Disgusting - anthrax delivery thru Reno Post Office

Paul,

I disagree that it is 'openness' which is being attacked. With all due respect, you don't see them frothing at the mouth over Canada, or France, or Japan. I believe that the idea that these people hate the Great and Powerful Wizard of Oz which we've been calling "Freedom" is a fallacy. Why would they? Under scrutiny, I don't think it stands.

I call "Freedom" a GPWO because I've never heard anybody explain what it is satisfactorily to convince me that they understand what it is, how it is, and what responsibilities come with it. To me, it's sort of become one of those cheap-arse little paper flags that people wave, then throw out the next day. It's just The Thing People Are Supposed To Do.

Rusty,

Okay, yes, I can agree to what you say. Provided we maintain level heads, and choose our methods objectively.

N2S,

I had to think on this one overnight. I think that I only agree in part, that we all value human life here. I feel that it has become easier than ever to dehumanize the 'enemy', and that most of us don't feel like walking a mile in their shoes. It's become "Us versus Them", and that makes empathy and compassion a less likely response. Which is really quite tragic, because when you get down to it, we're almost identical where it counts. If more people remembered that, we'd see less terrorism to begin with.
 
Originally posted by Rust
I call "Freedom" a GPWO because I've never heard anybody explain what it is satisfactorily to convince me that they understand what it is, how it is, and what responsibilities come with it. To me, it's sort of become one of those cheap-arse little paper flags that people wave, then throw out the next day. It's just The Thing People Are Supposed To Do.
Click to expand...

Rust... I'll take a stab at it:

Freedom: The right to publish thoughts that are contrary to the established government without fear or retaliation; the right to voice your own opinions in public; the right to pursue work in an occupation of your own choosing, live where you would like to live (within your means), travel where you want to travel and for the most part, take part in any recreational activity you wish to (within the laws of the land).

The opportunity to attend schools (within your means... and sometimes outside of your means) to achieve a higher education. The right to marry who you choose, have as many children as you wish, to attend whatever church or follow whatever religious practices you want.

Many more... but I'm at work----

Responsibilities of Freedom: Serve your country when it needs you; don't take for granted what you have in regards to Freedom; be tolerant of others excersising their freedom, even when they don't agree with your opinions/thoughts (unless they are endangering you or others).

I'll guarentee you that most folks I know who serve/served in the military don't consider Freedom to be a cheap-arsed flag to wave when it's PC to do so then throw away. This is something the we have sacrificed/died to protect, and will continue to do so.

It is easy to see these things if you travel to a foreign country and compare it to what we have here in the U.S. I was once told by an old Marine that it was his opinion that EVERY person should serve in the military in an country overseas before they were 21. It simply lets you see how good we have it over here. I didn't agree with him then, but I did a year later when I went overseas. I spent 6 years overseas and travelled to most countries in Europe and a few in Asia... the difference is simply staggering.

Okay, I'm back to work.

Alan
 
The old Marine was dead right. And if they don't want to serve in the military then they can serve in a volunteer capacity like the Peace Corps. But one way or the other it should be part of the deal and I hope the time comes when it is mandatory.
 
Originally posted by Bill Martino
The old Marine was dead right. And if they don't want to serve in the military then they can serve in a volunteer capacity like the Peace Corps. But one way or the other it should be part of the deal and I hope the time comes when it is mandatory.
Click to expand...

I'm with you on this Bro!!!!
There would dayum sure be a lot less of the poor dysfunctional home excuses and it would help to deal with the gang and many other problems as well.
The iceing on the cake is that it would make the kids that are already good even better IMO.
 
They would learn more in those two years than they did in 12 years of school here. And, lessons that can't be taught or learned here.
 
As part of the payment for it. Freedom is never free and those who are not willing to pay for it but only want to reap the benefits from it don't deserve it.
 
It doesn't fall under it at all.

It is more like the price of freedom.

Freedom doesn't always come free. :(
 
I agree with you Bill (fellas) ....and I gladly stand up next to you and defend her still today...
 
Mandatory 2 years of service for 100% (both genders) of the population commencing on your 18th birthday. Then a return to school with 100% of your room and board paid for at any public university for the full 4 year degree (provided you meet the admissions requirement, retain at least a "C" average, and remain active in the reserves).

n2s
 
Okay, here's one for you, then. What about wash-outs?

I've a friend who's a Bosun's Mate (IIRC) in the Canadian Navy, and I find his tales of boot camp apalling. I couldn't survive the kind of cruel discipline he endured, even if I found I was physically made of sterner stuff than I suspect. He never said as much, but I think he tends to agree with me - I've got The Wrong Stuff. I'd crack, and ultimately wind up in a military detention facility, or with a dishonourable discharge.

So, what about the misfits and the fragile? What about those who, like me, don't even qualify for military duty due to physical limitations? Pardon me if this sounds less like freedom to me, and more like totalitarian rule. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.
 
Rust, pick up and read "Starship Troopers" at your local library. Written by the Godzilla of science fiction authors, Robert Anson Heinlein. It is probably the most widely read and appreciated of the arguments for service to your country as a prerequisite to the privilige of voting and makes the most sense.

In Heinlein's proposal, service is not mandatory. It is a prerequisite to full citizenship. The idea being that the most trustworthy to excercise citizenship are those who have already demonstrated willingness to put the good of the country ahead of their own. Citizenship is not awarded til completion of service. That service may be military, it may be any number of other jobs, but it entails earning the vote through sacrifice. Anyone regardless of physical condition can do a tour, even the blind, halt, and maimed. But whatever the tour is, it calls for placing the welfare of others before your own.

Me, I didn't serve in the military. Don't know what I'd have done if I hadn't been physically exempt from the draft during vietnam. But I did spend ten years working abuse/neglect/exploitation of minors and the elderly. Working with juveniles, incest, and worse. Working early intervention with children at high risk for substance abuse. Supervising juvenile offender special programs on a reservation for five years. Interning with Adult Parole and Probation. Helping substance abusers. Facilitating improvements. Doing social work.

Hell with it. You're ready to open your ears, and your eyes. Then talk to me. Then only.
 
Originally posted by Rusty
Hell with it. You're ready to open your ears, and your eyes. Then talk to me. Then only.
Click to expand...

There are others in this forum besides yourself who I have been writing to, my eyes and ears are considerably more open than most, and I am hereby curtailing my part in this conversation before I completely lose my temper with this brand of condescension.
 
So, what about the misfits and the fragile? What about those who, like me, don't even qualify for military duty due to physical limitations? Pardon me if this sounds less like freedom to me, and more like totalitarian rule. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.
Click to expand...

I have no simple answers to this one. While I agree, that universal service would allow young people to gain incredibly valuable experience without putting them at a disadvantage in their chosen careers, Rust brings up a good point. We would need an alternative path for consciencious objector, and the physically, or mentally incapable. This is all academic anyway. We are talking about putting 7,000,000 young people in uniform, on top of a professional military training/command corps. with an additional 17,000,000 on active reserve.

We would never be able to afford such a thing. The financial cost would be the equivalent of fighting WWII on a continous basis. The US would have to evolve a global empire just to find the global real estate to give these kids an expat assignment. I am not sure if this is what Rust is suggesting with the reference to "totalitarian rule".

n2s
 
...The concept is actually quite simple.

If you can't serve militarily for one reason or another (physical or otherwise) there are other ways of serving your country and society.

It's the willingness to sacrifice for that concept that is important.
To just be willing to "take" and not "give" in return is less than honorable. There are men and women past and present that have offered their lives in defense of this nation and your freedom.

As Rusty alluded to, there are other forms of service to your country. Maybe you couldn't fight to protect your country, but worst case scenario, you could work in a munitions plant or do something else to further the cause where needed(hypothetically speaking). Or some other work that would further the needs of our nation.

If you're unwilling to do even that I think you're absolutely right to bow out of this conversation since it will only get more condescending from here.

You'll find that the "cantina" is peopled with folks who understand their debt to a nation and society that has allowed them to live in freedom and know that there is a price to pay to keep it that way.
 
Rust - I have never served in our nation’s military either. By the laws of our country you and I have the same rights as those who have. Neither of us need accept a summary judgement that our thoughts are less valuable than the thoughts of those that have served. But there may be things outside of our experience that you and I can learn from those that have served, if only we listen carefully.

There are several issues in this thread that bear commentary.

Civilian casualties- It seems to me that the citizens of a country comprise and are responsible for it’s government. Even the poor and uneducated can overthrow an unacceptable government. Witness the French revolution. It is impossible to wage war on a country without affecting that nation’s citizens. Are the women and children of a nation more “innocent” than the young men (many without a political thought in their head) whom it is acceptable to kill on the battlefield? I think that we must acknowledge that when we make war on a nation that harbors our killers, we will kill some natives of that country. It should be a regrettable, but predictable, consequence of aiding and abetting lethal attacks against US citizens.

Torture- I would rather US citizens did not engage in torture. Certainly not state-sanctioned torture. It seems to me that some fundamental values of this nation expressed in documents like the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights involve respect for the individual. I have argued above that circumstances may require killing individuals. I would hope that we can do it with open eyes and with respect for those we kill.

Aid- I have rarely seen aid in the form of food do any long term good. Much more valuable is the type of “aid” provided by HI. Perhaps it is more valuable because it is not pity-based alms at all. Rather it involves a respect for others. To bomb a nation while dropping food on them seems schizophrenic to me. Perhaps we should effectively defeat them, accepting casualties among the opponent nations citizenry, then commence any rebuilding process.
 
The tone of this discussion has become increasingly hostile and disrespectful from certain corners. If those who can afford me no respect feel that belittling my beliefs and my status as a worthwhile citizen of my nation constitutes a 'win' for them, so be it. I can't stop them.

A primary reason I am an advocate of peace is because it is something I have learned to treasure - I seldom have it. I am naturally predisposed to violence, and I have to fight myself every day, between what's in my heart and what's in my blood.

And it takes every ounce of will that I possess to just shut up when I know in my heart that I am right. But I have been doing my very best to stay 'well-behaved' in this forum, and I am not about to allow myself to screw that up by entering a flame war with the co-moderator.

And that's why I have nothing more to say.
 
Rust, one of the things I would still be willing to die for is your right to say anything you want on this forum -- except badmouth individuals, products or use foul language. That I'll delete but you are certainly free to express any notion, idea, philosophy, position, or just about anything else you have to say.

But when you swim against the current you must be prepared for a harder time than when you are swimming with it.

There's a hundred jobs I could find for you to do in volunteer service in Nepal or any third world country for that matter.

N2s, the cost for volunteer service is not all that great. When I joined the Peace Corps my pay was $75 per month. I spoke with a Peace Corps volunteer in Nepal my last journey and I think the pay had gone up to about $200 per month but that's not much for a degreed professional. I'll agree that the cost would be substantial but I think it would be worth it.
 
Rust,

I agree with Uncle and restate my previous post. Please keep posting. One of the things I posted as a responsibility of freedom was to be tolerant of others opinions.

If nothing more, keep up the dialog in order to keep communications open. We all might learn something from one another.

As stated, there are many different ways to serve your country. First off, some military basic training is easier than others. There is a huge difference between the Marine Corps and the Air Force. If I could make it (Air Force) as an out of shape 17 year old... anyone can. If you have a physical disability that would prevent military service... then take one of the other routes. For instance:

Peace Corps (mentioned)
Youth Conservation Corps or Civilian Conservation Corps (if it is still going... don't know)
Red Cross
Homeless Shelters
Hosptial Volunteers
any number of Social Service roles (like Rusty mentioned)

See my point? My initial thought was to get today's youth out overseas to let them see first hand how good we have it here in the U.S. The Peace Corps would also fulfill this goal. However, serving your country... or giving back to the country is what we are getting at...

I think that this ideal of contributing to the nation has slipped away over the past few decades. My generation hasn't seen a protracted war, neither have our children. The Gulf War was more like a Hollywood production, without a prolonged battle/casualties like Vietnam. The Nation hasn't been called on to support a war effort since WW.II and Korea. My generation and our children are growing up ignorant of what it means to have to fight for freedom. Everything has been handed to us without a huge cost of blood and battle. This inexperience (ignorance) will cost us... because people now have the mindset of "why should I go and serve...," not "Where do I sign up." NOTE: I have been very happy to see that enlistments are up and that our own forumite have enlisted too... way to go guys! I wish I could go with you...

In WWII, there were kids well under the age of 18 trying to enlist to fight. Today, there were people trying to think about how to get to Canada if the war broke out (right after the bombing). What was worse... PARENTS were trying to figure it out too!

During the Gulf War, people who were enlisted in the Guards and Reserves were actually complaining that they had to go active duty... "I didn't sign up for war... I just wanted to go to school..." That was a paraphrased quote from a Reservist that ran on CNN. I still remember it because it caused me to grind my teeth for days! Luckily, that type of behavior was an exception... not the rule. The majority went when called... that is their job.

To wind up this long post, our whole point is: If you are to be a productive member of our society... if you take advantage of the freedoms that you enjoy (see previous post), then when the country is in need of you... serve. In some form or fashion, lend a hand... get involved. If you are a pacifist (I have no problem with pacifists either), then contribute to the country in a peaceful way (Peace Corps). You will get the experience of a lifetime, learn to appreciate the U.S. more, and come away a better person for it.

Rust... keep posting. You are encouraging me to write more... which can't be bad at all. I don't mean to be condesending either... and appologize if I come off like that. It is just that you have landed on a very patriotic forum, full members who are rather vocal about their patriotism.

Again... welcome to the Cantina :D

Alan

BTW... Rusty: Robert Heinlein was my favorite author for years as I grew up. ST was a favorite book... I second everything you said about it. I also think he (Heinlein) was right about public flogging, or public corpral punishment :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top