Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You really need to study history. There would not be a U.S.A. if it were not for the military. We did not win the WW11 by being nice, sweet, or kind. And we did not win it because we were smarter either. There have been many other battles too.
We won WWII with the help of the Russians. You do realize that it was the Russian troops that surrounded Hitler?
Back to the point, yes, we do glorify the military, but at the same time we are willing to throw vets under the bus, especially if they don't suit our political needs.
There are a lot of anti-Americans out there. Sad, but true. Maybe they should read about how many Americans soldiers have been killed liberating and/or protecting other countries?
That is one reason why other countries don't spend as much on their military... They depend on the U.S. military.
Ok, lets turn this around on you and see if your willing to apply the same logic.
Lets say a situation exists where the US Government, no longer a democratic republic that represents the will of the people but the interests of a few elite have full control and are being aggressive and tyrannical not only against it's on population but toward many other countries.
Would you support a foreign liberating force to come in and clean up house?
If you don't, then why would you expect other countries citizens to support foreigners coming in to "liberate them"?
If you say that we don't need a foreign force because of the second amendment, do you really think the population with some pea shooters could stand up against them that have tanks, planes and bombs?
Also, the second amendment was instituted by the founding fathers to give the population the same power the government has. That is not the case today where all are just armed by guns alone. The population would need to be allowed to own tanks, bombs and military planes to be an equal deterrence to tyranny.
Naturally, military parades aren't sufficient by themselves, but they would be a step in the right direction toward binding what are now the two almost completely alien worlds of civilian and military society in America.
Additional steps I'd recommend would start with a simple measure: proper uniforms for all ranks. A clear distinction between combat dress and more formal dress should be made, with general orders requiring some mode of formal dress whenever the soldier expects to be in the public eye. The old military tradition of the "walking out" dress ought to be revived for this purpose: the history of American military tailoring certainly provides enough examples to work with.
The point would be two-fold: to enhance the esprit de corps of the soldier in the public eye, marking him off from civilians in a direct and instantly-recognized fashion, while at the same time catching the public eye and making civilians aware of the soldier's presence among them. Fatigues may be practical, but they are hardly admirable: who says to herself "I love a man in uniform" when he's wearing the functional equivalent of yard-work clothes?
A walking-out uniform doesn't need to be gaudy or covered in braid and gewgaws; but it should be colorful and distinctive enough to catch attention, and at the very minimum consist of a proper stiff cap, a well-fitting jacket, tunic or coat, and some sort of neckware.
Some would recoil from the expense. Given how minimal the additional uniform allowance would be by comparison to our total military expenditure, and how considerable the tangible benefits would be in terms of civilian-military relations, this is an objection easily dispensed with.
Some would complain that "proper uniforms" are un-American, on the grounds that Americans are an informal and practical people who disdain European finery. This is also easily answered: for most of its existence, the American military has taken pains with its tailoring, and the recent trend toward combat dress as a standard everyday uniform is of far more recent vintage than most people realize. There's nothing un-American about a soldier looking soldierly.
No; we have and will always owe our military much graditude. They are pretty much the only heroes i governamnt serve and rightly recive the honors.I alos don't think most have forgotten nw terrible the nation treated them after vietnam.
The final prong of my plan is a revived urban presence for the American military. For a modest expenditure, grand old Victorian-era arsenals or fortresses built in the center of most older American cities could be renovated or where necessary re-purchased. Where such a building doesn't exist, a suitably impressive building can be constructed.
Our older cities, east, west and middle, typically had such a "garrison", which were symbols of civic pride and often noteworthy for their architectural value. Many are now neglected, many have been sold for civilian use (one, in San Francisco, now houses a fetish pornography studio), or, sadly, demolished.
The point of such an urban presence would not be to house all military activities: obviously there are practical limits to how much of the military's activities can be carried out in built-up urban districts. Instead, the point would be to literally "show the flag": to maintain a physical and economic presence in the heart of our cities, which are the heart of our civilian society.
Nor should these renovated or rebuilt "castles" be simply office-space: they should be foci of military ceremonial in a small but permanent way, reminding civilians of the existence and role of the military in the most visible way possible. None of this has to be grand or alien: sentries in proper uniforms on the sidewalk, unit and national flags over the main entrance, regular parades by the divisional band from the gates to a convenient downtown park, followed by a lunchtime concert.
The point is that, at present, military and civilian society live with a paradox in the United States: we are the most militarized country in the western world, and yet of all western countries, possibly the one where the two societies are furthest apart, living their lives separately. Glitzy, ad-biz displays at Superbowl half-time are a poor substitute for a genuine linkage between the two societies - but the solution lies at hand, in our own recent past: real, physical integration between the two, enhanced by the sort of display and ceremony which has, until very recently, always been an aspect of military life most accessible and admirable to civilians.
Seems that every public event (sports in particular) is required to include a tribute to the armed forces. Have we gone a bit overboard on this? Are we an overly militaristic culture?
What say you?
Whatever you say you know who thank for the ability to say it.......
Seems that every public event (sports in particular) is required to include a tribute to the armed forces. Have we gone a bit overboard on this? Are we an overly militaristic culture?
What say you?
I think there is a lot of guilt from those that cheer and a little jealousy from those that jeer.
Whatever you say you know who thank for the ability to say it.......
Yes, this is often repeated; sometimes implied as here and often stated baldly that we owe our freedom to our military. Of course, it's not at all correct.
In the first place, to the extent that the military can defend our freedom, it can do so only in military terms - against an opposing military force. Thanks largely to obvious facts of geography, the United States has been threatened by the invasion of no enemy military force since the War of 1812.
Even then, the war aims of His Britannic Majesty's Government in 1812 included retaining possession of the Canadas and maintaining a supremacy on the high seas made necessary by Bonaparte's conquest of Europe. Subjugating the American people and depriving them of a liberty which they themselves claimed as an inheritance from their British forebearers was not part of the plan.
So in fact, the American military has never actually defended our freedom. We have certainly defended others' freedom, but we have been uniquely blessed by providence never to have been required to rely on our soldiery to defend our own. But the facts of military history are not really the source of the idea. Rather, it was born out of cold war necessity, in order to convince a essentially isolationist nation to remain committed to foreign places and foreign wars.
But the worst part of this canard is not its factual inaccuracy. It is the implication for freedom itself. A people who depend on a professional army for their freedom are not free: they are suffered to enjoy certain privileges. The freedom of a free people is won by the people, as a people, and held because the people, as a people, will have nothing less. A truly free nation owes its freedom to no one, and certainly not a standing army.
I am a Viet combat vet. Contrary to the popular notion nobody spit on me and no one called me a baby killer when I came home. They basically said nothing or just kind of uneasy around you. My own sister asked me if I would be "OK" staying at the house with her kids while she went out for a while. The movies and pop culture made us into monsters.
So yeah, I am happy to see the Vets get some respect this time around. But I do feel that all this "thank you for your service" in the checkout line is bit over the top.
And for alphamale and some of the others on this thread, not all of us think the same. I was against the war when I got drafted and REALLY against the war when I came home. I still think it was a horrible mistake and I feel the same about Iraq. Recognizing the contributions of our vets is one thing, but blindly and stupidly supporting one war after another and maintaining a huge military when our nation is not under any real threat is utter nonsense IMO.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
