theotherryan,
You are a spammer. You leave worthless comments on every blog you come across in the hopes someone will read your worthless crap of a blog site.
Who in the hell wants to get survival advice from a 23 year old punk kid, that by your own statements has no food storage to speak of and lives in an apartment.
Let me see where to start. Oh yeah FUCK YOU. Now that that is taken care of lets talk about your points. Broadly speaking there are two types of comments: hey man good post and I think/ have done X. I split somewhere between those two. If people want to moderate comments they do. For those who moderate comments they approve mine so clearly they are OK with the writers of blogs. If you as a troll don't like what/ how I comment that is really just too bad.
You are an idiot who can't even get my age right. If you are going to pick at something at least make sure it is right. By the tone of that comment I am guessing you are middle aged and have very achieved little in life by any measure. I can tell this by the emphasis you put on age. Successful (even marginally so) people measure others by their worth and accomplishments. All age tells is that a person has managed to live that long without dying which is an easy task these days.
As for food storage I don't have anywhere near as much as I would like but I would like to have a pretty enormous amount so I am probably not doing too bad now. Better then 90+% of the population in any case. As for an apartment WTF is wrong with that? I would live for free in your moms basement but that is already occupied by you.
Oh yeah and to conclude GO FUCK YOURSELF.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
![[Most Recent Charts from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_4.gif)
![[Most Recent Charts from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/t24_ag_en_usoz_4.gif)
Posts
47 comments:
HAHAH!!
Hey OTR- tell us how you really feel. Don't let that kind of stuff bother you man. You're right about being more prepped than 90% of the population. Frankly I would say 95%.
Sounds like the guy should think back to what he was like when he was 23 or whatever the right age is. You're doin' fine.
I admire your fortitude in putting up with wankers like that. To paraphrase the DEA agent on "Breaking Bad", the only shooting that troll does is into a kleenex.
TOR, Hey dude, don't let those trolls get to you! There is always someone that is going to poke a stick in your eye. I really found out who my real friends were, and who were the trolls when I got back from OEF (Afghanistan) a little less than 2 years ago! I just say, "fuck em"! I had a eye full of reality, and have been a 100% prepper for the last 2 years! TOR, "fuck 'em", when the country we live in turns to shit, they will be the first at your door step. Hang in there dude!
The troll,
I am honored a full blog post dedecated to me thanks. Little boy I think you missed the point, and didn't you mommy ever tell you not to use bad words. Shame on you.
Anyway my point was / is why would anyone waste their time reading crap written by someone who has done nothing or knows anything of what he writes?
Do you raise a garden, forage, have animals, trap, preserve your own produce, reload, make your own power etc?
What have you done or do now that would qualify you to give advice to those seeking knowledge?
This is not play time little boy, this is real the treat to our survival is real, you need to stop playing survival teacher, and go do for yourself.
Go over to Survivalblog and learn from JWR, there is nothing of use here. Only a thin skinned little boy, with no real world experience, an over reactive imagenation and a dirty mouth.
The troll
If you don't like reading the blog, don't. How about not wasting our time with your inane jealousy? If you have a blog, where is it? If you don't, piss off.
Dear Troll,
Who exactly are you to assume who and who doesn't have real world experience? TOR has done more in his 20-something (since you can't seem to get it right anyway) years then most "adults" I know. Not only is he smart enough to research and seek lessons from the learning's of others, but he also implements then into his own life.
I'm sorry if he isn't "survivalist" enough for you. That sucks, because you are obviously missing out on a opportunity to maybe learn something you didn't know. EVERYONE has something to learn and something to teach.
And if you dislike his opinions so much, go the f*** away.
LOL, he's just a cowardly little bitch.
From his reply, he's trying to give the impression he's the Be All To End All in preps. My guess is he has his "compound" pretty well secured away in mom's basement, with plenty of video war games, and as Hermit noted, plenty of kleenex.
Still, he's probably pretty accomplished in snaring and trapping the ever-elusive Trouser Trout...
I find it pretty funny that you see this blog as a waste of time, but you came back for a 2nd look. My guess is you'll be back again Mr. (or Mrs.) Troll, so here is my advice to you: get a hobby. Seriously. If you have nothing better to do with your time than leave insulting comments, I'm honestly sad for you.
There are so many survivalist blogs because everyone has their own way to do it. TOR and I live in an apartment because we move all the time while he is serving in the military, fighting for idiots like you. YOU'RE WELCOME. I would love to read your blog, since apparently you have all the answers.
What branch of the military is the little boy in the cub scouts. Most people I know that have served in the military are nothing but a bunch of pussy's.
Anyway its sad he needs his Wifey to defend him.
The troll
If you want to read a real survival blog written by a real expert I suggest going over to JWR's Survivalblog at http://www.survivalblog.com/
anything else is a waste of time.
Asshole Troll,
If all the military people you know are pansies then you are friends with some shitty people.
Seriously if all you can do is sit here and anonymously pass judgments on others, please move along. Go read the blogs of people you deem worthy.
WOW that was quick. I do not NEED to defend him, but he is at work (which is obviously not a time constraint for you). I'm amazed that you seemed so sure to know his age (which, by the way, was wrong) but you missed the military service part. We are honored you keep "wasting your time" here. Then again, you seem to have plenty of it.
On a side note: the plural to pussy is pussies. But then again, I doubt its something you need to refer to in its plural form often.
MFU Troll,
You say military people are pussies? Care to have a piece of me bitch? If you're feeling froggy son, just jump and we'll see. And all the plugs for JWR make it seem like maybe it's JWR doing the posting? Does he know what you're doing in his name? You are obviously a total coward, not even using a nom de plume. I'm here for you boy anytime.
YeOldFurt
hey, what's wrong with my parents basement? you can stack all the ammo/food supplies you want down here and it wont fall thru the floor, major bonus... :)
besides if the shoe fits...
ofpcorpsman
Wow!
TOR, first off love the blog as always, and yes the previous post is in jest (although i am currently in the basement, not kidding!!!) just saw the rest of the posts, and as a reservist (ofpcorpsman get it?) I was a little shocked, I was in Hadithah getting blown up/ shot at, too busy doing my job to fire back, we set up the police for the whole triangle, which effectively got a lot of marines out of that region, but fine, these idiots can call me 'pussy' all day, fuck 'em anyway, I just wish we could watch them shit thier pant when they get to the 2 way range!!!
ofpcorpsman
PTT Bravo OIF
Bloody Wanker!!!
Rawles site has a lot of good info, posted by Rawles readers who pay him to read their own info!
Many blogs chronicle their owners path to preparedness. They are not meant to be the end-all source for survival tips.
Then again, by posting these steps, others learn and share their own experiences, and everyone comes away with knowledge.
Except you trolls, who seemly can not assimilate thoughts that do not originate in your pityful mind.
Rock on Ryan!
The troll is missing what seems to me as an important point. If he is looking for knowledge then why wouldn't you want to read as many blogs/sites as your time permits? If you don't like what you read on a certain blog, the simple solution is to not go there.
I think he just wanted a little attention, which we have given you. Time for you to move on and piss off other people.
Before i flush you and your opinions down the toilet, let me give you a little bit of advise. You can gain knowledge form anyone if you are willing to look for it. Age means nothing when it comes being able to teach or learn. But it seems that you are too old or too stupid to realize what you are missing. And with that, i've given you way more attention that you deserve.
OTR, keep up the good work.
John
YeOldFurt,
I am not far from Central Texas- Huntsville in fact. Give me your name and address and we will see what we can get done.
YeOldFurt,
I am not far from Central Texas- Huntsville in fact. Give me your name and address and we will see what we can get done.
The Troll
Did the Troll fail to notice that Mr. Rawles said that he himself reads this blog, and sent Ryan a gift?
As for the language, well, I don't like it either. But it is his blog.
I also don't see a call for out-of-the-blue lambasting, either, Troll.
I think Ryan, just by mentioning preparedness in everyday speech and having a preparation-centered blog, is providing a good service for the community.
Ryan isn't forcing his blog upon you at gunpoint, Troll, so simmer down, now. Someone who insults another person is stepping on the other person to elevate himself. No matter how high you elevate yourself, you're still low.
YeOldFurt and Troll, act like adults, not ego-driven walruses with something lacking deep inside that you need to prove. That's no insult. That's an acknowledgement of your humanity, and your failing to live up to it.
Muscle and testosterone does not a man make.
Nothing says frantic anger posting like double posts.
OFP Corpsmen, There are definitely some benefits to living in a basement with free rent. Military life (particularly in the Reserves) can often lead to some living situations which wouldn't be your first choice. Stay safe.
Brass, I don't know what that guys deal was. As for language I've always been a bit profane and with the profusion of curse words at work often my subconscious thought is strewn with R rated words.
Theotherryan,
They pop up in my thoughts pretty frequently, too. More frequently than I'd like. While it tends to make me feel better for a fleeting moment, it stresses me out and makes me more frustrated in the long run. I consider swearing a problem, like cigarettes. They calm down your cough/stress in the short run, but make you cough and hurts your heart much worse in the long run. I know I'm really more happy when I refrain from the f-bomb, even in my mind. Ah well, the struggle continues. Swearing, I think, provides a tiny and far less evil version of the "release" that sadistic thugs get when they beat their wives. Though I don't think I would ever go that far, I believe that people who do horribly evil things start off as people who do less-evil things.
So, yes, I am a believer in the slippery slope, and also "there but for the grace of God go I," so I try (often poorly) to fight off all such manifestations of wrathful anger. If it prevents big problems, big score. If it prevents little problems, well, my life will be a little less stressful.
In this day and age, many people are walking powder kegs. A casually-given spark of profanity can be all it takes to set them off. So unnecessary, and so preventable.
This 'troll' is one of the first for you, right Ryan? I've been following your blog for the last month or two, and I don't notice many, if any. Didn't this troll originate over on Bison's comments section? This guy is just baiting folks and enjoying his fleeting attention. Some trolls have merit. Some of what they say has the ability to cut to the quick. Not this ba(i)ter. Anyone who attacks the gold standard (military service) on a blog for mainly militaristic folk (really, who isn't kinda militaristic here?) is just trying to get a rise.
-Humongous
Humungous, I've had them before but not recently. Usually I just let their crap die in the comments section but for whatever reason this one irritated me. I don't mind people pointing out the flaws or failure in my ideas at all. I don't mind criticism or complaints. It is all about how they do it.
You can't be a spammer on your own site.
Ban his IP and move on. What a retard.
"Go over to Survivalblog and learn from JWR"
You HAVE to be kidding!
Survivablog is the last place I visit and it is often 3 to 4 min. of drivel and writings from a few fans, rare there is any useful info outside of getting the pulse of the religion obsessed yuppie survivalist wannabes.
I found this blog because JWR mentioned it and posted a link (I think it was Rawles). Anyway, it was the time that one of the Ryan's went car shopping and the salesman tried to sell him a more expensive car with financing.
That was a hilarious post.
I stop by this blog almost every day. Right after I read SurvivalBlog.
Dean, How do I do that?
Radio Blogger, I think good stuff can be found at most sites. Just a question of whether sorting through the chaff (we all have some) is worth the wheat at the bottom. What is chaff and what is wheat is a very individual question.
Anon, It was probably JWR. He has been pretty awesome with the links over time. Yeah that was a good post. Glad to hear you stuck around.
TO Anoymous....Unlike many of you here I have met Ryan...
He a remarkable young man with skills very few his age possess!
He has a love for his country and family that shines with every statement or action he takes!
I am very proud I had the opportunity to meet this fine young man and I would trust him to back me up anytime the shit hit hit the fan!
Wifey,Maggy....Yall rock too!
Humongous,
I love firearms, et cetera, et cetera, but I'm definitely not militaristic. I'll admit that I don't hold any respect for the idea that individuals in the military are "out there protecting American freedom." I wholly believe they honestly think they are, but I have to agree with Ron Paul and Michael Scheuer: they're doing the opposite.
It's just that I'm pretty sure that no Afghani or Iraqi ever posed a threat of invading this land and imposing Shariah law or violating my freedom of speech or religion. The whole "they're fighting for our freedom" strikes me as really jingoistic (I know, it's a pinko commie term, I don't like using it either) and that just saying "they're fighting for freedom" seems to stain one's lips with an invisible Kool-Aid.
In addition, logically speaking, I'm pretty sure that there's absolutely nothing the military can do to prevent any determined individuals from coming over here and doing whatever they want to whoever they want. Anyone with evil intent, half a brain and a couple thousand bucks could do whatever they wanted.
So, no, I don't support the military, because I honestly don't think they've fought to protect Americans from a real threat of invasion and occupation since 1814. (The Japanese and the Germans could never have invaded, let alone occupied America. They were already spread far too thin, and as the Japanese allegedly said, "There is a rifle behind every blade of grass.")
But then, I suppose I may fall under the "troll" category in some folks' eyes. But at least I'm an intellectually honest, well-meaning troll.
After a deep breath, I resent any anonymous insulting anyone in the military. It takes a brave person to agree to sign away years of their lives so others can remain safely at home doing whatever they please. My sil was a barely 19 yo marine who was one of the first into Baghdad and later all those other places that no one can spell correctly. At 25 he now has a 60 yo back as a thank-you. Two of my sons are Air Force and we go right back to the American Revolution when my 56 yo great+ grandfather left his 76 yo mother at home to fight for freedom.
If others are brave enough to take a bullet for your freedom to be an idiot, at least be brave enough to find a screen name & start a blog site. Big talk from a small man.
As for reading his stuff - do you do everything on your own list? Because if you do the FIRST thing you should do is start a blog & teach the rest of us.
No one ever masters prepping, there is always something new to learn. The writers here talk about what they have done or are doing, what they have read or heard and we readers comment - yeah that's good, no its not, think about this. Remember the RV living? Suggestions for quickly removing supplies from storage in case of a bug-out situation? NO, to bad because I got some ideas to think about. No one is an expert on everything, not even Rawles or he would not encourage people to write & send in.
Not every good idea makes the blog or the comments. Sometimes it goes by email. Thinking about a good hiding place for something? Post your thoughts, wait for comments to adapt or wait for the email. I have sent & received ideas and advice. Made a some friends too. That is one side of blogging trolls never enjoy.
I don't read anyone's blog just for the "how to". If I wanted only directions from experts I'd read books. The everyday ups & downs, humor, and general exchange of ideas are what this is about. Don't like the company - don't bookmark & don't come back.
What has he taught? Well I have learned something about guns. And law. And possibilities...
It was an excellent suggestion of a hiding place btw.
Trolls...come out from hiding Sooner or Later...lol
I feel sorry for the troll. His parents obviously did not do a very good job in his upbringing. I was always taught " if you can't say anything nice, then don't say anything at all." The other quote I think applies to him is " it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt." BC in VA.
Stephen, Thanks for the kind words.
Brass, The Aleutian Islands (AKA America) were invaded by the Japanese during WWII. Pick up a history book.
Stephanie, As always you make awesome points. Guess I have never thought that much about what exactly people get from this stuff.
BC in VA, I do too. Their actions can cause me anger at the moment but I feel sad for them.
Brass,
That was Admiral Yamamoto, but he was referring to the mainland US.
“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”
He meant anyone, ever. That would also include the full might of the American military in the event of revolution. The amount of money necessary to complete this task does not exist in the world, nor does the resolve (short of 100's of nuclear attacks). He was not referring to being afraid of only the American military, but also (and mainly, IMO) of the heavily armed populus.
And quoting Ron Paul as if he agrees with your demonizing of the American soldier is a not-so-clever twisting of words, and wholly inaccurate. You have little support in your view of the American soldier. The American soldier does not dictate his/her duties while serving our country. Just because you don't feel that their service is "defending our freedom" doesn't mean that they are not serving our country, just the same. If you don't feel a sense of respect and gratitude every time you meet a US soldier, your mother didn't raise you right.
I agree that the deployment of troops across the globe is ass-backwards, and that is the fault of our leaders. But putting military pressure and engaging terrorists militarily deals a huge blow to these organizations, and along with increased security measures and our intellegence organizations, it is now much more difficult to execute a terrorist attack in the US.
The other Ryan, I've picked up a history book or two in my time, and I've read in at least one that Alaska wasn't a U.S. state until 1959. Sure, it was a U.S. claimed territory. Like the Philippines. Hee hee.
Also, I read that the Japanese didn't occupy it for long, due in part to the local Aleuts, and partly due to the fact that they were morons for having invaded a barren wasteland in hopes of building bases they had no manpower or material to staff. Hence, the statement I made, "real threat of invasion and occupation." It's pretty easy to invade and occupy a few rocks which are primarily populated by birdcrap. (Even the Brits were able to pull it off.) It's a different story when there is any sort of population. Hence, they would not have been able to pull it off, and probably would not have managed to even get a beachhead. Ever.
Of course, the Japanese would never have been able to take the Philippines from the U.S. by force if the U.S. military hadn't violently taken the land themselves during the Spanish-American War. It's amusing, in a grim way.
Then there are some people, of course, who claim there are documents saying that the U.S. military policy was to deliberately provoke the Japanese into "throwing the first punch." I've read them, myself, so I admit, I'm a bit biased toward that position.
Coach, thanks for reiterating my position with Yamamoto's words. "Anyone, ever." That's true, isn't it. Unless, of course, the people render themselves defenseless by being apathetic about everything, turn in their arms, and mewl to the U.S. government's military, "Protect us!" Asking the State for protection of rights has, historically, been a pretty foolish prospect.
Coach, did I "demonize" the military? Really? I said that they do not protect people and their rights like they honestly think they do. You call that "demonization?" Based on some folks' reactions, I can't help but have the feeling that I've blasphemed against some earthly god by saying what I did. Ares, perhaps.
Ron Paul said, in accordance with former CIA Bin Laden unit leader Michael Scheuer, that the (primarily) Saudi Arabians attacked on 9/11 for the reasons they said they did. Because of the United State (yes, singular) military presence in their countries. If that is true, then the deployment of more troops into their country will have the effect of helping create more terrorists. Which is what Ron Paul says. So please tell me how I am "twisting" his words, and how this "twisting" is a "demonization" of the well-meaning but wrong United State military soldier?
I'm sorry, I can't have respect for WWII bomber vets and their crews, who deliberately incinerated civilian populations. I can muster no gratitude toward men in P-47's and P-51's who were ordered to kill anything, anything that moved in a 50 square mile radius, even if it was a farmer and his empty wagon. There is nothing honorable about such men. They "just followed orders," which, for what they did, makes them about as honorable as the thugs they were fighting.
In Viet Nam, a lot of men killed a lot of men who posed absolutely no threat to us. One soldier in particular claimed that he didn't think of the people he killed as people. He thought they were over there fighting an idea, Communism, so anything went. His actions reflected his belief. His name was Lieutenant Calley.
Haiti has santaria, but serious religion around these parts is military-worship. The blind acceptance of the idea that by virtue of picking up a rifle at the behest of the same politicians who vote to ban your firearms and dismember babies on the taxpayer's dime, that they are suddenly living saints and heroes.
Do you think it makes you a good man to following the orders of politicians, as long as they tell you that you are "serving your country?"
I'll need some proof that these men who go invade and occupy countries that have no logistical possibility of invasion are "serving" or "protecting" me and my neighbors. Otherwise, I'll continue to make my own absurd claim that it's my "terrorist whistle" that keeps evil men away.
Another 9/11 could happen tomorrow, and there's nothing the military can do to prevent it, and you know it. So stop your soldier-worship. It's irrational, emotionally-based, and childish.
You can have no respect because you are looking at war from a civilian pov not a military one.
I cannot find the quote I was looking for but this is nearly as good:
“It’s fear, dude, just fear and you don’t have to be Sun freakin Tzu to know that real fighting isn’t about killing or even hurting the other guy, it’s bout scaring him enough to call it a day. Break their spirit, that’s what every successful army goes for, from tribal face paint to the “blitzkrieg” to …what did we call the first round of Gulf War Two, “Shock and Awe”!
Max Brooks "World War Z" pp 103-104
War is fought in the hearts & minds of a population. When the price becomes too high - money, wounded, dead, destruction- then the war is lost and one side surrenders. Bombing makes the price higher faster. The bombing of Japan went straight to the heart. The are many reports that while the death toll was high it would have been higher & monetarily costlier if the war had continued in the convetional manner.
Consider too, once people had seen the effects of such a weapon they have never used another. Built & tested but not used. The US has high moral standards that will not allow easy usage. THAT is a big reason the the war on terror will change names (as it is doing now) but will never really end. Enemy combatants know that the military would never be allowed to use their best weapons (not just nukes). The real winners are the politians who use fear to order the world to their advantage.
Yes we do have standards we just do not always live up to them. That is not a bad thing as it causes us to reflect on how we can do/be better in the future. Before the arguement is made that the military does not have high standards because of... Those are exactly the incidents that prove we have standards. Once the abuses were discovered & investigated IF they were true those involved were punished for no maintaining those standards. That is what distinguishes us from some third world army. Many other armies would shrug it off as part of the cost of going to war.
If we want to win wars efficently & relatively quickly then we need to let the military do their job period. If you want to insure another 9/11 never happened again the military would have been allowed to do its job. The Japanese still do not want to have a standing army lest they have another unfortunate war with a bad ending. Terrorists, their families & their countries know they will never receive equal treatment - they have no fear, the price is not high enough & never will be.
But then again - there were two terrorist events on US soil during the Clinton era. There was one on American soil(9/11) during the Bush years. There have been several major events around the world but none here. You claim the military is not doing its job - where are the events on US soil? Until you have a security clearance to read the reports you do not know as much as you would like to believe.
Soldiers are not idols to be worshipped. They are human beings who love their country and it's Constitution enough to put their lives on the line to protect & defend that country and that Constitution. They are to be under the orders of the Commander in Chief not the polititians. If they are, then who is not obeying the Constitution? and why do they remain in office? That is NOT the soldiers responsibility but YOURS and every other voter in the US. With every finger pointed at a soldier there are four others pointing back at you as a reminder to do YOUR job at election time. AND afterward.
But this discussion is really ended isn't it?
Stephanie, I cannot have respect for them because I look at things from a human point of view. Soldiers and non-soldiers must abide by the same moral law.
The end does not justify the means. No one may deliberately target non-combatants. Civilians. Women and children. What is the difference between incinerating hundreds of thousands of civilians, and slaughtering three thousand civilians, when the objective is the same? Both acts were intended to cause terror and force the enemy government to capitulate to its demands. They were all acts of terrorism. They were all atrocious acts.
I might add that despite what the historical revisionists and military hagiographers may say, a few men spoke up and said that dropping the atomic weapons on Japan was absolutely unnecessary, as the Japanese were already militarily crushed. Furthermore, regardless of its "necessity," (which is never a justification for immoral actions) they themselves maintained that the bombings were immoral. Men such as MacArthur, Spaatz, Nimitz, and Halsey. Look up their statements for yourself, if you're really a truth-seeker.
War is a macrocosm of the principle of self-defense. You may not defend yourself by terrorizing the aggressor; by killing his family, shooting his dog and burning his home. You defend yourself by directly stopping the aggressor.
The Swiss army must be doing its job phenomenally well. They haven't left their borders in 400 years, and they've never been invaded or been the target of a Muslim terrorist attack of any magnitude.
There are dozens of other countries who haven't been targets of Muslim terrorists, either. Funny thing is, they all share something in common: they don't interfere in the political affairs of other countries.
An absence of an attack over a span of 20 years does not mean much of anything. Again, I might as well say it's my "terrorist whistle" that is keeping evil men away. In reality, however, anyone who wants to can come in and do whatever they want to whoever they want, whether or not the U.S. army is occupying their land. Do you deny that fact? Do you really think even tens of thousands of occupying troops 4000 miles away can possibly stop a couple determined people from leaving those countries and coming over here? Bin Laden said that he was glad the American troops had come in force, because it made it easier to kill them.
The Commander-In-Chief? Who has the power, according to the Constitution, to declare war, Stephanie?
Stephanie, 95% of politicians are the same: they don't care what you want once you vote them into office. They care about taking bribes and feeling powerful.
As Emma Goldman said, "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal."
I am not responsible for the United State sending armed men overseas, and neither am I responsible for the conduct of those armed men. They are individuals, responsible for their own actions. Wearing a uniform to look like everyone else does not grant them immunity from thinking for themselves and doing the right thing. The troops are handed loaded guns: they are the ones who decide whether or not to pull the trigger. And on whom they draw a bead. One is not exempt from adhering to the moral law because one wears camouflage and a flag sewn upon one's sleeve.
You want to see a hero? Look for the commissioned officers who have refused to go to Iraq, and are taking the penalty and doing prison time, on the grounds that it was an unconstitutional order. Look for men such as Lieutenant Colonel Darrel Vandeveld, who refused to continue prosecuting Guantanamo bay prisoners when he found that evidence that would help clear some of them was being deliberately obfuscated. I will gladly tip my hat to such men, even though they are just doing what they ought to do.
No, the discussion isn't over. The discussion is being held more and more frequently all over the country and the world. Men are rediscovering what the Founding Fathers knew from day one: a standing army is the bane of liberty, and it is dangerous to keep one on hand, because politicians are likely to use it for their own purposes. I still cannot fathom how anyone can think that the use of troops is always good and noble, no matter what. Politicians send them overseas. Does the act of a politician sending armed men overseas somehow sanctify the actions of those armed men? Do men suddenly become saints and heroes for taking up rifles and killing at the behest of politicians? Don't tell me they would all uproot their lives, drop everything and kill men 4,000 miles away unless they were told to go. The only time that happens is when there is a real threat of invasion and occupation. Then everyone steps up. The politicians saying "they're a threat to our way of life" bovine effluvia is absolutely unnecessary when a real threat manifests itself.
Militarily crushed does not mean the same thing as surrendering. Japan may have been militarily crushed but it would not have surrendered, it was not in the national identity to do so.
How do you stop an agressor who believes that it is morally acceptable to strap a bomb on, walk into a crowd and blow everyone to pieces? That such an action will provide eternal rewards? When death is a greater reward than life?
The congress declares war but the Commander in Chief is in charge of the forces.
I maintain that voters are responsible for sending men overseas. Voters choose their representatives who choose to vote to declare war. Voters choose the President/Commander in Chief who makes decisions. If voters would fulfill their responsibilities to think about real issues and vote responsibly then perhaps our troops would not be overseas. If you are a voter and voted for those who are in office, you share responsibility. Can you say that you did not vote to re-elect anyone? that all your choices were new faces?
I do not believe that troops shoot as often as you seen to believe. If they shot everyone they were able to draw a bead on then no one would be left standing. Is it moral to use civilians as shields? If the soldiers where as amoral as you seem to believe them why aren't the casualty rates much higher?
I do agree that politicians do not seem to care about the voters once they are elected. Whose fault is that? Re-electing the same crew only reenforces the belief that "I must be doing something right or I wouldn't keep getting elected."
As for the discussion being over - my meaning was in this comment section no one's mind is being changed. My point is not that the sending is correct but that the soldiers themselves are doing their jobs. If you are a soldier your job is to go when & where you are told to go. There are some stiff penelties for saying no. To say that a soldier is immoral or even amoral is wrong. Soldiers fight other men's wars. Period. Not one soldier has asked to be a saint or a hero, but most would like to be respected for doing a difficult job that few want to do - being willing to lay their lives on the line to defend this country. If we do not like the definition of what constitutes defense or where that job is being carried out then the congress that declared the war & the commander in chief in charge of the troops need to be taken to task. Not the soldiers.
I do not disagree with everything you are saying. I do disagree with where you seem to be placing the blame. It is politicians that should be running your gamut not soldiers.
It is late & I am not at my best when tired. There seems to be no purpose to this discussion as we seem to see each other as both stubborn & blind. Good night.
So sorry that should be "running your gauntlet"
Brass--
You're right. We should disband our military, sit in a drum circle with Osama bin-Laden and sing kumbaya. All will be right with the world! Everyone will drop their weapons. Hooray! You've found the answer to global peace.
Fuckin utopia!!!
Except besides North Korea, Cuba and some of the Arab states, the rest of the world really doesn't want us to bring all our troops home and dismantle the aircraft carriers. They benefit from our insane willingness to be first-in where ever the fuck we are needed. Just ask Canada. They don't need a military, they have us as neighbors. We spend hundreds of billions on defense, and it is actually largely for the benefit of our international allies. It is what allows our global econmy to work safely.
But because, boo-hoo we pissed off some radical muslims, we caused 9/11?
The entirety of human history is war and conquest, with short periods of peace between. That is because you cannot change human nature. There will always be ruthless greedy people who want to dominate and rule. It creates an unending cycle of conquest and enslavement. Domination and uprising. Leading to more conquest and domination. We provide the Pax Americana, and most of the world is fine with it, even though some people grumble and protest.
Regarding our servicemen and women: you have a myopic view of what it is they do. Killing, if necessary. That is actually a small part of what they do. But they provide stability in countries that wouldn't have it without them, provide food, shelter, medical care. They help build roads, bridges, provide disaster relief. But no, fuck the immoral US soldier. Just because he risks his life for a meager income while perfomring these tasks, it doesn't excuse having to fight on the battlefield. The point is, you should be grateful to the US soldier because his/her service means that we don't have to force pussies like you to go do the fighting. Because then we'd be really fucked. Also, when you are in the miitary, you don't decide what you will do, and wont do today. You do as you are told. So to put the blame on these people for following orders is obscene, and unfair.
Never mind that a large percentage of military personnel come from low income homes, and are often severely limited in their choices in life. Many don't join because of personal politics, but to get a roof over their head and three square meals. But, no, fuck them. Right?
I didn't agree with the Iraq war, and I despise GW Bush for what he did while in office. But I have nothing but respect for our servicemen and women.
Stephanie wrote: "Militarily crushed does not mean the same thing as surrendering. Japan may have been militarily crushed but it would not have surrendered, it was not in the national identity to do so."
Let me rephrase your statement, in light of what I said regarding "war is a macrocosm of the principle of self defense."
"Being unable to continue acts of aggression is not the same thing as giving up. You have to keep shooting until not only they are incapable of harming you any more, but so that they die in punishment for what they did."
In other words, the goal of war is to neutralize the active threat they pose. Japan posed no more active threat. Total air and sea superiority belonged to the U.S. They could have bombed legitimate military targets as fast as they cropped up.
The Japanese were ready to surrender, Stephanie. MacArthur himself said that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. In addition, he said that the war might have ended weeks earlier if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor.
Stephanie wrote: "How do you stop an agressor who believes that it is morally acceptable to strap a bomb on, walk into a crowd and blow everyone to pieces? That such an action will provide eternal rewards? When death is a greater reward than life?"
There is only one way to stop such men: intelligence/infiltration. You will not stop him any other way. You cannot stop them by occupation, and not even, as the Brits have proven, by turning your country into a fascist police state with cameras on every corner and random pat-downs.
You're dreaming if you think you can stop him. As for myself, I know I can't stop him. And I'm not about to start rolling myself around in a big, safe Lexan hamster ball because I'm afraid of the bad mans Are you? Because the alternative you are offering has been sucking the marrow from the bones of the economy, with exponential deficit spending which has, in great part, led to the current economic unpleasantness. And economic troubles lead to political messiahs, who are going to save us from all our problems. And we all know how that turns out. Mark my words. The State, with the approbation of the dear voters, will establish a totalitarian regime, and eventually kill its own food source on a massive scale. With my magical crystal ball of painfully obvious historical precedent, I see it happening within 10 to 15 years.
You still say it's the responsibility of the voters.
Stephanie, you could have voted for Mother Teresa, and if she had accepted coercive political power (which she never would have) she would have been taking bribes and giving political favors to war manufacturers within a month. The nature of tax-funded politics is to corrupt. It doesn't matter how well-meaning and wide-eyed you go into it. If you go into a brothel and expect to convert everyone there, you're dreaming, because you stand in direct opposition to their material and monetary gain. Politicians love power. They do anything and everything to keep it. And the people, once they have given them the power, are too stupid and impotent to stop what they have started. It's the public choice theory in full effect. The State grows, liberty shrinks. It's what happens. The State will always grow if people keep planting it. I consider the State to be a weed. It produces nothing, but saps the resources needed by useful, productive plants.
If every time you let a venomous snake enter your neighbor's house, intending to rid it of rodents, and despite the fact that it killed a couple rats, it always bit and killed people, would you say, "Well, I just need to change the type of venomous snake I put into my neighbor's house?" No, you would recognize that venomous snakes bite by nature. Politicians are venomous snakes. They hide their venom glands very well. Some don't develop venom glands until they get into office. But 95% of the time, they do develop venom glands. The answer is not to switch the species of snake. The answer to stop using snakes to kill rats.
I don't elect anyone. I don't have the right to force you, at gunpoint, to provide services for me. Period.
"most would like to be respected for doing a difficult job that few want to do - being willing to lay their lives on the line to defend this country."
That's just the point: are they defending this country, or do they just think they are? I laid out several reasons why they are not defending this country. If I see a group of children hitting a hornet's nest, naively thinking he was going to eradicate the problem of venomous insects that way, would I say, "Good job, guys! Way to save us from those hornets by pissing them off more!" or would I say, "Look kids, if you want to get rid of a hornet's nest, you must first find the hornet's nest, identify it for certain, carefully isolate it by wrapping a burlap sack around it, then cut it off and stomp the contents. And that's the course of action if it is an immediate, active threat. Otherwise, the alternative is to leave it the heck alone, so its occupants don't bother you. It works for Switzerland. It works for the Netherlands. It works for Japan. But not the United State, oh, no. How dare they get upset if the U.S. military has bases in their backyards. I mean, you wouldn't be upset if Germany, Russia or Japan had military bases in your land. Of course not. And if you did have a problem, you'd just vote to change the politicians in power because they let those troops in. Because the politicians would really hear your little voice over the clinking of 30 pieces of silver being given them by the United State. Hee hee!
"To say that a soldier is immoral or even amoral is wrong. Soldiers fight other men's wars. Period."
Yes. They fight other men's wars. They get payment for fighting in wars. They know which side their bread is buttered on, and due to human nature, and violence being an unnatural behavior (from the beginning, God did not intend bloodshed among men) this can rapidly lead to corruption. Tell me: were those troops "doing their job" really protecting you and me when they went to fight in Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada, Panama, Cuba, the Philippines, and Iraq I? No. There were a lot of ulterior motives, and a lot of ruses to cover up the reasons for those wars, and to create reasons for the wars. I can't respect men who should know, based on history, that they're being sent in for causes other than what they're being told. Furthermore, their own personal misguided beliefs about why they are fighting do not justify going in and killing other men at the behest of politicians. They should know better. But then, they're only 18 years old. Full of themselves and full of testosterone. Prime candidates for dying for a cause. But not a worthy cause. It's a politician's ego-driven/power-hungry cause.
Coach, I've got two things to say to you:
Coach wrote: "But because, boo-hoo we pissed off some radical muslims, we caused 9/11?"
Let me arrange that for you again. "But because, boo-hoo, the U.S. state policy resulted in the incineration death of over 80 men, women and children at Waco, we caused Oklahoma City."
Oh, aye, Coach. It wasn't "we." It was the U.S. government's actions. What both McVeigh and the 9/11 terrorists did was gravely wrong. But you would have to be a raving fool not to recognize what prompted each of them.
Or do you think that McVeigh bombed the Murrah building because he hates American freedom and because he wanted to establish a world religion?
Coach wrote:
"Regarding our servicemen and women: you have a myopic view of what it is they do. Killing, if necessary. That is actually a small part of what they do. But they provide stability in countries that wouldn't have it without them, provide food, shelter, medical care. They help build roads, bridges, provide disaster relief."
If they didn't weren't killing or helping others to be killed, they'd be called missionaries. Missionaries. Now those are some people I respect. Humble men and women who recognize that true peace must spring from the individual heart outward, not from the bayonet into the heart.
Well Brass I have you pegged as one of those CanAmericans, you know those with less than a pair who went up north to save your own BUTT. If your not you should be.
You keep mentioning Switzerland. The only reason no one bothers them is because their money is there! You do know that don't you?
AS FOR THE SIMPLE CAMPAIGN TO FREE THE ALEUTIANS.
The following is from, http://explorenorth.com/library/military/aleutian_war-usarmy.html
"An attack on the Aleutians in early June 1942, Yamamoto believed, would draw the U.S. fleet north to challenge his forces. With the departure of the U.S. warships from Pearl Harbor, he would then move his main fleet to seize Midway. Because of Midway's importance—the island was within bomber range of Pearl Harbor—he concluded that Nimitz would redirect his fleet from the Aleutians to Midway to prevent the loss of the island. Yamamoto provided the Northern Area Fleet, commanded by Vice Admiral Boshiro Hosogaya, with a force of 2 small aircraft carriers, 5 cruisers, 12 destroyers, 6 submarines, and 4 troop transports, along with supporting auxiliary ships"
Does not sound like some small force to me or unprepared.
Now as for some Eskimos eliminating the Japs on ATTU WRONG AGAIN! They were used as Scouts and a Home Guard on the Mainland and along with local trappers were enlisted to scout the occupied islands and set up observation posts. They were called Castners Cutthroats. They were perfectly suited to survive in this environment. Read below what it cost to remove the Japs from ATTU.
This is from the same above site;
"The Americans reported finding 2,351 enemy dead on the island; an additional few hundred were presumed to have been buried in the hills by the Japanese. Only 28 Japanese surrendered. Out of a U.S. force that totaled more than 15,000 men, 549 had been killed, another 1,148 wounded, and about 2,100 men taken out of action by disease and nonbattle injuries. Trench foot was the most common affliction. Most of the nonbattle casualties were exposure cases, victims of the weather and inadequate clothing.
Yeah just a cake walk like you said. You might want to read those Canadian textbooks again or by a real one that tells the truth.
So BRASS just like the rest of your ILK "Engage brain before shifting mouth or keyboard into gear!"
Mark Kent
U.S.A.F. Retired
PROUD OF MY FELLOW MILITARY MEMEBERS! UNLIKE YOU
Brass,
No one need respect the military.
There is no law save your own conscience about who you must respect.
"If they didn't weren't killing or helping others to be killed, they'd be called missionaries. Missionaries. Now those are some people I respect. Humble men and women who recognize that true peace must spring from the individual heart outward, not from the bayonet into the heart."
And while you allude to Christian Missionaries, there those who believe in "Conversion by the Sword" and are not so humble.
And protection from those zealots requires men and women willing to resist them. God is more than willing to let his followers die.
And occasionally you'll get an Alvin York, Mitchell Paige, or Desmond Doss who can accomplish the amazing thing of serving God and doing their duty to their nation.
Post a Comment