| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
11 Jul 2006 06:04:56 PM |
| Object: |
Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
wrote:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITORIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
Special to the Sun
July 08. 2006 6:01AM
I'm a military combat veteran and critic of our government's invasion
of Iraq and Afghanistan, and I don't support the troops. I'll protest
in the streets to end the war, and when the troops come home, I'll do
what I can to see that they get the benefits and treatment they need
and deserve. That's my contribution to the troops.
Many people "oppose the war but support the troops." Rotten war, brave
soldiers. I don't buy this at all. Although little Johnny or Judy
might have once been that nice kid next door, he or she may now be
engaged in massacres and atrocities.
"The troops" are waging war against a civilian population, making
little or no attempt to distinguish between "insurgents" and
"collateral" innocents in the vicinity. When faced with frequent
sniping, mines, ambushes and treachery by supposed local "allies,"
even the best-trained occupation armies soon become brutal, sadistic,
cynical and demoralized.
Torture and atrocities happen in all wars, on both sides. None are
right, but America has to accept the fact that when little Johnny or
Judy enlists in one of the branches of service, he becomes a hired
killer.
People are convinced that however evil, wicked and misguided the
president might have been to launch the war, the ordinary soldiers who
are actually waging it are overwhelmingly dedicated and honorable. The
average person thinks that "99.9 percent of the troops" are as pure as
driven snow, our "best and brightest." I don't buy either of those
jingoistic platitudes. When I was in the military, it was composed of
many different kinds of people, including a fair share of losers,
brutes and bloodthirsty thugs.
I believe that every one of the U.S. government's military and "civil"
agents in Iraq are engaged in "a war of unprovoked aggression," and
therefore all bear some guilt for participating in an evil enterprise.
I am not suggesting that the man who drives a supply truck is as
guilty as the man who shoots a baby at point blank range, but all of
our forces are guilty to some degree.
Doing wrong is doing wrong, be it in Gainesville or Iraq. Bush told
the soldiers to go, and they chose to obey. When the Nazis at
Nuremberg claimed they were "only following orders," they received no
mercy, nor did they deserve any. Perhaps the enlisted men and women
who merely tagged along are less culpable than Bush, but nobody
involved in this huge criminal undertaking is entitled to a clean bill
of moral health.
The longer U.S. forces stay in Iraq, the more brutalized and
undisciplined they will become, and the more hated they will be. The
vast majority of the global community sees the U.S. as the bad guys,
and rightly so. We have no moral reason for being in Iraq and the
world knows it.
The problem in Iraq and Afghanistan is not that the U.S. forces have a
few bad apples. The barrel itself is rotten. To remain morally
upright, people need to steer clear of voluntary association with
criminals and acting as their mercenaries.
You always hear that the troops signed a contract and must obey
orders. Not if they deem such orders to be illegal or beyond moral
bounds. They can always refuse to obey, go to jail, go AWOL or move to
another country. These are better decisions than killing innocent
civilians for corporate greed.
The American military machine has killed and tortured millions of
innocent people and will continue to do so until made to stop. I call
on my fellow vets to heed Thoreau's advice that we use our lives to
"stop the machine" and thereby expiate the legacy of pain, suffering
and death we participated in.
News Information:
If you have a concern or comment about The Gainesville Sun
please e-mail or phone Jim Osteen or Jacki Levine.
Jim Osteen osteenj@gvillesun.com Executive Editor
352-374-5035
Jacki Levine levinej@gvillesun.com Managing Editor
352-374-5040
.
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
12 Jul 2006 09:06:01 AM |
|
|
<Codebreaker@bigsecret.com> wrote in message
news:1152659096.745308.66940@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
nobush@nowar.com wrote:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITORIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
What have you got against puppies, you freak!
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Atheist ***** Extraordinaire
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
13 Jul 2006 07:17:54 PM |
|
|
..
Robibnikoff wrote:
<Codebreaker@bigsecret.com> wrote in message
news:1152659096.745308.66940@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
nobush@nowar.com wrote:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITORIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
What have you got against puppies, you freak!
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Atheist ***** Extraordinaire
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Hotel Charlie One" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
12 Jul 2006 08:58:38 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1152659096.745308.66940@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITO
RIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
The Oath of Enlistment:
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend
the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and
that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and
the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations
and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Each and every enlisted serviceman or women says this oath. It is the
same as when I said it in 1973. You really should read it carefully as
it truly defines the purpose of a soldier.
1). I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States
against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
The soldier does not defend America. The soldier is not a toy soldier
for whoever sits at 1600 Pennsylvania. The soldier defends the
Constitution, first and foremost. He defends it against ALL enemies
foreign and domestic. Yes, there are domestic enemies of the
Constitution and sadly, many of them are called Senator, Congressman,
or even President.
2). that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
The soldier does pledge allegiance to the flag or to Congress or even
to the President. He pledges allegiance to the Constitution.
3). and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United
States
As long as those orders do not violate the Constitution. For example:
If the President were to give an order to "prevent that legal 18 year
old from voting, by any means necessary", the soldier must NOT carry
out that order.
4). and the orders of the officers appointed over me
As long as those orders do not violate the Constitution or orders
coming from the President.
= =
So what went wrong. Today's soldier and for that matter the soldier of
the '70s doesn't "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution.
The Constitution has all but been removed from scene entirely. Then,
as now, it is entirely about chain of command. The Constitution can't
give orders or punish those who disobey orders, but men can and men
do. The military, and for that matter, the whole government has been
subverted by those who crave power, and if the Constitution, which
even the bureaucrats have to swear allegiance to, gets in the way, the
Constitution be dammed.
Today's soldier is a coward. No, I don't mean that the soldier will
drop his weapon and flee the scene of a firefight, No, that won't
happen because the training is too good and more importantly, you
don't let your buddy down. But he is a coward nonetheless. He refuses
to follow the oath that he swore. When given the choice of following
the oath or following the orders of those who do NOT follow their own
oath's, today's soldier chickens out and puts himself above principle
and blindly disobeys his oath. He becomes a toy soldier for the State
instead of a defender of the Constitution. He will follow orders and
break laws doing it. I should know, I did the same damned thing in the
'70s. I accepted and executed orders given to me by those who ignored
theirs and I committed actions that I must now live with. I am also a
coward and I am not proud of it.
So go ahead CodeBreaker, use your Constitutionally guaranteed freedom
of the (electronic) press and post your contempt for an author who
points out the truth. You can do that, for now. But when the power
junkies decide that they want even more power and control, a palatable
excuse will be made (necessary for reasons of nation security), and
that too shall pass. And sadly, people like will be cheering on the
whole precess. May you get what you deserve.
--
The actions of the disgraceful Clinton and Bush administrations
make it possible for me to say without shame that I deeply regret
the day I put the uniform of my country. The freedoms that I was
willing to protect with my life are gone. The America of our founders
is dead. All we are waiting for now is rigor mortis.
HotelCharlieOne
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Day" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
12 Jul 2006 09:49:37 PM |
|
|
Hotel Charlie One wrote:
Codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote in
news:1152659096.745308.66940@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITO
RIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
The Oath of Enlistment:
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend
the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and
that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and
the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations
and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Is the "So help me God." part obligatory? If so, does it not violate the
Constitutional ban on religious tests for public office? Or is being in
the military nnot considered a public office?
Colin Day
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hotel Charlie One" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
13 Jul 2006 09:28:22 AM |
|
|
Colin Day <cday3@sc.rr.com> wrote in
news:5xitg.19547$so3.18108@southeast.rr.com:
Hotel Charlie One wrote:
Codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote in
news:1152659096.745308.66940@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDI
TO RIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
The Oath of Enlistment:
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to
the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the
United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me,
according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
So help me God."
Is the "So help me God." part obligatory? If so, does it not violate
the Constitutional ban on religious tests for public office? Or is
being in the military nnot considered a public office?
Colin Day
I don't think the military is considered a public office and in my
case back in '73, I was a room with thirty other guys who were all
saying the oath at the same time. If a couple refused to say "So help
me God", I doubt anyone would have noticed.
It's just another one of those, ta hell with it, it's more useless
words. Besides, once enlisted you can choose your religious
preference, and at least the military got it right. You cannot choose
atheism as your religion since atheism is not a religion. "None" is
what was on my tags.
--
The actions of the disgraceful Clinton and Bush administrations
make it possible for me to say without shame that I deeply regret
the day I put the uniform of my country. The freedoms that I was
willing to protect with my life are gone. The America of our founders
is dead. All we are waiting for now is rigor mortis.
HotelCharlieOne
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Onanite" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
11 Jul 2006 06:15:53 PM |
|
|
wrote:
nobush@nowar.com wrote:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITORIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
Special to the Sun
July 08. 2006 6:01AM
I'm a military combat veteran and critic of our government's invasion
of Iraq and Afghanistan, and I don't support the troops. I'll protest
in the streets to end the war, and when the troops come home, I'll do
what I can to see that they get the benefits and treatment they need
and deserve. That's my contribution to the troops.
Many people "oppose the war but support the troops." Rotten war, brave
soldiers. I don't buy this at all. Although little Johnny or Judy
might have once been that nice kid next door, he or she may now be
engaged in massacres and atrocities.
"The troops" are waging war against a civilian population, making
little or no attempt to distinguish between "insurgents" and
"collateral" innocents in the vicinity. When faced with frequent
sniping, mines, ambushes and treachery by supposed local "allies,"
even the best-trained occupation armies soon become brutal, sadistic,
cynical and demoralized.
Torture and atrocities happen in all wars, on both sides. None are
right, but America has to accept the fact that when little Johnny or
Judy enlists in one of the branches of service, he becomes a hired
killer.
People are convinced that however evil, wicked and misguided the
president might have been to launch the war, the ordinary soldiers who
are actually waging it are overwhelmingly dedicated and honorable. The
average person thinks that "99.9 percent of the troops" are as pure as
driven snow, our "best and brightest." I don't buy either of those
jingoistic platitudes. When I was in the military, it was composed of
many different kinds of people, including a fair share of losers,
brutes and bloodthirsty thugs.
I believe that every one of the U.S. government's military and "civil"
agents in Iraq are engaged in "a war of unprovoked aggression," and
therefore all bear some guilt for participating in an evil enterprise.
I am not suggesting that the man who drives a supply truck is as
guilty as the man who shoots a baby at point blank range, but all of
our forces are guilty to some degree.
Doing wrong is doing wrong, be it in Gainesville or Iraq. Bush told
the soldiers to go, and they chose to obey. When the Nazis at
Nuremberg claimed they were "only following orders," they received no
mercy, nor did they deserve any. Perhaps the enlisted men and women
who merely tagged along are less culpable than Bush, but nobody
involved in this huge criminal undertaking is entitled to a clean bill
of moral health.
The longer U.S. forces stay in Iraq, the more brutalized and
undisciplined they will become, and the more hated they will be. The
vast majority of the global community sees the U.S. as the bad guys,
and rightly so. We have no moral reason for being in Iraq and the
world knows it.
The problem in Iraq and Afghanistan is not that the U.S. forces have a
few bad apples. The barrel itself is rotten. To remain morally
upright, people need to steer clear of voluntary association with
criminals and acting as their mercenaries.
You always hear that the troops signed a contract and must obey
orders. Not if they deem such orders to be illegal or beyond moral
bounds. They can always refuse to obey, go to jail, go AWOL or move to
another country. These are better decisions than killing innocent
civilians for corporate greed.
The American military machine has killed and tortured millions of
innocent people and will continue to do so until made to stop. I call
on my fellow vets to heed Thoreau's advice that we use our lives to
"stop the machine" and thereby expiate the legacy of pain, suffering
and death we participated in.
News Information:
If you have a concern or comment about The Gainesville Sun
please e-mail or phone Jim Osteen or Jacki Levine.
Jim Osteen osteenj@gvillesun.com Executive Editor
352-374-5035
Jacki Levine levinej@gvillesun.com Managing Editor
352-374-5040
I don't see you countering any of his arguments as to why he does not
support the troops. Is that because you have no response?
Onanite
http://www.onanite.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ian Braidwood" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
12 Jul 2006 08:08:27 AM |
|
|
wrote:
nobush@nowar.com wrote:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITORIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
No, he's just more experenced than you are and more loyal to his
comrades.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c, Kicking AWOLs Cocaine Snorting Ass" |
|
| Title: Re: I don't support the troops - Gainesville Sun |
12 Jul 2006 12:21:06 AM |
|
|
On 11 Jul 2006 16:04:56 -0700, wrote:
nobush@nowar.com wrote:
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/EDITORIALS0101/60708001/1097/editorials
I don't support the troops
By CHAS CHIODO
Then he is the *****
He served. What have you NeoCon chickenhawk traitors done for us
lately?
Special to the Sun
July 08. 2006 6:01AM
I'm a military combat veteran and critic of our government's invasion
of Iraq and Afghanistan, and I don't support the troops. I'll protest
in the streets to end the war, and when the troops come home, I'll do
what I can to see that they get the benefits and treatment they need
and deserve. That's my contribution to the troops.
Many people "oppose the war but support the troops." Rotten war, brave
soldiers. I don't buy this at all. Although little Johnny or Judy
might have once been that nice kid next door, he or she may now be
engaged in massacres and atrocities.
"The troops" are waging war against a civilian population, making
little or no attempt to distinguish between "insurgents" and
"collateral" innocents in the vicinity. When faced with frequent
sniping, mines, ambushes and treachery by supposed local "allies,"
even the best-trained occupation armies soon become brutal, sadistic,
cynical and demoralized.
Torture and atrocities happen in all wars, on both sides. None are
right, but America has to accept the fact that when little Johnny or
Judy enlists in one of the branches of service, he becomes a hired
killer.
People are convinced that however evil, wicked and misguided the
president might have been to launch the war, the ordinary soldiers who
are actually waging it are overwhelmingly dedicated and honorable. The
average person thinks that "99.9 percent of the troops" are as pure as
driven snow, our "best and brightest." I don't buy either of those
jingoistic platitudes. When I was in the military, it was composed of
many different kinds of people, including a fair share of losers,
brutes and bloodthirsty thugs.
I believe that every one of the U.S. government's military and "civil"
agents in Iraq are engaged in "a war of unprovoked aggression," and
therefore all bear some guilt for participating in an evil enterprise.
I am not suggesting that the man who drives a supply truck is as
guilty as the man who shoots a baby at point blank range, but all of
our forces are guilty to some degree.
Doing wrong is doing wrong, be it in Gainesville or Iraq. Bush told
the soldiers to go, and they chose to obey. When the Nazis at
Nuremberg claimed they were "only following orders," they received no
mercy, nor did they deserve any. Perhaps the enlisted men and women
who merely tagged along are less culpable than Bush, but nobody
involved in this huge criminal undertaking is entitled to a clean bill
of moral health.
The longer U.S. forces stay in Iraq, the more brutalized and
undisciplined they will become, and the more hated they will be. The
vast majority of the global community sees the U.S. as the bad guys,
and rightly so. We have no moral reason for being in Iraq and the
world knows it.
The problem in Iraq and Afghanistan is not that the U.S. forces have a
few bad apples. The barrel itself is rotten. To remain morally
upright, people need to steer clear of voluntary association with
criminals and acting as their mercenaries.
You always hear that the troops signed a contract and must obey
orders. Not if they deem such orders to be illegal or beyond moral
bounds. They can always refuse to obey, go to jail, go AWOL or move to
another country. These are better decisions than killing innocent
civilians for corporate greed.
The American military machine has killed and tortured millions of
innocent people and will continue to do so until made to stop. I call
on my fellow vets to heed Thoreau's advice that we use our lives to
"stop the machine" and thereby expiate the legacy of pain, suffering
and death we participated in.
News Information:
If you have a concern or comment about The Gainesville Sun
please e-mail or phone Jim Osteen or Jacki Levine.
Jim Osteen osteenj@gvillesun.com Executive Editor
352-374-5035
Jacki Levine levinej@gvillesun.com Managing Editor
352-374-5040
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12.5 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -2543 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
-----
Contact duke's priest and ask
him why duke is such a racist:
http://www.stpatrickbr.org/
-----
newsgroups Yang promises not to revenge post
in response to Sound-of-Trumpet's *****:
rec.art.scifi.written
sci.archaeology
soc.history.what-if
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
