I Don't Owe the Military Anything

Lewrockwell.com ^ | January 29, 2004 | Brad Edmonds

[A Navy Vet]

Feh. The only thing I can agree with in this pathetic contadictory babble is the "standing army" issue. I believe we should enact a Constitutional amendment to update that particular discrepancy. The World is smaller, more complex, and much more dangerous than in Washington's time - the oceans no longer provide a natural barrier.

The Navy allowance aside, by extrapolation, we would also have to do away with out Air Force and land based nuclear deterent, as well as the Army. Unacceptable in today's geopolitical climate.

BTW, Brad, did you feel this way while working for the CIA knowing about its paramilitary operatives?

[RGSpincich]

Edmonds is wrong. He/we owe every military person, past and present, exactly what we promised them when they signed up. We also owe them everything promised to them as incentive or deferred payment Much of what a vet receives after his active service is nothing more than deferred payment from a time when the vet sacrificed his personal liberties and fair market pay to serve his country. And it's okay with me if the vet made his decision to serve based on receiving some long term compensation for a shorter term of service.

[avg_freeper]

he described the endless shifting of foreign enemies.

I'm familiar with the tactic. The enemy has been the Republicans, then conservatives, then the Right, now neo-cons, or the Zionist conspiracy, the military industrial complex, or big business.

Anything to rile up the isolationists and keep their head in the sand or up the derriere of the Lewellins of the world.

[Condor51]

I've never heard of this guy so I clicked the link and then perused some of his past 'articles'. I clearly don't know what to make of this guy?!? This article is crap, and some of his other articles seem to be written by a psychotic Martian¹ too, while others are witty, logical, and quite good - like this one; Poor Fat People.

So does anyone know, is this Brad guy supposed to be a Libertarian, Conservative, a I hate Everyone wacko, or what?

1) No offense meant to Martians.

[skip2myloo]

Glad you did -- you nailed it !!

[HRoarke]

Shooting the gators before they get to the boat...I love it!

A couple of observations:

I don't know many members of the military that walk around asking for acknowlegement. Mostly because we are keenly aware of being part of something bigger than ourselves. Hell, I'm almost emabarrassed when someone want to buy me a beer...I'd rather they give it to an enlisted Marine.

How was this guy's Dad in the AF for 24 years and "so good" but only made O-4 (unless he was prior enlisted)?

The dirty little secret on the left is that despite saying that they "support the troops but"...is that they really don't. They hope every action is another Vietnam, and break out "quagmire" at every opportunity because they hate and distrust the military, mostly because in their selfish little worlds they can't figure out why we do what we do.

Ship. Shipmate. Self.

[MEG33]

None taken...;)

[skip2myloo]

Whatever he and his "comrades" did for the CIA, it wasn't enough - or we wouldn't be digging thousands of bodies out of smoking holes in the ground.

That's called prima facie evidence.

[thoughtomator]

If one reads too much into 1984, they start seeing the signs everywhere. That way lies paranoia.

Then one eventually can rationalize the conclusion that, since war is often used as a distraction by tyrannical governments, all wars are therefore distractions by tyrannical governments.

Besides not passing the muster on Logic 101, it also qualifies you to write for Lew Rockwell.

[Freedom2specul8]

This has to be one of the most bizarre articles I've ever read. I don't even know where to start... I am thinking sacrifices, salaries, exposure to all kinds of horrible things..the list goes on and on. What would happen if we didn't have a military..and volunteers? I wouldn't even consider it a debt that we owe..but a blessing to make sure their needs are met. It's similar to the way I feel when my kids need something...it's a selfless love, but in a different way.

[Freedom2specul8]

War propaganda has strength...and people are easily manipulated. I think that is the underlying theme of 1984.

[skip2myloo]

If challenged on this article, Brad would claim complete success.

I bet he would say he only wrote it to stimulate thought and to provoke discussion.

And, it has.

If we ignore him, will he go away ??

[thoughtomator]

The underlying theme of 1984 is that despite the most extensive manipulation of circumstances and information conceivable (at the time, anyway), human beings will still be human beings. This (imo hopeful) message is virtually ignored in analysis.

With regards to the use of constant war to distract the population, well, we can see that in reality. But it is not the reality in the USA in 2004, and it is paranoid to believe that is the case. It is fantastic - literally, a fantasy - to believe that is the case.

[Freedom2specul8]

I don't think it is for today...but I do believe that clinton ''wagged the dog'' a lot.

[Freedom2specul8]

No...I don't think he will go away. I bet he has a lot of compadres.

[Freedom2specul8]

WRT:Clinton...Check this out...click
So of course Americans rallied round their president when he went on television and told them he'd taken resolute action to launch a war on terrorism. They'd been afraid his sexual troubles were making America a laughing stock. What better way to reassure them they needn't worry about the nation's image internationally? Americans will not stand for this type of terrorist activity" approved one senator on TV on Thursday night. "The United States has to lead" agreed another.

I remember very well the moment a couple of years ago when it dawned on me - Bill Clinton's easiest route to boosting his popularity, which at the time was flagging badly, was to assert himself in foreign policy.

[Freedom2specul8]

Sorry, I left off the quotation marks...

[buzzsaw6]

How was this guy's Dad in the AF for 24 years and "so good" but only made O-4 (unless he was prior enlisted)?

There are lots of reasons including the one you mentioned for not making O-5: R-I-F, job offer too good to refuse, health, bad OPR's, politics (e.g. no promote recommendation from the commander), lack of education (PME or civilian), etc.

The dirty little secret on the left is that despite saying that they "support the troops but"...is that they really don't.

Like Rush says, "What is good for Liberals is bad for the rest of us." God bless you for serving. Maj. Buzzsaw

[thoughtomator]

Sure, I agree that Clinton's actions could be accurately described as intended to distract the domestic audience rather than to achieve any foreign-policy objective. Really, all one has to do to come to that conclusion is examine Clinton's newfound discovery of terrorism at the time that Lewinsky was testifying in front of a grand jury.

However, to say that after 9/11 - that the current war is a mere distraction from the real problems here at home - exhibits a lack of critical thinking processes. I get the feeling from the author that he is reflexively committed to a particular policy (isolationism) and is willing to distort to any length to promote it.

[L.N. Smithee]

Just a temporary condition. All will be restored when we defeat "Goldsteinism".

..................what?..................