I’m not from Chicago so I don’t know anything about Mike North (except that his show is on an all-sports talk station), his intelligence, or his political orientation, but this passage below indicates he’s grossly (if not willfully) ignorant about medical knowledge from the last 40 years.
Well, it’s also a little twisted to think that anyone who questions giving out free cancer sticks to our armed forces must really hate our troops. Ifthe individual soldiers want to smoke, that’s their choice. However, I don’t think it’s such a good idea to assist them in damaging their health and feeding their addiction.
Nicotine is a fine drug for a soldier. Some (many, perhaps) soldiers smoke. They will indeed be glad to get some gifted smokes. Especially if they’re stressed out – and hey, you know, I think they just might be.
We’re going to send these people out into the desert to shoot at and get shot at by religious zealots with guns…and then get all huffy when some guy decides to send them some cigarettes? What, is North going to fly down there and hold a gun to each soldier’s head, demanding that they smoke? Maybe he’s just helping them out by giving some hard-working, stressed-out soldiers a gift that they might really enjoy. Also, the popular implied contention that everyone who smokes a cigarette will die at age 45 is rather silly. Yes, it’s unhealthy. Yes, it contributes to a very large and significant number of deaths. But some people smoke like chimneys and live long, healthy lives. Some people don’t. The idea of a free society is that each adult has the choice to do or not do anything s/he wants as long as they don’t endanger anybody else or the general public. (I imagine that second-hand smoke would not add significantly to the health risk of men who get shot at daily.)
This drives me nuts. A nice smoke to remove the edge of a hard day is a very nice thing indeed, addictive or not, and I can’t think of a harder day than being in combat. Passing out those smokes in WWII was a great move.
Of course, most of those cigs are gonna go to the rear echelon.
Anyway, smoking is (last time I checked) still mostly legal in some places. Until they finally get a bill passed to restrict smokers to wearing an airtight helmet while smoking… anyone got a light?
As much as I loathe the corrupt political system and lobbyists we have, I am kinda glad that there is a strong tobacco lobby.
I just think Americans would be better off spending their money buying phone cards for the troops. That’s something that can be enjoyed by all soldiers overseas, not simply a minority of them.
People are buying phone cards for the troops. Those aren’t two mutually exclusive options now are they?
Good Fucking God! What is this world coming too when people start questioning the negative long-term health implications of sending troops cigarettes WHILE THEY ARE IN COMBAT.
Hey, whatever makes them happy (within reason). They’re out there busting their asses and they want cigs? I’d buy a couple of packs and send them myself there was a way to do it.
And just in case ya’ll don’t know: if you have a prepaid calling card (AT&T, anyway), you can donate some of your minutes to the troops.
Interestingly, my former father-in-law says he was a non-smoker until he served in the British military where cigarettes were given to him as part of his rations. He said several of his colleagues were non-smokers going in, but they were all smokers coming out.
If troops are jonesing for cigarettes, then let them have cigarettes. But I can’t help but wince a little. I’d never stop anyone from sending cigarettes to troops, but I’d rather send something else-- care packages, phone cards, etc. Something that they would need and want, something to say “Hey, we care!” but not something that has been proven to be bad for your health.
Interesting that Wrigley’s shipping tons of gum over there. I wonder what else has been sent over in such massive shipments?
That’s generally my attitude. Of course, judging from some of the indignant replies I’ve gotten on this thread, you’d think I was some kind of puritanical health Nazi who gets his jollies knocking cigarettes out of the mouths of our hard-fighting soldiers. All I’m saying is that it’s a bad idea and that there are probably other things you should consider sending to our troops before you send cigarettes.
In any case, this news story reminds of a time years ago when my cousin and I were wrapping Christmas gifts for my grandmother and I happened to notice my cousin was giving her a large carton of cigarettes as a gift. My grandmother had been a heavy smoker (preferred brand: Camels unfiltered) since she was 15 and, during much of the time I knew her, was bothered by a variety of smoking-related ailments (she later died of lung cancer). When I saw the carton, I told my cousin I didn’t think this was the best gift for her but she replied that since my grandmother liked smoking, she saw no harm in giving cigarettes as a present. I find I’m having the same feelings toward this “smokes for our troops” drive.
Sorry, Cecil’s blowing smoke right there. (Burn the heretic!)
Look how he got to “…we come up with nearly three million smoking deaths.” He’s working from the assumption that a single study that concluded that 1 in 5 people are killed by smoking is correct, dividing the number of servicemen by five, and then arbitrarily inflating that figure by a coupla million.
Even with his more cautious estimate, he fails to account for the number of non-smokers who die from “smoking related diseases.” Emphysema is a “smoking related” disease, and yet more than ten percent of the people who succumb to it have never smoked.
Obviously, smoking is detrimental to your health – even if it doesn’t kill you, or doesn’t kill you until you’re over seventy and sick of the whole business anyway, heavy smokers arguably have a diminished quality of life. But such a blatant manipulation of statistical data to arrive at the highest number possible is way, way beneath our Enlightened Master.
Okay. I’m not a fan of cigarettes as well. Nor am I fan of telling someone who’s trying to provide comfort to deployed soldiers to go to hell or anything. In short, I don’t really care abou this.
But, yeah, I’m going to go ahead and say that, you know, the people shooting at them and stuff is a way more immediate risk we should be outraged about.
No cite for this, but there was news making the rounds on the net that we were shipping lots of condoms over to the troops. The official explanation was that the troops used them to keep sand from entering the barrels of their M-16s and other rifles. Of course, this was the same excuse used in WW II for why the soldiers needed condoms, when in reality, it was for the usual purpose of preventing STDs/pregnancies.
Frankly, if our troops want smokes, give 'em smokes. Even anti-smoking people should be able to support that position. After all, people in the throes of nicotine withdrawl can be rather nasty folks to deal with. Imagine what they’d be like if they were forced to stop smoking and had ready access to the finest military weapons available! :eek:
Out in the boonies, long way from home, food sucks, sleep is difficult and bullets are real, the free cigs in * C * rations were a God send. Worth their weight in gold. Those that did not smoke used them as barter goods…
Phones are better now but every GI I have talked to said… mail, mail, mail, mail … cigs…
Computer access is not to be had out in the sand… Cell phones are used out in the combat sands… They do get you your mail and you can have cigs… except on guard duty and while scouting but anywho… one of these places where you need to have been there or be there now…
For my own good would just get you bitch slapped. Send anything they want including more armor but don’t use your prejudices to curtail what they want. They are the ones doing the fighting.
Except that Nicorette, and the various other things they have to help people quit smoking didn’t do a damned thing for me. I can’t imagine what it’d be like if people were shooting at me when I was trying that stuff. I’d probably have a mouthful of gum, 30 patches plastered on my chest, and near lethal levels of Zyban in my system, and I’d still be wanting a cigarette.
I just want to add that even if you don’t smoke, having cigarettes in Iraq can be damn useful - to ease relations with the locals. If the U.S. is really interested in winning “hearts and minds”, there’s no better way than handing out Marlboros.