9 Yrs wasted?

[GregW]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

So which is it - I was talking in jest or am a hypocrite? Both is an acceptable answer.

1) I never said it was solely because of my height, but it's certainly one of the many reasons I wouldn't have stepped in. Regardless of someone's size, anyone stepping into that situation is grossly outnumbered considering the number of people cheering the situation on. (As an aside, bart mentioned the word around town is that kid did steal those shoes. If so, he got off easy by not being sent to the hospital on a stretcher.)

2) You're welcome to look at my post history in the Political Forum to answer you questions on my opinions of sending our military abroad as the world's police force.

Well, if you had read correctly, I said that I was taking it mostly in jest. Meaning that I was removing the ridiculousness of your statement, justifying the annihilation of an entire region based upon your opinion, while not removing your justification of military action against the region.

The reference to the shoe incident was just that, a reference. Has it not been established that a receipt was produced by the parents. Your justification is laughable at best. We are to believe the conspiracy theory of a person who was expelled from school based upon actual evidence. I really don't care to argue that case anymore. I see it as a waste of time and your point was taken. You feared bodily harm and therefore would not interject. That is your opinion and you are justified to it. I only mention it in contradiction to your justification of others risking their lives in a much more dangerous situation, while you yourself would not.

And finally I do not care to discuss this any further. Nothing will be gained and I see no point engaging in this. I simply asked a question to gain insight. The only reason I posed the question was in reference to one of the premier authors of the century posing a simple question:
Why is it that people justify military action when they themselves would not participate in it themselves? And, if they were too old why would they not volunteer their sons and daughters?
It fits right in with your statement. You are either hypocritical in the fact that you would justify the action and not participate yourself or will prove you are hypocritical if your post in the political forum are of the opposite nature. Take your choice. I don't care to research your past posting in the political forum. I see no reason for me to view the forum. It consists of people arguing back and forth and no one changing their opinion.

[spence]

Originally Posted by GregW

Why is it that people justify military action when they themselves would not participate in it themselves? And, if they were too old why would they not volunteer their sons and daughters?

It's a great question. Could it be the ease of a volunteer service? The use of force rather than politics to achieve impatient goals? The economic wealth that demands intervention to sustain it? The erosion of what it means to be a citizen?

I remember the first time ever in a casino in Windsor...was playing on a 25 dollar black jack table with another person's money...felt like I couldn't lose.

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by GregW

Well, if you had read correctly, I said that I was taking it mostly in jest. Meaning that I was removing the ridiculousness of your statement, justifying the annihilation of an entire region based upon your opinion, while not removing your justification of military action against the region.

So, you accept that the comment was a joke, but then criticize the comment as if it was serious?

And finally I do not care to discuss this any further. Nothing will be gained and I see no point engaging in this.

You don't care to discuss it any more yet you continue on with...

I simply asked a question to gain insight. The only reason I posed the question was in reference to one of the premier authors of the century posing a simple question:
Why is it that people justify military action when they themselves would not participate in it themselves? And, if they were too old why would they not volunteer their sons and daughters?
It fits right in with your statement. You are either hypocritical in the fact that you would justify the action and not participate yourself or will prove you are hypocritical if your post in the political forum are of the opposite nature. Take your choice. I don't care to research your past posting in the political forum. I see no reason for me to view the forum. It consists of people arguing back and forth and no one changing their opinion.

Since you've read farrrr too much into a statement made as a joke, I'll humor your...

For starters even if I was 100% serious, turning the entire region into a "glass desert" wouldn't put an American life in immediate danger as the comment is in reference to the effect on the silica in sand when a nuclear weapon is detonated. Sand + extreme heat = glass.

And to answer the original source motivating your long diatribe regarding my assumed support of sending American troops anywhere as the worlds police force and the hypocrisy of such a statement... I've been vehemently against Iraq from day one, just as I'd be against any action in Iran, Pakistan or North Korea. I'm more in the Ron Paul camp of pulling most non-essential American troops out of foreign deployments.

As a serviceman, I can respect your distaste for people that want to send our troops out yet wouldn't sign up themselves. I've mentioned this in that past... I tried to sign up my senior year of college, was medically declined and was declined again during the appeal process. Also worked as an EMT for 6 years, 4 of which were responding to emergencies in some of the crappiest neighborhoods, unsecured shooting victims, gang violence, etc. - nothing like a war zone and that doesn't make my opinion any more valid, but I mention it as I do take some contention with your statement: "I only mention it in contradiction to your justification of others risking their lives in a much more dangerous situation, while you yourself would not."