See other Resistance Articles
Title: Thank A Vet?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance216.html
Published: Nov 11, 2010
Author: Laurence Vance
Post Date: 2010-11-11 06:22:29 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 1660
Comments: 121
We’ve all seen the bumper stickers: "My son is in the Air Force," "If You Can Read This in English, Thank a Marine," "Proud Vietnam Veteran," "Fly Navy," and of course, "Thank a Vet." Why should we? Why should we call them heroes, give them military discounts, grant them veterans preference, express our support for them with ribbons on our cars, honor them with a holiday, hold military appreciation church services for them, and thank them for their "service"? Veterans Day began as Armistice Day to commemorate the signing of the armistice that ended World War I. It had nothing to do with honoring current and former members of the military like Veterans Day is celebrated today. And if the sole purpose of Armistice Day was to honor World War I veterans, it should never have been celebrated since no American soldier did anything honorable by intervening in a European foreign war. And it doesn’t matter if he was drafted or not. Britain’s last World War I combat veteran, Harry Patch, died last year at the age of 111. He boasted that he hadn’t killed anyone in combat. "War isn’t worth one life," Patch said, it is "calculated and condoned slaughter of human beings." In his autobiography The Last Fighting Tommy, Patch wrote that "politicians who took us to war should have been given the guns and told to settle their differences themselves, instead of organising nothing better than legalised mass murder." In the last years of his life, Patch warned some young naval recruits that they shouldn’t join. Frank Buckles, age 109, is the only American veteran of World War I still living. When asked while being honored for his service at a 2007 Veterans Day ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery what he thought about being there while the United States was at war, he replied: "I’m no authority, but I’m not in favor of war unless it’s an emergency." I think that Buckles is more of an authority on the horrors of war and the folly and wickedness of war than the current members of the Joint Chiefs. It is only because World War I did not turn out to be the "war to end all wars" that the holiday was changed to Veterans Day as a tribute to all soldiers who fought for their country. Although I believe World War II to be neither necessary nor good, I come not on this Veterans Day to criticize the "greatest generation," who, it turns out, were also great at pillaging and carousing. For reasons I explained in "U.S. Presidents and Those Who Kill for Them," World War II marks the permanent establishment of the American military as the president’s personal attack force to kill by his decree Koreans, Vietnamese, Laotians, Cambodians, Grenadians, Panamanians, Yugoslavs, Serbians, Afghans, Iraqis, Somalis, Yemenis, and Pakistanis. Next on the list is Iranians. Sometimes these presidential decrees are rubberstamped by a congressional authorization to use force, but they are always preceded by presidential lies and warmonger propaganda. So why should a Vietnam veteran be proud? He was typically young, ignorant, deceived, and drafted. He may have fought obediently, valiantly, selflessly, and fearlessly, but since he had no business fighting in Vietnam in the first place, I have nothing to thank him for. And I certainly can’t thank him for preventing the Viet Cong from turning America into a socialist republic. Besides, LBJ beat Ho Chi Minh to that anyway. Many Vietnam veterans have written me and expressed shame, remorse, anger, and resentment – not pride – for having been duped into going thousands of miles away from American soil to intervene in another country’s civil war. In fact, I have found that it is those who are not Vietnam veterans who are the most vociferous defenders of the war in Vietnam. The most undeserved and oftentimes disgusting outpouring of thankfulness I have ever seen is over those who have fought or are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The praise and adoration of those fighting in "the front lines in the war on terror" reaches its apex on Veterans Day, which has become a day to defend U.S. wars and recognize all things military. These soldiers certainly have done nothing worthy of thanks. Sure, they have rebuilt infrastructure – after bombing it to smithereens. They no doubt removed a brutal dictator – and unleashed American brutality in the process. And yes, they have rescued orphan children – after blowing their parents and brothers and sisters to kingdom come. What is there to thank our soldiers for? They are not defending our freedoms. They are not keeping us safe from our enemies. They are not protecting us from terrorists. They are not guaranteeing our First Amendment rights. They are not defending U.S. borders. They are not guarding U.S. shores. They are not patrolling U.S. coasts. They are not enforcing no-fly zones over U.S. skies. They are not fighting "over there" so we don’t have to fight "over here." They are not avenging 9/11. They are not safeguarding the American way of life. Oh, and they are not ensuring that I have the liberty to write what I do about the military. What, then, should we thank our soldiers for? Should we thank them for fighting an unconstitutional war, an unscriptural war, an immoral war, an offensive war, an unjust war, or a senseless war? Should we thank our veterans for helping to carry out an aggressive, reckless, belligerent, and interventionist foreign policy? Should we thank the military for sucking $1 trillion out of the federal budget? But, some will say, these soldiers are just doing their jobs. They can’t help it if the U.S. military sends them to fight in an unjust war in Iraq or Afghanistan. They are just following orders. They didn’t enlist in the military to kill people. What would any sane man think about a doctor who takes a job at a hospital knowing that the hospital instructs its doctors to euthanize old and sickly patients – and then says he was just doing his job, following orders, and didn’t take the job to kill people? Why are soldiers treated so differently? Why do they get a pass on committing or supporting those who commit murder and mayhem? But, someone else says, the military has lowered its recruiting standards and is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Many soldiers are ignorant about the true nature of the military and U.S. foreign policy. Why should we fault them for their ignorance? Why should they be criticized for unjustly killing Iraqis or Afghans or Pakistanis? They are just following orders. Let’s go back to the doctor I mentioned. Suppose that after he takes a job in ignorance at what he thinks is a reputable hospital he is instructed to euthanize old and sickly patients? What should he do? I don’t know of anyone who would say anything else but that he should quit his job or at least refuse to euthanize anyone. Again, why are soldiers treated so differently? Why do they get a pass on committing or supporting those who commit murder and mayhem? But, comes another reply, soldiers have a term of enlistment. They can’t just quit their jobs. Doctors can walk away from their jobs at any time. Then I guess it all comes down to morality: Be a mercenary and kill for the state or refuse to do so and suffer the consequences of dishonorable discharge and/or imprisonment. It is high time that Americans stop holding veterans and current members of the military in such high esteem. It is scientists, engineers, inventors, businessmen, industrialists, software developers, and entrepreneurs that made America great – not veterans of foreign wars. It is doctors, iron workers, taxi drivers, bricklayers, writers, electricians, and cooks that positively contribute to society – not soldiers. I would like to be able to thank a vet – on Veterans Day and every other day of the year – but I’m still searching for a reason.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
(Edited)
I agree 100%. I think the last time America fought a legitimate war was in 1812 and even that is debatable.
Waiting too late to oppose tyranny has always led to bloodshed.
Hair Salon Salisbury, CT
#2. To: Ada (#0)
Boy, that ought to get a lot of Pavlov's sheeple's panties in a twist. "But, but, but they're protecting my freeedums!"
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)
#3. To: Ada (#0)
First, I did not see anywhere if the author was a veteran or not. Second, it seems to me like this is a rerun, been here before??? Third, with NO veterans, would we be certain the author would be here now and in a position to dispense his bile so freely? And lastly, during his lifetime, did the author participate in any manner with the elections of any governments???
It is high time that Americans stop holding veterans and current members of the military in such high esteem. It is scientists, engineers, inventors, businessmen, industrialists, software developers, and entrepreneurs that made America great – not veterans of foreign wars. It is doctors, iron workers, taxi drivers, bricklayers, writers, electricians, and cooks that positively contribute to society – not soldiers.
#4. To: Ada (#0)
Calculated by the establishment to get unemployed riffraff and troublemakers of the street since the establishment is too inept to organize meaningful/rehabilitative tasks for this segment of the population. The inter-related monarchies of Europe had these periodic war escapades until Organized Jewry made wars into major productions (with devastating consequences) to establish the illegal Israeli state and of course to make money as their big guy in London did off the Napolionic war with Britain.
it's "calculated and condoned slaughter of human beings."
#5. To: Tatarewicz (#4)
Really??? Going back to day one, I hardly consider Joseph Warren, George Washington, James Madison and the like as being "riff raff" and needing rehabilitation.
Calculated by the establishment to get unemployed riffraff and troublemakers of the street since the establishment is too inept to organize meaningful/rehabilitative tasks for this segment of the population.
#6. To: Ada (#0)
How about our active duty Vets all go on strike around here -- like a labor union strike -- for about a week? Russia and China and the like would probably be here with their Militaries by then. If Vancey asks real nice, on his knees while he writes up another article saying, "Many thanks in advance", and Lew Rockwell publishes it with his endorsement, maybe our Military will go back to work and make them retreat.
I would like to be able to thank a vet – on Veterans Day and every other day of the year – but I’m still searching for a reason.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#7. To: GreyLmist (#6)
History is NOT a favored subject to most Americans of the ME generations.
How about our active duty Vets all go on strike around here -
#8. To: Cynicom (#5)
Bad example, Cynicom; Tatarewicz' comment certainly would not have included or implied such men. The Revolutionary war was fought with good reason. Your military service (was it during time of war?) and mine closely parallel. Dr. Vance, author of this essay, hits the target perfectly - right in the middle of the X-ring. VietNam war, and the Clinton,Bush,and Obama wars are illicit and unnecessary; WWI and WWII are now properly viewed as terribly suspect. The first rule of war is Propaganda, and the first victim is Truth.
Going back to day one, I hardly consider Joseph Warren, George Washington, James Madison and the like as being "riff raff" and needing rehabilitation
"The 'uniter' has brought the entire world together - to despise and deride us." lod
#9. To: Bub (#8)
Well, our military started there, with those men. They risked everything, Warren was killed on day one, so there had to be a starting point. My great/4 grandfather was 18, he took down his musket and joined the fray, killing people. Of course seventy per cent of the populace sat on their hands, did nothing, let the riff raff decide the fate of the country. Then when the shooting was over, they came out of hiding, cheering on the veterans that had won freedom for all. Some things never change.
Bad example,
#10. To: Cynicom (#7)
If they want to learn the hard way that our Military is necessary, regardless of how it's been misused so often by slimeball politicians, that could probably be arranged easy enough.
History is NOT a favored subject to most Americans of the ME generations.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#11. To: Ada, 4 (#0)
Yes. I will thank a vet. This nation honors those who died at Valley Forge and Antietam and on the beaches of Normandy, as well as those who every day put their lives on the line for America in Iraq, be it right or wrong to some. The military nature of America has to change, but those who have served, or are serving, deserve our respect.
#12. To: Cynicom (#3)
What difference does his background make in regard to his argument? You might wish to examine our participation in all foreign and domestic wars and decide for yourself whether any of them were necessary.
#13. To: GreyLmist (#10)
Anyone that participated in the process of choosing a government does not have clean hands. Shifting the blame onto the few is rather cowardly.
If they want to learn the hard way that our Military is necessary, regardless of how it's been misused so often by slimeball politicians, that could probably be arranged easy enough.
#14. To: Critter (#1)
The War of 1812 was the doing of the "War Hawks" who were sort of like today's neocons. They were hoping to annex what was left of Spanish Florida and even conquer Canada. We were lucky to have our country back at the end of it. We have England's preoccupation with other matters to thank for that.
I agree 100%. I think the last time America fought a legitimate war was in 1812 and even that is debatable.
#15. To: Ada (#12)
As a historian of sorts, just perhaps I do have some background in this system. As riff raff, I take offense to those that were and or are sideliners. Please use caution Ada when using the word...YOU...
You might wish to examine our participation in all foreign and domestic wars and decide for yourself whether any of them were necessary.
#16. To: Tatarewicz (#4)
The establishment prefers not to use the riffraff but sometimes, especially if a war is prolonged, that is all they can get. Initially wars kill the best and brightest males of that generation.
#17. To: Ada (#0)
"It is high time that Americans stop holding veterans and current members of the military in such high esteem. It is scientists, engineers, inventors, businessmen, industrialists, software developers, and entrepreneurs that made America great – not veterans of foreign wars. It is doctors, iron workers, taxi drivers, bricklayers, writers, electricians, and cooks that positively contribute to society – not soldiers." Well then, as an Army Vet from '65-'68 Artillery, How about thanking me for 7 Patents as an Engineer. Or the 3 Industrial Manf. Plants that I was Plant Mgr. of? Or the Machine Shop I started when I got out of Mfg.? Other than that, I've really just sucked up my SS.
#18. To: ndcorup (#17)
Well Sir, as riff raff most likely you and I are mucking up this thread in particular and the forum in general. I need to be taught my place. Someone mentioned the best and the brightest as paying the bill by dying. That is not factual, never has been, and anyone desiring to, may peruse the official government records that break down the death statistics by ranks. The best and brightest rise to the top, the riff raff remains at the bottom, this seems always to be true and accepted. Official records show the overwhelming death rate of the bottom layer VS the top layer death rate. Too many people here do not want to be reminded that a riff raff soldier refused to kill any more during WW2 and Eisenhower had him shot. This by a man that never in his military career had one day of combat. Eddie Slovak was against war and killing, he deserted time after time, so he was shot. No loss, just more riff raff.
Other than that, I've really just sucked up my SS.
#19. To: Cynicom (#18)
Isn't it surprising that we Riff-Raff can actually use a.......computer thingy? The Army gave me a lot. Those who haven't served, just don't comprehend. I got E-5 at 12 months, thanks to a Brig. Gen. Kenny, It was a start in Life, and some of the best and worst experiences. But I left the Army changed, and ready to fight for what I wanted. Every male with two arms and two legs should have the experience. And I was paid well for my time later, much later, The V.A. gave me a Liver Transplant when I was 63.
The best and brightest rise to the top, the riff raff remains at the bottom, this seems always to be true and accepted. Official records show the overwhelming death rate of the bottom layer VS the top layer death rate.
#20. To: Ada (#14)
How dare you belittle this country's efforts to fulfill it's manifest destiny! We, as a young Nation again engaged in battle the most powerful military on the planet and defeated them. If England could have driven us back into their colonial empire they would have...preoccupied or not. The Battle of New Orleans was a resounding military victory, pitting a small, outnumbered army of American regulars and volunteers against the most hardened veterans the British could muster. A little bitch like you is not even fit to comment on their sacrifice or achievement. (The War of 1812) - We were lucky to have our country back at the end of it. We have England's preoccupation with other matters to thank for that.
"The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor" - Ronald Reagan
#21. To: Jethro Tull (#11)
Those who fight for wrong might not realize what they are doing but that's no reason to honor them.
be it right or wrong
#22. To: Flintlock (#20)
How dare you belittle this country's efforts to fulfill it's manifest destiny! OMG manifest destiny. The Battle of New Orleans was fought after the war was over. And, yes, the Brits would have rolled over the whole country just the way they did Washington, D. C. if they had put their attention to it.
#23. To: Cynicom (#18)
Someone mentioned the best and the brightest as paying the bill by dying. That is not factual, never has been, and anyone desiring to, may peruse the official government records that break down the death statistics by ranks. Please don't assume that "the best and brightest" are indicative of rank. Plenty of morons in the upper echelon.
#24. To: Ada (#22) (Edited)
Yes, a concept a little bone-smoker like you probably finds repugnant. The combatants didn't know that and fought accordingly...we won They did put their attention to it, and they failed. The contest was akin to an amateur going 10 rounds with Ali to a draw, yet pukes like you would say Ali won. We won the War of 1812 and went on to conquer the continent under the envious eye of England, yet they did nothing because they could do nothing.
OMG manifest destiny.
The Battle of New Orleans was fought after the war was over
And, yes, the Brits would have rolled over the whole country just the way they did Washington, D. C. if they had put their attention to it.
"The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor" - Ronald Reagan
#25. To: Cynicom (#3)
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
#26. To: GreyLmist (#6)
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
#27. To: ndcorup (#17)
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
#28. To: Cynicom (#18)
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
#29. To: ndcorup (#19)
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
#30. To: Cynicom (#18)
The one who posted this article, as well as all those who are in agreement with its contents, are as guilty as the bastards who sent all those young men (and most lately women, too) to war. Do my panties have to be in a wad for me to think that way? Hardly! I know too well who are the guilty parties and those giving credence to the subject writing are adding fuel to the fire of the elite. By the way, save your words that are designed to either change my mind or have me look ignorant. I have lived too long, seen too much, studied and researched history too intently, and suffered too many years at the hands of the guilty to think any other way than I do.
... as riff raff most likely you and I are mucking up this thread in particular and the forum in general.
#31. To: ghostdogtxn (#28)
ghost... If you read the walk up to that, the gist was the best and brightest always die in war. That is untrue, always has been and anyone that is interested can view the statistics for the past many wars.
Or is it all bullshit?
#32. To: Ada (#12)
It doesn't matter if none of those wars were necessary. It doesn't change the fact that our Military is necessary. Vance and Rockwell and their sort amount to unnecessary noisemakers with enemy accents. No doubt, keeping us safe from our real enemies and their cadre of serpentine propagandists is not at all what they'd really like to see our Military tasked with doing.
You might wish to examine our participation in all foreign and domestic wars and decide for yourself whether any of them were necessary.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#33. To: Phant2000 (#30)
Best and brightest has intrigued me. That is a contradiction it itself, if we have the bottom of the social order doing the dying, surely they are NOT the best and brightest. From experience, when my turn came, the best and brightest managed to skip out on a government mandated service to kill people. Out of thirteen young men, five hustled into college and were exempted. One became a doctor, two engineers, one a pro ball player the other a farmer. They were the best and brightest, never went, sat on the sidelines. We of the riff raff went except one that was homo sexual. Three were wounded, one twice. Yes, we were the hated riff raff that have now become the hated veterans.
By the way, save your words that are designed to either change my mind or have me look ignorant.
#34. To: Ada (#21)
Ada, Make all these eeevil military industrial complex dupes go away, then come speak to me about drawing down our forces. OK?
#35. To: Cynicom (#33) (Edited)
I have NO hate for the "riff raff that have now become the hated veterans". As to the "best and the brightest ... doing the dying", those sending them never identified them in such terms. They were merely identified as "expendable".
Yes, we were the hated riff raff that have now become the hated veterans.
#36. To: Flintlock (#24)
While the Balltle of New Orleans was a win, the War of 1812 was not. We were lucky to get a draw out of it. We can thank Napoleon for that. I don't know what a bone smoker is but Manifest Destiny was certainly repugnant.
#37. To: Phant2000 (#35)
I doubt if there are many here that truly understand how the "riff raff" are indeed determined to be expendable. To write off thousands with the stroke of a pen is beyond the intellectual comprehension of far too many people. I did not mind being seen as the riff raff of society, we knew our place in the social order, however to be used by society as cannon fodder and then be written off here on this forum, as someone not worthy of any consideration, is rather difficult to accept.
They were merely identified as "expendable".
#38. To: ghostdogtxn (#29)
A few years prison would do anyone a lot of good. So I agree with you. And thanks to veterans who won the wars for banksters, prison or the military are the only choices millions of young Americans have these days. In fact, as you well know many who served were given that choice by sentencing judges. But, we should never fail to be grateful for the marines who served in Haiti (?) or those who served in The Philippines(?) or the brave troops who attacked Granada, which had a socialist govt for years, but two weeks before Granada nationalized the banks that laundered drug money destined for the final wash at the Federal Reserve via Miami or Chicago. Smedley Butler pointed to at least 100 wars and conflicts that were unnecessary. So, even if some wars since 1812 were arguably in America's interest (I disagree but I won't dispute it because it's not necessary to making my point) is that any reason to pile up young American bodies without daring to question the need for those losses? Old men who romanticize their military experiences should be told if they helped enslave half of Europe for over 40 years. They are Soviet war vets who fought on the wrong side. George Patton was either a brilliant visionary or a traitor, and those mindless vets would have followed whoever won the debate to attack the USSR while we had the chance. Both sides couldn't be on solid moral ground. And if simply following orders was enough to vindicate vets there wouldn't have been any Nuremberg trials.
A lot of my clients say the same thing about prison. They go in and they have no skills and a bad attitude, and when they come out often times they have learned machine shop or welding or carpentry or even computer skills.
The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relations, there is an atmosphere of moral mediocrity, paralyzing man's noblest impulses._Solzhenitsyn
#39. To: HOUNDDAWG (#38)
Romanticize???? That is a stretch of the imagination , rather new to me. I dont know of anyone that ever viewed military life in such a light. The blood and gore, the death and dying were rather realistic teachers, one never romanticized then or later about the dead.
Old men who romanticize their military experiences should be told if they helped enslave half of Europe for over 40 years. They are Soviet war vets who fought on the wrong side.
#40. To: Cynicom (#39)
You can't expect much more from someone who obviously doesn't understand how so many were "used by society as cannon fodder". Furthermore, it is UNACCEPTABLE to be "written off here on this forum as someone not worthy of any consideration".
Romanticize????
#41. To: Cynicom (#18)
I don't see those at the top as any real measure of the best and brightest. Too many of them are the actual riff raff and many at the bottom could be much brighter and better than them, if not artificially held back by the imploders of our economy, our society in general, as well as our governmental cohesion Constitutionally.
The best and brightest rise to the top, the riff raff remains at the bottom
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
.
.
.
Comments (42 - 121) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest