At what point does obsessive disdain for the military become pathological?

[11 Bravo]

It has become downright comical to read the fevered references the name "Smedley Butler" by some at DU.
I wonder how many of them know a thing about Gen. Butler? Like the fact that his views on war were forged by combat in the Philippines, China (Boxer rebellion), the Banana Wars (to protect American grower's interests) in Central America and the Caribbean, and Honduras. Or that he was awarded his 1st Medal of Honor for action in Mexico and his 2nd in Haiti? Basically ALL of his combat experience was seen as a result of engagements he was sent to fight in order to preserve American business interests. Gee, I wonder why he said "War is a racket". Perhaps it was because all of his wars were precisely that.
But Smedley Darlington Butler died in 1940. Do any of the people who so love to fling his name around doubt that he would have been proud to serve in either Europe or the Pacific during WWII? Or Korea?
And does anyone doubt that while Smedley Butler might have questioned the rational for some of the conflicts in which this nation has become embroiled; he would not have hesitated to smack the shit out of anyone who denigrated the men and women who went to fight in those conflicts? Hell, he would have feasted on any one of the numerous smug, uber-hip individuals who invoke his name today.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

1. At what point does equating militarism with patriotism become pathological?

Would Smedley Butler have been proud to serve the oil companies in Iraq? Would he have been proud to serve in a senseless war in Vietnam (that may have been about oil, given the revelation of oil reserves in the South China Sea)? Would he have been proud to teach right-wing Central American governments to torture revolutionaries? Would he have been proud to invade Grenada to keep them from becoming uppity?

[11 Bravo]

3. You would be unlikely to find anyone less in favor of war and less ...

likely to equate militarism with patriotism than someone who has actually seen combat. But at the same time, you would be hard pressed to find anyone more liable to take offense when a smug asshole belittles any appreciation of their sacrifice as "ego-stroking".

[NoOneMan]

5. Do you always thank fishermen for their seafood?

That being, a far more dangerous job in terms of mortality rates.

Perhaps we should just be a thankful society and appreciate all the different, unique sacrifices each member makes for each other, without trying to create some hierarchy enforced via social customs and taboos.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Wow, the sad part s that vets

Don't go on and n about their service.

They woud like those services promised to be kept though. That seems like too much.

Perhaps you'd be happier if we had a second march on Washington from destitute vets.

I mean, they did not have the good sense to die.

[JoeyT]

22. Which vets?

I know many that do and I know many that don't. I am sick of the stupid "YOU WOULDNT HAVE NO FREEDOMS IF IT WASNT FOR US!" bit, as if we've had to fend off constant attacks from other countries over the last few decades. Which probably counts as going on and on about service. Though I've noticed the ones that have actually been shot at before are the least likely to go on and on about being in the military while the ones that piloted a desk or manned a gas pump frequently never shut up.

I consider their joining the military a contract: They were promised free health care and retirement they could live on, and they should damned well get it. My refusal to worship anything in a uniform has no bearing on my insistence the federal government honor its contracts and promises.

Edited to add: I basically find threads like this as absurd as a "Thank a plumber you aren't ankle deep in shit!" or a "Thank an electrician you aren't sitting in the dark!" thread would be.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

24. Yes, what JoeyT said

I think that the people whose lives were ruined due to their being forced to participate in senseless wars deserve the best of care.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Funny, the vets I know

All they want is their va to be left alone, and Tricare.

They are also among the most jaded people you'll ever not meet, and quite anti war.

But hey, I guess it/ time to not fulfill that and wait for another march on DC.

Yes, we have an empire problem...take it with the political class that right now wants to take these services away.

[JoeyT]

29. It depends on which one it is for the ones I know.

My dad and two of my uncles insist that military people are "special". Their word. To hear them tell it the three of them personally defended America from multiple waves of Russian tanks with nothing more than a blunt stick and a small bag of rocks.

In reality one was stationed in Australia, one in Germany, one in Japan, all in the 1980's. That's the limit of their combat experience overseas.

All three would shit a backward porcupine if their Tricare was taken away, and all three vehemently oppose healthcare for all. Only the military deserve it. The rest of you don't.

That kind attitude isn't the majority, but it isn't nonexistent or even uncommon in my experience. That said the only guy I know IRL that's even more of a screaming liberal than me is ex-military. Just depends on which one you're talking to.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. Ah, rear echelon personnel

That explains it.

The ones I know are all combat vets. They are all, to a man ( and a few women, Iraq) all for single payor healthcare.

There is a rule of thumb, the farthest from the actual front lines, the more gung ho people tend to be.

My luck is that I am married to a combat vet, my BIL is a combat vet, I am, from somewhere else, and the ones at Veterans for Peace I know are combat vets. I also know a SEAL from Nam, that makes the rest look like cheery people really.

It s a matter of luck, I admit.

[Rob H.]

65. You just described my dad (although I don't know if I'd call him jaded)

He's a Vietnam vet and career US Navy--he shocked the hell out of some of his younger coworkers in the run-up to the Iraq war, too. They were all being jingoistic, flag-waving morons about it (mostly Republican, of course, and not one of them had ever served) and he let them know loud and clear that it was a huge mistake and wouldn't be the cakewalk that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al., were assuring the US public it would be. They never made the mistake of bringing it up around him again!

Edited to add: my mom gets Tricare, just like my dad does, and thinks a similar benefit should be available to everyone. They're both big supporters of single-payer healthcare. My mom is even pro-pot, and I never thought I'd hear my straitlaced mom railing about the stupidity of the "drug war" and wanting to legalize marijuana. Then again, they're both smart, educated people, so....

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. Good for your dad

Combat vets have an idea since they have been there done that.

My hubby and I do tell tales in the fools errand hope that people might get it.

We're the exception and I increasingly realize it is a fools errand.

[Jackpine Radical]

57. Tell that to the 25% of my 1st Cav unit

that were casualties in 1 week at Khe Sanh.

[NoOneMan]

63. So yes, some conflicts are more deadly than others

Just as some fishing vessels are as well.

Is there some threshold rate where we only honor and thank people if the death toll rises above it? So only some fishermen and soldiers are to be honored and not others?

[Jackpine Radical]

71. These guys were mostly draftees, not in line for benefits.

The ones that survived slunk home, tried to reintegrate themselves into society, & mostly did their best to hide their military experience.

[NoOneMan]

73. Yeah?

The point?

[Shivering Jemmy]

78. His point is obvious

That those vets were forced, on penalty of imprisonment, to offer their lives in a job they did not willingly sign up for and could not willingly quit. There is no fishing job in America of which that is true.

I will not post further on this subject.

[NoOneMan]

79. So are those vets an exception who "served" and should be "honored" exclusively?

Yes or no?

[Jackpine Radical]

86. No, they should be fucken reviled

like they were in 1968.

[NoOneMan]

2. When does the defense of it become pathological?

Also, why should non-employees care about your medals you guys always go on about? I don't think you care about our Employee of the Month plaques?

I think you are being upset because people are not reacting to your group the way your group has decided everyone should customarily treat you. Is that the fault of the people, or your group's arbitrary expectations of perpetual praise and respect?

[hobbit709]

12. I don't know any vets that go on about their medals.

And ideological fanatics give me a major pain in the posterior.

[JackRiddler]

72. Right about now... this thread!

[NuttyFluffers]

4. ask the GOP. they managed to pathologically worship and disdain the military at the same time

perhaps we should merely empathize with the military, an unpleasant job for unpleasant times. that way we can remember our priorities are to humanity.

after every war engagement there will be human suffering on all sides. there is no glory in duty. there is no joy in duty. there is only assured pain, but a pain that must be endured. (it may accord honor.)

but more importantly such a nightmare task should elicit our sympathy. the victims of aftermath rely on our compassion. it is time to put away our idols and idles and remember there's a person inside the uniform, too.

[RomneyLies]

6. K&R n/t

[Rex]

7. I don't know, but I think the occurance is as rare

is this supposed 'hero worship' some have for the military. They are both extremes imo.

[Ernesto]

8. WHAT ABUOT BLOWING THE WHISTLE ON REPUKE PLAN TO OVERTHROW THE US GOVRNMENT?

http://www.eclectica.org/v1n1/reviews/wharton_plot.html

"Rumours of the plot reached Washington, where the Committee on Un- American Activities (CUAA)--was already exposing fascist intrigues. Its cochairmen were John McCormack (D MA) and Samuel Dickstein (D NY). CUAA got in touch with Smedley Butler: did the general have anything to tell them? After prying out all the plans he could, Butler asked a friend, an experienced newsman, to confirm the whole incredible scheme. The reporter visited twice with an agent of the conspirators (a wounded Marine vet) and set down his findings.

Secret executive hearings of CUAA opened November 20, 1934. Sworn testimony showed that the plotters represented notable families --Rockefeller, Mellon, Pew, Pitcairn, Hutton; and great enterprises-- Morgan, Dupont, Remington, Anaconda, Bethlehem, Goodyear, GMC, Swift, Sun.... Some people named as plotters laughed, all denied everything."

[bluestate10]

9. A balanced view of the military is best.

Some on DU hate anything military. The truth is that sometimes war is the only way to resolve problems. What has been seen for the last half century for our country is that our nation has entered wars that could have been resolved by means other than war, the Afghan war may be an exception because it is impossible to deal with islamic radicals in any sane way, IMO.

Americans should be proud of and support it's soldiers when those soldiers behave in accordance with the code of conduct that they are expected to behave to in the military. That code is good, although the issues of sexual assaults and fraternization must be dealt with. What americans shouldn't tolerate is excessive spending on un-needed military hardware and encroachment of religion into military policy decisions.

[Spider Jerusalem]

11. Sorry, but...

WWII, okay. Korea? We were there to "stop the spread of Communism". Same thing with Vietnam. And Grenada. And then the operation in Panama to get Noriega. First Gulf War, part of an international coalition, in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and violation of Kuwaiti sovereignty; second Iraq War, trumped-up reasons, faked intelligence reports, nonexistent WMD, and Afghanistan, revenge on the Taliban for 9/11. By my count that's maybe TWO justifiable military actions by the US since WWII (Gulf War 1 and Afghanistan).

And "support the troops" seems in a lot of ways to be used as a mindless way of saying "support the military" and of justifying inflated defence budgets. The individual soldier or sailor or airman is not the military as a whole. It's quite possible to criticise the overall mission while at the same time recognising that the individual troops are just doing their job.

[L0oniX]

13. +1

"support the troops" seems in a lot of ways to be used as a mindless way of saying "support the military"

[rl6214]

40. In a military community it is meant as support the troops

We have a military base nearby and for us support the troops has meant having a couple of them in our home for thanksgiving dinner and again for Christmas dinner. I have worked with wounded warriors and taken vets up to the local mountains and taken them on trail rides in our jeep. I have also helped the local base put together packages to send to the troops overseas containing toiletries.

That's what support the troops means to us.

[maxsolomon]

82. That is not the general use of the phrase in Gulf War propaganda.

as intended, it stifles debate over the role & expense of the Dept of Defense & the projection of American power.

"Support our Troops" is roughly equal to "Shut Up, Hippie".

[Dash87]

14. I support the troops by not wanting them in harms' way.

I get offended when drooling slobs like Hannity and Limbaugh tell the troops how they should feel, and what they should do.

I think your fight is less with Liberals, and more with the right wing's faux worship of our military. Example: fighting tooth and nail against veterans' benefits. They scream "support the troops," but when it comes to keeping them off the street, they're nowhere to be found.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

16. Amen.

I think it was Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 911) who said that among the things we owe veterans for promising to give their lives to protect us is that we'll NEVER ask them to make good on that promise unless there is absolutely no alternative.

[Hekate]

15. KnR. As a non-vet, I was so proud to stand with the Vets for Peace...

... during the Bush years. Members of our local group, Chapter 54, were the ones marching with the flag during the many protests of Bush's invasion of Iraq. They served under it, they were not going to dishonor it, it was theirs. But did they "worship" that service or demand that others do so unthinkingly? Hell no. They went when called, some voluntarily, some by draft, and did what they had to do, and came home -- some with permanent wounds, some with medals we never heard about except from others. We had representatives of every US war from WW II on down to the Gulf War. They believed (as I do) that when this country needs defending, it needs defending, and otherwise diplomacy and not bloodshed is the answer.

Thanks, 11Bravo, for the historical correction and for your service.

Hekate
http://www.vfpsb.org/arlington-west/
http://www.vfpsb.org/

[arely staircase]

17. a couple of OPs ago

"i don't hate the military, i just don't worship them" someone felt complled to make that the thesis of not one, but two, lenghty threads.

kinda wierd, really

[WinkyDink]

18. When does love of the military become pathological?

[TheKentuckian]

19. When you hate the grunts half as much, as much, or more than the fuckers giving the orders

and worse the fuckers getting absurdly wealthy on all the misery and death for sure. Especially, when it is conscripts forced by threat of ruin, prison, and death.

Probably happens before that but I see a bright line here and it happens, it usually happens if there is any blowback at all it goes to the grunts.

[rl6214]

41. What are these "conscripts" you are speaking of?

[TheKentuckian]

70. Draftees. Not an issue now but has been in the past and could happen again.

[rl6214]

87. Exactly, we don't have to worry about conscripts with our all volunteer military

[Pretzel_Warrior]

20. Ugh...so other than Ww2, all other modern war by USA

Has been a racket. Including Afghanistan.

Nothing wrong with a country having defensive capability, but that is not what the military is being used for.

The fact that you choose not to see it is on you.

[Taverner]

21. Good question. Please allow me to answer.

As far as I know, "supporting the troops" is to keep our military so threatening, so dangerous, so forceful, so that no one out there would even THINK of launching an attack against us.

This is what is meant by "defending your freedoms," even though no war has protected American borders since the war of 1812.

This means, you support every war we have had since.

Now, I can understand a few. World War II was pretty necesarry - of course 99% of this can be blamed on the lack of support for Wilson's "League of Nations" but I get it.

And Korea, well, hell, we created that mess, so we should have fixed it.

But every other war has been furthering our FINANCIAL interests, not our freedoms.

If you think they have, then - well I have nothing more to say to you.

If you want to argue a specific incident, I'm willing.

And despite what YOU think of ME, I am not your enemy.

I never sent you to kill someone you don't know for a reason they never told you.

But fire away.

[sarisataka]

26. The need for any war is debatable

even the vote for WW2 was not unanimous...

But what was the last war the military got us into? If it is not the people who join the military then maybe your... antipathy should be directed elsewhere. Just sayin'

[Taverner]

27. An officer can always refuse orders. There may be consequences, but they can always refuse. nt

[sarisataka]

30. Anyone can refuse

an unlawful order; indeed it is a service member's duty to do so. I have seen soldiers and Marines do so, hell I refused orders that were borderline. It does beg the question of what is an unlawful order...

Shoot unarmed civilians- pretty clear. Invade Iraq because some intelligence indicates WMDs and terrorist links backed by tepid UN statements--- a bit fuzzy. Since the potential to fail order could be life imprisonment or even death under certain circumstances, it is understandable that orders from the political side are given benefit of the doubt...

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. You know, it s easy to say people can disobey orders

I did...it was clearly illegal.

But it is cavalier to ask, or demand when you have never served in any military. The consequences could have included a firing squad.

But I agree with Sarisaka, since civilians control the US military, you really want to stop the machine, look in the mirror.

Oh and my dear, through your representatives you have sent others to war.

[sarisataka]

37. It is rare for us

to agree but I see it twice here.
-the civilians are responsible for wars. The poor grunts have to clean the mess after the diplomats soil the carpets...
-I saw your statement on REMFs above. So true, you can always tell a combat vet from a desk jockey

Sleep well and peaceful dreams friend

[redgreenandblue]

44. In a democracy a soldier is not barred from being part of "civilian leadership".

All the more when there is a volunteer army, a soldier casts a referendum on the validity of the ongoing conflict by signing up and staying loyal to the chain of command.

No, I have not sent others to war. I spoke out against the Iraq war, and was called a traitor by the people who couldn't wait to be part of it. Had I as much as lifted a finger to physically be an obstacle to the injust war effort, those same people would not have hesitated to kill me. Since then, I stopped giving a shit what happened to them. To me, anyone who signed up for Iraq bears the full burden of responsibility for it. The war would not have happened if there hadn't been a mass enlistment movement.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Of course you ignore the UCMJ

And how the real world works.

As well as the very real economic draft.

Oh and yes, you and I have sent people. That is our ultimate responsibility as...citizens.

[redgreenandblue]

52. So, people who sign up are innocent because of economic draft,

and people who choose not to participate are guilty because they are the civilian leadership. And that is how the real world works?

I had access to exactly zero levers of power when Iraq was invaded. Other people had at least one thing that they could have done, which is not to be part of the pro-Bush mass enlistment movement.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. You had some responsibility

As well as the rest of us.

Free clue, members in active service don't have a right to an opinion and can only disobey, are obligated to do so, if the order is illegal.

You, on the other hand, elect people, can write to congress on any subject and can protest.

If you do not understand this, I feel sorry for you.

Also I feel sorry for you if you do not understand that for many in the armed forces, that is the only feasible way out of the hood and a life out of poverty.

I really do. Lattes come to mind.

(Yes, the military votes, but cannot hold a public opinion...chain of command and all that jazz)

[redgreenandblue]

55. Economic draft cannot explain the spike in enlistment when the Iraq war started.

Yes, for some people the military is the path out of poverty. On the other hand, there clearly existed a large number of people who were eager to participate in the Iraq war for reasons other than poverty.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. Really? After 911 I tried

The two people who showed up were not taken.

We lived by a recruiter, hubby retired in 2004.

And he had trouble making quotas.

They had to drastically lower standards to meet quotas.

So what other tall tales you want to tell me?

[redgreenandblue]

60. LoL. Ok, you win.

Economic draft is the main driving factor of recruitment.

However, I maintain that the same "economic forces" which are driving some people to enlist are preventing other people from being able to do jack shit to influence public policy. Writing to congress? My letter will go straight to the recycling bin.

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. Run for congress

Organize

Whatever.

Limos and lattes continue to come to mind.

And no, I did not make that up. There were news stories all over the place on that, and some groups f people who did join to get training that before were not accepted. A minority of recruits, members of the Aryan Nations for example.

The Atlantic is a good place if you want to educate yourself, which I suspect you don't

And since nothing can be changed, blame others and sit on your hands.

But yes dear, we both sent them to war.

[cliffordu]

67. LOL...You are such a great kidder.

I love it when you play this role.

[pinboy3niner]

43. Allow me to answer you...

"Support the troops" is meaningless lip service from many on the Right, but it does mean something to many Americans who do, actually and tangibly, support serving troops, military families and veterans. I protested against the Iraq War and I contribute to Iraq and Afghan Veterans Against the War, to VoteVets, and to causes that support wounded warriors. I also volunteer at local quarterly outreaches to homeless vets and chair the key committee for a group that displays a mobile replica of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. I also support and contribute to a local group that provides financial aid to vets who are struggling. I also participate in support "rap" groups for veterans. To many of us, "Support the Troops" really does MEAN something beyond a propaganda slogan or a feel-good expression for conservatives.

Your assertion that the notion of "defending our freedoms" depends on the validity of the justification for our wars, or for any particular war, is entirely bogus. What defends our freedoms is having a "standing army," or a standing military, actually, which serves as a deterrent to attack or invasion. Those who serve, regardless of their reasons, and regardless of where they serve, whether in a combat zone or a missile silo in Ohio, provide that defense of our freedoms.

Those who have never served often raise the idea of U.S. troops being sent somewhere, unjustifiably, "to kill someone." But the reality for the individual troop in a combat zone--a troop who may or may not support his or her war--is survival. The troop is placed in a situation in which others are trying to kill him or her. The troop's goal is not to kill--but to survive, and to help his or her comrades survive. And for their comrades they will take incredible risks and even lay down their own lives. That may not be the image of the brainwashed, murderous soldier--but that's the reality.

And while you or I may disagree with a particular U.S. policy, when troops are ordered to go somewhere they are ordered in our name, by the officials we elected.

So maybe you could lighten up on the disparagement of our troops, and focus your outrage where it really belongs...

[XRubicon]

84. Great reply. nt

[Zoeisright]

23. Never.

Chew on that.

[think]

28. $500 million per year is spent just on our military marching bands

The pathological label might be better applied to those that would consider spending $1 trillion yearly on defense & security a logical thing to do.......

[TheMadMonk]

31. I dunno. Let's talk about 50 years of national priapism. /nt

[JohnnyLib2]

33. Seems to me that the "disdain" is trendy these days, especially on the internet.

I'm old enough to have seen many cycles of ups and downs in popularity of "the military"
and suspect that will change again.

The current denunciations don't set well with many (remaining) whose lives were greatly affected by the draft.
That includes me.....

K & R

[think]

35. Propping up Banana Republic dictators and the profits of US mulitnationals

through the use of our military will NEVER be something I'm proud of as an American who believes in democracy for ALL people.

That doesn't mean I don't respect the members of our military or the need for a strong military to protect AMERICA. It only means that I hold in contempt the abuses of our military for personal economic gain or other abuses of power through military means.

Calling out these abuses of our military is NOT disdain for the military. It is disdain for it's misuse PERIOD.

[lastlib]

36. "At what point...?" For me, it was about two hours after Kent State.....

...and I'm pretty sure it continues thru today....


Peace!

[DissidentVoice]

38. I served...

...and I'll be damned if I let anyone shame me for it.

[cecilfirefox]

39. ikr!

[grahamhgreen]

42. ***Horsehockey*** No one here is "denigrating the men and women" who serve. Link?. The General would

have been on our side - against these foolish excursions for profit in the ME.

[redgreenandblue]

45. Not hating the people seen posing in the Abu Ghraib pictures is pathological.

[pinboy3niner]

46. Right on, Brother!

I don't know if it's "smug, uber-hip individuals," but there are some who disparage the troops--which is something Smedley Butler never did or woud do.

I responded to some of these issues in Post #43, above.

[Prometheus Bound]

47. Let's take a realistic look at disdain for the US military.

US Soldier Suicides Outnumber Combat Deaths In 2012
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/12/28/us-soldier-suicides-outnumber-combat-deaths-in-2012/

Veterans & Homelessness
- Between 529,000 and 840,000 veterans are homeless at some time during the year.
- On any given night, more than 300,000 veterans are living on the streets or in shelters in the U.S.
- Approx. 33% of homeless males in the U.S. are veterans.
- Veterans are twice as likely as other Americans to become chronically homeless.
- Veterans represent 11% of the adult civilian population, but 26% of the homeless population, according to the Homeless
Research Institute (2007).
- Veterans are more at risk of becoming homeless than non-veterans
- The number of homeless Vietnam-era veterans, male and female, is greater than the number of soldiers who died during the war.
http://www.veteransinc.org/about-us/statistics/

18 U.S. Military Veterans Commit Suicide Every Day
http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2011/12/10/18-u-s-military-veterans-commit-suicide-every-day/

[Egalitarian Thug]

49. Well played indeed. A brilliant response to a hit and run rant about something that never happened.

[11 Bravo]

92. Ummm, the "hit and run" ranter is still here. And if you wish to claim that posts attacking ...

service members "never happened"; then you either possess the reading comprehension skills of a second grader, or you are one remarkably dishonest individual.
(See, I have assimilated myself! I'm not a grunt anymore, so I didn't say "lying mother-fucker"!) Even us worthless old soldiers are not so irredeemable that we can't occasionally participate in polite society.

[Egalitarian Thug]

93. You're still lying. I've known too many like you in my life. You steal the credit that others have

earned through their sacrifice and spend the rest of your pathetic life strutting around bullshitting the ignorant.

I've seen several posts attacking the military that have been diverted to personnel, but no OPs attacking what you claim.

Save your bullshit for somebody that'll buy it.

[11 Bravo]

95. You have known too many like me in your life? Funny, I could say the same.

Strutting bullshit, while sadly the occasional posture of a few vets, has been, at least in my experience, almost non-existent at DU.

But you, in your wisdom have decided that I am "lying", and "stealing the credit that others have earned through their sacrifice"?

We need to get together at a DU meet-up. I'll bring my DD-214, and you bring ... whatever the fuck it is you bring.

You have no idea what I have experienced, and I have only ever referenced it sparingly on DU. But you, in your sublime ignorance, feel free to call it bullshit...

Fuck you.

[Egalitarian Thug]

96. I recognize all of your bullshit, it isn't even original. Try selling somewhere else, poseur.

As for fucking me, in your dreams, tough guy.

[11 Bravo]

97. Been here 11 years, and haven't sold a thing. But it's always fun to meet ...

a loud-mouthed newbie clown. Have a nice life, you big scary "thug".

[Egalitarian Thug]

98. I always do, and it's always tough guys like you that bring out the thug,

because it's guys like you that make the world a worse place every day you're in it. I'm too old to put with your shit and there's nothing assholes like you can do to me anymore.

So just know that any time you dare to bring up any of the great men and women that try to make this nation or the world better, and sully their memories with half-truths and lies to support the twisted, perverse world you live in, I'll be there to call your bullshit.

[Egalitarian Thug]

94. What? Too busy protecting our freedom to reply to what I wrote to you specifically?

C'mon, you've taken it upon yourself to speak for the General, to tell all of us morons what he would do if he were alive today and how he would react.

Please. Since none of us have any idea about the real Smedley Butler, it's up to you to enlighten all of us. Overwhelm us with your amazing insight into the mind of one of America's true heroes.

[whatchamacallit]

51. But that doesn't fit on a little ribbon as well as Support Our Troops

Good post.

[Arugula Latte]

50. False premise.

We disdain the use of a military that is used not to defend this country but to prop up U.S. multinational corporate interests.

[Coyotl]

54. Sometime after all the troops are home from foriegn soil and the military budget is less than 10%

[Vinnie From Indy]

58. At what point does a straw man argument become relevant?

This OP should get an award for incoherence. What is the OP's point?

Is the use of Butler's name by folks at DU mean they have a pathalogical hatred of our military?

Is there a cadre of smug, "uber-hip" individuals on DU denigrating soldiers AND invoking Butler's name in the same posts?


WTF is this?

[nadinbrzezinski]

59. Yes

Is there a cadre of smug, "uber-hip" individuals on DU denigrating soldiers AND invoking Butler's name in the same posts?

Mentioning names would be a call out.

And it is mostly name, with chorus in about twenty or so OPs over the course of the last week of the year.

[Vinnie From Indy]

62. Is it me or is your reply equally as incoherent?

I will ask you directly.

Are you offering that there IS a cadre of folks posting here on DU that are invoking Butler's name as some sort of justification for attacking our soldiers?

[Rex]

64. No that is not it.

Long story short - someone posted a thread stating they will not 'worship the military' (which the OP posted in) and you can probably guess where it ended up.

[Vinnie From Indy]

68. Thx! Trying to get my bearings on this thing!

Cheers!

[Rex]

69. Anytime!

There is so much going on here that we need a 'who is who' and 'what's going on at the moment' scheduler!

This is all from the gun threads on GD...leads to everything else that is gun or meta-gun imo.

[Egalitarian Thug]

74. "Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until

I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service." - Smedley Butler

All of your projection is nothing but your own wishful thinking. He didn't question the rationale of all of our conflicts, he was certain they were crimes. The idea that he "smack the shit out of anyone who denigrated the men and women who went to fight in those conflicts" is nothing but your own prejudice, insecurity, and wishful thinking.

Had we adopted his plan for the U.S. military we would not have entered WWII at all as the Japanese would have had no reason to attack Pearl Harbor. If you're going to pretend to speak for great men, you should at least learn something factual about them beforehand.

[stultusporcos]

75. Less then 5 percent of Americans ever served in the military therefor 95 percent of people

don't know what the F they are talking about.

Just sit back and laugh at the posts.

It is pointless to try and straighten people out about the military on the internet.

[white_wolf]

85. Sorry that doesn't fly.

Every person in this country has a right to criticize the military and their actions. Simply because I never joined doesn't mean I don't have enough knowledge to know that invading foreign countries without cause and murdering their people is wrong, I don't have to join to know that everyone who participated or covered up acts of torture are scum.

[stultusporcos]

88. Yes you can say what you want it is still sort of a free country

However......

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Abraham Lincoln

[white_wolf]

89. You should take your own advice. That was Mark Twain, not Lincoln.

Though to be completely accurate it is rather unlikely that he was the first person to use it. There is a quote in proverbs that says much the same thing and this is likely a common adage passed down though the years.

[stultusporcos]

90. The quote has been mostly attributed to Lincoln

However Samuel Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, Oscar Wilde and Silvan Engel (Journalist back in the time of Lincoln) and it is even sometime attributed to Lincoln quoting Silvan and as you mentioned Mark Twain. It is also attributed to religious texts too.

If all you want to do is argue about the source of a quote then you do not really understand what I posted in the first place.
Good day to you I have nothing more to say to you on this subject.

[white_wolf]

91. No I understand I just think you are the one being foolish.

[MADem]

76. It's attention seeking behavior. I tend to consider the source.

By their words we shall know them...and know that they don't have a firm grasp of history, either.

[earthside]

77. Disdain for THIS military ... you bet!

Looks like it is still a racket.

[think]

81. Very effective and to the point. It is unfortunate most people aren't aware of this including myself

Thanks for posting.

[quinnox]

80. no idea about the Butler name thing but this thread reminds me of how

some duers were seemingly shocked and horrified that other duers didn't show proper respect and reverence for a military ritual of guarding the unknown soldiers tomb in a thread a month or so ago. It was like - *gasp* - "How can you not salute these patriotic soldiers or appreciate the solemness of this ritual??" My response to that is well represented by - No, having a brainwashed reverence or respect for military rituals does not represent patriotism or honor, not in my book anyway.

[think]

83. US Major General Smedley Butler wrote a book after his service called War is a Racket

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

Basically he outlines that most of his military service was done at the behest of multinational corporations who profited from the wars and other military interventions in the early 1900s.

~Snip~

"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

~Snip~

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

As for the military I still do my best to show my respect for the troops and separate it from those people who manipulate our world view in order to profit from war. The war profiteers are very good at what they do and it is unfortunate that they keep getting away with it.

Be it more simple would I rather they profit from helping humanity rather than coming up with themes for an endless war....