Republicans who want war, but won't enlist. - Page 5

MMMMMM · #41 03-10-2005, 01:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
M tried to dodge the point, and apparantly has given a few other Republicans some cover-rhetoric to hide behind. But the fact remains: you can guage the sincerity of a man's words by his actions. A man who will "support a war" by sending someone else to fight it for him, but who won't step up and join in that fight himself, is a fraud

[/ QUOTE ]

This is sheer nonsense.

Do you support the work of firefighters? Well then why don't you just put on a firefighting suit and zip on down to your local firehouse and be ready for action next time a fire breaks out in your neighborhood. Someone once said you can gauge a man's sincerity by his actions. A man who will "support" firefighting by sending others out to fight fires, but who won't actually don a firesuit and get in there and do battle with a hose against the flames, is a fraud.

Amazing to me that you can actually believe what you wrote above.

QuadsOverQuads · #42 03-10-2005, 01:37 AM

Very cute how you throw a barb at me, then edit out the part where I said "because I'm an ex-Republican". Very DoubleThink of you. You'll make a fine Bush supporter.

q/q

Dead · #43 03-10-2005, 01:38 AM

I think it's very DoublePlusGood.

Go Big Brother.

vulturesrow · #44 03-10-2005, 01:42 AM

Thanks for the thoughtful response. And about the namecalling, as I generally try to avoid that, so my apologies there. And I freely admit there is just as many lemmings on the right as there are on the left. I just find it some what humorous in that the left generally champions themselves as defenders of diversity but yet have no place in their party as it stands now for those who are pro-choice just as one example. But as you said, on to things of actual relevance.

The only reason I made the comment about your questioning what exactly I've done during my military service. I just didnt like the implication that if I had been in the military but hadnt been to Iraq then my support of the war would be hypocritical.

The fact remains that supporting a cause places no onus on the supporter to go out and physically take part in it. That is ridiculous. I dont disagree that a man who does go out and do that shows a higher level of dedication, but it doesnt make you a hypocrite not to.

QuadsOverQuads · #45 03-10-2005, 01:48 AM

Ok, M, let me explain to you in detail why your "reasoning" is complete BS :

[ QUOTE ]
Do you support the work of firefighters? Well then why don't you just put on a firefighting suit and zip on down to your local firehouse and be ready for action next time a fire breaks out in your neighborhood.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, I support them by not starting fires.

You, by contrast, are starting wars. You're like an arsonist who accuses his opponents of not "supporting the firefighters" because they would rather put thier efforts into preventing the fires in the first place. It's so absurd that I can't believe you actually thought it would fly. Of course, you're a Republican, so even obvious absurdity is clearly no constraint on your rhetoric.

[ QUOTE ]
Someone once said you can gauge a man's sincerity by his actions. A man who will "support" firefighting by sending others out to fight fires, but who won't actually don a firesuit and get in there and do battle with a hose against the flames, is a fraud.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I had -- even accidentally -- been involved in starting a fire, I'd be volunteering my services day and night until it was put out. It's called personal responsibility, and it wouldn't take an internet discussion for me to act on it. And I exercise that same responsibility by not creating situations that put firefighters into harm's way.

You, on the other hand, have NOT exercised this responsibility. You have lied the nation into wars of aggression. You have campaigned for those wars. You have flagrantly and intentionally deceived and manipulated and maligned your fellow citizens in pursuit of those wars. You Did This. Over and over and over and over, until you finally got what you wanted.

You. Did. This.

And yet when it comes time for actually deciding who's going to put their OWN ass on the line in order to FIGHT these wars you're aggressively promoting, you're all suddenly MIA. Or you have "fallen arches". Or, gee, the kids probably have soccer practice that day. Or (fill-in-the-blank).

You're not just hypocrites, you're outright frauds.

[ QUOTE ]
Amazing to me that you can actually believe what you wrote above.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you.

As to what *I* wrote, however, I not only believe it, I stand by it 100%.

q/q

Dead · #46 03-10-2005, 01:52 AM

well said

andyfox · #47 03-10-2005, 02:01 AM

We all have political opinions. We're not obligated to act on them. If the war is an abomination, what have you done to stop the war? Couldn't you do more?

As for me, though I agree that the war is wrong, I'm busy trying to be a good husband, father, and son. I run my business, run carpool, exercise, read books, listen to music, help my son with his homework, take my dad to the doctor, and take time to, yes, play poker and post here.

The soldiers haven't died because of the Republican posters' lust for war.

MMMMMM · #48 03-10-2005, 02:10 AM

Well, q/q, I'm definitely not a Republican, so you're off base there too.

Nor have I "started" any wars, as you erroneously claim.

Your entire argument is based on the premise that it is hypocritical to support something if you don't jump in and get involved in it yourself in a major way. But most people simply cannot do that for all the things they support. Nor, I suspect, can you.

Professional soldiers fight our wars. Professional policemen try to protect our neighborhoods. And professional firefighters put out our fires and are among the first responders for the injured in accidents.

You may think the Iraq war was ill-advised. That however is irrelevant with regard to the validity of the faulty point you first presented.

There are many things I, and no doubt you, support, but are incapable of jumping in and working at professionally. It is ludicrous to ascribe hypocrisy in such cases on that basis; to fairly do so would require a much more compelling basis.

BCPVP · #49 03-10-2005, 02:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If I had -- even accidentally -- been involved in starting a fire, I'd be volunteering my services day and night until it was put out. It's called personal responsibility, and it wouldn't take an internet discussion for me to act on it. And I exercise that same responsibility by not creating situations that put firefighters into harm's way.

[/ QUOTE ]
Funny, you would work to put out fires that only you start. Our wonderful soldiers fight to put out everyone's fires. Just like the professional firefighter who puts out everyone else's fires, no matter who started them.

Dead · #50 03-10-2005, 02:49 AM

Except the US has started most of the world's "fires", including supplying arms to Saddam. So really, our soldiers are attempting to clean up messes that our government created.

Nice try.