Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ratbastid
True enough. I'm just reacting to the political messages embedded in the song. You know--anybody who still honestly thinks that the Iraq war has anything to do with freedom is either completely delusional, or has a political agenda. I'm not saying she should have been attacked for going to visit the troops. It was a good thing to do. I just think she's falling back on some shaky rhetoric in defending herself.
|
For a change, I'm going to have to disagree with you. Fighting for freedom is more than any single war. It's more than any single country or single unit or single soldier. It's more than any single political message or soapbox. As a soldier, I don't get to pick which wars I fight in, but I'm proud to serve my country regardless because the end result is a better world. I don't agree with what we're doing in Iraq. I DO agree with what we're going in Afghanistan.
It's much like being a parent. Not every choice you make is going to be the perfect choice. But in the end, the hope is there that your child turns out to be a good person. That's what fighting for freedom is about. That's what having pride in your country is about. That 4 or 8 years with a lunatic president doesn't mean that you aren't fighting the good fight or that your country isn't something to be proud of. One crazy bigot in congress doesn't mean the system doesn't work and the whole thing isn't worth fighting for.
To chaulk her feelings up as "delusional" or "political agenda" is just harsh rhetoric. Since you haven't spoken to her directly about the meaning of her words, yours is only an interpretation, and likely colored by your view on world politics at large and your feelings on the war.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gilda
I don't mind using patriotic imagery, but the repetition of "fight for freedom/in a job that must be done" tends to grate on my nerves, because it seems an endorsement of the reasoning for being in the war rather than support for the troops. There is, in my mind, a clear distinction between being sympathetic to and supporting the people involved and endorsing the misguided ideals that have the US and its allies there in the first place.
|
I'm not sure how you see this as the case. Could you clarify? Having a military is a must. It has been since the dawn of time. Sure, there are rare exceptions, but as a rule, there will always be someone willing to oppress others, and they're happy to do it with force.
In light of this, being a soldier/marine/et cetera is a "job that must be done". Fighting in wars, whether you agree with them or not also falls into that category. It's not a matter of making excuses, it's a matter of reason. It's a job that must be done that most people are not willing or able to take.
As I mentioned above, "fighting for freedom" is more than just a war, battle or skirmish. It's larger than you or me. It's greater than our administration, our politicians, our voters. It's something that, while barely tangible, must carry on, for better or for worse. Funny, that statement, "for better or for worse". It applies to life in nearly every way. Things will never be all good, and hpefully they will never be all bad. But fighting for what I believe in, as a long-term goal, despite how I might see the short-term, is well worth my effort. It's difficult for many to support troops that so adamately support the war. But the reason many of us fight for our countries is because we believe in the mission AS A WHOLE. It's individual parts may not be great, but as in my example above, you do what seems good at the time and hope in the end, your kid (or country) grows up right.