The super preforator is a machine gun, useful for putting a lot of holes in something quickly. (At the time that this movie was set, it would have been mounted on an artillery chassis and called a Gatling gun, but the principle is the same.)
Well look what is happening now: A bank run in CA. Depositors are at this moment lined up outside this bank waiting for the doors to open to get their money and close their accounts.
Podman you said "OK, Mr. McCain are we just a nation of whiners, or do the peasants really need their money to survive?" Please explain this? Do peasants have more than $100,000 on deposit at these financial institutions? Really not sure where McCain is to blame but I'm sure your fanciful mind will come up with some reason. Enlighten me please
I think the fact that McCain has NOT fired one of his campaign Big Wheels (like most of the others), after calling the American people a "nation of whiners".....speaks volumes about this fart.
It's a stack of dominos waitng to fall. Who will be the next regioanl bank to clsoe its doors? WAMU should weather the storm, but some of the others I'm not sure about...
Naturally the bailout is really a loan from China, and it will continue to devalue the dollar, and Oil being priced in dollars will continue to rise comparatively, and people are loosing value on goods and on savings, and gas will rise to $6 per gallon, and heating oil to $7, and people will loose their jobs due to recessive pressures, and costs will continue upward, and the dollar downward, and the FED will print more money, and ...
Oh, the young woman from the western colonies seems unaware of the fact that over here in Europe we usually do not add a laughing track to comedy to tell the audience when something is funny.
Is it that? Or is it a case of someone who joined for self-serving reasons (education benefits, health care, lack of employment opportunities on civvy-street, etc.), and then found out he may actually have to use that weapon that he was trained to use-----and then not liking it?
You will die when I say you must die!!!
C- The situation in the middle east isn't really news anymore so I don't think someone would sign up not knowing there could be a chance to get shipped out.
Look, I know I've been beating a dead horse with this whole "deserter" thing lately, but I'll tell you why this pisses me off so badly:
No matter what uniform I ever wore in my life, whether the one I wore as a young man when I enlisted, or the one I've worn for the last 22 years...I took an oath to uphold the ideals and principles that that uniform represented, in whatever capacity. I did so of my own, free volition. Sure, I've had many, many times where I wanted to scream, kill, cry or just "take the short-cut", so to speak. But in the end....I still voluntarily took that oath. Either my word and beliefs are good at the Bank Of Integrity....or they're not. I like to think mine is. At the end of the day, even if it's only ME that appreciates it, and I can face that fella in the mirror every morning when I'm busy getting my gear on and mounting up for another day "out there", and I'm at peace with it (and him).....then it works for me. And off I go.
I really don't care which military/police force of whatever country we're talking about here, be it Canadian, American, British, French, Italian, Bulgarian, Nepalese...I don't care: a person who abandons, deserts or otherwise flees the things he/she voluntarily swore to uphold based on the the uniform he/she was wearing......
...erm not sure where this will lead but perhaps this guy deserted on the basis that his CIC was a morally bankrupt scumbag who was sending tropps in harms way for no goood reason
If this is his rationale then perhaps he has a point?
The article doesn't suggest this one way or the other.
This quote, 'I always did believe in protecting my own country, if it came down to that. But I'm over here fighting a war for a cause that means nothing to me'
...and I know a volunteer is precisely that. However they volutneered on the basis that they would only be sent into harms way when it was for a greater good.
Guess people sometimes just have to stand up for what is truly right
Personally, I still can't agree with you for this reason:
Even if the C-In-C is the most incompetent, clueless boob on the planet (and you know MY thoughts on the current one!), then we still come back to the same point:
A soldier does not and cannot pick and choose his wars.
He may agree or disagree with the "mission" at hand, and that's fine. But this perception that there is some kind of "democracy" within the military is mistaken. Now, don't get me wrong: GWB IS a fuckin' idiot, and a majority of Americans (judging by the latest polls) have come to realize this. If one knows this....why on earth would one voluntarily elect to serve under him when he's C-In-C? BUT...if you go and do so regardless....then you have have effectively gven up your "right" to decide where you will or will not go. All you have is that oath. And your word. And the buddies (at the very least) that you've abandoned.
I may be opening up a HUGE can of worms with this (depending on how I articulate this).....but....can you tell me me what is to this day considered to be the MOST efficient, organized and effective military force in the entire 20th century?
(This ties into the whole "loyalty to God, Country and Uniform" creedo)
Mom: "Mr. Army man, my son is a good boy, and he doesn't like it at your camp, so he left. He has never liked camping."
Major Confusion: "Mrs Long, this is not camp, and when your boy volunteered, it was a agreement between him and the US military. He must return or face Court Marshal!"
Mom: "Well I guess he will want to talk to that Mr. Marshal then."
Major: "Mrs. Long could you please hold for a moment."
[ The Major dials the General ]
Major: "General we have the deserter's mother on the phone, and she wants to give her son a chance with Mr. Court Marshal."
I hope he gets beaten down. Canuck, I can't agree with you enough on this one. Wonder how much of Canadian taxpayer dollars this guy has used up thus far in this trial?
And that brings to mind yet ANOTHER issue to this whole fiasco:
There definitely are some very legitimate "refugee" claimaints out there, who do have an honest desire to emmigrate to Canada (as well as the U.S.), who are fleeing some truly horrific, abusive and repressive regimes, and I'm all for allowing them to stay, and make better lives for themselves. Absolutely.
But to claim "refugee status" as an American? From the United States??? Because you decided you don't want to serve in the military you volunteered for? And further burder the Canadian taxpayer with their spurious claim??
Canuck, I think in this case both sides are wrong. The young man is wrong because he volunteered for the army and that includes doing things you may not like at all.
But on the other hand these young soldiers are abused by a corrupt government who had them take a vow to protect their country but them sends them to fight a war that has nothing to do with the principles they have been swon to, but is just aimed at monetary gains for a few.
Would you have condemned a German soldier who deserted Hitlers army? Where do you draw the line?
The bottom line is that those who are willing to risk their life for their country and ideals do have a damned fucking right that those who send them in harms way do so only when it really is in the interest of protecting said country and ideals and only if there is no other option left.
Unfortunately we live in a world where those who rule don't care shit for those who are effectively their employers.
Interesting one C - personally I reckon it was the VC.
As for the arguments regards desertion, Bug put it far more eloquently than I could, but I also get your point too C.
I know a volunteer absolves his right to choose the wars he fights, but when his government is choosing irresponsibly on his behalf then he should stand up against it.
Call it conscientious objection, desertion, what you will... Fact remains he will get his arse kicked but he will undoubtedly have made his point in the process.
I get both your points about the whole "morality" thing; believe me....as I've said above, when it comes to matters of "morality" or "integrity" or trying to do the "right" thing or fall into the "right" side of conscience....hey, I'm with you. Truly I am.
But the point I'm trying to emphasize here, is that these young men we call "deserters" have fled from a juriscdiction that has the Rule of Law. They have a sound mechanism and/or protocol in place, to air their grievences, and possibly towards a solution. That includes legal representation and their day in court.
Running off from your post, and fleeing one democratic country to take "refuge" in another democratic country....is a little absurd....is it not? That's like someone from France or Great Britain seeking asylum in Canada or the U.S. for similar reasons, as "refugees".
Plus, Bug, I hardly think the German comparison was a fair one. During WWII, if a German soldier, airman or sailor deserted......do you think he'd have a FAIR trial? Seriously. You and I and a lot of folks here are aware that the Krauts took a VERY dim view of such offences, yes?
And speaking of which, in answer to my earlier question: the most efficient, organized and professional military force of the entire 20th century was.....the German forces in WWII. No, I'm talking about the thugs who ran the death camps; rather, the combined might of the Wermacht, Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine. We're talking about a country the size of Texas ( I believe) that pushed all the way into Northern Africa and almost strangled almost to fucking death, and reduced Stalingrad to rubble. All this, while gobbling up half of Europe. Brutal. Efficient. Organized. Unstoppable. It was only by the grace of whatever God one believes in, that the U.S. finally entered the war, and that was what the tipping point was for the Germans. This was simply because however talented the Nazis were in an industrial sense (which they were, when it came to armament production)....there's no goddamn way they could compete with the U.S. churning out a Tommy Gun, or a tank, or a jeep or a bullit or a bomb, every seven fucking SECONDS off of the assembly line. No way. In the end....it's what eventually helped finish them off. Couldn't match that pace. But without that? I don't even wanna think about it.
I digressed a bit there. Sorry.
Anyways, that about sums up my argument about these "deserters". Can't think of anything more to add to it. But, if there's anymore thoughts on the subject, I'll certainly jump in again.
my only comment would be...these guys took an oath to defend the Constitution...among other things...when you're serving and you're seeing the constitution being shredded and trampled all over, I think it then becomes your duty to defend the Constitution by Deserting that which is doing it the most harm. Yes lots of guys join for kinda crappy reasons and probably take that oath pretty lightly, but at this time in history...Dissent is Patriotic. They aren't hurting anyone by deserting...
C - I kinda go with what you say BUT your assumption is that the 'rule of law' in the US is STILL something we all hold highly in regard.
Would it be fair to say this may not actually be quite such a steadfast option in the US any more?
Sure, this kid has made a claim that we find strange, but would NOT find it strange were this kid to to come from searching for refugee status from a despotic third world nation. You bemoan the fact this kid has come to Canada seeking sanctuary from serving in a war he didn't join up to fight on the basis that we all assume he has fair and even procedures waiting for him in the US - clearly he feels he doesn't or he wouldn't have taken such a drastic step! (baculum makes a fair point here surely?)
The kid may be a little deluded about things (perhaps less than we would like to admit), but he is making his point and gaining column inches / coverage as a result
The US may be a developed nation but it's leaders and institutions are acting like despots hence the claim from this guy.
Yep the Nazis were efficient, effective and organized. Blitzkrieg was the tactic they used and was the tactic copied by the US for the invasion of Iraq.
Think it's important to remember they were also the invading nation - defending nations always tend to fight to the death far harder and hence the Germans were halted by both the Soviet ground forces, and by the RAF (Poles, Canucks, Kiwis, Aussies etc all included) on the run up to the Nazi Operation Sealion. Yes the US war machine stemmed the tide. Bottom line is the Nazis still ended up over-reaching and had they stopped invading after trying Russia and Britain, they would probably have retained the land they'd taken regardless of US intervention.
The VC on the other hand were all that and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, made it count, took names, promptly disgarded them as irrelevant, and continued kicking ass until the invaders left the country.
THEY are the most efficient, effective and organized force. They were defensive, they were cheap, they were motivated and they knew the terrain
A defender is morally stronger than an invader - makes a BIG difference. And might have also swayed this young man into deserting
Canuck, sure there is a difference between a dictator and a president gone mad. But it is gradual, that is why I asked where to draw the line?
Still my opinion is that both sides are wrong and it seems like most of the US courts see it the same way, which is why the majority of the deserters get silently discharged with a minor spot on their records.
You raise some VERY valid points, re: the nations being invaded vs. the nations doing the invading, and their respective high-grounds when it comes to issues of morality and whos is "right" (or who can honestly make that claim). Very true. However, it just seems to me that this kid, being from the U.S., DOES have resources at his disposal to challenge his nations foreign policy and his deployment to Iraq....AT HOME. I just cannot believe that fleeing to another free nation to make this point, is the appropriate thing to do. What in Gawds name would that accomplish? That's like one of the Revolutionary War colonists saying "Hey guys! Let's go fight against the British for our freedom and make a point.....by going to France!". See what I'm saying? Maybe I'm a bit naive in this regard (and stranger things are possible!), but I just cannot believe that the U.S. legal system in this regard (and yes, it has its problems----who's dosen't?) is THAT far gone, that this young fella feels he will be unjustly "PERsecuted".
Good point about the V.C., though. But.. .they were more of a guerilla force, as opposed to a combined, uniformed military force with navy, army and air components. Should have made this clearer on my part. Sorry.
Bug:
You might be right, in a sense. There IS a blurry line between a "dictator" and a "president gone mad". The end result is still the same, ain't it? But again...back to my point...this is why the brilliant Founding Fathers created a CONGRESS, to keep numbskulls precisely like GWB in check (and even the power to get him/her ousted, if need be). Alas, this is why Congress' current approavl ratings with the American people is in the single-digits: they're not doing their goddamn job. So...the system is there; it's the individuals who aren't exercising it, because they choose not to, and take what they think is the "easy route"; in this current Congress' case, that means capitulating to GWB at every turn.
I picked up this stat, courtesy (of all places) The Christian Science Monitor:
"Approximately 500,000 US military personnel deserted during the Vietnam War, with an estimated 100,000 draft or military resisters going into exile %u2013 at least 90 percent to Canada. From 2002 to 2007, some 24,000 US soldiers have deserted, an estimated 50 to 200 of whom have gone to Canada. Now, deserters must be granted refugee status to stay.
Sources: The Encyclopedia of the Vietnam War, MacCleans, Associated Press. Compiled by Leigh Montgomery."
From 2002-2007.......there were 24,000 DESERTERS???
Christ.
No wonder you never hear this in the mainstream media.
C, this is a young man just into his 20s, do you expect him to have the experience, resources, and connections to actually fight the deterioration of the system? Running likely looked to him like his only chance.
We have all done questionable, even reckless, things we thought were right in our youth (yours truly included), and when we thought "Option A" was the ONLY option.
But if that's the case with this young man.....then why was he "gown-up" enough, I guess, to join the United States military? I'm almost positive when he joined, there was a Mom, a Dad, a brother, a sister, an uncle who was maybe in 'Nam, or a grandfather who was at Normandy, or a cousin who's in the Marines.....SOMEONE...SOMEWHERE....probably said to him, "Fantastic! You're now a MAN! Congrats! I'm proud of you!" But when he decides to flee to another nation by deserting....then...what? Now he's back to being a reckless kid? It's a folly of 'youthful indiscretion'? Sorry, Bugster. Can't buy into that one. I just can't. Like I said...intriguing point you made....but I can't buy it, for the reasons I've stated.
What the hell time is it where you're at, anyways?????
Putting a person into a uniform does not turn him into a responsible human being, if you are an asshole before you are just an asshole in uniform and if you are just a large kid you are just a large kid in uniform. After all that is what the military likes to have: Kids big enough to fight but not grown up to understand.
I enlisted at the age of 17, and without going into the gory details, I can honestly say it's had a positive impact at that early stage of my life (my parents would be able to tell you the difference they saw!). Not saying it's like that in EVERY case....but I'd bet it would be the same with a lot of them.
That was supposed to read as "GMT plus 1", my time zone, on daylight savings though.
Could it be that you are a quite different type of personality thatg the young man in question? Plus you had the advantage that your country did not put you in a shitty situation as his did?
I guess I was fortunate enough that I wasn't put into a "shitty situation" (but isn't ANY war shitty?).
But then again, one COULD argue from a Canadian perspective that since we have an active military role in Afghanistan and are taking three times as many casualties there as ANY other country, when one takes into account the ratio of the size of the force that was sent.....well, I guess one could easily see that as a "shitty situation", yes?
And if THAT is the case......I can honestly tell you with no word of a lie, that there has not been ONE SINGLE report of ANY desertions from within the Canadian Armed Forces to the best of my knowledge due to this conflict, let alone any potential "deserter" seeking "refugee status" in the United States.
Now lest my American friends I'm boasting or insulting anyone hereabouts, I assure you (and them) nothing could be further from the truth. Not at all. See, up here it's a vastly different mindset when it comes to military indoctrination regarding young men and women. When I was in, all the usual 'patrriotic' blather was a part of it, as well as "duty, truth, honor", etc. But also emhasized was HISTORY, i.e., "history" in the sense of the accomplishments of whatever regiment/unit had, that you served with; they would simply then say "Can you live up to this tradition of honor, courage and dignity?" In my own regiments case, shit, they can trace their mobilization all the fuckin' way back to the goddamn Boer War! (1899); WW I (Battle of Passhendale and Ypres); WW II (kicking the fuck outta the Nazis as they pushed them outta Sicily), Holland (liberation of same); Korea; and now Afghnistan. So after all of that, and then when they eye you up-and-down, and say to you that they've NEVER had a single case of desertion in their entire history....believe me, you get into the mindset that you sure as fuck don't wanna be the first. No way. BUT....they also teach you that wherever the Will Of Parliament sends you...you are STILL part of a global, or at least, INTERNATIONAL effort (be it in combat in Kandahar Province, or a peacekeeping mission in whatever war-torn mudhole you're sent to), and that you're not out there hot-doggin' it, like GWB.
So we can trade back-and-forth over what the definition is, of "a shitty situation", but like I said above.....in the end...it will ALWAYS come down to ONE thing:
Character. Integrity.
And whatever strength you may or may not have.....
Personally I think the kid is probably savvy enough to know how to work the media
By going to a neighbouring, and most importantly, equally developed and allied nation and effectively claiming 'refugee' status he is doing one thing
Creating publicity.
I agree with you on the moral imperative of a volunteer soldier to fight when ordered. No problem on that
However I also agree that he has a duty to refuse to fight when ordered into a blatantly wrong battle.
My guess is this kid (for that is what he is) is also smart enough to know this too - he just wants to make a point and will do so FAR more effectively via these means than he would staying at home in the US and getting silenced by the press and disgraced by the armed services.
Guess that's all really.
Streamy would have this kid hung drawn and quartered for so much as deigning to think the war improper - kinda miss the loon really.
A lot of people are gonna have a negative perception of Obama, and that's fair game; BUT...whatever one's opinion is of Sen. B. Obama....you will NEVER see him in front of a camera and microphone, going "Ohhh...ahhhh....ummm...errrrr....(dead silence)....ummmm....I can't remember....ahhhhh....what was the question?"
That alone should be a death sentence for ANY presidential candidate's aspirations.
Yea, because he has not been asked any tough questions!! Its simple, Obama is a rockstar and the press is a teenage girl with a crush. Plus, Obama had the forethought to skirt most votes so it wouldn't catch up with him come election time.
Hi again everybody! I'm BWB, the coolest dude on Glumbert. All the guys and gals here like me, even though I sometimes fall out with people about politics and shit. I've had an interesting life, unlike Infinity/Moderator/Tyranus/Dirtbag etc, who is a pile of shit.
Oh yes, I forgot. Obama would shoot you in every orifice if he thought for one moment that you might damage his career. He isn't alone in that. So would any of the power hungry fuckpigs. So don't waste your time saying "this guyu's better than that guy". They're all gold plated fuckers.
George W Bush, Gandhi, Jesus Christ, Barack Obama, Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, John Lennon, The Angel Gabriel, Canuck 1963, Gore Vidal, Michelangelo and badlywipedbuttocks met in a bar.
Each of them explained their philosophy.
Then they agreed they would kill anyone who stood in the way of what they saw as their quest to enlighten the world.
Yep! It's all about power and total bullshit!
Easier to remember how to say it in polite conversation maybe... As in 'Im so happy our moronic president may be thinking twice about going to war with I'm A dinner Jacket'
...or is it just me....?
Anyway...of MUCH more import is the fact that C & Throbby are almost reaching out to each other
Of course this is meant in a diplomatic sense only...there are many bridges to cross before fully normalised relations commence...but it's a start at least
Comments (94)
To post a comment, you need to login or signup.