Reply
Sun 22 Jul, 2007 09:30 am
John Kerry Does It: Breaks the Taboo, and Shoves It Back Down Their Throats
by Paul Abrams
Posted July 20, 2007
I have been hoping, pleading, wishing that the issue of the war proponents not volunteering, that not a single member of the Bush family has volunteered, would rise to the surface. I have written about it on this site, and placed ads in Crawford, TX, newspapers when the White House Press Corps was in town to watch Bush clear brush while al-Qaeda plotted.
In "Ultimate Accountability: The Conspiracy of Silence", I pointed out why, namely that politicians and the MSM had an understanding that it would not be raised. Nonetheless, this is a very potent weapon, as I could personally attest having directly asked Jeb Bush and Bill Kristol those questions standing eyeball-to-eyeball, and, in both cases, noted the red-flushing of their faces and, in the case of Kristol, shouting "why should I, why should I?";and in the case of Jeb, turning on his heels and strutting away. Charlie Rangel said he introduced the draft proposal rather than confronting the subject directly. Charlie Rose wondered why to raise it? Howard Fineman, said "yeah, right."
John Kerry has done it. On Olbermann yesterday he said, "it is about time that those promoting this war offered up their own children to fight it, and anyone who themselves are 40 and under in the Congress and the Administration"...
This was in response to the letter Hillary Clinton received from Eric Edelman, former Cheney advisor, now in the Pentagon, and, according to Turkish newspapers, the absolute worst US Ambassador to Turkey in history. Edelman wrote that Clinton's letter asking what plans the Pentagon had for withdrawing US troops was, in effect, helping our enemies.
Democrats typically would slam the Administration for such accusations, thus succumbing to their invitation to join their argument. Indeed, that is what Hillary did in her response.
John Kerry did it better. He shoved it back down their throats so that they would choke on it. He also broke the taboo on calling for those voting and promoting the war volunteering themselves and having their own children go to Iraq.
This hypocrisy is NOT the major reason we should not have invaded to begin with, nor the main reason we should withdraw all our troops. It is, however, a potent weapon because it strikes at the most "reptilian" part of our brain: their fear conflicting with and overcoming their grand ideas of remaking the world so long as someone else took the risk.
Now, John Kerry has broken the taboo. Politicians, bloggers, and MSM -- repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat.
Don't challenge the concept of civilian control of the military lightly, my friend. The road that goes down is not one the Democrats are able to travel...
Also, that said, if you want to talk about "offering up your children" to military service, isn't that up to the children involved? Once you're eighteen, the decision to enter military service is yours - you sure as heck shouldn't be press-ganged into it just because your Dad is in Congress.
Avatar
Avatar ADV wrote:Don't challenge the concept of civilian control of the military lightly, my friend. The road that goes down is not one the Democrats are able to travel...
Also, that said, if you want to talk about "offering up your children" to military service, isn't that up to the children involved? Once you're eighteen, the decision to enter military service is yours - you sure as heck shouldn't be press-ganged into it just because your Dad is in Congress.
Even with the draft, the wealthy and/or connected families managed to keep their children out of the military. It's an ancient pattern, even to the point of the wealthy paying poor young men to take their place in the military.
BBB
Re: Avatar
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:Avatar ADV wrote:Don't challenge the concept of civilian control of the military lightly, my friend. The road that goes down is not one the Democrats are able to travel...
Also, that said, if you want to talk about "offering up your children" to military service, isn't that up to the children involved? Once you're eighteen, the decision to enter military service is yours - you sure as heck shouldn't be press-ganged into it just because your Dad is in Congress.
Even with the draft, the wealthy and/or connected families managed to keep their children out of the military. It's an ancient pattern, even to the point of the wealthy paying poor young men to take their place in the military.
BBB
Yeah but we don't have a draft. The rich and connected don't need to do anything to keep their children out of the military if they don't want to join.
The notion that only those serving or who have served can have an opinion on war & peace is nonsense.
Further nonsense is the notion that every one who has served is anti-war.
Yes, those that have served may have a different perspective and one which which we should take seriously, but it should not be conclusive or compulsive.
Unless you served BBB, by your implied argument, you should shut your virtual trap.
Finn
Finn wrote: Unless you served BBB, by your implied argument, you should shut your virtual trap.
It might help if you rewired your brain.
BBB
Having served or not is beside the point, except when chickenhawks are able to send someone else off to fight, while they totally avoid any sort of danger their entire lives. They can ingest a fine meal in their mansion, then sit back and pick their teeth, while planning the next move, which quite possibly ends in a series of deaths and, in a place like Iraq, with no measurable success to balance the equation.
Re: Finn
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:Finn wrote: Unless you served BBB, by your implied argument, you should shut your virtual trap.
It might help if you rewired your brain.
BBB
yea! Rewire your brain butterhead!
dunno about breaking the taboo. People called on the administration and their kids to join in the war from the beginning. I've heard many such calls. Perhaps not from a senator, though.
Will having a draft really end the war or just send the hard luck cases, who can't find a way around having to serve, off to continue more of the same?
<Swell, swell. Yourself? Gee, we're completely invisible with these brackets here!>
dagmaraka wrote:<Swell, swell. Yourself? Gee, we're completely invisible with these brackets here!>
<not so loud, we might be overheard>