Where I’m from the vols are all we have.
How about nobody’s allowed to have any opinions whatsoever unless they have personal experience of the thing they have an opinion about? That would cut way down on the number of arguments people got into.
What energy gammas? N-16, or Co-60? And if I can get a job I can move… nothing keeping me here. Cool…
An example of such ‘expert’ leadership:
I wonder how long our country would have lasted if we held our leaders to deciding only on matters with which they had personal experience. We probably wouldn’t even been able to form a nation with that restriction.
Here’s the thing about war: sometimes it’s fought for reasons less grand than “defense of liberty” – even less noble than “hey, that’s my oil!” Sometimes, wars are fought for reasons of policy. Policy, like “the U.S. needs to assert dominance in the Middle East,” or “we must contain Communism in Southeast Asia.” Such policies may, in fact, provide good reasons to make war, but they will always be arguable reasons. While moderates may choose their battles (heh), doves tend to oppose policy-based war, preferring to reserve military action as retaliation for obvious wrongdoing. Hawks, on the other hand, will support such wars – because they approve of war as a policy tool. It’s a corollary that they think that every young American ought to be willing to serve American ends in that way. That’s the sort of war that even moderates can oppose if it’s poorly thought out. If a given hawk holds that attitude AND has a history of avoiding combat himself, even a moderate might be tempted to call attention to the contradiction, and a pissed-off dove will call it hypocrisy, and call the hawk a chicken.
If belligerent military types are called ‘Hawks’.
If pro-war civilians are called ‘Chickenhawks’.
Should anti-war civilians be called ‘Chickens’?
I prefer “Battledoves”. They’re fairly common around here.
He’s at the back of the crowd, safe and secure, cheering for the troops to march into Baghdad and overthrow that mean ol’ Saddam for no justifiable reason whatsoever. Sounds like “chickenhawk” to me.
Civilian who are pro-war are not called chickenhawks. It’s those who advocate war but aren’t willing to fight in that war when the opportunity presents itself. Chickenis common slang for *coward. * The word hawk designates one who supports a war.
Frankly, I see nothing wrong with having the good sense to admit to your fears – especially in a war that doesn’t make sense. But to support that war and still act in a cowardly manner is hypocritical.
If you are anti-war, you are designated a dove – which is the sign of peace.
Instead of a dove, some might call you merely a chicken.
Do you see why I prefer to avoid stupid labels like this?
Someone who opposes war in general is a pacifist. While there may be a sound moral or religious basis for a person’s pacifism, I personally believe that this is a terribly naive stance given the realities of the world situation.
Pacifism is accomodated through things like conscientious objection to conscription, which is an honorable way to avoid military service.
For everyone else, war should be decided on the merits of that particular war.
Well, I’m there too. Although I think there were plenty of reasons to get rid of Saddam.
I’ll just assume you’re not willing to call me a chickenhawk, given my humble yet honorable service.
So, am I permitted to advocate war, while NI isn’t, somehow? And if so, why is that right, in a democracy?
I just think, rjung, that you use whatever cudgel is handy to smack at your perceived enemies. Not terribly nice, in my book, and hardly consistent.
I think there are plenty of reasons to get rid of Bush.
I think there are plenty of reasons to get rid of Bush. 
That makes you a Barn Owl.
Is this some form of joke?
You didn’t get it? We’re assigning birds to almost every political position, and barn owl is as arbitrary as the rest.
Ah gotcha.
I guess I’ll call *NK a cocoo bird then.
<shrug>
wtf
ok ok, I’m off to get breakfast and coffee.
That should read…
I guess I’ll call NI a cocoo bird then.
My cite referred also to the US anti-war movement:
Regards,
Shodan
What about people who are generally pacifists, and who opposed the invasion of Iraq, but wouldn’t be permitted to join the military even if they tried (for medical reasons or whatever)?
Are we allowed to have opinions? And if so, what bird are we?
I dub thee Carolina Wren. With Yellow Jasmine in your hair.