View Full Version : Why Should We Respect Professional Soldiers?
I found this argument when I Google searched "Professional Soldiers" here. (http://hubpages.com/hub/Why-Should-We-Respect-Professional-Soldiers)
It upsets me quite a bit, and I was wondering what a QP would say to such an outrage?
Why Should We Respect Professional Soldiers?
By Pseudonymous
I’ve never understood the exaggerated public respect that is accorded to professional soldiers. Most recently in the UK we’ve witnessed the spectacle of the Prime Minister effectively being emotionally blackmailed into phoning the mother of a soldier killed in the war in Afghanistan because apparently he made a few mis-spellings when he sent her a hand-written note of condolence. Frankly, I would prefer it if the leader of our country delegated this little administrative task to someone who can spare the time.
Why do we owe these soldiers respect? Some would argue that they are fighting for their country and while this is true it is also true that they are in the situation of their own accord. No-one joins the army of ignorance of what the job involves.
In fact this is the very reason why soldiers do not deserve the exaggerated respect they receive. Soldiers join the army knowing full well that they will have to kill people. I cannot begin to imagine the mindset of someone who thinks this is ok. The fact that these men and women are apparently okay with the idea of being paid to kill others is pretty disturbing to say the least and hardly worthy of respect.
In fact it is no surprise to find that 8.5% of inmates in the UK prison system are former soldiers. In 2007, 11.6% of US army recruits needed ‘moral waivers’ for past criminal acts in order to be able to join. We should not be surprised about this, the lack of empathy needed to be a decent criminal is a top requirement for any prospective soldier.
The huge wars of the last century, WW1 and WW2, were fought largely by conscripts. True, there were also plenty of volunteers, but I think it is fair to say that from the point of view of the UK at least, both wars posed a serious risk to the country’s existence.
That is the difference between soldiers in those wars and professional soldiers. Soldiers in WW2 especially did not want to be involved but they had little choice. By comparison, professional soldiers today are like a bizarre kind of tourist. They sign up, get kitted up with things which hurt people and off they go.
I remember speaking to a guy who was in the Paras (the UK Parachute Regiment) once and he was saying how ‘gutted’ he was that he had missed the Falklands war and left before he had a chance to be involved in the first Gulf War and so never really saw any ‘action’. I find it hard to believe that this is an uncommon attitude amongst professional soldiers. Many of those who are now complaining about poor (killing) equipment would have been the most enthusiastic about the prospect of war back in 2001.
Now your trenchant flag-waver will defend these soldiers by saying that they are defending their country but that is not true. Both UK and US soldiers are involved in wars which have little or no bearing on the security of their respective countries. Sure, there are important geo-strategic interests at stake, but it is not the case that there is a massive risk to the ordinary citizens of either country from Islamic extremists, let alone Afghans or Iraqis.
There are plenty of people who do far more important jobs in our societies but receive far less credit. Just off the top of my head it should be fairly obvious that, for a country not threatened by war - doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, firefighters and policemen all perform far more useful jobs than soldiers. I don’t think we should put these guys up on a pedestal either as there are plenty of reasons why people choose these jobs, not all of them gratifying, but the fact is that they contribute vastly more to society.
All of these groups, especially teachers and social workers, are subject to all kinds of abuse from the media and other commentators when things don’t go perfectly. Yet it seems as though soldiers can do no wrong, unless of course they are actually implicated in a war crime, in which case these soldiers are hastily labelled as ‘not representative’ of the rest of the army.
Do soldiers have their uses? Sadly, our world is still troubled enough that they do. In particular there is a benefit in the international community deploying soldiers to keep the peace in troubled countries, though clearly there is a need for international agreement on the wheres, whys and hows of deployment.
But this does not mean that soldiers deserve the excessive respect that they are accorded. No-one joins the army in ignorance of what the job involves and the choice to join is weighed up against the often generous benefits of joining. Most worryingly of all has to be the mindset of the kind of person who considers killing for money acceptable, irregardless of the patriotic nonsense with which these motivations are disguised.
Utah Bob
02-02-2010, 12:36
Not worth a response.
IMO anyone (not just QP's) who puts there life on the line for the well being of others, without an agent and a Multi- Million Dollar contract.
That is selfless service, it is deserving of respect.
neecheepure
02-02-2010, 13:56
Let me reach way back and quote "Toy Story" on this one....
"You are a sad, strange little man..."
Last comment...
Hey, bro - what's so wrong with killing? Just imagine if you never brushed your teeth - oh wait, nevermind. Umm.. imagine if you never flushed your toilet after "moving your bowels" (as someone such as yourself might say). That's all we're doing - flushing the toilet so you guys don't have to smell it.
:D
Warrior-Mentor
02-02-2010, 16:02
Clearly someone who doesn't understand that some things are worth fighting and dying to defend.
Someone who is either making an argument for a conscript (read UNprofessional) Army, or outright surrender.
Someone not worth discussing this with at any length.
And yet, we will continue proudly defend their right to say things we find repugnant.
Because that's who we are and what we believe.
Not worth a response.With utmost respect, I disagree. I find attacks upon professions vital to everyday life problematic, especially those directed at professionals in the armed services. While this particular commentary is directed at the British army, it indirectly assails the American army as well. IMO, such attacks, if left unchallanged, can have devastating historical consequences. An example from our own past illustrates my point.
During the Gilded Age, the U.S. Army was regularly subjected to these types of broadsides in what we now call the "MSM." In 1868, the Independent averred that the likelihood of “a respectable American citizen” joining the regular army was less “than he would volunteer for the penitentiary.” Nine years later, the New York [I]Sun described the army as a collection of “bummers, loafers, and foreign paupers.” In 1887, the New York Herald suggested that the army, a pack of “poor shiftless waifs” who had enlisted out of desperation, could not provide adequate national defense.*
These types of attacks had a significant, if not decisive, impact on military reformers' collective ability
to communicate that the military effectiveness of army was deteriorating throughout the Gilded Age,
to articulate why reform was necessary despite the fact that there was no strategically significant foreign threat to America itself, or
to respond to American navalists who sought to promote the navy directly at the army's expense.
An example of the first dynamic listed above can be found in a 1869 article in the New York Times. This article discussed a report by General W.T. Sherman that was a part of the secretary of war's annual report to Congress. The article primarily focused on the reduction of the army's personnel that followed the American Civil War. The article stated that the reduction required a “delicacy of management,” and had been achieved “without the slightest difficulty or embarrassment.” The piece concluded:And it has been done, too, so effectually that, as General Sherman shows, “we have not a single regiment that may be said to be in reserve.” We have reached, think our officers, the limit of wise and prudent reductions considering the vast extent of the country and its present condition.**
However, if reads General Sherman's report, one quickly realizes that it was a document written by a professional soldier to warn civilians that the army was in bad decline. Yet, because the media had placed themselves as the interpreter of contemporaneous military affairs, the message was not only missed, but distorted so that it became the opposite of what General Sherman wrote.***
By my reading, it was not until 1939, when General George C. Marshall sat before congress as the army's chief of staff during numerous rounds of testimony that American civilians began to re-align their views of professional soldiers.
_______________________________________________
* These quotes are from Jack D. Foner, The United States Soldier Between Two Wars: Army Life and Reforms, 1865-1898 (New York: Humanities Press, 1970), p. 74.
** "Our Army in Time of Peace," New York Times, 7 December 1869, p. 6.
*** William T. Sherman, “Report of the General of the Army, 20 November 1869,” as attached to U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of War, Being Part of the Messages and Documents Communicated to the Two Houses of Congress at the Beginning of the Second Session of the Forty-First Congress, Volume I, House of Representatives Executive Document 1, pt. 2, Forty-First Congress, Second Session (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1869), as printed in U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Executive Documents Printed by Order of the House of Representatives During the Second Session of the Forty-First Congress, 1869-’70, Volume II (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1870).
**** Mark Skinner Watson, Chief of Staff: Prewar Plans and Preparations [The United States Army in World War II: The War Department] (1950; reprint, Washington, D.C.: United States Army Center of Military History, 1985), pp. 8, 15-56.
bandycpa
02-02-2010, 16:28
This is an awful lot of attention for an article written by someone named "Pseudonymous".
MOO YMMV
Bandy
armymom1228
02-02-2010, 16:52
I doesn't take much honor to write that kind of trash and hide behind a psuedonym..try saying that to my face.
An Army Mom.
This is an awful lot of attention for an article written by someone named "Pseudonymous".
MOO YMMV
Bandy
Word.
The writer is a tool. And a coward.
Clearly someone who doesn't understand that some things are worth fighting and dying to defend.
And yet, we will continue proudly defending their right to say things we find repugnant.
Because that's who we are and what we believe.
Very well said Sir!!!
Some folks just do not understand that we live free beacuse brave Special Forces Soldiers fight and die to protect Our freedom...because They are Men, trained to do things "others" would not or could not do!
IMVHO, there is a majority of dime, pencil, and welfare "pushers" who seem to think Freedom is Free, and their sad-assed right in this world....:mad:
Thank God for Special Forces Soldiers...for without them...honestly, where would be??? Have a couple of guesses, but the details are gruesome, so I will refrain from posting...
Holly
Dozer523
02-02-2010, 18:15
I found this argument when I Google searched "Professional Soldiers" here. (http://hubpages.com/hub/Why-Should-We-Respect-Professional-Soldiers)
It upsets me quite a bit, and I was wondering what a QP would say to such an outrage? Golly, I googled Professional Soldier and I found this. http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/professional-soldier/
A fascinating comparison of Professional Soldiers to hackers. Ooooo La Lah.
The only thing I find upsetting is that on your second post you toss this turd onto our expensive Living Room Persian carpet -- we picked it while we were deployed.
What? Didn't we pay enough attention to you when you posted your 15 word intro? BTW you DID manage to spark a sarcastic comment from Mitch. Which is pretty damn hard to do! (He's one of the nicest QP's here . . . not like me.)
This question O2 theft.
Golly, I googled Professional Soldier and I found this. http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/professional-soldier/
A fascinating comparison of Professional Soldiers to hackers. Ooooo La Lah.
The only thing I find upsetting is that on your second post you toss this turd onto our expensive Living Room Persian carpet -- we picked it while we were deployed.
What? Didn't we pay enough attention to you when you posted your 15 word intro? BTW you DID manage to spark a sarcastic comment from Mitch. Which is pretty damn hard to do! (He's one of the nicest QP's here . . . not like me.)
This question O2 theft.
QP Dozer523, I would like to apologize for defiling the QP carpet
I didn't mean to stir anything out of QP Mitch, I made the mistake of posting a weak intro and just wasn't sure how to unscrew myself.I thought my best option was silence since I'm a nobody.
I'm disappointed in myself for making such a bad impression to the men I look up to so much in only two posts.
I'm sorry for all the racket.
I am not a QP or military, my opinion therefore does not matter, I realize now there is no need for me to post.
I just wanted the opinion of the men I respect the most,
but I forgot my place.
It won't happen again.
back to lurking
-Shawn
TOMAHAWK9521
02-02-2010, 19:00
"War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
- John Stuart Mill
The Reaper
02-02-2010, 19:22
QP Dozer523, I would like to apologize for defiling the QP carpet
I didn't mean to stir anything out of QP Mitch, I made the mistake of posting a weak intro and just wasn't sure how to unscrew myself.I thought my best option was silence since I'm a nobody.
I'm disappointed in myself for making such a bad impression to the men I look up to so much in only two posts.
I'm sorry for all the racket.
I am not a QP or military, my opinion therefore does not matter, I realize now there is no need for me to post.
I just wanted the opinion of the men I respect the most,
but I forgot my place.
It won't happen again.
back to lurking
-Shawn
Shawn:
You are an American citizen, and we serve to guarantee your right to speak your mind.
We represent you, and do the bidding of the civilian leadership you have elected to lead us.
As professionals, we are different from amateurs. Conscription has served this nation well, but may not be the correct method for providing military forces in today's complicated world.
Not all soldiers are perfect, but the Army today is the finest I have ever served in, no disrespect to our forebearers. Our soldiers know their craft, and try to accomplish their assigned missions with a minimum of collateral damage. Consider the difference between our bombing campaigns in WW II or Vietnam, and our efforts today.
I would further challenge his comments about the incarceration rate of servicemembers, at least here in the U.S. Friends of mine working in the Federal Prisons have told me that there are very few veterans among their population. I suspect that a bit of quick demographic research would demonstrate that.
Pseudonymous writes anonymously because he presents an argument which he lacks the intestinal fortitude to attach his name to. He is a coward and a buffoon. He is the guy who hides at home and hopes that the men on the wall who have the courage to stand their posts do their job and keep the bad men at bay. Were he around in 1941, he would have been a Nazi sympathizer, a Communist, or a pacifist. Whatever it took to get along, and to ensure his personal security, selling out his brothers, right up till they came for him. He can write his screed today and make his criticism of better men who serve their nations, without the moral courage to identify himself, and then go back to a meaningless existence, holding his manhood cheap, likely depending on the charity of the state.
Behold the modern, liberal, pacifist pussy, in all his glory.
TR
HisDisciple
02-02-2010, 19:33
It upsets me quite a bit, and I was wondering what a QP would say to such an outrage?
I have made my share of mistakes on here, but are you trying to kick a hornet’s nest? Wow, the fact that you would even ask such a question makes me wonder about you. What do you think their response is going to be?
One can't argue with a dead horse(Pseudonymous) and QPs definetly know why someone posted something. I'm not mad at you, but you might want to look at Your Rucksack is the Hall threads before the Team Sergeant finds you and Dozer523 was nice!:eek:
Word.
The writer is a tool. And a coward.
I crown her Word, and double down .
As we sit here pissed off, remember one thing. Smile back at the asshat who says things like this tool, and simply remember she/he can do that, voice her/his oppinion because of you, "The Professional Soldier"
Pissing on their pantleg is allowed while smiling at them in situations like this.... :)
Buck
Word.
The writer is a tool. And a coward.
Agreed, writer is a skycrane. Biggest tool in the world.
Big Boss
02-02-2010, 22:23
Behold the modern, liberal, pacifist pussy, in all his glory.
Sir, that was the most hilarious sentence I've read on this forum. I concur.
Utah Bob
02-02-2010, 22:44
Some limp-wristed UK denizen who posts anonymously. To what end?
Is he serious or just a shit disturber? Who knows? His opinions couldn't possibly interest me less.
Like I said, not worth responding to.:rolleyes:
Some limp-wristed UK denizen who posts anonymously. To what end?
Is he serious or just a shit disturber? Who knows?My bet is that the guy has read too many novels by the late George MacDonald Fraser.
I am highly impressed with The Reaper's professional response. Well, except for the pacifist pussy part. Clearly The Reaper was restraining himself.
Smile back at the asshat who says things like this tool, and simply remember she/he can do that, voice her/his oppinion because of you, "The Professional Soldier"
I'm not feeling that generous. I have this secret fantasy to watch Pseudonymous dragged by his skycrane hair (thanks jbour13) to some God-forsaken corner of A-stan without a computer to hide behind. There he can use his anonymous bad-assed tool self to win friends and influence taliban. Since he believes "professional soldiers today are like a bizarre kind of tourist," hopefully he won't take it personally if the ODA Tour Bus rolls up to watch his beheading while taking bets on how much he pisses himself.
From Pseudonymous: "If a situation was to arise in which my country was to be invaded then it would be ordinary people like myself for the most part who would be required to fight."
God help the UK, home of the recently identified species self-righteous ordinary fighting skycrane..........
If this reasoning isn't good enough to give Professional Soldiers respect, I don't know what is...
It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.
It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Soldier, not the community organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.
It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.
There is an inlaw in my family that is much the same ilk as the person that wrote this anonymous letter. He has never been able to understand why my husband, my father, my mother, my son, many uncles, and myself would find honor in being part of the military. Maybe his decision to go to school at the University of Colorado in Boulder is a great indicator of this.
I once had the occassion to make this statement to him "I may not agree with a word that is coming out of your mouth, but I would give my life to ensure you had the right to say it. Can you say the same?" He stood there looking at me with his mouth wide open trying to come up with a clever retort. He looked like a carp.
I have never had to worry about having said discussion about my profession ever again. Although I do love to poke at him a bit when things like earthquakes/tsunamis/hurricanes happen and ask him how he would accomplish the huge relief efforts, if we didn't have a standing military. He never has a good answer.
ZonieDiver
02-03-2010, 10:19
He never has a good answer.
They never do!
Team Sergeant
02-03-2010, 10:31
Not worth a response.
I agree with you, this individual is not worth our time. But I'd like to respond to many others.
Let me make one thing perfectly clear, I didn't join the military to earn any "civilians" respect. (And I could give a rat's ass if no name cowards such as "Pseudonymous" writes something disrespectful or if he plays with his own feces and still lives with his mother. I don't care.)
And some of you got it all wrong, I was not in uniform 20 years to protect individuals such as Pseudonymous rights to free speech or to defend his way of thinking. It was not my job.
My oath does not include defending anyone's free speech, your right to bear arms, your left-wing socialist views, or to defend your mom, dad, father, brother, sister, grandma, senators, congressmen or members of the administration. You will not catch me jumping in front of nancy pelosi, harry reid or anyone else to take a bullet with their name on it.
Ain't going to happen. (Besides, that the job of the Secret Service, they defend "people". )
I'm not here to defend you or everyone on your twitter, facebook, or myspace page.
My one and only job was to defend the "United States Constitution" period.
Now if you can wrap your head around that last sentence for a few seconds you might begin to understand what that means.
I am here to defend a document, a thought and an ideology that now seems to escape the understanding of most Americans.
The ninety-nine percent of the "respect" I have and show is for my past and present brothers and sisters in arms that defended the US Constitution.
If respect is to be shown by "civilians" it should be directed toward their own US Constitution and the brilliant men and women that wrote it.
Team Sergeant
Utah Bob
02-03-2010, 19:05
My one and only job was to defend the "United States Constitution" period.
If respect is to be shown by "civilians" it should be directed toward their own US Constitution and the brilliant men and women that wrote it.
Team Sergeant
Well put. We took an oath to defend the Constitution. The Constitution defends the citizens.
Shawn:
You are an American citizen, and we serve to guarantee your right to speak your mind.
We represent you, and do the bidding of the civilian leadership you have elected to lead us.
As professionals, we are different from amateurs. Conscription has served this nation well, but may not be the correct method for providing military forces in today's complicated world.
Not all soldiers are perfect, but the Army today is the finest I have ever served in, no disrespect to our forebearers. Our soldiers know their craft, and try to accomplish their assigned missions with a minimum of collateral damage. Consider the difference between our bombing campaigns in WW II or Vietnam, and our efforts today.
I would further challenge his comments about the incarceration rate of servicemembers, at least here in the U.S. Friends of mine working in the Federal Prisons have told me that there are very few veterans among their population. I suspect that a bit of quick demographic research would demonstrate that.
Pseudonymous writes anonymously because he presents an argument which he lacks the intestinal fortitude to attach his name to. He is a coward and a buffoon. He is the guy who hides at home and hopes that the men on the wall who have the courage to stand their posts do their job and keep the bad men at bay. Were he around in 1941, he would have been a Nazi sympathizer, a Communist, or a pacifist. Whatever it took to get along, and to ensure his personal security, selling out his brothers, right up till they came for him. He can write his screed today and make his criticism of better men who serve their nations, without the moral courage to identify himself, and then go back to a meaningless existence, holding his manhood cheap, likely depending on the charity of the state.
Behold the modern, liberal, pacifist pussy, in all his glory.
TR
Thank you QP TR, I am exalted to be able to post on a forum filled with professionals such as these!
I posted this thread knowing full well I could have received a back-lashing from hell from the Team Sergent; which would be understandable.
I don't like to make drama in other people house's, but this Pseudonymous had the audacity to ask such a question that not only attempts to disgrace every man and women who ever volunteered to wear the uniform it also attempts to make other civilians question there blanket of freedom provided by these rough men.
It's as two faced and insane as a meat eating PETA member! "Why should we respect soldiers?" by Pseudonymous, really now, how could seat back and have this ignorance insult the men I respect most in this world?
Thank you for allowing me to post to share with you all.
It also helped me write a proper response to Pseudonymous.
Respecting Professional Soldiers
Why should we respect Professional Soldiers? This question can be considered mostly as a liberal pacifist view whose ideas see the world very differently. These are people who grow up never having to do the necessities of life for themselves; a good example of this is the fact that most people in our society never have to get their hands bloody from hunting and killing their own meal. To many people, live foods come from stores. Most people can live their whole lives never giving thought to how these resources are truly acquired, but behind the scenes of all the magic and wonder of these self replicating food shelves exists an industry to keep the food shelves stocked just as a person sleeps safe at night because of law enforcement which is there because people were given the freedoms to govern such laws by a soldier who fights to keep our way of life from those who would wish to oppress us and do us harm.
There are millions of unmentionable people who work under this invisible curtain to keep societies working and operating safely. From the mail that gets to a person’s door to the garbage being taken away, we respect these people the same way we should respect our soldiers. They provide a service that allows people to focus on other things and tasks. From growing up in a safe society it’s easy for people to forget wear freedoms come from as they forget how food gets on their table. The freedoms that our governments established have been built on the bones of fallen heroes. All governments were forged by the blood of soldiers; people who fought, not talked, about right or wrong. A country can never repay the debt to these heroes. All societies can do for these men who sacrifice so much is to give them a little respect for the protection of their society. A professional soldier deserves the respect of all members of a societies chosen government. When people need conflicts to be resolved they need a competent force to meet these threats that words or a drafted army can never meet.
Drafted soldiers are inferior to a Professional Soldier this is proven by the same reason why we don’t draft people to be mailmen, garbage men, and butchers. Why? The reason is because a Professional competent man exists to fill these roles and get the job done right. After World War two, the most costly war of human life in all of existence. How can people say they will only fight when millions have to die to win over tyranny? This absurd view can be expressed the same way as an analogy saying we as a society should only put out flames when half the world is engulfed in fire and then rapidly seek to draft men to put out the flames? The same reason to have a Professional Soldier is the same reason to have all professional services; to keep people safe. People who object to a warrior killing the enemy is the same as a child disgusted by the realities of how his meat was put on the table, but does not push his plate away. The necessities of our way of life are bought for us by those who “volunteer” to serve. Men of words will always need men of action to uphold the values they speak of. So we should respect our Professional Soldiers it’s the very least we can do.
-Shawn
robert2854
02-04-2010, 20:40
it seems as though nuwt is a recruit for the ACLU or some other organization that demands freedom for himself, but no one else as he cares for only himself and will not attempt to assist anyone or any country and maybe that is why we seperated from his kind in 1776.
Dozer523
02-04-2010, 23:31
Thank you for allowing me to post to share with you all.-Shawn
This is the rough draft, right?
it seems as though nuwt is a recruit for the ACLU or some other organization that demands freedom for himself, but no one else as he cares for only himself and will not attempt to assist anyone or any country and maybe that is why we seperated from his kind in 1776.
Did you even bother to read this thread before posting?
craigepo
02-05-2010, 09:14
My opinion:
Author's girlfriend/wife left him for some young stud Royal Marine/British Para/SAS dude, possibly while he was away attending some liberal douchebag seminar. He posted anonymously so said young stud doesn't show back up and stomp a mudhole in his ass.
Utah Bob
02-05-2010, 10:00
My opinion:
Author's girlfriend/wife left him for some young stud Royal Marine/British Para/SAS dude, possibly while he was away attending some liberal douchebag seminar. He posted anonymously so said young stud doesn't show back up and stomp a mudhole in his ass.
I think you may possibly have put your finger squarely on the crux of the gist here. :D
Team Sergeant
02-05-2010, 11:01
My opinion:
Author's girlfriend/wife left him for some young stud Royal Marine/British Para/SAS dude, possibly while he was away attending some liberal douchebag seminar. He posted anonymously so said young stud doesn't show back up and stomp a mudhole in his ass.
LOLOL, well put!
Dozer523
02-05-2010, 11:12
My opinion:
Author's girlfriend/wife left him for some young stud Royal Marine/British Para/SAS dude, possibly while he was away attending some liberal douchebag seminar. He posted anonymously so said young stud doesn't show back up and stomp a mudhole in his ass. It's GOT TO BE TRUE, it's comin' from da Judge.
Looks like you weren't overturned on that parking - violation - death - penalty case decision. :D
Remington Raidr
02-06-2010, 11:51
My opinion:
Author's girlfriend/wife left him for some young stud Royal Marine/British Para/SAS dude, possibly while he was away attending some liberal douchebag seminar. He posted anonymously so said young stud doesn't show back up and stomp a mudhole in his ass.
I would go with "boyfriend".
I totally skipped even clicking on this thread until now just from seeing the title. There has always been and always will be navel gazers and there will always be "men in the arena". IIRC, jackasses like this voted Winston "fight them on the beaches" Churchill out after the war was won and his replacement sold jet engines to the Soviets. Sigaba's post on the "gilded age" made this thread worth a look.
I guess if a response to the question was absolutely necessary I would keep it short and easy to understand - Fvck you, azzhole.
1stindoor
02-11-2010, 16:51
"War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
- John Stuart Mill
Put my sig quote back! Jeez...you can't trust anyone anymore. I'll have you know John loaned this to me about 25 years ago...I even stenciled it on my GMV door in Afghanistan. I'm happy to see others know it too.