Skip to comments.What is the Warrior Spirit?
Posted on 07/18/2003 2:17:22 PM PDT by TERMINATTOR
Every opponent the US has faced yet have believed the above, starting with George III and lately ending with Saddam Hussein. Thus far, they have been uniformly wrong--mistaking a wish to be let alone with with an inability to fight.
See the thread on "The Jacksonian Tradition:
for the best explanation as to why that I have yet seen.
Please spare those of us who find ourselves trapped in the Los Angeles Prefecture of the Peoples' Republic of California. There is simply no way to obtain a concealed-carry permit...unless you are a diamond merchant, a politician or a celebrity.
More sentimental crap:
The Star Spangled Banner
(The Defense of Fort McHenry)
September 20, 1814
By Francis Scott Key
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, now conceals, now discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines on the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner! O long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wiped out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, for our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner forever shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
Its sooner than you think
As a woman I am disgusted when I look around and
see all the wimpy liberal men and just as bad, masculine Hiltery wanna be woman
Remains to be if Saddam is wrong.
Saddam has already been proven wrong, as evidenced by the presence of US forces throughout Iraq. The question was whether US soldier will FIGHT, not whether US politicians have the balls to stick out the NON-FIGHTING aspects through to an acceptable finish.
It has been my understanding for a good while that something like what we've got now was his strategy all along. He even went so far as to use BlackHawk Down as a training film. You're right that we're not talking about the will of the American fighting man per se, but more the will of the American people in general. As for the latter, I really have my doubts. And it is the lack of will on the homefront that has the potential to cause us to lose as it did in Vietnam.
actually, I think that's correct. The whole "warrior" veneration irritates the hell out of me.
When I think of a "warrior" I picture Arnold as Conan- flowing locks, fancy sword, bulging, muscular, hairless physic, waving his blad around and swearing mighty oaths through his capped & polished teeth.
When I think of the word "soldier", I imagine the short, grizzled,pot-bellied 45 year old centurion, who, upon spying the vaguely homo-erotic tableau Conan is staging, turns to some pimply faced legionaire and says "Octavius- have the ballista men put a bolt through that faggot."
Soldiers eat "warriors" for breakfast. A soldier is a professional, not a performer. A soldier should have the same relationship to his adversary(ies) that the guy with an air-powered bolt gun has to the cattle that come up the chute at the slaughterhouse. Combat between soldiers and warriors should not be about valiant champions engaged in single combat- it should be indsutrialized homicide.
Gang-bangers, Afghani tribalists, Fedayeen- sure, you're warriors. I certainly hope so. Makes the soldier's job easier.
I'm all for cultivating a more martial attitude both within our military, and within the civilian populace. But we should do that be reclaiming the concept of the soldier- not by trying to buy into some fancy-schmancy poofter warrior posturing.
How true, but you'll never convince the FCVs of that; they're having too much fun playing with their 'warrior' dolls.
I'd love to hear what you have to say- I think this is actually a moderately important issue facing our military. By fiat, all army guys are now Black Berets- does this mean they are "mighty warriors?"
I want our soldiers/sailors/airmen/marines etc. to inflict maximum damage upon the enemy. I suggest that berets, "warrior" gobblygook etc. is not the way to achieve that.
Please let me know how this differs from your reality.
I wasn't suggesting the troops themselves were pansies- I was suggesting that the recent "warrior" hoo-ha was silly, similar to substituting headgear for training/higher standards."
Soldiers (who are, by the very nature fo their jobs (making war) warriors
I disagree. They are SOLDIERS- they fight as part of a discplined, trained, team. They are professionals.
do not consider this list of morons to be warriors
but I imagine those twits (ganbangers etc.)think of themselves in those terms- "I am a mighty warrior for the crips/Allah etc." I suspect very few of them would say they are soldiers.
All four of them are quiet, thoughtful, courageous, in perfect shape, take their jobs very seriously and deadly on the personal level.
Good for them, and again, good for us- we're fortunate to have them on our side. And they sound like better soldiers than I ever was.
My objection is not to them, but to the idea that the word "soldier" does not encompass the attributes you mention- I believe it does. Also, my concern is that the recent use of the word "warrior" in place of "soldier" is part and parcel of the same ethos that gave us the black beret- i.e. style over substance.
Your roman Centurion fantasy aside, it's best not to ignore or underestimate even a weak looking enemy.
Sure, look what happened to Varus and the three legions the Germans wiped out. But it's not really a fantasy-generally, Roman soldiers ate barbaric warriors for breakfast. And the point of the fantasy was not that a "weak" enemy could be defeated- just the opposite. My point was that even an avatar of physical contioning & skill at single combat like conan would be squashed by soldiers, who aren't interested in looking good, but focus on destroying the enemy by the most efficient means at hand.
From my earlier post-"A soldier should have the same relationship to his adversary(ies) that the guy with an air-powered bolt gun has to the cattle that come up the chute at the slaughterhouse."
I'm sorry we're at loggerheads over this- I think you've mistaken my dislike of the word warrior (in this context) with dislike/contempt for the troops themselves- which is not the case.
You ever think that Yoda's speech might have been patterned after a Shosone elder? Hmmm? Here's the link to where Col. Cooper made the statement, although he'd apparently made in his classes for some time before. The written commentary dates to 1993, but he taught at (and owned) Guncite (formerly API) from 1975 to 1992. While the first Star Wars episode came out in 1977, I wouldn't be too surprised to find that Col. Cooper never saw it, but of course I don't know one way or the other. OTOH, I do think Col. Cooper would approve, in general, of Yoda's philosophy.
Well, except for the Vietnamese communists. But then again they had many allies here, paid allies in some cases, fellow travelers and usefull idiots in others, but many in the media. Those "allies" of the perpetrators of reducation camps and the killing fields are still there in the media and most especially in the entertainment industry.
I wouldn't go insulting our pioneer women that way. My own grandma, may she rest in peace, would wup your A$$ for a statement like that. Then she'd wup mine for bringing it to her attention. Well not really, but she was a tough old bird who would suffer no such nonsense. I sometimes cringe to think what her mother must have been like. :)
To be fair, the Vietnamese communists were slaughtered in vast numbers. We just weren't all that interested in keeping the slaughter going.