Posted on 01/23/2014 11:20:30 AM PST by tom h
What constitutes “warfare”? How is “warfare” executed today? Is it only engaged by infantry/soldiers/SEALs shooting at each other, in direct hand to hand combat or is it conducted by an entire, dedicated force of people doing many different jobs to ensure victory over their enemy?
By definition, the definition you chose to use is all inclusive...not discriminatory.
Warfare is a process, a strategy and it demands the best from all of its people who are required to enjoin that process or the strategy fails. Down to the lowliest of low...none are redundant or unnecessary.
warfare: the process of military struggle between two nations or groups of nations.
So, using your definition of warrior, engaged in warfare, any who enjoin warfare, through whatever means to ensure victory, are warriors.
I do agree that calling football players or anyone else not engaged in the defense of our nation through the process and strategy of actual warfare “warriors” is nonsense.
But I draw the line there...any who wear the uniform and are engaged in warfare, are, using your definition, warriors.
Talisker
You should calm your sh*t down. You are on a RAGE here, dude. Just because folks disagree with you and what YOU think the world should be.
It’s an OPINION forum. Everybody has their opinion. And everyone forms and bases their opinion on the experiences of THEIR lives, their observations, and their logic. Just because it doesn’t agree with yours, doesn’t make them your freaking enemy.
When you jump in peoples’ faces and piss them off, you should expect it right back at you.
Lighten the hell up. Or just leave it the hell alone and move on. You’re making enemies where none need be.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
The only fact that makes me continue to disagree with you is his acting like a victim and continued rationalization of his behavior.
A similar situation will no doubt come up next weekend, or early next year. We can assess his character then as well.
I'm betting his behavior will be no better.
“And it’s being done for one reason - to protect that idiot feminist interviewer who should never have been down there on the field in the first place, let alone asking questions of someone in such a hyper-state.”
“It was a “gotcha” from a lipsticked, prim and proper, pearl f*****g earringed journolist with a very nasty agenda.”
Damned right! It was a plot right from the start by that sports hating, man hating, kitchen hating lesbo!
Pat yourself on the back. Libs are blaming her for the entire thing, too.
Whatever. Everyone needs to move on.
A bit too late for that. He’s managed to make the SB all about him. I wonder how his teammates feel about that. It’s like they no longer even exist. They should rename it the Richard Sherman Bowl.
MBA's don't get on TV and act like a gang-banging thug and have full sleeves. Sherman's a thug and I cannot wait to see Peyton Manning and the Bronco's burn his ass in the superbowl.
Another murderer.
“...Richard Sherman is a warrior, high on adrenaline, violence and victory....”
Marcus Lutrell is a Warrior.
Sherman is a football player, playing a game
Yup. The word has been so overused and over-applied it’s become meaningless. Hell, a peewee football player manages to hang onto the ball for three seconds is granted warrior status.
Pat Tillman was a Warrior, who could have had a major football career.
He gave that up to serve his country after 9-11, and made the ultimate sacrifice.
He’s the only football player that I’ll ever say was a Warrior.
Seriously, you’ve never watched a Democrat politician give a speech. They all talk like that.
He didn’t graduate. He’s a moron.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.