"Thank you brother/sister for taking part in an aggressive war against a people that have not harmed a hair on my head. Thank you for carpet bombing the cradle of civilization Thank you for imprisoning, torturing, humiliating, terrorizing, and killing people whose language you don't even speak.
is that it?
...or is it "Thank you for doing the horrible work of empire so I don't have to."
I mean, what is it exactly that you are thanking them for?
And I am asking about the thanks. I'm not implying that they should be spat upon, reviled, cursed, etc. I just want to know exactly and not abstractly what it is you want to personally thank them for?
Joanna
boddi satva wrote:
>I know I'm over-posting, but honestly you don't see a difference
>between thanking active-duty soldiers for their service and
>"establishing the military as some superior caste to which the rest of
>us owe gratitude for all the freedoms and rights we possess." I mean,
>you don't honestly equate these things, do you?
>
>
>
>On 11/25/05, Gar Lipow <the.typo.boy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On 11/25/05, Louis Kontos <Louis.Kontos at liu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If you have genuine respect for military personnel, for whatever reason,
>>>then it makes sense to speak honestly with and about them. Thanking them for
>>>a military adventure that you yourself call unjust seems rather hypocritical
>>>-- and condescending -- to me. I feel no need to thank anybody for doing
>>>something I consider unjust, notwithstanding everything you said about the
>>>military code. While you seem to appreciate the military code (at least
>>>those parts of it that mandate obedience and sacrifice, not anything else),
>>>you seem to lack an understanding of hypocrisy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>That is true as far as it goes. But "gratitude" towards the military
>>is not only hypocritical; it is truly dangerous as well. Zell
>>Miller repeated a well worn right wing meme when he said at the last
>> Republican Convention:
>>
>>
>>
>>>It has been said truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter,
>>>
>>>
>>who has given us the freedom of the press. [cheers] It is the soldier,
>>not the poet who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the
>>soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest. It
>>is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose
>>coffin is draped by the flag, who gives that protester the freedom he
>>abuses to burn that flag. [cheers] No one should dare to even think
>>about being the commander in chief of this country if he doesn't
>>believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and
>>defenders of freedom at home
>>
>>Do you see how dangerous this will be if it succeeds? Establishing
>>the military as some superior caste to which the rest of us owe
>>gratitude for all the freedoms and rights we possess? Seeing the
>>military in fact as the basis for those rights, and thus able to take
>>them away on whim? That is what lies behind the whole "gratitude"
>>line.
>>
>>___________________________________
>>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>>
>>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
>
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20051125/d0e045f3/attachment.htm>