Perpetual War & Never-ending State of Mourning

On the other hand you didn't fly over N Vietnam with people shooting at you. I might still agree with you about "hero", though, because it is a completely abused word - there were plenty of other pilots who flew in the same skies as McCain. However his level of risk was still much greater than the majority of people serving in the military at the same time. To label someone playing sports, a politician or generally most public figures a hero is complete and utter BS.
Agreed.
 
On the other hand you didn't fly over N Vietnam with people shooting at you. I might still agree with you about "hero", though, because it is a completely abused word - there were plenty of other pilots who flew in the same skies as McCain. However his level of risk was still much greater than the majority of people serving in the military at the same time. To label someone playing sports, a politician or generally most public figures a hero is complete and utter BS.
Yep. Not sure I agree that his level of risk was greater than the majority serving though... well those INSIDE of Vietnam anyway.
 
Do you think John McCain is a hero? Even though he was captured?

On the other hand you didn't fly over N Vietnam with people shooting at you. I might still agree with you about "hero", though, because it is a completely abused word - there were plenty of other pilots who flew in the same skies as McCain. However his level of risk was still much greater than the majority of people serving in the military at the same time. To label someone playing sports, a politician or generally most public figures a hero is complete and utter BS.

I think you can do heroic things, but that doesn't necessarily make you a hero. He flew into battle knowing the risks. That's heroic. It doesn't make him a hero. Lots of people criticize McCain. Personally, I try not to criticize his service in the military. As far as I know, he did his duty. And like him or not, I don't see how you can discredit his years as a POW. He was tortured and put though hell. But his years as a politician, those are fair game, and it's my opinion that his many years in politics show he wasn't a hero.

Truthfully, I'm not sure what makes a hero. Is a hero someone without fault? If that's the definition of a hero, then I would argue heroes are a myth and none exist. Is a hero defined by one action in life, or a lifetime of choices. If you measure any man's life, he's bound to have stumbled, so again, can anyone truly be considered a hero? My honest opinion, no one is a hero to everyone, but most people have individuals in life they personally consider heroes where others may never understand why. My hero was always my dad. I don't expect that others would look upon him as a hero, and that's fine, but he was a hero to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I think you can do heroic things, but that doesn't necessarily make you a hero. He flew into battle knowing the risks. That's heroic. It doesn't make him a hero. Lots of people criticize McCain. Personally, I try not to criticize his service in the military. As far as I know, he did his duty. And like him or not, I don't see how you can discredit his years as a POW. He was tortured and put though hell. But his years as a politician, those are fair game, and it's my opinion that his many years in politics show he wasn't a hero.

Truthfully, I'm not sure what makes a hero. Is a hero someone without fault? If that's the definition of a hero, then I would argue heroes are a myth and none exist. Is a hero defined by one action in life, or a lifetime of choices. If you measure any man's life, he's bound to have stumbled, so again, can anyone truly be considered a hero? My honest opinion, no one is a hero to everyone, but most people have individuals in life they personally consider heroes where others may never understand why. My hero was always my dad. I don't expect that others would look upon him as a hero, and that's fine, but he was a hero to me.

This. His military service deserves respect I think. That doesn’t give him carte blanche to be an idiot as a politician though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
I feel like Ras just learned the word propaganda with as many times as he repeated it in here. It's like in school learning a new word of the day, using it a new sentence over and over.
 
Yep. Not sure I agree that his level of risk was greater than the majority serving though... well those INSIDE of Vietnam anyway.

Definitely true of troops within Vietnam - a lot of those guys were subject to day after day of hostile environments. McCain's as a pilot would have been a few hours at a time, and perhaps not every day. My comment really meant all people serving in the military at the time.

I was on Okinawa at the time, and one of the most amazing sights was driving through a huge ammunition storage facility just off the runway at Kadena - literally going through long canyons of munitions piled on both sides of the road apparently as high as the crates could be stacked. And that would have been a fraction of what was actually expended in Vietnam.
 
I think you can do heroic things, but that doesn't necessarily make you a hero. He flew into battle knowing the risks. That's heroic. It doesn't make him a hero. Lots of people criticize McCain. Personally, I try not to criticize his service in the military. As far as I know, he did his duty. And like him or not, I don't see how you can discredit his years as a POW. He was tortured and put though hell. But his years as a politician, those are fair game, and it's my opinion that his many years in politics show he wasn't a hero.

Truthfully, I'm not sure what makes a hero. Is a hero someone without fault? If that's the definition of a hero, then I would argue heroes are a myth and none exist. Is a hero defined by one action in life, or a lifetime of choices. If you measure any man's life, he's bound to have stumbled, so again, can anyone truly be considered a hero? My honest opinion, no one is a hero to everyone, but most people have individuals in life they personally consider heroes where others may never understand why. My hero was always my dad. I don't expect that others would look upon him as a hero, and that's fine, but he was a hero to me.

I separate McCain's military record from his political record, and I respect his military service - not so much his politics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
So you are coming off of Military Appreciation Month, May, and the exposure is more prominent then. You also have several holidays and prominent dates during that time related to the military (Memorial Day, VE Day, etc...). Something to consider.

Edit: also this was put in place by Congress in 1999. So while your observation of the timing with 9/11 is close it isn’t the actual reason for NMAM as it predated 9/11

You are welcome to add your comments after this action...
 
There’s no reason to lower the flag for this.

The policy is becoming overused and will ultimately render the honor insignificant. To the extent that it primarily honors politicians who have and deserve no honor, it is already an abhorrent practice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
But at least it further validates what I initially felt. We have far too many occasions of the national mourning...

Certainly - if we were actually mourning the deaths of those who defend the country, but in most cases that isn't what it's all about. It's a custom more in line with the old multi gun salute for visiting "dignitaries". "Dignitaries" like the ones who infest DC and "deserve the honor" are generally the very people who cause the deaths of others on the battlefield.
 
You are welcome to add your comments after this action...

I said in the other thread they shouldn’t have done this. The governor is within his power to do it at a state level. No reason for this at the national level.

But what correlation is there with these civilians and military appreciation? I don’t see any.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
From 9/11 To COVID-19: Nineteen Years Of Permanent "Emergency"

Trust the Experts!

Support the Troops!

Be Always Afraid!

The media itself remains an accomplice in this. Then, as now, media pundits and "journalists" side reflexively with officials promoting fear and obedience to the state.

Thanks to the reaction to 9/11, governments in the US are now far larger, far more expensive, and far less limited by laws and constitutions than in the past. This is what happens when a country believes itself to be in a constant state of emergency. Due process is out the window. Governments get away with far more than would have been the case otherwise.

This is America in a state of permanent emergency. The justification for the regime's ever growing power changes over time. But the results are the same.

1600056688880.png
 
Are The Forever Wars Really Ending?

“There is no… sound reason for the United States to continue sacrificing precious lives and treasure in a conflict not directly connected to our safety or other vital national interests.”

William Ruger

In Trump’s first term, his commitment to extricate America from the forever wars went unrealized, due in part to the resistance of hawks Trump himself appointed to carry out his foreign policy agenda.

Clearly, with the cuts in troops in Germany, Iraq and Afghanistan, and the appointments of Ruger and Macgregor, Trump has signaled a new resolve to reconfigure U.S. foreign policy in an “America First” direction, if he wins a second term. Will he follow through?

Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has been in an extended argument with itself over America’s role, America’s mission in the world.
 
I'm not advocating it but when we are no longer the reigning super power maybe we can be like France, UK, Germany, etc and let someone else carry most of the burden and have troops stationed all over the place.

I also recognize that theoretically we could do that now but too many interests wouldn't allow it and it would mean we were no longer the reigning super power. China would hold that honor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
I'm not advocating it but when we are no longer the reigning super power maybe we can be like France, UK, Germany, etc and let someone else carry most of the burden and have troops stationed all over the place.

I also recognize that theoretically we could do that now but too many interests wouldn't allow it and it would mean we were no longer the reigning super power. China would hold that honor.
You really think China wants to have troops all over the world and getting entangled in all of these regional skirmishes?
 
You really think China wants to have troops all over the world and getting entangled in all of these regional skirmishes?

No, they want to financially control the governments of these countries and make them use their troops to enforce China’s will. And if they don’t then China will use their military might.

Almost the exact opposite of how we handle things.
 
No, they want to financially control the governments of these countries and make them use their troops to enforce China’s will. And if they don’t then China will use their military might.

Almost the exact opposite of how we handle things.
The moment China places a significant amount of resources outside of their region of influence, for example in Africa, that would open the door for India to gain an advantage in the Himalaya region. Now they Chinese would find themselves in a two front war and stretched out under a rolling pin.

That's just India. That doesn't count what Vietnam, The Korean peninsula, Japan, or the United States would do.
 

VN Store



Back
Top