[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Israel Sold American Weapons to Azerbaijan to Kill Armenian Christians

Daily MEMES YouTube Hates | YouTube is Fighting ME all the Way | Making ME Remove Memes | Part 188

New fear unlocked while stuck in highway traffic - Indian truck driver on his phone smashes into

RFK Jr. says the largest tech companies will permit Americans to access their personal health data

I just researched this, and it’s true—MUST SEE!!

Savage invader is disturbed that English people exist in an area he thought had been conquered

Jackson Hole's Parting Advice: Accept Even More Migrants To Offset Demographic Collapse, Or Else

Ecuador Angered! China-built Massive Dam is Tofu-Dreg, Ecuador Demands $400 Million Compensation

UK economy on brink of collapse (Needs IMF Bailout)

How Red Light Unlocks Your Body’s Hidden Fat-Burning Switch

The Mar-a-Lago Accord Confirmed: Miran Brings Trump's Reset To The Fed ($8,000 Gold)

This taboo sex act could save your relationship, expert insists: ‘Catalyst for conversations’

LA Police Bust Burglary Crew Suspected In 92 Residential Heists

Top 10 Jobs AI is Going to Wipe Out

It’s REALLY Happening! The Australian Continent Is Drifting Towards Asia

Broken Germany Discovers BRUTAL Reality

Nuclear War, Trump's New $500 dollar note: Armstrong says gold is going much higher

Scientists unlock 30-year mystery: Rare micronutrient holds key to brain health and cancer defense

City of Fort Wayne proposing changes to food, alcohol requirements for Riverfront Liquor Licenses

Cash Jordan: Migrant MOB BLOCKS Whitehouse… Demands ‘11 Million Illegals’ Stay

Not much going on that I can find today

In Britain, they are secretly preparing for mass deaths

These Are The Best And Worst Countries For Work (US Last Place)-Life Balance

These Are The World's Most Powerful Cars

Doctor: Trump has 6 to 8 Months TO LIVE?!

Whatever Happened to Robert E. Lee's 7 Children

Is the Wailing Wall Actually a Roman Fort?

Israelis Persecute Americans

Israelis SHOCKED The World Hates Them

Ghost Dancers and Democracy: Tucker Carlson


Resistance
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: 1554
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  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 89.

#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.

ndcorup  posted on  2010-11-11   9:09:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: ndcorup (#17)

Other than that, I've really just sucked up my SS.

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.

Cynicom  posted on  2010-11-11   9:21:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: Cynicom (#18)

Eddie Slovak was against war and killing, he deserted time after time, so he was shot. No loss, just more riff raff.

Slovak did not desert because he was against war and killing. He deserted because he was "too scared" to serve in a rifle company (his words). As if every other Joe in his unit weren't scared as well. He was given an opportunity to throw away his statement and return to his unit by every single officer that spoke with him as his case went up the chain of command. He didn't think they would kill him butt instead would send him back to prison, where he was most comfortable. He thought wrong.

You are correct that he was riff-raff. Slovak was a career criminal who had been in and out of prison since he was a kid. He was classified 4-F due to his criminal record until 1943 when they needed warm bodies, at which time they reclassified him to 1-A and drafted him. Had he went back to his unit and served, the chances are very good that after the war was over that he would have went right back to being a criminal and the tax payer would have had to pay for his imprisonment. Good riddance to bad trash as far as I am concerned.

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2010-11-11   15:34:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: F.A. Hayek Fan, All (#50)

Good riddance to bad trash as far as I am concerned.

Rather harsh sentence by someone that was not there.

Of course you already know that he was shot for a reason OTHER THAN DESERTING, YOU ALREADY KNOW THE OPINION OF THE MAJORITY INVOLVED.

Cynicom  posted on  2010-11-11   16:19:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: Cynicom (#54)

Of course you already know that he was shot for a reason OTHER THAN DESERTING, YOU ALREADY KNOW THE OPINION OF THE MAJORITY INVOLVED.

He was shot for a variety of reasons:

Lt. Col. Henry J. Sommer, the division judge advocate: “The accused is an habitual criminal. He has never seen combat, has run away twice when he believed himself approaching it and avows his intent to run again.…”

Maj. Frederick J. Bertolet, assistant staff judge advocate, ETO (European Theater of Operations): “If the death penalty is ever to be imposed for desertion it should be imposed in this case, not as a punitive measure nor as retribution, but to maintain that discipline upon which alone an army can succeed against the enemy.”

An official comment, undated, from C. Robert Bard, a colonel in the judge advocate general’s office, provides the following: “During the period 1 January 1942 through 30 June 1948, 2,864 Army personnel were tried for desertion.…Of these, forty-nine were sentenced to death. Only one was executed.” Over a six-and-a-half-year period, then, reasons were found by those in higher authority to void the death sentences of forty-eight men found guilty of desertion. Only in Slovik’s case was no reason found. SIovik, guilty as many others were, was made an example—the sole example, as it turned out.

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2010-11-11   17:18:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#59)

He was shot for a variety of reasons:

Out of thousands, he was chosen by IKE, to set an example.

Ike went against the advice of his staff.

One may avail themselves of books written by those on the court martial board that were horrified that an example was to be made of one that was from the bottom step of society.

I have never before come across anyone else, military or no, that rushes to such harsh judgment about an event, and they display so little knowledge.

Cynicom  posted on  2010-11-11   18:05:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: Cynicom (#63)

One may avail themselves of books written by those on the court martial board that were horrified that an example was to be made of one that was from the bottom step of society.

Those books were written years after the fact - after the men had a chance to reflect on what they had done. I gave you a link from an article by Cpt. Benedict B. Kimmelman who sat on the jury. In that link were quotes from the JAG and the assistant JAG. No one was "horrified" at the time the event took place. Kimmelman didn't become "horrified" until after the Battle of the Bulge when he was captured and in a German POW camp and reflected upon what he had done. The men on the firing squad were also not "horrified." One stated, ""I got no sympathy for the sonofabitch! He deserted us, didn't he? He didn't give a damn how many of us got the hell shot out of us, why should we care for him?" The other soldier said, "I personally figured that Slovik was a no-good, and that what he had done was as bad as murder."

I have never before come across anyone else, military or no, that rushes to such harsh judgment about an event, and they display so little knowledge.

Just because I do not agree with your portrayal of Slovak as a poor victim does not mean that I have no knowledge of the matter.

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2010-11-11   18:27:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: F.A. Hayek Fan, All (#68)

Just because I do not agree with your portrayal of Slovak as a poor victim does not mean that I have no knowledge of the matter.

Sorry to disagree but your knowledge of that affair and how the military works is abysmal. Especially for someone that was once a part of the system.

Cynicom  posted on  2010-11-11   18:47:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#88. To: Cynicom (#69)

Sorry to disagree but your knowledge of that affair and how the military works is abysmal. Especially for someone that was once a part of the system.

If I am so ignorant about the Slovik matter and "how the military works" then please educate me, because with the exception of my opinion of Slovik, everything I have stated about him I have backed up with a link from one of the men who found Slovik guilty. That cannot be said about you. You claim that Eisenhower went against the advice of his staff without providing a lick of evidence to back up the claim. On the other hand, I have provided a link which clearly shows that he was found unanimously guilty, that the President of the Court Martial board sentenced him to death, that the death sentence was enthusiastically approved by the JAG, the assistant Jag, and the division commander, MG Cota. Contrary to your claim, Eisenhower followed the advice of the people directly involved in the matter.

As for not knowing how the military works, those are empty words you threw out because I do not agree with your attempt to cast Slovik as a victim. Yeah he was a victim in the sense that he and millions of others were drafted and forced to fight a war we had no business fighting. Should he have been executed? No, probably not. The other 49 weren't. However, he knowingly played the odds and lost. He was given every opportunity to recant his written statement. When the cook took Slovik to his CO, the CO tried to get him to recant his written statement. He refused. The JAG tried to get him to recant his written statement prior to the court martial. He refused. The members of the court martial tried to get him to recant his written statement, not once but twice during the court martial. He refused. If he had recanted they would have dropped the whole damned matter. They did everything but beg him to man up and go back to his unit.

Since my knowledge is so abysmal, please tell me which of the facts I have stated are untrue and/or what I have left out.

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2010-11-11   20:58:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#89. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#88)

If I am so ignorant about the Slovik matter and "how the military works" then please educate me,

Education seems to be out of the question.

Any person posting here prints a photo of himself, some good, some not so good.

Brashness, immaturity and arrogance always stands out. It turns people off. Add incivility and obscene language to the photo and it comes across in living color.

ON the forum we are the portrait we paint.

Cynicom  posted on  2010-11-11   21:07:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 89.

#90. To: Cynicom (#89)

ducation seems to be out of the question.

Any person posting here prints a photo of himself, some good, some not so good.

Brashness, immaturity and arrogance always stands out. It turns people off. Add incivility and obscene language to the photo and it comes across in living color.

ON the forum we are the portrait we paint.

I have been neither uncivil to you nor have I used obscene language in discussing this topic with you. That is nothing more than a red herring. I find it funny that you had no problem in posting to me until it was time for you to put up or shut up. LOL! As if people can't see through your pitiful attempt to hide the fact that you are incapable of refuting the link I provided or anything I have said.

Begone old man and quit wasting my time.

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2010-11-11 21:24:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 89.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]