Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Where the Hell is our president?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="donner" data-source="post: 1490785" data-attributes="member: 277"><p>Talking about people without arms and legs wasn't intended to gain sympathy or play on emotions and isn't a red herring. It was meant to point to a part of society that would be completely disqualified from military service, and by your earlier post, not qualified for anything above dog catcher. </p><p></p><p>You throw around terms like "bleeding heart," yet you failed to answer the question posed about your argument. Also, it is truly sad that you consider someone who wants to protect his or her rights, and the rights of disabled Americans, a "bleeding heart."</p><p></p><p>I get that you are looking out for your kid, and there is evidence to suggest that people who have served and people who haven't served make different decisions about the role of the military. But again, there are 'wankers' in all walks of life and plenty of who have served. To assume that they would make 'better' decisions about what 'butt-end' part of the world your kid goes to is ridiculous. That kind of logic suggests that Jimmy Carter had a better understanding of the role of the military than Thomas Jefferson did (since Jefferson never served). </p><p></p><p>Our military (currently) is made up of volunteers, meaning they willingly agree to go where the civilian government sends them. If you don't like the choices the government makes then change who is in the government or get out. Don't try to restrict the rights of people who, for a variety of reasons, couldn't serve in the military.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="donner, post: 1490785, member: 277"] Talking about people without arms and legs wasn't intended to gain sympathy or play on emotions and isn't a red herring. It was meant to point to a part of society that would be completely disqualified from military service, and by your earlier post, not qualified for anything above dog catcher. You throw around terms like "bleeding heart," yet you failed to answer the question posed about your argument. Also, it is truly sad that you consider someone who wants to protect his or her rights, and the rights of disabled Americans, a "bleeding heart." I get that you are looking out for your kid, and there is evidence to suggest that people who have served and people who haven't served make different decisions about the role of the military. But again, there are 'wankers' in all walks of life and plenty of who have served. To assume that they would make 'better' decisions about what 'butt-end' part of the world your kid goes to is ridiculous. That kind of logic suggests that Jimmy Carter had a better understanding of the role of the military than Thomas Jefferson did (since Jefferson never served). Our military (currently) is made up of volunteers, meaning they willingly agree to go where the civilian government sends them. If you don't like the choices the government makes then change who is in the government or get out. Don't try to restrict the rights of people who, for a variety of reasons, couldn't serve in the military. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Where the Hell is our president?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom