. One known casualty was an “Itinerant Person” who was bayoneted by a militiaman. Another casualty was Oliver Miller, killed in the raid on a tax collector that started the whole thing.
All in all, there were few casualties and only two Federal convictions for treason — both of whom were pardoned by Washington. Frankly, it was more of a whiskey protest than a Whiskey Rebellion. And the whiskey tax was subsequently repealed.
bobba5 – with only two posts and I conclude you are a whining idiot.
Good to know you like vets being abused and the military getting deployed domestically. I’ll let you get back to autoasphyxiating yourself.
“I used to spend a great deal of time reading about battles on foreign lands. European, the Pacific Theater, and elsewhere. Because that is what our “education system” wants us to read about.”
Some of them are well worth the read, like when TTAG’s Ralph recommended ‘Helmet for My Pillow: From Parris Island to the Pacific’, by Pacific theater Marine Corps grunt Robert Leckie :
It’s 99 cents, less than one American Dollar. Pick it up.
Leckie puts you in combat on a steaming south Pacific rock. What it was really like, when his unit was pinned down for a month in the steaming summer heat and having to smell the American and Japanese dead decomposing around him and his unit.
It’s not an easy read, but it’s well worth the read, and the lousy 99 cents.
‘With the Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa’ by E. B. Sledge is another good read :
These are two great books. With history being re-written every day by the Left, there may come a time when both books and their authors will be forgotten, written out of American history, disappearing like statues of old soldiers that have vanished across the country as if they never existed.
The two books you list sound interesting. Here are some books I have found interesting. They are not politically correct. I have found them very enlightening.
Samurai! by Saburo Sakai, Martin caidin and Fred Saito
Fight and Rebellion, slave resistance in eighteenth-century Virginia by Gerald W Mullin
The Pink Swastika, homosexuality in the Nazi Party
by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams
Breaking the Chains, African-American slave resistance by William Loren Katz
Black Man with a Gun by Kenneth Blanchard
Factories of Death Japanese, biological warfare in WW2 by Sheldon H Harris
Why I Stand, from freedom to The Killing Fields of Socialism by Burgess Owens
The Deacons for Defense, armed resistance and the Civil Rights Movement by Lance Hill
We Shoot Back, armed resistance in the Mississippi Freedom Movement by Akinyele
Negroes and the Gun, the black tradition of arms by Nicholas Johnson
Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg
The Negro in the American Revolution by Benjamin Quarles
They are in no particular order.
The first sad reality is that there are people in our world who adhere to no righteous restraints and who are ruthless. The second sad reality is that such people often rise to power. The final sad reality is that good people will not stop such unrestrained and ruthless people without physical restraint — which necessarily comes in the form of physical violence.
Today we remember the good people who gave their lives resisting the ruthless people in our world who, in pursuit of power and riches, were all to happy to harm countless thousands/millions of victims.
“lo, the postillion!”
I find the most sadness in that this is just the end of three day recreational opportunity for most Americans rather than a time for contemplation of the lives lost in service to our country. Simply fishing, water-skiing, gorging, and drinking is a hell of a way to memorialize. I hope I am wrong about how many people treat it this way.
Oh, and the sales. he lousy ‘sales’…
I think it’s okay for people to look at the Memorial Day weekend as a chance to have fun. That’s what the heroes fought for — not just for a country, but for a way of life.
Interesting perspective Ralph.
Yeah, and like the other guy says, ” Those who surrender freedom for safety get and deserve neither.”
What’s the average refresh rate… I think it’s past due.
Remember the fallen and honor them by continued fighting.
Thank you rubes and suckers for going to other countries and killing people and breaking things at the behest of those who deceived you and lied to you for their own purposes of wealth and power and not what you were told.
Thank you for falling for the lies and false flags perpetrated by our own government for the express purpose of getting us into these damned wars and for being suckered into fighting major wars where millions of lives were lost and which set the stage for next major wars.
Every war since the revolution has been unnecessary and engineered for the gain and consolidation of wealth and power by those who want to be an American aristocracy. Even the revolution was won by the militia and the French, with Washington and the regular army losing every battle they fought except for the single instance of attacking drunk Hessian’s late at night on Christmas Eve.
Without US entry in WW1 the countries fighting it would have run out of money and supplies and been forced to a reasonable peace, Germany would not have sent Lenin back to Russia to destabilize them, so there would have been no Bolshevik revolution, no USSR, no rise and spread of communism. Without the treaty of Versailles there would have been no Wiemar Republic, no super depression in Germany, no rise of the Nazi Party, no Hitler, and no WW2.
Thanks guys. Great job.
Disband the military and return to the militia system.
Another proggie leftist heard from. Surrounded by plastic products derived from oil. Driving an oil powered car. ‘No war for oil’ type of asshole. Would love to see the US balkinized and in 3rd world status.
Straw man argument. Nothing in that post strikes me as leftist. In fact a fairly well known U.S. politician once wrote:
“…Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.”
America is a first world super power. Yet he wishes for a nation that is as wealthy as we are to revert to a ‘militia’. With our wealth and resources up for grabs to the first professional army that wants it.
And talk of straw men. Every alternative bit of history he stated was nothing but a straw man. History could have went a million ways if one event had been changed.
Just another proggie missing hillary.
Look, I don’t disagree that is it somewhat pointless speculate on what might have happened if one or more things had been different. Having said that, the path of events that was outlined is precisely what did happen. WW1 created both the USSR, the spread of communism and led directly to WW2. There is a pretty good case that the U.S. picking sides in WW1 didn’t really make things better for us or anyone else, we will never know, but seeing how the past worked out should serve as a cautionary tale. Good intentions don’t always lead to good outcomes. Anyway, none of that or anything that was posted is leftist. Hence, straw man argument. I’m sure you see my point.
The whole “US caused WW2 by entering WW1” mantra is a load of revisionist history bullshit that’s popular among know nothing’s on reddit and YouTube. Anyone who actually knows anything about the history surrounding WW1 doesn’t make that claim. There’s honestly too much history for me to explain it in a ttag post, so I’ll sinply say the real information is out there. Go find it, and no, it’s not as easy as looking on Wikipedia.
JWM in some ways he is spot on, others maybe, maybe not. The founding fathers had a well deserved fear and loathing of standing armies, banks and any great amassing of power in the hands of a few. In the US as in 99% of countries around the world there is not just that in all 3 regards. Most have standing armies (the founders wanted a state “organized” Militia as opposed to military), most have big multinational owned banks and the Fed is multinational owned not government owned as most think. The first such bank in modern times was the bank of england which the Rockerfeller’s own and that was gained as part of a deal to fund the British side of the Napoleonic war. They also funded Napoleon as well. If you want to understand more about how these banks work there is a good little book called “The Emperors Clothes Cost Twenty Dollars” by Lloyd Darland. Then there is how governments have been amassing more and more centralized power and creating laws left right and center till the populace have little room to breathe, let alone liberties left intact. Then just to rub salt in the wound we have the media 99% of which is directly or indirectly owned by the same ones that own the banks and through their control of most nations Reserve Bank (The Fed is a Reserve Bank) also control the government of the nation.
So in closing Most of what he was saying while not said in the best way he could have was reasonably accurate to a degree. the situation in countries mentioned may or may not have altered course but they may have… who knows
Toni. I won’t get into the banking issues. But for a nation that is as big, wealthy and loaded with resources as the US the notion of not having a standing army is folly. We are simply too rich a prize not to have professionals on the walls.
ok so what about the cost of a standing army. There is also the lack of liberty that having one also entails part of which is via taxation. Taxation of the individual was only brought in in the US in the very early 1900’s… how did the government fund things like an army before that. Pure and simple Taxation is nothing but an extortion racket run by government rather than the mafia. One thing is sure though, once taxation is put in place government ALWAYS grows it till the populace are starving due to the tax burden on them. It may take decades to get to that point but it always does. A standing army that is controlled by a central govt also always has little choice in where it goes. If that govt wants to send them on some fools errand that does nothing to protect the citizens of the nation and only serves to enrich a small number of govt officials and their cronies then they should not be there. That is why i would also if it came to it make it so that every politician who called for the troops to be sent overseas MUST go with them and serve in the front line, not somewhere to the rear. Not only them but also ALL family members of said politicians of serving age. That in and of itself would solve most of the issue of the troops being sent places that there is really no need for them to be
“That is why i would also if it came to it make it so that every politician who called for the troops to be sent overseas MUST go with them and serve in the front line, not somewhere to the rear. Not only them but also ALL family members of said politicians of serving age.”
The issue was settled long, long ago. Forced service is de facto slavery, and a nation is not free if individuals can be forced to support its political goals.
But I do agree with you.
lol no i am just saying that those that wish to send the troops off to war MUST be prepared to do battle themselves. Do you think the troops of old being led by their king would have gone to fight if the king had not been leading them into battle…. i think not. In fact many if the king had demanded that they fight on his behalf so he did not have to they would have quickly killed him themselves. why should todays corrupt politicians be held to a different standard.
Oh and those old tribes etc would not have just killed the king but his whole family as well for the insolence of the king to sugest such a thing
“Do you think the troops of old being led by their king would have gone to fight if the king had not been leading them into battle….”
Our only experience with that here was the dust-up around 1776. Not reading anything about the king leading troops in the field. Nor did that king lead troops in battle with the French during that same time.
But I still agree with you that people with no skin in the game likely are less careful with the lives of others. One the otherhand….veterans of WW2, who knew war, relatively easily threw the US into Korea and VN.
A standing army is a cheaper alternative to a Chinese or Russian or Mexican invasion. Or the threat of force that gains the hostile country what it wants cheaply. And how much liberty is lost to a puppet regime placed by the chinese or other ‘strongman’ nation.
We are a first world nation in the twenty first century. The frontier days are long gone.
And think about your own liberty, Toni. You are in a region that could easily be dominated by the chinese if the US was taken out of the equation.
yes i do think of our own liberty in our own region as well. big bases with lots of troops and gear are easily taken out, does not matter here nor there or anywhere else for that matter. look at the battles you have had against a number of countries and yes i do realize that part of that is all this PC BS that does not allow troops to do what needs to be done to WIN a war and some of that crap came out of the Geneva Convention and other similar. You also have to remember though that this is a very highly technologically advanced army against guerilla troops that in some cases are armed with weapons from WWII and earlier and there are still huge difficulties in defeating them. Small groups that are well trained in guerilla warfare are much harder targets. If a country has few large bases but it does have many small groups as mentioned it actually stands a better fighting chance of prevailing unless the opponents are quite happy to go large scale nuclear and not many are wiling to do that because it would destroy the resources they hope to gain for the most part. Also a populace that resolves to make a stand against an invader is very difficult for an invading army to defeat because of the fact that the defenders are fighting for those they love, their way of life and all they care about. The troops of the invading army are not till you push them back on their own soil
“Also a populace that resolves to make a stand against an invader is very difficult for an invading army to defeat because of the fact that the defenders are fighting for those they love, their way of life and all they care about.”
Perhaps a review of the invasions of France, Belgium and the Lowlands, especially the aftermath would be in order? Thinking “the Resistance” didn’t seriously threaten the invaders during occupation.
Toni, the point of a professional standing force is so that you do not have to have civilians fighting in their own towns. You don’t have an invading army looting, raping and murdering in Anytown, USA.
A resistance that lasts generations may not ultimately win and the damage done to your own people, towns and nation is devastating.
And even with just a militia you still have a standing army. Because who controls and orders that militia? The .gov, of course.
Hmmmm…. so salty.
You know, Strych, I considered directing some ‘thoughts’ his way, but in the end, a P.O.S. like that just isn’t worth the effort.
As Shire Man the other day noted, he hates himself and is heel-bent on imposing his mental illness on us.
Fuck him and every last other like him…
Excellent demonstration of an ad hominem attack, well done. Perhaps we could get some circular reasoning now, or maybe a non sequitur?
In fact, you might enjoy “War is a racket”
written by Smedley Butler the highest decorated marine of the time, you know since everyone that disagrees with you is a “p.o.s.” As you put it.
Not everyone. But you, yes.
Get cancer and experience pain no opiate will ever mask, fuckwit… 😉
No, really, read the linked article. You might learn something.
I love you guys and your love for butler. After a lifetime of drawing checks and bennies and only after he’d retired and secured those bennies did he speak out. Even though as an officer he was able to resign and leave the service at virtually any time. Did he take the moral high ground and hand in his papers?
But he’s a favorite of the left.
I only bring him up as he was a highly decorated veteran who wasn’t cheering for more war. This is Memorial Day after all, is it not fitting to discuss what was purchased with shed American blood? People say that liberty and freedom where purchased with that precious blood. OK, fair enough, read the article, show me how what he said was wrong and how in fact freedom and liberty for Americans was the real result. We already know you can sling the leftist tag, how about instead, refuting the argument.
jason. I have a passing familiarity with butler. Again, quoting from a man with no more morals than he has isn’t giving strength to your argument. I have seen war and am not cheer leading for it. But showing respect to the troops who tried to do an honest job under trying circumstances, troops that had no right to quit as smedley did, appears to be too much to ask for from the proggie types like crimson.
He just had to pick a post about this day to use the ‘rubes and suckers’ line and you just had to rush to his defense. You guys are butlers type to a T.
Do you really not understand the concept of an ad hominem attack? Really? It is totally irrelevant whether or to what extent Butler was a piece of shit. It has no bearing on the argument he put forth. Refute the argument, if you can.
jason. You’re apparently under the delusion that we’re in an argument. We are not. There’s nothing to argue about. butler has proven himself to be a man lacking in honor and morals. Whatever he writes is just an excuse to cover his own character flaws. Might as well read stalin’s opinion of the west and claim it’s a valid argument.
A bit salty perhaps, yes, but non-factual? Unreasonable speculation?
Unwarranted and unsubstantiated speculation with logical leaps and claims of literally unknowable “facts” as valid arguments and an utter disregard for the entirety of a situation, nevermind the nuance of it. All wrapped in a nice venomous bow too.
The whole tone of it smacks of mean spirited elitism as if the author has never believed someone in error or been led down the garden path. As such it’s on par with telling a rape victim she shouldn’t have worn a short skirt.
Since the overall thrust of the post is insulting, and intentionally so I might add, I see no particular reason to engage in parsing the specific claims made since they were only made in furtherance of the overall ad hominem which you yourself claim to so greatly deplore as a tactic of argument.
Without question there is unwarranted sarcasm, and likely a bit of a mean spirit as well. Never-the-less, I suspect that the main point was not to denigrate those that served, but rather to point out the largely futile nature of the service.
To use your analogy: do we honor the service of rape victims? Have a special rape day? Of course not. The notion seems absurd. Rather we view victims of rape as people that need our love and support, as it can be quite a trial to recover from such a traumatic event. Further, at an appropriate time we might suggest methods whereby the chances of again being victimized by a rapist might be minimized (defense training, awareness, etc.)
If Memorial Day served a similar purpose, where meaningful support of our veterans was actually engaged in, if highlighting the largely futile nature of the wars in which we have fought was the purpose, if the shed blood and sacrifice of our friends and family members and neighbors that was wasted was acknowledged, if this day was used to truly honor the fallen by learning from the mistakes of the past and taking steps to rectify them to the extent possible, then I would be all in 100%. But, unfortunately, it not. It’s mostly the flag waving and hero consecration of our national religion which primes the pump for more of our young naive men and women to join up and “sacrifice” for our country. In the end, it seems to me that exactly the opposite of what a day like today should be is all that happens, and the death and destruction to no discernible purpose marches on.
But that’s just my opinion, and against the horde, I’m nobody.
“If Memorial Day served a similar purpose, where meaningful support of our veterans was actually engaged in, if highlighting the largely futile nature of the wars in which we have fought was the purpose, if the shed blood and sacrifice of our friends and family members and neighbors that was wasted was acknowledged, if this day was used to truly honor the fallen by learning from the mistakes of the past and taking steps to rectify them to the extent possible,”
This is the thrust of “win at any cost”. If you don’t want to win, if you just want to send messages, then the lives lost are truly lost to no avail. However….
Memorial Day is to honor those who did serve, who did stand to the wall, who did risk everything so the protected could have so much. People engage in wars, and people will always have base motivations. War is not the issue. The intention for which lives are the token is what counts.
When the winner of the competition for design of the VN war monument was announced, I was insulted beyond words. No matter how stupidly the war was conducted, the lives written on the wall were real, not conceptual, not statistics. The large majority of the names on the wall may actually be draftees. People loaded up like cartridges in a magazine, and sent down range for political purposes. These people deserve recognition and veneration for taking one for the rest of us. A black wall buried in a non-descript rise in the terrain was just a horrible disrespect of those real lives.
And then I got older.
About ten years after the wall went up, I realized that it was actually the perfect monument, a rebuke to the people of the nation who were ashamed of the VN war, ashamed of the country for making a bungling attempt to turn back evil. The monument is a stark reminder, a dark mark on our national conscience. And a thundering statement that war is too important to just treat warriors like so many bullets downrange. Gone, forgotten, expended for nothing more than holes in paper.
That has been my testimony to any who would listen’ about that twelve year descent into a national nightmare that the nation is all to quick to dismiss as political folly.
I was actually chilled by the VN monument in Frankfort, KY. I recommend everyone have a view:
The link has an explanation of the design, but I couldn’t find really good pictures of the actual function.
And lest we forget….there were ~54,000 deaths from the VN war (12yrs). There were ~33,000 deaths from the Korean war (3yrs)
I agree with you Sam. The Kentucky monument seems to be incredibly well done, both artful and respectful.
“I agree with you Sam. The Kentucky monument seems to be incredibly well done, both artful and respectful.”
Even this conversation about that monument gives me chills. It is, as it should be, haunting.
“I agree with you Sam. The Kentucky monument seems to be incredibly well done, both artful and respectful.”
Now that’s really weird, ‘Jason’.
There you are, appreciating respectfulness for those killed in warfare, while your initial comment was nothing but mean-spirited spite on a post, honoring war dead, on a day set aside to honor those dead. Intentionally meant to be disrespectful.
My, my. Aren’t you just a walking contradiction? 😉
Appreciation for a clever and tastefully done monument that accomplishes it’s purpose in evoking an sympathetic emotional response should not be confused with the notion that what those men and women were sent to do and in fact did was somehow honorable. Most if not all were deceived even if only by themselves into doing despicable things, sent, in many cases, forcibly, against their will, by their wicked political masters. My father was drafted for that war. Just own it. It was a terrible mistake that they went to kill and be killed, and to what purpose? I can only hope that a memorial such as the one in Kentucky will drive home the message that we have no business getting involved in foreign wars.
As to the mean spirited comment…
Really? Pot – Kettle much?
There are always those who live in the historical fantasy land of “what ifs”. Maybe the political context of the wars you despise didn’t line up with your perfect alternate history. Those of us who participated in those wars probably know it better than most that the political motivations for those wars were far less than holy.
911/OIF – We got punched in the face and came out swinging. Blame the politicians (and brass) for missing the target. Dont blame the hand and and fingers.
Let me explain something for you. Volunteering for service does not justify the motivation for the fight; volunteering for service is about teaching those around you that sometimes fighting is necessary despite the motivation for the fight.
Id take the company of those rubes and suckers any day. I know that they will always have my six even when the political motivation is less than perfect.
“Blame the politicians (and brass) for missing the target. Dont blame the hand and and fingers.‘
So, um, what exactly were the Nuremberg trials about precisely?
“So, um, what exactly were the Nuremberg trials about precisely?”
Putting lipstick on a pig, that’s what they were about. An attempt to dress up war as some sort of white glove affair. The trials were merely to give cove to executing the losers (especially the loser leaders).
The “western world”, some where after the death of the Roman Empire, decided to try to draw a humane picture of war and warriors. Prior to that, annihilation of the enemy (and maybe the entire tribe/town/village/city) was the norm for warfare. Somehow, wars were to be fought for high principles, honorable affairs to be conducted by the most compassionate of peoples. Rules, in other words. Rules about the means, methods, thoughts, weapons and conduct of the most base, mean, brutish and brutal interactions of one people with another.
The Nuremburg trials were designed to make victors acting like victors be somehow antiseptic exercises in the function and outcome of laws. Masking utter destruction of an enemy in nice dancing clothes to make vengeance seem justified, just and tidy.
A crock of crap arose after 1945, proclaiming that wars are not about destroying an enemy, but sending messages that the actions of the enemy are uncouth and should be reconsidered before things get worse than they are (there is no real definition of “worse” in this context).
Germany and Japan launched wars of conquest. The reasons are irrelevant. Other nations decided that such wars were not useful, and the nations causing the wars needed to be subjugated, destroyed if necessary (unconditional surrender – which Japan escaped). These same nations should have been turned into dependencies of the victorious nations, not allowed to ever again function as independent countries.
Should the political and military leaders (down to the bureau and squad level) have been severely punished (killed)? Yes. Instead, the polite, righteous and holy victors imagined into existence something called “crimes against humanity”. This fiction made all the victors feel good about themselves (except maybe the Soviets who just wanted revenge down to the apartment dwellers). There is no war that is not a “crime against humanity”, because, as General Sherman put it – “War is all hell” (not “War is hell”). An all hell it is. There is no polite way to kill your enemy.
Perhaps you missed my implied point, specifically that unnecessary killing, murder camps, torture, etc. are not justified by “I was just following orders”. If you think that in war every conceivable action, no matter what it is, is justified, simply because it is war, then you might want to do some reflecting on your personal system of values. Just my opinion FWIW.
“If you think that in war every conceivable action, no matter what it is is justified, simply because it is war, then you might want to do some reflecting on your personal system of values.”
If you conceive of war as anything other than kill or be killed, you would not last long as a warrior. No matter your moral principals, in war, there is killing, being killed, wounding, being wounded. There are no honorable deaths, just death in all its finality. Patton had it right, but understated it.
Sam, your being intentional dense. That is not the killing I’m talking about. Of course it is kill or be killed when in the trenches. I’m referring to ditches filled with civilians executed after the battle was over, widespread rape, and the like. This isn’t that complicated. Some things are wrong. If you don’t believe that then what the hell are any of us fighting for in the first place. The whole notion of “modernity” is based on the idea that some ideas are in fact better than others. If all that motivates you is rape, murder, take…well, I truly don’t know what to say.
“If all that motivates you is rape, murder, take…well, I truly don’t know what to say.”
What I am saying is there are absolutely no rules in war; none. You destroy your enemy any way you can, including the civilian population (which is the factory of warriors). Rape? When there are no rules, there are no rules. Morality in war? Foolishness. Only the victor has the capacity, interest or need for morality. The defeated live at the pleasure of the victor. Putting the results of victory (morality?) ahead of the victory itself is self-delusion.
Killing civilians is legitimate as a means to end the war sooner, and reduce the casualty count of your army and civilians. Look at what we have today: an open admission that rather than eradicate the problem of terrorism, we consign “our” innocents to an acceptable level of death and destruction because it is considered immoral to wipe out whole populations. Want to end terrorism, remove the factory that produces terrorists: mothers. Not willing to do that? Then the death of innocents of your own tribe is on your hands. Tell the remaining family members that their relatives experienced a honorable death because “we can’t be as bad as them (the other, the terrorists), and this is the price innocents pay for lack of determination by society to exist in peace and safety. When your enemy decides that killing you and yours, all of them, the entire tribe, is not only moral, but a compunction of belief, natural law, spoils of war, or whatever, pretending to be morally superior will leave you and yours under a wind-swept plain, forever honorable, and forever dead. This is your better idea, better way.
Study the Roman campaigns against Carthage. Note the outcome. Note the hordes of lives of Romans that were not extinguished by constant marauding attacks from Carthage.
So, if unlimited war offends you, work like hell to ensure you and your nation are never committed to war. Half-measures kill for no justifiable reason. Half-measures kill you for no justifiable reason (except the reason your enemy used to justify never-ending war with you). Why do we constantly need to learn that “In war, there is no substitute for victory”?
I love people that take their physical and mental cowardice, lack of commitment and action, and general pessimist skeptic nature, as some sort of erudite disposition that lends them a high moral platform. I always end up relishing the schadenfreude and feeling better about myself. Petty, but I’m just a man
Sam, if what you are saying is true, if war is total war and nothing else, then how will we ever attain a civil society? For what purpose do we have laws? Is not the competition of life war? Should we not all strive to live within the self imposed boundaries that make existence possible? If everyone on both sides rages forth to scorch the earth, what will be left? If you truly believe as you have stated, then why did we leave any Germans, Italians, or Japanese. Hitler had already built the death camps, why didn’t we use them, and rid the world of this scourge of wicked people unfit for life?
I would suggest, that humanity has moved past the notion that genocide is an acceptable solution for a problem created by a corrupt ruling class. The soldiers that die on the field of war are not well served by their own deaths. Have you never read of “The Christmas Truce”? Although, war will likely always be with us to one extant or another, the notion that fewer is better, and the foreign wars are problems created by others that must be solved by others is not unpatriotic, or un-American. It quite simply places a very high value on the lives or our friends and family and neighbors. Why must we endlessly fight wars for other people and solve problems not of our own making?
I understand the tone that The Crimson Pirate used was likely intentionally provocative, but the idea that soldiers are heroes and that more is better. Well, we’ll just have to disagree I suppose. I hold nothing against those that have served. I simply wish that those now serving and that those who will serve in the future would spend a bit more time thinking about what is really being accomplished, who is benefiting, and who is paying the price.
What I am saying is that until humans are perfectable, war will not go away. There are alternatives, of course. It is possible to live in relative peace with others in your neighborhood, city, state, etc. We have methods other than killing and maiming to resolve interpersonal conflict. We have certain assumed values (always subject to majority rule: legislation) that can be shared. However….
When war is the only option, when war is unavoidable, when an implacable foe is sworn and capable of killing you and everyone you know, then either wage total war, or just submit to whatever the enemy desires. We have been fighting half-assed wars since 1945, and things are more of a muddled mess, more dangerous than at any time before. Do not commit war with a hope it won’t really be all that bad. When you depend on someone to do the fighting and dying, you are guilty of the worst of sins if you do not allow your champions to win. You are saying, “Well, try really hard, and if it doesn’t work out, sorry about your forfeited or ruined life, I gotta go watch reruns of Rockford Files”.
War is not police work on a larger stage. When the world fears your ability to destroy utterly, and the willingness to do so, things get real quiet, real quick.
People here are fond of, “Rather be judged by twelve, than carried by six”. What I am saying is, “Rather the world fear us unequivocally, than even hold for a moment the thought that it is possible to harm a single citizen and live to tell the tale.”
Jason he’s simply wrong. The statement “every single American war was wrong except the revolution” is complete leftist crap. You know that. Quit defending that downright silly position.
Get an Education,
Your right, that is a crap statement. I’d suggest that the war of 1812 was also justified. 😉
I would go so far as to argue that “Justification”, actually isn’t even the issue. Even Vietnam, Iraq and the Mexican war can all be “justified”, the question is was it the most beneficial decision or a blunder for the nation. All of which could be debated Infinitum.
Jason. A civil society? That’s a pipe dream that will never happen.
Amazing, what you typed.
You need to return to your liberal college and demand a refund for your education. Or stop getting your history lessons from YouTube. Your complete lack of knowledge surrounding WW1 alone is enough to refute your entire post.
I remember the comrades lost in Vietnam – several Marines that I knew paid the ultimate price there, with others wounded. I lost a couple of pals in Beirut – I wasn’t there, but they were when the barracks was bombed. So yeah, freedom isn’t free. Despite all the good times people have on Memorial Day never thinking of the sacrifices in our military that enables them, I tend to get reflective on this day and remember. And remember, the sacrifices that enable our freedom weren’t all made by those who died; some of those that survived still bear the mental and physical scars from when they paid the price for liberty.
I was in Beirut, twice. Thank you for remembering, few do.
I just stumbled across this clip from WW2, a TBF ‘Avenger’ gunner being buried at sea in his aircraft :
Here’s his story :
As a nation where fewer and fewer serve, there will be fewer and fewer families affected by their service.
As a nation we have increasingly relied upon the very few to do 100% of the heavy lifting for the rest of us.
When I served, the norm was “one and done” for combat deployments. Today we expect the same brave young (and some not so young) Americans to return to combat 2-4-6 or more times. The effect on the Post 9/11 generation of warfighters is beginning to be understood but we as a nation are not standing behind those who wear the flag on their sleeve.
Mental health issues, unemployability, substance misuse, suicide are so commonplace as to barely raise alarms any more.
Families are not surviving these wars of multiple deployments and disproportionate burden.
We have perverted the core mission of our National Guard and even Reserves beyond recognition.
A generation of children are now coming of age born to the first of the war fighters Post 9/11 and the problems confronting them are terrifying…but again, no alarms, no acceptance.
On Memorablia Day we can only remember and pay respect to those who have gone before us.
What we can do every other day of the year is behave as proud Americans and honor our fallen by remember their service and sacrifice but also by ensuring that we provide all that is necessary to ensure our veterans AND their families.
“For those who have not fought for it, Freedom has a flavor the protected will never know”
The majority of the anti-government/military conspiracy crap written on here “sounds” like it’s coming from the old folks home for decrepit Vietnam War protesters. This nonsense should be on a comedy website!!
As long as they get their pot.
Our liberties and freedoms are eroded each and every year. The threat is INTERNAL, not EXTERNAL.
Memorial Days are all the same they glorify war rather than teach children most of our wars were fought out of blind greed and a desire to dominate other countries both militarily and economically.