2007
Soldiers are Idiots; Teenage Girls are Brilliant
Dave Pierre over at Newsbusters points out the - well, I’d say “stunning” but it’s not; I’m quite numb to it after so much repetition - hypocrisy of the left on the war in LAT Writer: Joining Military Not ‘A Well-Informed Choice,’ But A ‘Product of Manipulation’.
A 21 year old man, old enough to vote, marry, sign contracts, buy alcohol, go to prison if he breaks the law, change his citizenship, or do pretty much anything else he wants, elected to join the military. He stated his reasons clearly:
But that wasn’t good enough for his uncle, the LA Times writer.
And as for soldiers as young as my nephew, I don’t see enlistment as a well-informed choice but as a product of manipulation.
And yet, as Pierre points out, that same LA Times writer believes that 13 and 14 year old girls are mature and responsible enough to make decisions about sex and abortion.
Lopez wrote that he hoped his own daughter “will be able to handle herself as responsibly as these girls have.” It sounds like these teens have earned more respect from him than his own adult nephew.
It’s perfectly acceptable for someone who is legally a child to make life and death decisions. But it’s trickery and manipulation for an adult to do so. The meme that our troops are “poor kids who get sent to war” is a lie, and a disrespectful, pathetic political lie at that. Like it or not, they have the same right to make decisions as the protester who takes to the streets with signs demeaning them.
These choices hinge on two world views as described at Powerline.
[Meyer] noted that there are two competing views about the post-9/11 world: (1) that we’re at war with radical Islam and (2) that we’re simply experiencing high levels of violence as a result of our values and policies. Under the first view, we should strive for victory and avoid defeat on battlegrounds such as Iraq. Under the second view, we should merely try to reduce episodes of terrorism while adjusting our values and policies.
Too many people are emoting about Iraq rather than thinking critically about it. Annoying blowhard Bill O’Reilly is the latest. Engram at Back Talk describes it:
As an emotional reaction to events in Iraq, this is perfectly understandable. As an intellectual stance, however, it’s insane, one that could be aptly summed up like this: “Iraq is a mess, the Iraqis want us out, therefore, America should immediately surrender to al Qaeda.”
Of course, like all proponents of withdrawal, Bill O’Reilly neglects to mention al Qaeda. That’s because his position would not make any sense if he did. Like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, Bill O’Reilly solves this problem by simply adopting an eerie code of silence about al Qaeda in Iraq. I wonder if history will record this inexplicable phenomenon or if it will remain forever unnoticed?
As the U.S. military and President Bush both become increasingly clear that al Qaeda is the primary enemy in Iraq, others are graduating from the “eerie code of silence” stage of development to the “eerie code of denial” stage of development. The New York Times is the prime example. A few days ago, their public editor announced that the paper would henceforth attempt to engineer doubt in the minds of their readers about the role of al Qaeda in Iraq — just because they can (not because they have any evidence to justify their skepticism).
Bill Roggio handily debunks the claim that we are not fighting al Qaeda in Iraq. And if you read the milblogs, you know that troops on the ground have been calling out the green zone media and its liberal stateside editors for their lies for months, long before the surge fully took effect this month -
No, all is not sweetness and light. But perfection is not a reasonable standard, and amidst all the mistakes and setbacks in the war, measurable progress has been made. You just don’t hear much about it because it doesn’t fit the body-count narrative. And after all, what do troops on the ground know? It’s not like they’re adolescent girls.
Link to Pursuing Holiness and track back your latest and greatest here!
Trackback using Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson’s Website, Mark My Words, Big Dog’s Weblog, Right Truth, Shadowscope, DragonLady’s World, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pet’s Garden Blog, third world county, Right Celebrity, Woman Honor Thyself, Wake Up America, Stageleft, Nuke’s news and views, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, CommonSenseAmerica, Dumb Ox Daily News, Church and State, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Committees of Correspondence, 123beta, guerrilla radio, DeMediacratic Nation, Adam’s Blog, Jeanette’s Celebrity Corner, Webloggin, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao’s Blog, , Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Walls of the City, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, CORSARI D’ITALIA, High Desert Wanderer, The Yankee Sailor, and Public Eye, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
July 17th, 2007 at 12:21 am
If the Iraq War is so critical to America’s future, then how come it is mostly, if not exclusively, lower middle class and poor people who do the fighting (and dieing)? If this war was as important as Bush says, then wouldn’t the sons and daughters of the wealthy line up to join the Army out of a sense of patriotic duty? In fact, Army recruiters are now signing contracts with 9th and 10th graders without their parent’s knowledge in poor inner city schools. Perhaps they saw what happened to Pat Tillman and decided to sit this war out.
And how come, since the war began in March 2003, hasn’t President Bush attended even a single soldier’s funeral (he’s had 3500+ opportunities)? And why has he spent so little time working on the war? If you were President and the Iraq War was in the state that it currently is, wouldn’t you be chairing meetings and reviewing strategies? Or would you be sitting in meetings that you don’t understand and then relying on your Vice President to explain what it all means after the meeting is over?
I cannot value a war that 1) our elites could care less about and 2) very little effort is being put into trying to win, if winning was even the goal in the first place.
July 17th, 2007 at 6:10 am
George, saying that “poor kids” are fighting this war is a lie that I assume you’re repeating out of ignorance. Read this for more info; the chart says it all. You’re going to need to provide a link for that 9th and 10 grader thing, because I’m calling BS on that. They’re not going to sign a contract with a 14 or 15 year old; it wouldn’t be legal. So unless they’re 18 in the 9th or 10th grade, this is simply not happening.
July 17th, 2007 at 8:53 am
It is rather impressive how often that meme gets repeated by anyone trying to make their case against the military… It is almost repeated as often as the untruth that terrorists only come from the lower economic levels of life as well.
As for the article itself… I guess that just goes to show how friendly the MSM is with the military. Talk about having priorities slightly out of whack…
January 14th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Laura, you’re a smart girl. I have never actually seen a graph like that before, but i know personally that it’s true. Being one of those “poor boys” who originally joined the army because I couldn’t find a job, I’d like to say a few things to George, because what good am I if not to inform. The army isn’t signing contracts with underage people, end of story. As a matter of fact, the Delayed entry program won’t take you that young, maybe at best, 12th grade while your still 17 with your parents permission. I won’t speculate or pretend to know what the president does, but I do know this, what he does if in my best interest. He is more or less in charge of this great country of ours… that’s a busy man. So excuse him if he is worrying about my parents’ social security or maybe working with his people about what he is going to do when we eventually have to go to war with Iran, while also having to deal with the war in Iraq. I will tell you this in all TRUTH, we don’t need him at our brothers funeral, we need him working out a realistic plan on how we are going to finish this, because the man that just says “pull out” is the man who doesn’t have the facts about this war. The last thing I will say, this is to all who read what iv written, curse my name… burn a flag if you want, march up and down the streets condemning this war. Call me a baby killer and a rapist or a bigot if you want. All of those things that you do prove to me every day that we truly do live in a free country, a place that you can do and say what you feel without fear of retaliation. That isn’t why I joined, but it’s something that i will be able to say that I did. I had a part in the freedom of a nation. How many of the people exercising those rights can say the same?
January 14th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Thanks for your comment, Tim, but especially thank you for your service.