That taste in the mouth
Sep. 30th, 2007 03:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecunium"There is a core of anger in the soul of almost every veteran, and we are justified in calling it bitterness, but the bitterness of one man is not the same thing as the bitterness of another. In one man it becomes a consuming flame that sears his soul and burns his body. In another it is barely traceable. It leads one man to outbursts of temper, another to social radicalism, and a third to excesses of conservatism."
- WW I veteran Willard Waller in 1944, anticipating the return of the troops from WW II
I found that while looking at the comments to Army of Dude's entry about being a Phony Soldier (which is a damned moving post).
One of the weasly little shits who made anonymous reply said this:
The only thing that's phoney about this post is the author of it, probably another Sen. Murtha type.
Or probably a pussy like liberal Max Cleland.
That sort of shit pisses me off.
Over at Making Light theres a conversation going on about patriotism where someone says soldiers patriotism ought not be questioned. I'm with abi, no one's patriotism ought to come up. In part this is because the idea of "patriotism" is a will-o-the-wispy shibboleth. Everyone in the States has an idea of what it means, and few agree.
There are those for whom it means, "My Country, no matter what."
Some subscribe to Teddy Roosevelt's dictum, ""To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
Other's think as Kerry does, Dissenters are not always right, but it is always a warning sign when they are accused of unpatriotic sentiments by politicians seeking a safe harbor from debate, from accountability, or from the simple truth.
But no one can make a window into another's soul and know what they think and feel.
But service... that's different.
Cleland, he served. He lost limbs in that service. Murtha served, and was wounded.
McCain served, and was tortured in his captivity.
Limbaugh insulted all of them; by way of their service.
Why? For the same reason he insulted me.
Because our politics are different from his.
He admits he didn't want to go to Viet-nam, and was able to skate (when he failed out of school and lost his student deferrment) because he had some ingrown hairs on his ass.
But me, and Alex (of Army of Dude) and every other soldier who doesn't want (back) to go to Iraq (as he didn't want to go to Viet-nam) are phonies. He, at least; you see, was honest. He didn't want to go and took advantage of a treatable condition to avoid it.
Rush, et al., denigrate the service of every one who dares to do what Roosevelt did in 1918, and criticise the policies of the President. He's raised his belief in his "Leader" to a fetish. A touchstone by which authenticity is measured.
Those who don't agree (not won't serve; note the distinction. I didn't think the war was a good idea, I went. Pat Tillman thought it was illegal; which belief I didn't share. He went. The NCOs who wrote the Op-Ed which ran in the NYT went, and went back, and two of them are dead; a third is in hospital), are phony.
Maybe he's right. We did/are doing things we don't believe it (because of something else we do believe in: duty). So perhaps Rush would like to see all those who don't want to go/go back(again) to Iraq be "un-phony" and act as Montesquieu's rational army.
I'm sure he'd be supportive.
Right. He'd be calling for their necks in a noose (it's not as if he hasn't called for people to be killed before... oh! right, those were jokes).
That quote at the top... it's true. We are all bitter. It comes of being those who do the impossible, for the unwilling ("I didn't want to go), and getting a big fat shit-sandwich from them when we return.
I'd say Limbaugh can kiss my ass, but I wouldn't be willing to turn my back on the treacherous bastard.
- WW I veteran Willard Waller in 1944, anticipating the return of the troops from WW II
I found that while looking at the comments to Army of Dude's entry about being a Phony Soldier (which is a damned moving post).
One of the weasly little shits who made anonymous reply said this:
The only thing that's phoney about this post is the author of it, probably another Sen. Murtha type.
Or probably a pussy like liberal Max Cleland.
That sort of shit pisses me off.
Over at Making Light theres a conversation going on about patriotism where someone says soldiers patriotism ought not be questioned. I'm with abi, no one's patriotism ought to come up. In part this is because the idea of "patriotism" is a will-o-the-wispy shibboleth. Everyone in the States has an idea of what it means, and few agree.
There are those for whom it means, "My Country, no matter what."
Some subscribe to Teddy Roosevelt's dictum, ""To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
Other's think as Kerry does, Dissenters are not always right, but it is always a warning sign when they are accused of unpatriotic sentiments by politicians seeking a safe harbor from debate, from accountability, or from the simple truth.
But no one can make a window into another's soul and know what they think and feel.
But service... that's different.
Cleland, he served. He lost limbs in that service. Murtha served, and was wounded.
McCain served, and was tortured in his captivity.
Limbaugh insulted all of them; by way of their service.
Why? For the same reason he insulted me.
Because our politics are different from his.
He admits he didn't want to go to Viet-nam, and was able to skate (when he failed out of school and lost his student deferrment) because he had some ingrown hairs on his ass.
But me, and Alex (of Army of Dude) and every other soldier who doesn't want (back) to go to Iraq (as he didn't want to go to Viet-nam) are phonies. He, at least; you see, was honest. He didn't want to go and took advantage of a treatable condition to avoid it.
Rush, et al., denigrate the service of every one who dares to do what Roosevelt did in 1918, and criticise the policies of the President. He's raised his belief in his "Leader" to a fetish. A touchstone by which authenticity is measured.
Those who don't agree (not won't serve; note the distinction. I didn't think the war was a good idea, I went. Pat Tillman thought it was illegal; which belief I didn't share. He went. The NCOs who wrote the Op-Ed which ran in the NYT went, and went back, and two of them are dead; a third is in hospital), are phony.
Maybe he's right. We did/are doing things we don't believe it (because of something else we do believe in: duty). So perhaps Rush would like to see all those who don't want to go/go back(again) to Iraq be "un-phony" and act as Montesquieu's rational army.
I'm sure he'd be supportive.
Right. He'd be calling for their necks in a noose (it's not as if he hasn't called for people to be killed before... oh! right, those were jokes).
That quote at the top... it's true. We are all bitter. It comes of being those who do the impossible, for the unwilling ("I didn't want to go), and getting a big fat shit-sandwich from them when we return.
I'd say Limbaugh can kiss my ass, but I wouldn't be willing to turn my back on the treacherous bastard.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-01 12:18 am (UTC)Thank you.
He just had better things to do, you understand? Other priorities. He was going places and a Future.
Military service isn't for his kind. /sarcasm
Rush pisses me off every time he opens his mouth.
Especially when I see stories about vets who lost limbs and are in debt on the front page of the newspaper. Or when I hear about people who commit suicide when the VA can't find room or time for them. Or when they try to pretend female veterans don't exist.
DV