Comments on: Chickenhawk Redux – Sacrificing Children http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/ Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:55:42 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: ALS http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50341 ALS Wed, 29 Jun 2005 20:22:51 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50341 <blockquote>That’s what freedom is all about! </blockquote> Almost right. Freedom is about being able to support (or not support) a war, regardless of whether or not your son is fighting in it. We all get a say. Isn't that dandy?

That’s what freedom is all about!

Almost right. Freedom is about being able to support (or not support) a war, regardless of whether or not your son is fighting in it.

We all get a say.

Isn't that dandy?

]]> By: Phil Lanager http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50324 Phil Lanager Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:46:25 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50324 What are the Bush girls doing these days anyway? I never hear about them doing anything at all. As far as military service, I would think it an honor for those two able-bodied young women to both serve in Iraq. Their dad should be consistent when talking about making "sacrifices" and encourage them to sign up for service right away while the Army and Marines need them. I'm glad someone out there has the balls to ask these questions. That's what freedom is all about! What are the Bush girls doing these days anyway? I never hear about them doing anything at all. As far as military service, I would think it an honor for those two able-bodied young women to both serve in Iraq. Their dad should be consistent when talking about making "sacrifices" and encourage them to sign up for service right away while the Army and Marines need them. I'm glad someone out there has the balls to ask these questions. That's what freedom is all about!

]]> By: LJD http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50323 LJD Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:25:43 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50323 No one wants to see their loved one go to war. Actually, no individual wants to go to war. Yet they volunteer for this duty, repeatedly. It is a sense of right and wrong, of helping those in need. The chickenshits just don;t get it. They figure if we just hang around the coffee house pissing and moaning about how bad life in the U.S. is, then the rest of the world will just leave us alone... Until the issue of the day is helping whatever country resist their opressors. Somehow between demanding support and actually giving it, they abandon the whole damn thing. No one wants to see their loved one go to war. Actually, no individual wants to go to war. Yet they volunteer for this duty, repeatedly. It is a sense of right and wrong, of helping those in need. The chickenshits just don;t get it. They figure if we just hang around the coffee house pissing and moaning about how bad life in the U.S. is, then the rest of the world will just leave us alone... Until the issue of the day is helping whatever country resist their opressors. Somehow between demanding support and actually giving it, they abandon the whole damn thing.

]]> By: Roger http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50316 Roger Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:44:55 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50316 oops...forgot to add something to that last paragraph: And let’s be brutally honest here, no one wants to send their son, daughter, niece, nephew to war. Personally, I don't want to ever see my nieces and nephews in harms way. This litmus test of sons and daugters is bogus. oops...forgot to add something to that last paragraph:

And let’s be brutally honest here, no one wants to send their son, daughter, niece, nephew to war. Personally, I don't want to ever see my nieces and nephews in harms way.

This litmus test of sons and daugters is bogus.

]]> By: Roger http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50315 Roger Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:42:24 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50315 Patrick Henry spoke that immortal line, "Give me liberty, or give me death!" Did he serve? The argument that the cause is only just if you are willing to commit your own sons and daughters is utter nonsense and incredibly flawed. What if I was the one greenlighting the war in Iraq? I don't have a son or daughter. For medical reasons I was not able to serve in the military. And let's be brutally honest here, no one wants to send their son, daughter, niece, nephew to war. Patrick Henry spoke that immortal line, "Give me liberty, or give me death!" Did he serve?

The argument that the cause is only just if you are willing to commit your own sons and daughters is utter nonsense and incredibly flawed.

What if I was the one greenlighting the war in Iraq? I don't have a son or daughter. For medical reasons I was not able to serve in the military.

And let's be brutally honest here, no one wants to send their son, daughter, niece, nephew to war.

]]> By: ALS http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50303 ALS Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:15:53 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50303 This argument is completely bogus. Whether or not you have a child in the service has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not you are "entitled" to support a war. Those of us who support the war in Afhanistan and Iraq simply can't win this argument. Because if you support the war, but have no children in combat, that makes you a chicken hawk. But if you support the war, and have children in combat, you're obviously a Bush-worshipping brainwashed right wing nut job. This argument can't be won. According to their logic, if you support the war, you are wrong, regardless of whether or not you or your loved ones serve. This argument is completely bogus.

Whether or not you have a child in the service has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not you are "entitled" to support a war.

Those of us who support the war in Afhanistan and Iraq simply can't win this argument.

Because if you support the war, but have no children in combat, that makes you a chicken hawk. But if you support the war, and have children in combat, you're obviously a Bush-worshipping brainwashed right wing nut job.

This argument can't be won. According to their logic, if you support the war, you are wrong, regardless of whether or not you or your loved ones serve.

]]> By: Pug http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50294 Pug Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:55:52 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50294 It is not at all a silly argument. It is an extremely fair question to ask why not one member of the extended Bush family is currently serving in the military. Tim Johnson's son served. Doris Kearns Goodwin's son served. John McCain's son is in the Navy now. Johnson and Goodwin, of course, are traitorous Democrats, not nearly as patriotic as the Internet posters you see so often. It is a little too easy to favor wars when you know you and your loved ones will not be called upon to serve, isn't it? The yellow ribbon on the back of your SUV, next to the W04 sticker, does not make you a great patriot. There are many cliches to support this argument. You know, "actions speak louder than words", "where the rubber meets the road" and things like that. Of course not everyone can serve, but those that are able-bodied supporters of the war, and of the right age which is now 38 or younger, should be packing a rifle in Ramadi if they really believe what they say. The silliness, as usual, comes from the besotted fool Hitchens. If you really believe a cause is worth someone's son dying for, then you should be willing to risk your son also. It is not at all a silly argument. It is an extremely fair question to ask why not one member of the extended Bush family is currently serving in the military. Tim Johnson's son served. Doris Kearns Goodwin's son served. John McCain's son is in the Navy now. Johnson and Goodwin, of course, are traitorous Democrats, not nearly as patriotic as the Internet posters you see so often.

It is a little too easy to favor wars when you know you and your loved ones will not be called upon to serve, isn't it? The yellow ribbon on the back of your SUV, next to the W04 sticker, does not make you a great patriot.

There are many cliches to support this argument. You know, "actions speak louder than words", "where the rubber meets the road" and things like that.

Of course not everyone can serve, but those that are able-bodied supporters of the war, and of the right age which is now 38 or younger, should be packing a rifle in Ramadi if they really believe what they say.

The silliness, as usual, comes from the besotted fool Hitchens. If you really believe a cause is worth someone's son dying for, then you should be willing to risk your son also.

]]> By: Christopher Cross http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/chickenhawk_redux_-_sacrificing_children/comment-page-1/#comment-50251 Christopher Cross Wed, 29 Jun 2005 01:21:49 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/?p=11117#comment-50251 I'm trying to joint the Army--the Army bureacracy is making it exceedingly difficult. I'm trying to joint the Army--the Army bureacracy is making it exceedingly difficult.

]]>