See other History Articles
Title: There Are Too Many Veterans
Source:
Lew Rockwell
URL Source: http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance126.html
Published: Nov 12, 2007
Author: Laurence Vance
Post Date: 2007-11-12 06:41:23 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 2235
Comments: 251
We have too many veterans. We have too many living veterans. We have too many dead veterans. We have too many wounded veterans. We have too many disabled veterans. We have too many veterans who have fought in wars. We have too many veterans who have never fired a shot. Any way you look at it, we have too many veterans. Veterans Day began as Armistice Day – a day to commemorate the signing of the armistice on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month that ended fighting on the Western Front in World War I, "the war to end all wars." A few years after World War II, the holiday was changed to Veterans Day as a tribute to all soldiers who fought for their country. Veterans Day has now become a day to honor, not just those who have served in the military during wartime, but those who have served during peacetime or are serving now. It has also become a day – even though we have Armed Forces Day – to recognize all things military. Why? Why do most Americans hold veterans and current members of the U.S. military in such high esteem? Why is there such a military mindset in the United States? One reason people feel this way is because they falsely believe that those who serve in the military are somehow defending our freedoms. They are convinced that it is the military that stands between a free society and subjugation by some foreign power. They think that it is because of the military that we still have our First Amendment rights. It is inevitable that whenever I write about the military I receive an e-mail or two from a current or former member of the military who closes his rebuke (which usually argues that I have the freedom to write the "trash" that I write because of the U.S. military) with this simplistic cliché: "If you can read this e-mail, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank a Marine." Has anyone ever thought this through? Are we are supposed to believe that the German army that couldn’t cross the English Channel to invade Great Britain and make its population speak German was going to cross the Atlantic Ocean to invade the United States and make us all speak German if it wasn’t for the Marines? Or was it Japanese that the Marines kept us from speaking? Or perhaps it was Spanish because of the tremendous threat we faced from Spain during the Spanish-American War? Were we in danger of having to speak Russian during the Cold War? Looking at the history of U.S. military interventions, there is one thing we can thank the Marines for: We can thank the Marines for helping to carry out an evil, interventionist U.S. foreign policy. Thanks a lot, jarheads. Semper Fi and all that jazz. Our freedoms, our liberties, and our Constitution that all Marines swear to uphold are under attack by our government. The state is a greater enemy than any foreign country or ruler. If the Marines are to really defend our freedoms, then they should be deployed to Washington D.C. After they oversee the closure of most federal agencies and expel the bureaucrats from the city, they can protect the Constitution (with fixed bayonets) from its daily assault by the members of Congress. In that case I would even say with you: "The few, the proud, the Marines." Another reason the military is held in such high esteem is that most Americans wrongfully assume that the military is actually engaged in defending the country. They don’t know about the hundreds of U.S. military bases on foreign soil. They don’t realize that there are thousands of U.S. troops stationed abroad to defend other countries. They have no idea that the United States has troops in 150 different regions of the world. Instead, they think that it is because of the military fighting terrorists "over there" that we don’t have to fight them "over here." The threat of a conquest of America by foreign invasion is nonexistent. And if we were attacked with nuclear weapons, even the Marines would be helpless to defend us. Although the purpose of the U.S. military should only be to defend the United States from genuine attacks and credible enemies, it has primarily been used to intervene in the affairs of other countries. When all of the troops come home and start guarding our borders and patrolling our coasts then, and only then, can we say that the military is defending the country. Even the Coast Guard, which actually patrols our coasts, is tainted – thanks to another unconstitutional, unwinnable war that the government is engaged in that is more destructive than the "enemy" we are fighting: the war on drugs. Still another reason for the military mindset is that members of the military are viewed as "public servants." Members of Congress like to brag about how they have been in public service their whole life. Some policemen and firemen have jumped on the "public service" bandwagon as well. But if you want to be a policeman or a fireman, fine, just don’t expect us get excited about the fact that you have a job. And plenty of jobs are just as dangerous. Veterans are looked upon as special because they "served" in the military. It didn’t take any special education, experience, or accomplishments to land a job in the military – they just signed on the dotted line. We don’t bestow any special honors on bricklayers, mechanics, and accountants; yet, we see plenty of bumper stickers that say things like: "My son is in the Air Force." We never see "My son is a plumber" or "My son is a garbage collector" or "My son is a waiter"? And why not? The people in those occupations don’t drop bombs on anyone. They "serve" some important needs of society. Shouldn’t we honor them as least as much as soldiers? It is unfortunate that some of the most vocal defenders of today’s military are Christians. It is even worse that churches fawn over current and former members of the military on Veterans Day. In response to my recent article "Should Anyone Join the Military," I was chastised by two detractors. The first asked if I could read the Old Testament and still say that no one should serve in the military. I was also told that God instructed the Jews and others to destroy people. It is not hard for me to read the Old Testament and still say that no one should serve in the military. America is not Israel, and the U.S. military is not God’s army. And telling me that God instructed the Jews and others to destroy people is like telling George Bush that he is the decider. There is no denying that God instructed the Jews and others to destroy people. But George Bush is not God, America is not the nation of Israel, and God didn’t command the U.S. military to kill anyone. My other detractor appealed to Alphonsus Liguori and maintained that as the sword maker has no control over the product, so "the soldier does not commit an actual sin unless he chooses to break a moral law while in the military." It is "the leaders or military officers who sin when they issue immoral orders." Military service is "morally neutral." But what kind of morality is this? It certainly isn’t Christian. What kind of morality says that it would be okay to kill someone in an unjust war in his own country who was no threat to you or your country because you are wearing a military uniform? Oh, I forgot: Just don’t break a moral law while you are killing him. It is high time that Americans stop elevating members of the military to a position of honor. It is long past the time when veterans have done anything honorable. We should abolish Veterans Day. And because of our shameful foreign policy and militarism during the twentieth century, we should abolish any Armistice Day celebration as well.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-66) not displayed.
.
.
.
#67. To: FormerLurker (#43)
The war was not going well for Britain until we came to their assistance. With all due respect, this just isn't true. I would respectfully suggest you read up on the Battle of Britain. By the time the United States entered the war, the threat of invasion by Germany was over. This was mostly because of Hitler's own stupidity. After the Battle of Britain Hitler pretty much changed tactics, against the advice of his general staff I might add. If Hitler would have continued putting pressure upon the British Air Force he would have had air superiority which would then have given him an opportunity to invade Britain. He blew it though and that opportunity never came again. The only help the United States was giving at this time was military supplies. I would also disagree with your earlier post that the Nazi's would have taken over Europe had the United States not entered the war. This just isn't the case. It is pretty much acknowleged that even if the United States had not entered into the war, the Russians and the rest of Europe would have defeated Hitler. While it took a long time for the Russian War machine to gear up due to the size of the country and its poor infrastructure, once it was geared up, Hitler didn't stand a chance.
I mean the government of the United States. There were many American pilots who volunteered to fly for both the British and Canadian Air Forces. but they did so as private citizens.
First of all, most you listed were Dominioners who didn't have a choice. Second, you think the Czechoslovaks saw the British as allies? It was the Brits who wouldn't even allow the Czechs at the table to decide their own fate at the Munich Agreement. A good many Czechs were just as satisfied serving in the Wehrmacht shooting Brits. Some were more predisposed to be in the resistance so they could blow up Austrians, and still others were Commies who spent their time laying tracks for the Soviets to roll in with the socialist paradise. I'm sure there were even some Catholic zealots who went down to help the Croat Ustasha dispose of their little Serbian Orthodox problem. You have some fairy tale black and white version of Europe that is about as sophisticated as a 5 year olds.
I expect that's because of our nearby presence. WWII made it clear that a ready military is part of surviving the future. That does not mean license to preemptive invasions or domestic tyranny. For that you need a corrupt Congress and a thoroughly corrupt and treasonous WH.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
You are wrong. There are many that have defended this country from real threats, regardless of what you think. No, I am right. China upped it's military spending to a whopping 46 billion (the usual agencies in the US claim it is 96 billion but who would believe them?) Who could blame them? US flotillas off her coast day and night- fat spy planes over her coast day in night. How many countries on her borders are US aligned and have US bases? China has a reason for needing a military. It is called defense. Defense from a country that has proven itself to be a serial aggressor. Who has China invaded? Does China have even one- one - foreign military base? Bully? Who has "Bullied" the US? I will say this again- of all the countries of the world- this one- has the least reason to have a standing military. Not a living veteran has done anything to "defend" this country from anything. Now- if you want to "honor" some of them- honor the ones who were drafted against their will at the age of 21 and got a german 88 in the gut at some idiotic pointless battle that we don't "celebrate"- that Steven Spielburg doesn't make a movie about- like Hurtgen. Honor them- not for their "service" - but for being victims and having their lives snuffed out for the whimsy of some a-hole politician in a distant city that never gave a shit about him. Unless you consider slaughtering stone age tribesmen to be "defense" and deserving of the term "wars" This country hasn't defended itself from foreign threat since 1815 and even then- most of that defense was by citizen militias.
How did our "nearby presence" work out for Panama, Grenada, Honduras, Nicaragua, Chile, and El Salvador? Think about it.
I never said it was a friendly nearby presence.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
There's two types of countries on that list. Ones that the US invaded or ones that the US used the country's own military in either a coup or civil war for its own purposes. By getting rid of their standing army, Costa Rica has eliminated half of the possible threats (the one used most often).
What do you think corrupts Congress and has made the White House the seat of delusional wannabe Neros of the world? It is the US armed forces. It is the greatest scam ever. Americans resisted the scam when there was no mass media to scare them with ludicruous tales of "threats". It was hard to convince a literate Iowa farmer in 1875 that his taxes needed to be raised to support a military to invade China and get a piece like every other Europeon nation was doing or had done. But- with the dawn of the radio age- and the income tax- it was off to World War One and Americans have been buying the scam ever since.
Yep. They have built military bases on the Paracel and Spratly islands, and have acquired the Panama Canal zone and set up huge "shipping facilities" there which could very well be used as military staging areas. They have a similar base in the Bahamas.
I would guess that Costa Rica hasn't given us a reason to invade and that it has nothing to do with their lack of a standing army.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
No one recently, thanks to those that have served as a deterrent against that would try.
It's the handful of greedy industrial-complex corporations. The Cold War is dead, long live the new Cold War!
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
Uh huh. What can one say to someone who sites commericial deals to run the pananma canal and the building and improving of docks for commerce as military bases? Not much. We are done.
No I don't. I warned back before the invasion of Iraq that we were attacking an innocent nation needlessly, and that it would result in a quagmire similar to Vietnam. It's only served to lower our readiness against REAL threats, and has resulted in a huge loss of life and treasure. It has brought us scorn from across the globe, and has done nothing positive for our "National Security".
Bingo. No money in it for the MIC.
Do you think they would be so stupid as to overtly build military bases in Central America, where instead they could do so covertly by disguising them as "shipping facilities" and "warehouses"?
Well thanks for the kind words SOP. I'll be sure to reciprocate in due time.
No, it is the standing military. The greedy industrial complex corps naturally exist to feed the standing military. No standing military- no complex. This country does not now, nor has it ever needed a standing military. Ever. I know this hard to see given that we are raised in a sea of military worshipping goop since we have been in diapers- but it is the fact. This country cannot- cannot- be invaded. The greatest military on Earth with the largest most sophisticated navy the world had ever known couldn't keep 13 colonies with barely 2 million people- only a third of which supported the rebellion- from seceeding. And Germany was going to invade with Tiger tanks and "take over" America? Japan? LOL. And in this day and age- when a few tactical nuke missles could wipe out any invasion fleet in mid ocean or decimate any landing staging area- there is really really really no reason for a standing military larger than what is necessary to keep a few nukes polished and ready.
We are done. If you are the sort of person who sees commerce facilities as "bases" then I imagine a bag of castor beans found in Iraq means they had a chemical weapons program. We have nothing to talk about.
Screw you Burkeman. You're the sort of person that gives the neocons their ammunition, and causes people to side with them against all reason.
Well being invaded by an aggressive nation is too high a price to pay for not giving the greedy corporations a military to sell to. There are other options. We have not been invaded, but there has been a silent coup. Our military has been mute while we fight wars for Israel. Bribery has shut the mouths of many, I imagine blackmail shut the rest. Assuming we rid ourselves of this evil plague brought to us by the Bush cabal, we will still need a high-tech standing army. The world is complex and China has a 200,000,000 standing army.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
China does not have a two hundred million standing army. It had a 2 million man army but has since been slashing that down as it modernizes. And China- of course- has reasons for one. They are called Russia, India, Japan, and the US. Those are real potential threats to China- not fake ones. China's military has never operated beyond a country that borders it. Their last attempt at a sea invasion of another country was in 1281 against Japan- (and China was under Mongol rule then) and it failed miserably. Recent Chinese history more than justifies a standing army. Frankly- I am amazed they don't spend more on their military than the paltry sums they do now considering the shame of being invaded by Japan, Russia, and carved up into zones of control by European powers last century. What similiar experience has the US suffered that would justify the trillion dollar a year military budget and 1000 foreign military bases? Nothing even remotely close.
Ooops! Thanks for the correction: With 2.3 million active troops, the People's Liberation Army (PLA) is the largest military in the world
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
Do you really think that Israel is to blame for why the US is up to its neck in the ME in blood? Israel is just one excuse. If Israel didn't exist DC would still be using its collosal military in the ME or some other part of the world. Look- when you are an empire- when you aspire to rule the world- smaller countries are going to try and use you for their ends. And some faction in the empire will think it is a good idea. That Israel seeks to use a DC Beltway warfare state already pre-disposed to foreign involvement- that wants wars to justify its powers and existence- that goes looking for countries to beat up on and invade- that looks for trouble- is only natural. Israel is under no illusion. The US is not it's friend. They are using an imperial state that is looking for wars anyway- to fight theirs. If it wasn't Israel's wars- it would be someone elses. Nearly all the wars Imperial Rome fought aided or helped out some other party that sought to use Rome to achieve their local ends. And Rome was more than willing to be used. The legions just needed something to do. This idea that Israel is "controlling" US policy is rather naive and quite simplistic. Israel is not getting the DC warfare state to do anything it isn't already more than willing and ready to do. A few blips in history and it could have been Iran that the US is fighting for in the ME. The "who" or the "what" or the "where" really doesn't matter to the Empire. Hell- if the US had 3 million wealthy, educated, and highly successful Armenian Americans instead of just 300,000- maybe the US would be fighting on behalf of "Greater Armenian" now instead of Greater Israel. It really doesn't matter to DC.
I agree. This idea that Israel is "controlling" US policy is rather naive and quite simplistic. Israel is not getting the DC warfare state to do anything it isn't already more than willing and ready to do. But Israel does exist, and the most powerful lobby is AIPAC.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
LOL. Never has a document been more invoked and cited but rarely ever followed than the US Constitution. The Constutition prohibits the Federal government from doing 90 percent of what it does today. When Bush allegedly said about the Constitution, that it was just a "Godamned piece of paper", he was only saying what has been true for a very long time.
And if AIPAC didn't exist- it would be someone else. If there wasn't a Jew in the United States- the US empire would still be kicking down doors in the ME or some other part of the world at the behest of some other self interested party. The point is- it doesn't matter to DC whose wars they fight. They want to fight elective wars. You know what prevents the US from siding with Iran and bullying Israel? An Iran lobby and a few million partisan Iranian Americans at the ear of the emporer. That's all.
LOL. A bit of an exxageration. Tasmanians were close though. When the Brits got there- the Tasmanians, cut off from the rest of the world for about 15,000 years, had lost the ability to make fire. They had regressed to the stage of "fire keepers"- they always kept a flame going and if that went out- had to wait for a forest fire.
Even if we accept that World War II was in some sense defensive (which is debatable), that still doesn't explain why I should feel gratitude to today's vets for their occupation and destruction of hole in the wall third world countries that not only never threatened us but probably didn't even care about our existence. Once again, why should I "thank" somebody for siding with one Somali warlord over another, bombing Serbia or occupying Iraq? How did any of that nonsense "protect our freedoms?" And why should be people who did this be entitled to some kind of special standing in society?
As there would be no airforce or artillery to call in airstrikes from a mile away I doubt the veterans would be of much use fighting an occupation. Experience shooting guys in sandals and track suits armed with AK 47's with gattling guns mounted on C-140 gunships circling overhead at 3000 feet wouldn't be much help. US Veterans haven't fought a peer enemy in 50 years. US troops in stand up fights with equals have a rather mixed record. Ask the Germans- who played their B and C teams on the Western front what they thought of the American fighting man?
Well, at least those that START 'em.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
I'm not following you here, could you clarify this statement?
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
You will never hear me demeaning veterans. Worst case, they went to hell, and if they were lucky they returned. Best case they wasted a hunk of their life. I think what these people are calling out against is the drumbeat of FALSE FEAR perpetrated on us. They view Veterans Day as a jingoistic, opportunistic appeal that ingenuously honors veterans and promotes more waste of lives.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
The admiral of the Mongol fleet had a bad time of it - ran into a typhoon, fleet wrecked etc. His retirement was a short. The Arabic Emir gives us the English word Admiral, BTW.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Of course they/we do. But they are misdirecting their rage for yet another unnecessary war once again brought down upon us by a tribe of plutocrats. My heart goes out to you.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
War has become a spectator sport Remember all the press conferences during Gulf War I with generals showing us video of how we could drop a bomb down an air shaft of fly a cruise missile in a window? You could almost hear the home viewing audience cheer the death and destruction. We are a shameful shadow of the nation we once were and have been slouching toward this situation for a long time.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
Tragically, an assault on the common man by another untouched, "high-minded", wrong-headed politician.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
It's the wars that DIDN'T happen that I was referring to. In other words, I was speaking of the DETERRENCE against wars, rather than actual recent conflicts. Oh, you mean like the current debacle Bush involved us in? the Axis powers could have launched invasions of South America. From there, they could have pushed northwards up through Mexico, and carried out an invasion of the US from both coasts and from the south. And right about then, accoding to the lights of a feller called Monroe, they'd have gotten on our fightin' side.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
The "war" is not going well for us. See anybody coming to our assistance?
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
You're a propagandist's wet dream.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
Comments (108 - 251) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIf we hadn't joined Britain in her fight against Germany, Britain would have exhausted her resources and would have been unable to repel an invasion. It was BECAUSE of our help Britain was not invaded.
#68. To: FormerLurker (#67)
The only help the United States was giving at this time was military supplies.
#69. To: FormerLurker (#64)
(Edited)
Brave souls responded to a clear threat against an ally due to their convictions and courage.
#70. To: SmokinOPs (#65)
Ask the Costa Ricans why they do so well in one of the most unstable parts of the world without one.
#71. To: FormerLurker (#30)
(Edited)
#72. To: robin (#70)
I expect that's because of our nearby presence.
#73. To: SmokinOPs (#72)
#74. To: robin (#73)
(Edited)
I never said it was a friendly nearby presence.
#75. To: robin (#70)
(Edited)
For that you need a corrupt Congress and a thoroughly corrupt and treasonous WH.
#76. To: Burkeman1 (#71)
Does China have even one- one - foreign military base?
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#77. To: SmokinOPs (#74)
Ones that the US invaded or ones that the US used the country's own military in either a coup or civil war for its own purposes.
#78. To: Burkeman1 (#71)
Bully? Who has "Bullied" the US?
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#79. To: Burkeman1 (#75)
#80. To: FormerLurker (#76)
#81. To: Burkeman1 (#71)
Unless you consider slaughtering stone age tribesmen to be "defense"
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#82. To: robin (#77)
Costa Rica hasn't given us a reason to invade...their lack of a standing army.
#83. To: Burkeman1 (#80)
What can one say to someone who sites commericial deals to run the pananma canal and the building and improving of docks for commerce as military bases?
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#84. To: SmokinOPs (#69)
You have some fairy tale black and white version of Europe that is about as sophisticated as a 5 year olds.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#85. To: robin (#79)
It's the handful of greedy industrial-complex corporations.
#86. To: FormerLurker (#83)
#87. To: Burkeman1 (#86)
If you are the sort of person who sees commerce facilities as "bases" then I imagine a bag of castor beans found in Iraq means they had a chemical weapons program.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#88. To: Burkeman1 (#85)
#89. To: robin (#88)
#90. To: Burkeman1 (#89)
#91. To: robin (#88)
Our military has been mute while we fight wars for Israel.
#92. To: Burkeman1 (#91)
If Israel didn't exist DC would still be using its collosal military in the ME or some other part of the world.
#93. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#66)
When asked what he thought of our troops being used on American Soil for different missions, or against the American People, his words were, "It'll never happen because it's unconstitutional."
#94. To: robin (#92)
But Israel does exist, and the most powerful lobby is AIPAC.
#95. To: SmokinOPs (#59)
Shit, some of them hadn't even discovered fire.
#96. To: FormerLurker (#42)
(Edited)
#97. To: FormerLurker (#40)
The best one could hope for would be a strong insurgancy against an occupation force. However, I'm not sure many in this country could wage such an insurgancy, EXCEPT for the VETERANS.
#98. To: robnoel (#19)
those that support wars have by and large never been there.
#99. To: Burkeman1 (#94)
You know what prevents the US from siding with Iran and bullying Israel? An Iran lobby and a few million partisan Iranian Americans at the ear of the emporer. That's all.
#100. To: Cynicom (#20)
Damned riff raff "jack off" veterans anyway, why should we even recognize tham.
#101. To: Burkeman1 (#89)
Their last attempt at a sea invasion of another country was in 1281 against Japan- (and China was under Mongol rule then) and it failed miserably.
#102. To: Cynicom (#26)
Do these people share any blame??? Of course not, they ride on the high moral plane.
#103. To: Arete (#17)
#104. To: Cynicom (#23)
The Civil War?
#105. To: FormerLurker (#36)
#106. To: FormerLurker (#43)
The war was not going well for Britain until we came to their assistance.
#107. To: FormerLurker (#45)
In the real world, the US fought against the Axis powers in WWII. In your world, we shouldn't have. Looking at the possibilities and probabilities of your world takes more than just a glancing utiopian afterthought, it requires a serious look at various factors.
.
.
.