Local leftyblog “Clean Cut Kid” provides a nice demonstration of what passes for logic among the Kos-wannabes:
Has pro-war Thune sent his daughters to Iraq to fight for democracy yet?
Not only do we have a rehash of the incredibly stupid “chickenhawk” meme, but we have the idiotic idea that people “send” their children to war. Yes, obviously people don’t choose to join the military of their own free will.
Here’s a hint for those people who use the term “chickenhawk”. If the only people allowed to support a war are those who served, then the same should logically apply for those who don’t. In fact, let’s just take that argument to it’s obvious logical end and make sure that no one who isn’t part of the military has any say in military affairs whatsoever. Of course, that’s what we like to call a “military dictatorship.” But when all you’re looking for is the kind of silly slur an elementary-school student could master, who cares about such things as logic, reason, or common sense?
The point here isn’t whether or not Thune (or anyone else) is allowed to support the Iraq war in the absence of military service. Certainly he (they) can.
The point is that many of you are willing to support the war, but not to the point that you are willing to fight it yourself. The dying is for others. The typing and talking is for Thune and you. At least we know what your role in the “fight” for “democracy” is.
If you don’t like that being pointed out, I can’t but wonder why you would be so ashamed. Typing and talking are importants part of this battle.
REPLY TO THE KOSLINGS Thune sending his daughters to war was an example which of course the war supporters would take offense with. The point is do you see any of the Bush, Thune, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. kids volunteering? GWB, Cheney, Thune, none of them served in the REAL military or went to war, so therefore they think they know all about war. Isn’t that logical? Basically my biggest complaint with them is they KNOW they are RIGHT. They could never be wrong.
The fact that the Jay Redings of the world get so defensive when called to put their musket where their mouths are speaks volumes. The same with pseudo-hawkish politicians of today were seeking deferment after deferment to avoid combat in the last war they “supported”. Today, along with Jay Reding, they shore up their portfolio with as much Halliburton stock as they can afford, cheer on every military conflict that has the potential to inflate America’s financial self-interest, and carefully avoid service for themselves and their offspring….all while shouting down those who remind Americans exactly which demographic is and isn’t doing the fighting.
Particularly with the current crew of military veterans running for Congress under the Democratic banner, the Dems would be wise to point out as often as possible that the cowardly pukes chanting for more and more war will NEVER under any circumstance have the gun powder residue of combat on their own hands. The pretty little uncalloused hands of Jay Reding will stay Ivory smooth no matter how dire things get in the war(s) he cheers on nearly every day. The more pseudo-outrage that Reding expresses over that point being brought up, the more rational people should keep pushing back and hold him accountable for what wartime REALLY means….as opposed to the additional tax cuts he also insists upon.
So, I take it you’re a supporter of military dictatorship, then? How dare you allow civilians to vote, as apparently in Mark’s little fascist paradise only the military has the right to even speak on military affairs?
Where’d you serve, Mark? What was your rank? What gives you the right to speak out against the mission of our troops if you’ve never served yourself?
Or is this exactly what it quite clearly is – just another idiotical leftist talking point designed to shut down debate without all the bother of having to know a damn thing about this war?
“Or is this exactly what it quite clearly is – just another idiotical leftist talking point designed to shut down debate without all the bother of having to know a damn thing about this war?”
From a fellow who displays his lack of knowledge about this war on a daily basis…
Looks like we really struck a nerve with the “best blogger in the Upper Midwest”, but I’m not sure why.
Blogging is the most imporant thing you can be doing in the war on terror. Keep up the great work. I’m sure the terrorists are hiding under their beds in fear of right-wing bloggers.
Jay, you go well beyond merely “supporting the war”. The average noncombat Joe out there who merely “supports the war” doesn’t raise the ire of most war opponents and nor does he deserve it. It’s people like yourself who champion war from a half a world away and ridicule those who wish to end the quagmire, including those who HAVE been in combat like John Kerry, who simply cannot be put in your place too many times. If you choose to play the armchair warrior and stand in judgment of dissenters who are much more knowledgable and experienced in such affairs than yourself, the last thing you should be doing is piss and moan when someone brands your ass with the “chickenhawk” label.
Regarding my record of military service, as soon as I start championing wars and pathologically ridiculing those who disagree with it, ask me that question again and I’ll be sure to give you an answer.
Entrance into the military is something done voluntarily by adults. Contrary to what you might believe, there has not been a draft for quite some time. Parents can’t “send” their children to the military. I know it must be hard to get over the fact the draft has ended, but it did decades ago, really it did. I would not like to be in a combat unit that had the recogniziable child of some politically famous person. It would be a much more dangerous place because the bad guys would really like to kill or capture that person.
By the way, anybody bothered to check up on the chicken hawk (Cooper’s hawk). Pretty tough bird. Our leaders ought to hire at least one writer who has enough smarts to look something up instead of running with a great sound-bite.
AKA, “anyone who doesn’t agree with us.”
And again, the same “quagmire” bullshit we’ve heard again and again. The argument that Iraq is a “quagmire” is idiotic – and shows the abject ignorance of those who use it. After three years of engagement in Iraq, the Iraqi have managed to hold three free elections, form two governments, and build up a military force which even former Gen. Barry McCaffrey says is doing well – and he’s not only a military man, but a former critic of the war.
But no, armchair Clauswitz’s like Mark think that Iraq is a “quagmire” – apparently we can’t turn a failed state into Switzerland in three years, then it’s time to fuck the mission and go home.
It’s that kind of ignorant, defeatist, and hackneyed argument that makes those who use it not “chickenhawks” but merely chickens.
A man whose combat experience ended 30 years prior, and who returned home to slander the brave men whom he left behind. Given the military’s attitude towards Sen. Kerry, I wouldn’t be trumpeting him as the model military man… but given your ignorance of all things martial, it’s no surprise you’d make such an argument.
Which you certainly the hell are not. Nor the Koslings at CCK, and as smart a guy as Nicq is, last I checked I was the one with the very expensive piece of paper in my study that says I know a thing or two more about this particular subject than the average Joe.
The “chickenhawk” label is an idiotic argument. It’s stupid, and you’re too much of a coward to accept its full conclusion. If someone can’t speak for the use of military force without having served, why the hell should anyone be allowed to speak against it without similarly having served in the military?
Either we have a system in which everyone, civilian or military alike has the freedom to support a war or not, or no one outside of the military does. Last time I checked, this nation was a democracy, which means your crude and stupid little attempts to shoot my arguments down are the sort of crap one has come to expect from people who can’t argue an issue on its merits.
I support this war because the only way we will ever end the threat of terrorism is to change the culture of autocracy that spawns it. And if you don’t like that, then too damn bad. I support the mission of our troops, I want us to win, and I want the people of Iraq to have a sane and democratic society.
If that makes me a “chickenhawk” and a “war-mongerer” and whatever stupid little labels you chose to throw at me, then that’s fine. I’m proud to be a chickenhawk, and chickenhawks like us eat chickens for lunch…
“The “chickenhawk†label is an idiotic argument. It’s stupid, and you’re too much of a coward to accept its full conclusion. If someone can’t speak for the use of military force without having served, why the hell should anyone be allowed to speak against it without similarly having served in the military?”
Nobody has ever suggested your lack of service excludes you from saying whatever you want about this war. But if you want to champion a war that you have no intention of fighting in under any circumstance, be prepared to be repeatedly and deservedly lectured about what a coward you are. If the mission is so worthy that you smugly condemn everybody who has ever disagreed with it, there is no justification for your decision not to participate in it. Preach on all you want….as long as you can handle being called a chickenhawk asshat for the unimaginable hypocrisy of it.
“last I checked I was the one with the very expensive piece of paper in my study that says I know a thing or two more about this particular subject than the average Joe.”
What in the hell are you talking about?
Except for:
Under any circumstance? If drafted, I’d almost certainly go. In fact, there is a rather good chance that within the next year to three years, I will end up in a military position.
Except I have the right to say what I choose, regardless of whether or not I chose to make the military my career. (And make no mistake, the military is a career in this country.) If you have a problem with democracy, that’s your problem, not mine.
Remember that this “chickenhawk asshat” pays the bills for this site. You’re a guest here, and it would behoove you to act accordingly.
And again, I want our troops to win. What do you want?
I have a degree in political science, including democratization theory. The very expensive piece of paper in my study is my diploma. Granted, I hardly qualify as an expert, but that certainly means I know a bit more about the situation than the average Kos-wannabe.
Sorry Jay, I got a little snarky there. 😉
And for the record, I’m a proud owner of a very expensive piece of paper indicating my expertise in these matters as well; I graduated a year ago. So you’re not the only one here
And, also for the record, I’m on your side in this; I don’t think military experience is particularly relevant in this matter, nor is whether or not a politician has a child in the military.
The most important point has been ignored:
Jay wants to claim we are attempting to “muzzle” him — so to speak — because he lacks military service or has shown a willingness to put his life on the line in a war he supports.
Not true.
All I and Mark — and others who have observed right-wing bloggers on this subject — are saying is that if you want to talk big and then refuse to put your life on the line in the manner that is required of others as a result of your “big talk”, the be prepared to be ridiculed and labled in the appropriate manner for such behavior.
It is obvious you can’t take it and that we have struck a nerve with you on this particular point. I think it’s because you know there’s a whole lot of truth in what we’re saying and you’re embarrased by it. Frankly, I can’t blame you. You support a war launched on a suspect premise that has taken the lives of thousands, but are unwilling to put your own life on the line in the hunt for WMDs in Iraq. You should be embarrased.
“In fact, there is a rather good chance that within the next year to three years, I will end up in a military position.”
At which point you’ll have gravitas on the matter when pounding the drums for war. Let me know when that happens.
“If you have a problem with democracy, that’s your problem, not mine.”
As you said yourself in reference to the Dixie Chicks. Everybody has the freedom of speech. They do not, however, have the freedom to avoid criticism for the speech when it’s idiotic or comes from a position of ignorance or hypocrisy.
“Remember that this “chickenhawk asshat†pays the bills for this site”
Hmmmm….I have a blog that costs me nothing. Why pay for you can get for free?
“And again, I want our troops to win. What do you want?”
Considering there was never a clearly-defined victory to be attained, wanting our troops “to win” never struck me as a viable option even in the beginning of this misadventure. It seems even less so today. I guess that means I want our troops to give Iraq as decent of an opportunity for self-sufficiency as possible (which they’ve done a pretty good of….at least on paper) while acknowledging that nothing good can come from overstaying our welcome.
I needn’t “claim” that – it’s inherent in the whole stupid “chickenhawk” meme.
Which is still a stupid argument. I also support firefighters, but I’ve never lifted a firehose. I support the police, yet I’ve never once caught a criminal. I support the priesthood, but I don’t wear a collar.
The whole “chickenhawk” meme is incredibly dumb. Again, if war supporters are hypocrites for not having served, why are war detractors also not hypocrites for not having served. The argument is nothing more than a transparent attempt to shut down one side of the debate without ever arguing anything on the merits.
No, it’s because the argument is anti-democratic and repugnant. Everyone has the right to speak out for or against actions of US foreign policy regardless of military service. That’s democracy, and apparently some people don’t like democracy.
If no one who hasn’t served can’t support a war, then I fully expect you to start a petition for a Constitutional amendment to restrict elected office to veterans only… or do you want to be a “hypocrite”?
Which is another comment which demonstrates your abject ignorance of this war and what it’s about…
“Which is still a stupid argument. I also support firefighters, but I’ve never lifted a firehose. I support the police, yet I’ve never once caught a criminal. I support the priesthood, but I don’t wear a collar”
But you don’t actively ridicule and question the patriotism of those who don’t support firefighters, the police, and those who don’t wear a collar on a daily basis. For that matter, you don’t champion the moral authority of fighting fires or preaching at the pulpit many times a day either. The same cannot be said about the war which you more than simply “support”, but champion and ridicule others who don’t champion it.
Actually, yes, I would question the patriotism of someone who doesn’t support firefighters or police. Wouldn’t you?
You’re damn right I do. Hell, I even have an NYFD hat sitting around somewhere. I guess that makes me a “chickenfirefighter”, right? And wouldn’t a priest be someone with moral authority? (Well, most of them anyway…)
Because the people who are trying to ensure that America is defeated in this war are wrong – and their actions would harm this country. And they can use slurs like “chickenhawk” all they want, but that doesn’t make their position any less reprehensible. The fact that they claim to “support the troops” while acting to lower their morale and tell them they’re in a fight they can’t win (Which would be news to them since front-line troops keep reenlisting in record numbers…) is the very definition of hypocrisy.
Is there a particular reason you won’t fight the war you “support”? Why won’t you put your life on the line? Maybe you have a perfectly legitimate exuse for warmongering and then leaving the dying to others.
What of you? Where do you get off telling our troops, putting their lives on the line in Iraq, that they can’t win? What gives you the right to dare speak out against the policy of the United States military if you’ve never so much as held a rifle? What makes you so much smarter than the thousands of troops who not only went into battle in Iraq, but went back because they believed so strongly in the task they’re fighting for? What makes you so much smarter than Gen. McCaffrey? What gives you the right to sit safe in front of your computer and accuse our troops of being too stupid to know they’ve lost?