"George Plimpton" wrote in message
...


No problem with that sentiment. The problem is, in many cases, the heroes
never should have been there. The soldier who threw himself on top of a
grenade in Vietnam to save his comrades was a hero to his comrades, but he
didn't sacrifice himself for his country - the US had no legitimate reason
to be fighting in Vietnam and wasting the lives of 58,000 soldiers.

Doesn't matter if they "should have been there" or not. They were still
serving their country and sacrificed themselves for the country. It's
essential that our servicemen are ready to execute lawful orders whether
they were wisely issued or not.

On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:30:56 -0500, "ATP"
wrote:


"George Plimpton" wrote in message
...


No problem with that sentiment. The problem is, in many cases, the heroes
never should have been there. The soldier who threw himself on top of a
grenade in Vietnam to save his comrades was a hero to his comrades, but he
didn't sacrifice himself for his country - the US had no legitimate reason
to be fighting in Vietnam and wasting the lives of 58,000 soldiers.

Doesn't matter if they "should have been there" or not. They were still
serving their country and sacrificed themselves for the country. It's
essential that our servicemen are ready to execute lawful orders whether
they were wisely issued or not.

George is kinda dim,have to explain things so be patient with him.

db

On 12/14/2011 6:30 PM, ATP wrote:
"George wrote in message
...


No problem with that sentiment. The problem is, in many cases, the heroes
never should have been there. The soldier who threw himself on top of a
grenade in Vietnam to save his comrades was a hero to his comrades, but he
didn't sacrifice himself for his country - the US had no legitimate reason
to be fighting in Vietnam and wasting the lives of 58,000 soldiers.

Doesn't matter if they "should have been there" or not. They were still
serving their country and sacrificed themselves for the country.

That's what I dispute. They weren't "serving their country." They were
being used by the regime that ran their country at the time.



It's essential that our servicemen are ready to execute lawful orders whether
they were wisely issued or not.

What if the entire war effort is criminal from the outset?

"Delma T. Ivey" wrote in message
...
On 12/14/2011 6:30 PM, ATP wrote:
"George wrote in message
...


No problem with that sentiment. The problem is, in many cases, the
heroes
never should have been there. The soldier who threw himself on top of a
grenade in Vietnam to save his comrades was a hero to his comrades, but
he
didn't sacrifice himself for his country - the US had no legitimate
reason
to be fighting in Vietnam and wasting the lives of 58,000 soldiers.

Doesn't matter if they "should have been there" or not. They were still
serving their country and sacrificed themselves for the country.

That's what I dispute. They weren't "serving their country." They were
being used by the regime that ran their country at the time.



It's essential that our servicemen are ready to execute lawful orders
whether
they were wisely issued or not.

What if the entire war effort is criminal from the outset?

That's not for a serviceman to decide, and it doesn't diminish their service
in my opinion.

On 12/14/2011 6:51 PM, Delma T. Ivey wrote:
On 12/14/2011 6:30 PM, ATP wrote:
"George wrote in message
...


No problem with that sentiment. The problem is, in many cases, the
heroes
never should have been there. The soldier who threw himself on top of a
grenade in Vietnam to save his comrades was a hero to his comrades,
but he
didn't sacrifice himself for his country - the US had no legitimate
reason
to be fighting in Vietnam and wasting the lives of 58,000 soldiers.

Doesn't matter if they "should have been there" or not. They were still
serving their country and sacrificed themselves for the country.

That's what I dispute. They weren't "serving their country." They were
being used by the regime that ran their country at the time.



It's essential that our servicemen are ready to execute lawful orders
whether
they were wisely issued or not.

What if the entire war effort is criminal from the outset?



These guys will never understand what you are talking about. Most people
will know you mean if you are a soldier fighting in the wrong cause such
as being a German soldier fighting for Hitler. In such a case is what
they are doing wrong even if it's brave or heroic? Most of us would
agree that if they are fighting for an evil cause then they are just
pawns of criminals or are part of the criminal enterprise themselves. If
that is true then nothing they do is right or moral.

The problem is right wingers can understand this when they see it in the
Germans or in anyone else the U.S. fights with. But they can't
comprehend that it would ever be the U.S. that is doing the wrong thing.
To them, if the U.S. military is in a conflict then it's right. Period,
end of statement. Unfortunately, it is proving to be more often than not
that the U.S. military is doing things no better than what the German
military did in WWII. We need to keep a closer watch on ourselves to
make sure we never do that. Some would argue we already have in places
like Vietnam and Iraq. They make a good argument, I think.

Hawke