The Calling; why we join

[Infanteer]

I don't really have a horse in this one (although Moore's "point" was a non-sequitur), but I seem to recall a "debunking" which showed that he was flat-out lying about the number of offspring in the services of congresspeople and that their number was higher than the raw statistical average of Americans (i.e., they had more of their "children" serving than one would expect from a random sample of the population).

Probably, I wouldn't put it past him - I just like the idea he brought up.   I wonder how the Members of Congress (or within the DoD) would be acting IF their kid, instead of sitting in the Ivy League, was braving IED's everyday in Iraq.   I guarantee you that we wouldn't be seeing those soldiers welding on locally bought sheet metal to protect their Humvees (and, true to soldier form, laughing about how it will prevent the shrapnel from going right throught them and instead just let it lodge in their body).

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

I guarantee you that we wouldn't be seeing those soldiers welding on locally bought sheet metal to protect their Humvees (and, true to soldier form, laughing about how it will prevent the shrapnel from going right throught them and instead just let it lodge in their body).

Can't argue with that ...

 

[Britney Spears]

I think you are imagining THAT "underlying implication": no-one (ar at least very few) are denying her right to an opinion ... I, as far as I can tell most of the people here, and most of what I read, does not suggest that she should not have an opinion, nor be stopped from voicing it (indeed I'd wager that most of us support these rights); what we disagree with is the morality of using a soldier's death to further her own selfish agenda and that of her supporters (i.e., anti-Semites like David Duke and Crawford Peace House).  It cheapens and dishonours his death as well as that of others that have died in a cause that they believe in.  The only implication is from her supporters (including the mainstream press) who suggest that she has some sort of moral authority.

OK, so here is our main disagreement. You think that Ms. Sheehan is "using her son's death to further her own agenda".

This is a meaningless meme that the right wing media spun out of whole cloth. What is she suppose to do, protest the war but maintain a strict silence about her son's death in the very same war? Talk about them as if the two events were completely unrelated?  If you are seriously suggesting this, then our correspondence must conclude here. Here, we'll pretend for a minute that you, sitting on your ass here in Canada,  have the moral authority to dictate what she can and cannot do, and also interpret the significance of Spc.Sheehan's life and death -for the sake of argument, since every single one of you already assumes this anyway.  Why don't you tell me how she's supposed to go about protesting the war without "dishonouring her son's death"?

Second, what is this "selfish agenda" you keep prattling on about? What exactly is so selfish about wanting to end the Iraq War? Her son is already dead, so I don't see what personal profit she, or me, or Micheal Moore, is suppose to derive from ending the war. If there is one, please tell me about it because I want my cut too!

There's a selfish agenda in the Iraq war, but it's not the agenda of the anti-war crowd, you can be sure of that!

Probably, I wouldn't put it past him - I just like the idea he brought up.  I wonder how the Members of Congress (or within the DoD) would be acting IF their kid, instead of sitting in the Ivy League, was braving IED's everyday in Iraq.  I guarantee you that we wouldn't be seeing those soldiers welding on locally bought sheet metal to protect their Humvees (and, true to soldier form, laughing about how it will prevent the shrapnel from going right throught them and instead just let it lodge in their body).

Don't get hung up over the parent child rubbish. Asking "Would you want your child to be fighting in Iraq?" is exactly the same thing as asking "Would you yourself want to be fighting in Iraq?". Both questions are asking if the pollee thinks Iraq is worth his personal sacrifice.  Of course, unless you are actually asking it in Iraq, the second question is meaningless.

 

[48Highlander]

OK, so here is our main disagreement. You think that Ms. Sheehan is "using her son's death to further her own agenda".

This is a meaningless meme that the right wing media spun out of whole cloth. What is she suppose to do, protest the war but maintain a strict silence about her son's death in the very same war?

So you go from pretending it's not happening, to justifying what she's doing?  Need a hand getting back into your rocker?

Her son's death and her political beleifs ARE unrelated.  He died because he put his life on the line for something he beleived in.  Her beleifs have nothing to do with personal responsibility and sacrifice, and everything to do with blaming the government for anything you perceive as a problem.  You're tellling me that she can't be expected to say "I wan't an explanation from Mr Bush as to why he lied about the reasons for the war"?  That she has to, instead, scream "I want to know why you murdered my boy!"?  Well, sure, ok, 'm willing to agree that she seems to be from the shallow end of the gene pool, and as such cannot be expected to understand how her actions are dishonouring her sons memory.  I expect better from you though.

 

[Spr.Earl]

I see a Mother asking why my son died because of your lies,thats the way I see it and nothing else.
She had no intention making it a political topic,others are using her for there own political means and now she has become a political topic and is being vilified just because she wants to meet Dubyya face to face and ask him some questions.

Yup so much for the Land of the Free.

 

[48Highlander]

I see a Mother asking why my son died because of your lies,thats the way I see it and nothing else.

So what she's saying is "my son was an idiot, but I'M smart enough to know you're lying!  I want to know why you tricked my poor little retard into going to such a horrible horrible place!" 

What a load of horse-manure.  Not only is she using his death to further a cause which he would have been absolutely opposed to, but at the same time she's also mocking his judgement and intelligence.  Bravo.  All concerned mothers should take notes from her.

She had no intention making it a political topic,

Bullshit.  She wouldn't be camping outside the presidents ranch if she didn't want to make it a political topic.

others are using her for there own political means and now she has become a political topic and is being vilified just because she wants to meet Dubyya face to face and ask him some questions.

You mean meet him a SECOND TIME.  To ask him a whackload of loaded questions which were probably formed by a commitee funded by Michael Moore

She could have asked all the questions she wanted the first time she met him.  Her behaviour now is nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Yup so much for the Land of the Free.

So much for common sense.....

 

[MTAB]

1SG, welcome to the site, I apprieciate your time and correspondence:

Thank you very much


You stated: has any authority to accuse the grieving mother of a dead soldier of being a liar,  then I'm afraid we've not enough common ground for any meaningful discussion.

Ma'am, did you read any of the talking points in reference to Mrs. Sheehan?  Did you even bother to click on the link?  O'Reilly never called her a liar; all he did was point out that she said one thing on her first meeting with President Bush that was qouted in one newspaper, then she says something else that contradicted her own comments.

I applaud your opposition to the war, it's your right and everyone's right. I just do not applaud folks that are disengenious (ref: Mrs. Sheehan), nor people that try to use the "emotion card" as if to say "I suffered a loss so no one has the right to challenge my opinion"

I'll even take this a little further with the risk of being berated by folks that will not understand: 

I enjoy seeing all types of protests, all types of people honestly speaking out against something they feel strongly about (even if I do not agree with it).  I enjoy seeing peaceful demonstrations, I enjoy the fact that anybody can get on a soap box and state their opinion; do you know why?  It is because those rights were bought and paid for with the sweat and blood and sacrafice of countless veterans from all over the world; it is a high price to pay, and a hard one to achieve and a very rough road to travel, all in the name of freedom:  Freedom that now includes:

o an increase from 4 million to 9 million female registered voters in Afghanistan since the fall of the Tali
o the first ever female governer in the history of Afghanistan
o girls being given a formal education in Afghanistan without fear or having to do it in secret
o Local nationals in Afghanistan marching in the streets holding peaceful demonstrations without fear
o Local Nationals in Afghanistan coming up to CF forces to state a grievnce and I qoute (since it was said directly to me) "Because we know we can  without fear of being shot" and "We know you are our friends trying to help us"
o a man can do something as simple as shave his beard off without fear
o Egypt holding mulit-candidtate presidential elections for the first time
o Saudi Arabia holding mulit-candidate provisional elections
o Lebanonese people marching in the streets calling for democracy and forcing Syria out
o an Iraqi draft constitution developed in only 2 years ( it took us 11 years! to fully ratify ours, and Iraq has a draft in only 2)
o free elections in Iraq
o mass torture and murder ended in Iraq

Was any of this done without mistakes, miscalculations, or poor judgments?  Not at all, mistakes are always made.  Will sacrafices continue to be made?  yes they will.  Will Soldiers continue to pay the ultimate price?  Yes they will.  Will my family mourn my loss should I pay the ultimate price?  Yes, they will.  Will they bemoan the President for it? No.  Will they view it as me freely choosing to expend my life in what I thought was a worthy cause?  You bet your sweet a** they will!

As far as "not enough common ground for further discussion".... c'est la vie (sp?)

V/R
MTAB

 

[MTAB]

48Highlander,

Bravo!

 

[Britney Spears]

I just do not applaud folks that are disengenious (ref: Mrs. Sheehan), nor people that try to use the "emotion card" as if to say "I suffered a loss so no one has the right to challenge my opinion"

Then we are in agreement, since I don't believe the last part either, but how can you expect her to continure her protest without making reference to her loss? Regardless of whether it makes her case stronger or not, berating her for doing so is just assinine.Her viewpoints are not very well thought out, heck I disagree with a lot of them, but as usual, instead reasonable debate, the right wing media resorts to outrageous character assasination.

Will they bemoan the President for it? No.  Will they view it as me freely choosing to expend my life in what I thought was a worthy cause?  You bet your sweet a** they will!

Why are these two mutually exclusive? Just because I gave my life for a cause doesn't make the cause immune to attack.

 

[Andyboy]

Why don't you tell me how she's supposed to go about protesting the war without "dishonouring her son's death"?

If I might interject here for a minute, you have highlighted the problem. In my opinion she can't do both. By doing one she is doing the other. As such I find it very hard to understand why she would choose to do so and can olnly chalk it up to people influencing her decisions that don't have her or her son's best interests at heart.

I won't speculate on her personal motives but I do think she is being used by anti-war/anti-Bush organizations to further their cause. The fact that they have exploited this obviously troubled woman in the way they have makes me slightly ill but is the naure of the beast I guess. One more casualty of war I suppose and I imagine she isn't the first and won't be the last. 

 

[Britney Spears]

The fact that they have exploited this obviously troubled woman in the way they have

I think this isthe key dissonance that we (and that includes me) are experiencing. When other anti-war voice their support and give assistance to Ms.Sheehan, you call it "exploitation". I suppose you *could* call it that, if you can also call MADD using mothers who have lost children to drunk driving to further their cause to be "exploitation".

Micheal Moore is against the war, Cindy Sheehan is against the war, I WAS against the war, are all our relationships exploitational in nature? This is why I brought up the MADD example, as well as when Bush used the dead soldier's family in his SOTU address. It only seems exploitational to you because you see the anti-war movement as fundamentally evil, and that no reasonable person could possibly be in it for any reason other than personal profit. Thus, you only see "exploitation" when I see a fratenal alliance for an honorable cause.

Since I don't hold this view about the pro-war crowd, and I believe that most soldiers who are fighting do it because they believe in the war and not for personal gain, I have no issue with Bush's "exploitation" of the dead soldier's memory.  I suppose until you can hold the same attitude towards me and the anti-war crowd, then there's no convincing anyone here.




O'Reilly is still a dirty lying bigot, though.

 

[48Highlander]

It only seems exploitational to you because you see the anti-war movement as fundamentally evil, and that no reasonable person could possibly be in it for any reason other than personal profit.

Oh, and now you're a mind-reader too eh?

 

[Andyboy]

Brit,

I have gone out of my way to be civil to you even though you have not answered in kind. I would appreciate it if you would do me the favor of not attributing thoughts and feelings to me which you would not attribute to yourself. It is a concept known as respect. I respect your right to, as well as your ability to form, a rational opinion and as such I assume there is a logical, rational reason why you feel the way you do. In other words I give you the benefit of the doubt. I believe you are intelligent enough to make an informed decision and to formulate an intelligent opinion, therefore I don't feel the need to be insulting to you when disagreeing with you. These are conepts which most of the posters here seem to understand but which seems to be foreign to you, which is disappointing because I am interested in discussing and learning, not mud slinging.

As to the matter at hand, Mrs Sheehan has lost a son, a husband (in divorce) and now has a parent in a coma. I think we might agree that she is most probably in a mentally weakened state, could we not? As such she is possibly susceptable to being influenced by people some of whom may be using her for what they want rather than what is best for her, or the memory of her son. If you seriously beleive that the entirety of the anti-war movement is in it for purely altruisitc means then you have something to learn about human nature. I doubt you do believe it, though, I think you are just being argumentative and defensive of the position you've placed yourself in mostly through your inability to debate a point without vitriol, insult and rhetoric.

And just so we're clear, I fully support the duty of citizens to protest the actions of their government, I think it is one of the foundations of our way of life. What I am saddened by is the thought that a fallen comrade might well become remembered as "Famous War Protestor Cindy Sheehan's Son" rather than being remembered for the sacrifice he made for a cause he believed in.

Have a nice day,

Andrew

 

[Britney Spears]

I have gone out of my way to be civil to you even though you have not answered in kind. I would appreciate it if you would do me the favor of not attributing thoughts and feelings to me which you would not attribute to yourself. It is a concept known as respect. I respect your right to, as well as your ability to form, a rational opinion and as such I assume there is a logical, rational reason why you feel the way you do. In other words I give you the benefit of the doubt. I believe you are intelligent enough to make an informed decision and to formulate an intelligent opinion, therefore I don't feel the need to be insulting to you when disagreeing with you. These are conepts which most of the posters here seem to understand but which seems to be foreign to you, which is disappointing because I am interested in discussing and learning, not mud slinging.

Little thin skinned are we? Yes, I'm the one "sliinging mud" here, while posters here who have never met Ms. Sheehan and most likely never lost any loved ones to war call her a "disgrace". Now I'm the last one who would complain about a double standard, and I won't, but I urge you go back to the begining of the thread for some examples of real mudslinging. If I thought someone wasn't being civil enough, then I just ignore them. I haven't read any of 48thhighlander's posts for months, and I get along just fine, although it seems he's got a lot of feelings for me. 

As to the matter at hand, Mrs Sheehan has lost a son, a husband (in divorce) and now has a parent in a coma. I think we might agree that she is most probably in a mentally weakened state, could we not?

Just like most of Stalin's opponents were, according to their trials. But for the sake of argument, Sure.

As such she is possibly susceptable to being influenced by people some of whom may be using her for what they want rather than what is best for her, or the memory of her son.

So what IS  best for her? A muzzel? "Get thee to a nunnery"?

If you seriously beleive that the entirety of the anti-war movement is in it for purely altruisitc means then you have something to learn about human nature.

I have extended my offer a number of times in this thread, and up to now there has been no takers (unless 48thhighlander has, but judging from previous experience, I doubt his explanation would be very interesting). WHAT, exactly, does Cindy Sheehan personally have to gain from the end of the Iraq War? WHAT do I have to gain for spending all this time arguing the issue?  Micheal Moore has profited greatly from the Iraq War, and Bush'es hamfisted, incompetent response, through his movie Farenheit 9/11, which I'm sure you are aware of, so I don't imagine he's too upset about the invasion. After all, everything he says  in the movie are lies, right? What would he make movies of if Iraq haden't been invaded? Kosovo?  The only benefit I can think of is safety from future terrorist attacks. I suppose that's selfish, but you and Bush benefit equally from that as I do.

Until one of you proves otherwise, "Selfish motives" is a red herring you continue to swing ineffectually at the anti-war movement. It's starting to smell a bit.

I think you are just being argumentative and defensive of the position you've placed yourself in mostly through your inability to debate a point without vitriol, insult and rhetoric.

I do get a bit smug sometimes when I'm right.

What I am saddened by is the thought that a fallen comrade might well become remembered as "Famous War Protestor Cindy Sheehan's Son" rather than being remembered for the sacrifice he made for a cause he believed in.

I respectfully disagree(not that I ever disrespecfully disagree, but I better exaggerate the drill movement, just to be sure).  10 years from now, when GW2 is looked upon fondly as a masterstroke of American foreign policy, and the entire Middle East, particularly the democratic, secular Iraqi state, as well as knowledgable Americans, will look back on this incident and scoff at how silly and wrong headed the Anti-War movement was, just like how silly the isolationists of WW2 look today. All will remember the sacrifice of Spc. Sheehan, in spite of the misguided attitude of his mother. After all, the fruits of his sacrifice will be apparent for all to see, just like those of WW2 veterans are today.

How could it possibly be otherwise? 


Note: Perhaps this thread should be split.....

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Perhaps you could all simply do with a rest from it for awhile. :

 

[Britney Spears]

recceguy:

Give the media a few more days to beat this thing to death.....

 

[Fishbone Jones]

So long as it doesn't happen here. Leave the journalists to do what they do best.

 

[Andyboy]

Oh well. Not the reply I was hoping for but certainly the reply I was expecting. Thanks Brit, for showing me and the rest of the board your true colours. As I thought you're nothing more than a Troll. Disappointing, but as I said, not surprising. I guess the search goes on for reasoned, logical, and intelligent discussion from your side of the debate.

I will follow your advice though and ignore you from this point forward. Too bad this forum doesn't have the ignore feature.

Regards,

Andrew

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Guess some people can't take the hint. Temp lock now in place.