# Volunteers Needed: "The War On Terror Cannot Be Won If We Fail In Iraq" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 14, 2007, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887 "2007-01-14T01:06:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/221 "2007-01-17T05:12:19Z")
[QUOTE=RedFury] Mind if I butt in? But of course not, right? [/quote] Not at all. You’re not butting in. I asked you for your response. > [@](#): > > So? You’ve done likewise and have obviously come to the conclusion that it’s far safer to cheer them on from the sidelines. Yes. Of course. Obviously it’s much safer not to be in the front lines. That’s one of the reasons why I don’t enlist. I said that earlier when I said that’s also why I don’t ride a motorcycle anymore. When I had kids I put them first and decided that I should not take the risk of not being there for them, financially, and as a parent. Secondly, it would entail a very long absence from my children. When my wife and I had kids we talked a lot about the responsibilities, and I agreed to put them first. I quit smoking, got in shape, stopped high risk behaviors, and agreed that I would take a position that didn’t require me to be uprooted, travel too much, or have long absences. > [@](#): > > You’ve got to be fooling _yourself_. How long has it taken the insurgents in Iraq to “train” themselves into formidable nemesis to the so-called "most powerful force the world has ever seen? You know, as in your infamous Big Dog theory. Many/most of them were civilians just like you or I prior to your bogus and immoral invasion. And, I might add, most of them weren’t superhumans such as yourself. Run fifty miles? Hell, I doubt most of them could _walk_ more than one or two. An interesting argument. I think there are some merits to it. The insurgents are fromidable. I wonder why. I think running fifty miles, like I have, is a bit of a narcissistic vanity. Part of the reason I do it, is because I think we are very pampered people and not particularly tough or used to discomfort. Doing so is an attempt to step away from that. To toughen myself. I’m not sure that it means a lot compared to a life of hardship and desperation, but I don’t think it means much. That’s kind of besides the point anyway. The insurgents use different tactics. It doesn’t take a lot of training to be a suicide bomber. Many of the things they do don’t require training, or significant training. The insurgency is by it’s very nature and ad hoc sort of enterprise which I would guess is both a strength and a weakness. The insurgents as a general rule don’t engage in open combat. We do. They don’t engage in disciplined and integrated arms operations. We do. An American soldier by his very nature is highly trained. I don’t think you can reasonably equate the insurgency to the US military and suggest that the success of the one means that our troops don’t need to be trained. Perhaps I’m wrong, though. Do you feel that we should be sending poorly trained or untrained troops into combat? An interesting argument, but ultimately, I think, a poor one. > [@](#): > > So, in other words, you’re pussywhipped and choose to wave your pom-poms from the safety of your living room. Yep, just like the Kanadianbacon, **Stones** , two of the toughest, meanest, SOBs one could ever encounter _on-line_. Yes. I choose not to enlist, but I still support the war and the troops that fight in it. On the other note, I don’t really no about those other guys but if we are to measure toughness they don’t really count for much. Nobody is more macho or talks tougher than you… from the very safe anonymity of the internet. > [@](#): > > Guess you don’t think many/most of those dead and maimed soldiers had the same thoughts and ideals about the future (and their wife’s and children’s) as you do. I don’t know what they think. I do know that I would not be willing to have kids and then enlist in the military and face getting killed or maimed while those children depended on me. I respect that other people may feel differently and make different choices. Being a free country with a volunteer army that’s the way it is. I don’t expect everybody to feel the same way or make the same decisions, and I don’t look down on them at all if their decisions and mine don’t match and they prioritize differently. To do so is intolerant. > [@](#): > > Reckless motherfuckers, huh? Nope, nope, that can’t be it. Perhaps many/most of them had no other choice if they wanted to advance in life and better the future of their loved ones. The false dilemma is a pretty common fallacy. It rarely comes down to “no choice.” Certainly some people had poor alternatives and made the best decision they kid. I frankly don’t see what bearing that would have on my choice, and I really don’t see how you can make that argument reasonably unless you refuse to eat because other people in the world are going hungry. Do you? > [@](#): > > Too bad about 30,000 of them are either dead or disabled for life. And for what? So you can keep your promise to your wife? Please. I take my commitments seriously, and I do my best to fulfill them. I wouldn’t dare equate my choices with those of a dead or disabled serviceman who served the country whether or not he agree with the war. > [@](#): > > Grow a pair. They might impair your superpowers (as in bothering you when you run and/or hunt for days. Quite a change from the glass marbles you currently own) but they might make a man out of you yet. Highly doubtful if you ask me judging by all the shit you’ve spewed here throughout the years. Once again, I think you sure are a very tough, pull no punches, aggressive sort of guy… while typing anonymously on the internet. FWIW, you do have a point though about the shit I’ve spewed. I mostly regret the vitriol and anger that I’ve shown here. I don’t think it’s very becoming or manly or particularly meaningful in this context where it can have no consequences, and it does nothing to enhance an argument other than inflate a compensating and cowardly ego. Hurling insults over the internet to anonymous strangers makes one something of a cowardly weenie, IMO. So I’m trying to stop. That’s my new year’s resolution anyway. > [@](#): > > Hate to break it to you, **Scylla** , but you’re only a legend in your own mind. It was pointed out to me once that if you think about that phrase, it can be inspiring. I know. I’m trying. > [@](#): > > Indeed. Precisely why you’re a narcissistic, windbag. For fuck’s sake, it ain’t that different to shoot a helpless deer that it is an insurgent. Except, of course, that unlike deers, insurgents can shoot back. I haven’t been there and lack your experience killing bad guys. I guess I’ll have to take your word about how easy it is, and how little training it takes to be an effective soldier. > [@](#): > > Which brings me back to your “training” bullshit. Great aim, familiar with guns and killing, superathlete, SDMB’s (along w/ **Stones** ) toughest dude…dude, you’re ready to ship out with hardly a week of boot-camp. I mean, think about it, if the way you project your super-macho image here is anything close to reality you won’t need to fire a shoot – Iraqis will simply shit their pant and drop their weapons just seeing such an awesome specimen come their way. I don’t know. You sound pretty tough, and you make it sound so easy. I know you don’t agree with the war and all, but boy it sure would save a lot of lives and money on both sides if you just took all your experience and knowledge and when over there and won the thing. > [@](#): > > Come on, once again, grow some yarbles and acknowledge Elvis is correct. It’s all about saving “your own ass\*.” And yes, every fuckin’ post you make in support of this genocide (including the one I misinterpreted. Though you had a bout of sanity) is a cheer for the death of _others_. You can read minds, too? That’s you, Elvis, and RTF! I don’t know which is more amazing, the ability you guys have to read minds or how often your arguments depend on that ability. > [@](#): > > Holy shit! There’s more of your crap to rebut? Surely you won’t mind if I pass. Whatever’s good for you. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/222 "2007-01-17T07:59:36Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] Do you think you have to buy into Bush’s view of the war to enlist? I would hope that whether or not somebody disagrees with the war they still might think that serving in the military is a worthwhile thing to do. [/quote] Uh… **no!** In fact, that’s the point of this entire thread, so it’s sorta funny you and Mr. Moto are still confused. If you think the **terrorists win** and western civilization, as it were, is in serious danger if we lose in Iraq then you should get over there right away because the consequences would be so dire. I mean, we’re talking about western civilization here…the light and hope of the world and all that shit, y’know? Everyone else, the sane people, don’t believe that, so the idea of Democrats or smart Republicans signing up to support a fantasy as you and others suggest would be…well, interesting. Besides, most people don’t like killing kids or becoming unhinged during the relentless slaughter and going off and raping women or whatever. If you support the Iraq war but don’t think anything particularly bad will happen to us when we lose/finally get tossed out of there then no one has a problem with you not signing up. Well, beyond wondering why you support it…but yeah, you get the idea. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/223 "2007-01-17T08:54:46Z")
Well, not sure if it matters the way things have gone on their own on this thread, but I still think he was talking about civilian volunteers, kind of a like a Peace Corpse. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 10:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/224 "2007-01-17T10:12:03Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > That’s an excellent question. They Reserves and the Guardsmen are different because they have chosen to accept the risk. I do not. I respect their choice, but mine is different. I used to like to ride motorcycles. I used to smoke. I used to engage in other physically risky behavior. When I had children I stopped doing all that because I feel that I have an obligation to be there for them as children and survive to be there father and support them through college, both financially and as a parent on the scene. > > For the first four and a half years of my life I saw my father, and he saw me only on a few short occasions, because he was in the service. I understand the sacrifice. As a child, I lived it. I don’t want my children to live it. It’s also the pact that my wife and I made. She would not have had children with me if I was going to be in the service and the chance of getting called away. Two things bug me about this bit of dodgery. The last paragraph specifically because of the heritage nature of the military. A good chunk of my friends with military fathers joined the military, so I don’t see that “I won’t do that to my kids” as a particularly obvious objection to military service. Many military postings allow for a family life, much of the time. Certainly the reserves, for christ’s sake. But more irritatingly, the first paragraph seems to disregard the fact that many reserve members and guardsmen have children. Either disregarding or there is a serious disconnect between how Scylla thinks the US military is securing the future of America and how we save his own kids. If he joined the military it would be a “risk” for his children but lucky for Scylla, others decided to do “protect America’s future” by waging war in the Middle East for him and his kids. Lucky those reservists don’t think quite like him, at least the stay at home with their kids part - it’s good they think the gung-ho part. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/225 "2007-01-17T11:43:24Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] Do you think you have to buy into Bush’s view of the war to enlist? [/quote] Maybe you either didn’t read the OP, or have forgotten what this debate is about. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/226 "2007-01-17T11:59:27Z")
[QUOTE=RedFury] Fuck-off, sleazeball. The attack the messenger rebuttal is way too lame even for a dipshit like you. [/quote] In case you didn’t realize it, you’re calling someone out for a personal attack while addressing them with terms like “sleazeball” and “dipshit”. > [@](#): > > From The Guardian: > > [High-profile air strikes ‘killed only civilians’](http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4946478-103681,00.html) > > That good enough for you, lardass? Or are you going to keep playing The Three Monkeys? What you quoted says specifically that not all of the attacks were approved by Rumsfeld. The time sensitive ones were not. Here’s how I view the ethics of the whole thing. First and foremost, it is an ethical abomination to aggress a people who have done you no harm. I call it “coercion”, or “initial force”. Every action taken by the aggressor after his initial salvo is as coercive as the first _even if it is in defense of an aggressive response_. Thus, I can’t out of the blue slap you and then put up my arm to defend against your return slap. What appears to be a defense is only a further aggression. You are entitled ethically to retaliate against me with force necessary to end my aggression. But even though I might have aggressed you, you have no right to aggress Mr. Smith in your efforts to get back at me. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/227 "2007-01-17T12:11:02Z")
[QUOTE=Liberal] In case you didn’t realize it, you’re calling someone out for a personal attack while addressing them with terms like “sleazeball” and “dipshit”. [/QUOTE] Seems he’s calling someone out for attacking the **messenger** rather than the message. I don’t see the inconsistency in throwing in a few choice words while doing so. At least he’s not chastising someone for being rude while having been rude himself one page ago. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/228 "2007-01-17T12:32:54Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] Seems he’s calling someone out for attacking the **messenger** rather than the message. [/quote] Yeah, and thus personal. (A messenger is a person.) > [@](#): > > I don’t see the inconsistency in throwing in a few choice words while doing so. And yet… > [@](#): > > At least he’s not chastising someone for being rude while having been rude himself one page ago. …you see it when it suits you. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/229 "2007-01-17T12:55:09Z")
[QUOTE=Liberal] Yeah, and thus personal. (A messenger is a person.) [/quote] Look, you fucked up, plain and simple. You suggested hypocrisy for using a personal attack while he was pointing out that you were attacking the source rather than the message. It’s hardly hypocritical to say you’re a dipshit for avoiding the issue. Boy, how did we ever get along without this nitpicky and incorrect semantic legerdemain? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/230 "2007-01-17T13:45:43Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > So, in other words, you’re pussywhipped and choose to wave your pom-poms from the safety of your living room. Yep, just like the Kanadianbacon, Stones, two of the toughest, meanest, SOBs one could ever encounter _on-line_. This from someone given to issuing threats to other Dopers - online. 😃 The hypocrisies of the left are like the mercies of the Lord - new every morning. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/231 "2007-01-17T14:07:03Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] I think the “chickenhawk argument” is that people who favor the war, are eligible to enter the military, and do not, are hypocrites, and possibly cowards, and possibly don’t deserve to have an opinion or state it, are contemptible, etc… [/QUOTE] My position on that is, as I have indicated, mostly unformed. But of course, as you have described the issue, the issue itself is kind of a jumble, beginning with your “hypocrites, and possibly cowards” formulation - as the ‘chicken’ of ‘chickenhawks’ clearly implies a lack of personal willingness to take the risks that the ‘hawks’ part implies that one is urging on others. As I have said, the spectrum from integrity to hypocrisy and that running from bravery to cowardice are two completely different things. If I had a position on this issue, it would probably be at least as nuanced as my position on what I earlier called ‘hypocrite hawks’, IIRC. I would not confuse my urging that there be no personal morality test for posting here at the SDMB with what I would expect from either a friend, a politician, or an opinion-maker. Accordingly, your claim that I have taken a stand on the ‘chickenhawk argument’ based on my position about posting here is only true as it applies to posting on this board. If that’s all you’re claiming I’m taking a position on, that’s fine. Otherwise, what we have is a silly ‘gotcha’ moment that doesn’t say much for your integrity as it applies to these debates. Not that that should keep you from posting. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/232 "2007-01-17T14:26:38Z")
[QUOTE=Scylla] You can read minds, too? That’s you, Elvis, and RTF! I don’t know which is more amazing, the ability you guys have to read minds or how often your arguments depend on that ability. [/QUOTE] You never did show how my argument _depended_ on that ability. You have now made that assertion twice, but you have never explained it or backed it up in any way. The other thing (which I didn’t bother with at the time, but now that you’re persisting) is that my ‘mind-reading’ consisted of noting that Bush had taken two seemingly contradictory positions, and observing that there was apparently no connection between the two in his mind. Inferring people’s thoughts from their words is something people routinely do in their daily lives. Except when **Scylla** wants to get pedantic, it is rarely considered ‘mind-reading’ to do so. But feel free to score all the cheap, irrelevant points you want if it suits you. I once thought you were intelligent and funny. Maybe you once were. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/233 "2007-01-17T14:54:51Z")
Let’s address a few things here, just to clarify some matters and muddy up some others. Might as well have some fun. Now, I certainly don’t think you need to agree with the current administration to join the military, and I think that would be a lousy way to go about business. If you decided you liked the military and wanted to make it a career, you could count on serving Democratic and Republican presidents alike. I’m one of the most partisan members of this board, but my military service was from 1993 to 1998. I served at all times a president I generally did not like or agree with. And even if I disagreed with some of the orders I received, I had no problem following them through. This included, BTW, service in the Yugoslavian conflict (albeit in a noncombatant role) and I had strong opinions at the time (and still do) about our policy. My job was to carry out policy set by others. I think on balance things are better for us (and me) having done so. Had I been making policy, though, I would have done things differently. I read an article recently by Pat Conroy that absolutely floored me. I said before that people had to choose their path, and he had chosen his. During Vietnam he dodged the draft and became a war protester. A teammate of his went to Vietnam and became a POW. And when Pat Conroy met up with Al Kroboth years later, he became deeply ashamed of his actions, and decided that a less cowardly course would have been to go to Vietnam and then later protest the war. [Article here.](http://www.democracy-project.com/archives/002937.html) Now, this may be a subject for another thread, but I think it is worth discussing anyway. The onus in these discussions tends to be put on Iraq war supporters to enlist, since they’re supporting the war rhetorically but not doing much about it. Yet this war was voted on by democratically elected representatives, and as unpopular as it may be now, we are all in it together in some sense. And when our soldiers die over there, it is a loss to us all. Additional manpower and leadership might make a difference, as Pat Conroy thought. Additionally, there is a good bit of evidence that while political conservatives and the apolitical will serve in the military under a Democratic president, liberals don’t serve in anywhere close to these numbers under either Democrats or Republicans. Surveys tend to bear this out, and I discussed this disparity on these boards before. So with all of that, shouldn’t people of all beliefs (apart from pacifists) be considering the military? And shouldn’t they do so even if they believe a particular mission or battle or war might be misguided? Pat Conroy thought so. Of course, he shirked out of an obligation. The only obligations on us now are moral ones. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/234 "2007-01-17T15:44:32Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] So with all of that, shouldn’t people of all beliefs (apart from pacifists) be considering the military? And shouldn’t they do so even if they believe a particular mission or battle or war might be misguided? [/QUOTE] I think it’s a good question. **Scylla** has already raised it, in a manner more specific to this war. [I’ve started a GD thread on this issue](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=404414). See you there. But before you go, any thoughts about what I asked you @209? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/235 "2007-01-17T16:06:45Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] Never said that they did, as a general rule. See above. But in WWII, think it would have been OK for a healthy, single male in his early 20s who wasn’t an elderly aunt’s sole support (or some such) to “support the war” by putting a “support the troops” magnet on his car, or would you have considered that an empty gesture on his part? (I know - he almost surely would have been drafted. But assuming by some fluke he wasn’t.) [/QUOTE] During WWII, my grandfather was ruled 4-F because of a heart murmur. Of course, he was perfectly healthy and active and athletic, and would lead a outdoors centered lifestyle until he died of cancer in his late 70s. Even so, the Army didn’t want him. Not only did he have to explain this to some people who questioned it at the time, I always thought he felt guilty about it in some sense, even though, of course, it wasn’t his decision or his fault. And obviously, he knew quite a few people who didn’t come home. Now, obviously, he wasn’t going to serve that way. But he did his part by working in the steel industry in Pittsburgh, an industry vital to the war effort. My other grandfather was out of the draft pool due to age, but moved from Pittsburgh to Baltimore to build Liberty ships. I’m not going to demand that people with stickers on their car join up. But I will ask what stake they have in this war that isn’t magnetic. It is actually a question I have for all of you, not expecting an answer, just some serious reflection. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/236 "2007-01-17T16:19:06Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] During WWII, my grandfather was ruled 4-F because of a heart murmur. Of course, he was perfectly healthy and active and athletic, and would lead a outdoors centered lifestyle until he died of cancer in his late 70s. Even so, the Army didn’t want him. Not only did he have to explain this to some people who questioned it at the time, I always thought he felt guilty about it in some sense, even though, of course, it wasn’t his decision or his fault. And obviously, he knew quite a few people who didn’t come home. Now, obviously, he wasn’t going to serve that way. But he did his part by working in the steel industry in Pittsburgh, an industry vital to the war effort. My other grandfather was out of the draft pool due to age, but moved from Pittsburgh to Baltimore to build Liberty ships. [/QUOTE] Can I boil that down to a “a ‘support the troops’ magnet would have been an empty gesture in WWII”? Not trying to put words in your mouth, just asking. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/237 "2007-01-17T16:24:31Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] Look, you fucked up, plain and simple. [/quote] No, I didn’t. Neener neener neener. :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > You suggested hypocrisy for using a personal attack while he was pointing out that you were attacking the source rather than the message. It’s hardly hypocritical to say you’re a dipshit for avoiding the issue. He said I was attacking the messenger. That’s an accusation of ad hominem by definition. > [@](#): > > Boy, how did we ever get along without this nitpicky and incorrect semantic legerdemain? Probably the same way you always have — by obfuscation, incomprehension, and nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/238 "2007-01-17T16:25:27Z")
[QUOTE=Liberal] In case you didn’t realize it, you’re calling someone out for a personal attack while addressing them with terms like “sleazeball” and “dipshit”. [/quote] I’ll try amd make this simple. Like I’m talking to a not too bright five year old. Listen-up, asshole, my complaint was that you spent your time digging-up shit on _Chris Floyd_ and NOT the thruthfulness of what he WROTE. > [@](#): > > What you quoted says specifically that not all of the attacks were approved by Rumsfeld. The time sensitive ones were not. Alright, molasses for brains, let’s back-up a minute here. All I claimed in my [FIRST](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8158333&postcount=193) post on the matter was that, and I quote myself: _**“Moreover, although my google-fu is not helping, I clearly remember reading that Rumsfeld had to be consulted in pre-war raid (of which there were many) when the chosen targets posed danger to fifty or more civians in the surroundings. He approved each and everyone of them”**_ Now read that again…take your time and tell me how either of my cites fails to back said claim? There ain’t dick there about “time-sensitive” missions is there? In fact, if my memory was faulty at all, you should’ve pointed to the _lower_ civilian death threshold held as a standard. Not that it mattered of course, since – say it with me now – **Rumsfeld approved them all** > [@](#): > > Here’s how I view the ethics of the whole thing. First and foremost, it is an ethical abomination to aggress a people who have done you no harm. I call it “coercion”, or “initial force”. Every action taken by the aggressor after his initial salvo is as coercive as the first _even if it is in defense of an aggressive response_. Thus, I can’t out of the blue slap you and then put up my arm to defend against your return slap. What appears to be a defense is only a further aggression. You are entitled ethically to retaliate against me with force necessary to end my aggression. But even though I might have aggressed you, you have no right to aggress Mr. Smith in your efforts to get back at me. And that’s what I call a steaming pile that has jackshit to do with the FACT that I proved my original recollection of the Rumsfeld approved, pre-war, civilian killing sorties through the use of VERIFIABLE INFORMATION/CITES. So print this post and eat it. Unless of course, you want to go on another fishing expedition to try and discredit air force commander, General Michael Moseley, as another “notoriously one-dimensional political hack quoted in a leftist blog.” Ian Andersen must have been thinking of you when he wrote the lyrics to the great tune “Thick As A Brick.” There, chew on that for a while, dipshit. And stick a flute (not Ian’s please!) up your ass. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/239 "2007-01-17T16:59:57Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] Can I boil that down to a “a ‘support the troops’ magnet would have been an empty gesture in WWII”? Not trying to put words in your mouth, just asking. [/QUOTE] It is an empty gesture now, if that is all the person is doing. Of course, we cannot know at first glance. A woman driving with such a sticker may be an emptyheaded dittohead or the wife of a serviceman in Iraq. No way of knowing without knowing her. Which is why it comes down to individual hearts and minds and actions for me, not stickers. And I don’t have one on my car. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2007, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887/240 "2007-01-17T17:30:21Z")
Serendipitously, The Washington Monthly features the following exchange between Jim Lehrer and Bush. > [@](#): > > LEHRER: Let me ask you a bottom-line question, Mr. President. If it is as important as you’ve just said – and you’ve said it many times – as all of this is, particularly the struggle in Iraq, if it’s that important to all of us and to the future of our country, if not the world, why have you not, as president of the United States, asked more Americans and more American interests to sacrifice something?.. > > PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, you know, I think a lot of people are in this fight. I mean, they sacrifice peace of mind when they see the terrible images of violence on TV every night. So we are all sacrificing. We are sacrificing our beautiful minds. Good to know we’re all in this together. Of course, Bush has repeatedly railed against showing terrible images of violence on TV every night. So, if he were to have his way, I wonder what our sacrifices would be then? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/volunteers-needed-the-war-on-terror-cannot-be-won-if-we-fail-in-iraq/387887.md?page=13)