What a #^&#^&#^&#^&.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Jim, there's nothing I've said that should be taken as a defense of his statement.

I'm trying to offer some constructive perspective rather than simply write Hayes's comments off as those of a mental case. That he's wrong and his timing is poor doesn't make him insane.

He still is a terrible show host though.

-spence

"Jim, there's nothing I've said that should be taken as a defense of his statement."

No?

You said he was not irrational. You agreed that calling servicemen heroes could be construed as supporting the war (in other words, you claim his premise is not without merit). You said you could see why a liberal might think like he does.

That's not defending him? Spence, there's an old southern sayiing..."don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining".

A child appreciates the difference between supporting a war's purpose, and crediting the foot soldiers with the valor they display. Any child sees this enormous difference. But not Hayes, and not you. You're both too driven by radical ideology to have any semblance of common sense.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You said he was not irrational. You agreed that calling servicemen heroes could be construed as supporting the war (in other words, you claim his premise is not without merit). You said you could see why a liberal might think like he does.

I said his comments were not irrational for an anti-war liberal to make. That is not a de facto endorsement, far from it, it's simply a reasoned observation.

Look, many people believe we've become a society desensitized to war and that a military industrial complex has too much influence on our government. The combination of factors some would argue leads to perpetual war...

I've mentioned in past threads an interesting book that discusses some aspects of this by Andrew Bacevich (The New American Militarism) a self described Catholic Conservative who fought in Vietnam, was an Army Colonel and lost his own son in Iraq in 2007.

The point being that these ideas don't exist in a black and white world. The difference though between someone like Bacevich and Hayes is that while they may have similar opinions (i.e. opposition to the Iraq War) one has real world experience while the other is simply an academic. As such there are lessons that are not fully learned. Hayes in his remarks isn't calculating enough of the the up front human cost (i.e. I'm signing a blank check to the US Govt) so he's being quite insensitive and hence is wrong or so I believe.

But to write off his behavior as a mental issue is also reckless. If the lessons of Vietnam have not been fully learned...castigating people like Hayes isn't the way to move forward.

Personally, I think Chris Hayes had his own "teaching moment" right before the camera.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I said his comments were not irrational for an anti-war liberal to make. That is not a de facto endorsement, far from it, it's simply a reasoned observation.

Look, many people believe we've become a society desensitized to war and that a military industrial complex has too much influence on our government. The combination of factors some would argue leads to perpetual war...

I've mentioned in past threads an interesting book that discusses some aspects of this by Andrew Bacevich (The New American Militarism) a self described Catholic Conservative who fought in Vietnam, was an Army Colonel and lost his own son in Iraq in 2007.

The point being that these ideas don't exist in a black and white world. The difference though between someone like Bacevich and Hayes is that while they may have similar opinions (i.e. opposition to the Iraq War) one has real world experience while the other is simply an academic. As such there are lessons that are not fully learned. Hayes in his remarks isn't calculating enough of the the up front human cost (i.e. I'm signing a blank check to the US Govt) so he's being quite insensitive and hence is wrong or so I believe.

But to write off his behavior as a mental issue is also reckless. If the lessons of Vietnam have not been fully learned...castigating people like Hayes isn't the way to move forward.

Personally, I think Chris Hayes had his own "teaching moment" right before the camera.

-spence

"Look, many people believe we've become a society desensitized to war "

No rational, sane person thinks that.

"and that a military industrial complex has too much influence on our government."

Only conspiracy-theory kooks believe that, the same loons who think 09/11 was an inside job.

"The point being that these ideas don't exist in a black and white world. "

Sure they do exist in black and white. Giving soldiers an "atta boy" is NOT THE SAME THING as saying the war is just. Spence, few things in life are as simple as this. How you can fail to admit this is beyond me. It's incomprehensible.

I have never heard anyone conclude that supporting the trioops is the same as supporting the reason for the war. That's an Evil Kineval-size leap to make.

But liberals live in the world of kookiness...

"If the lessons of Vietnam have not been fully learned...castigating people like Hayes isn't the way to move forward. "

If Hayes hasn't learned the lesson from Vietnam, he has a mental disorder. Many people are opposed to the Iraq War. I have never heard anyone hold that against the troops. To do so is irrational.