OT - I just got this in my email and thought I would share

Thanks. You just said that you want me to stand the wall and protect you and yours, then you insist on complaining of the manner in which I provide that protection while standing on that wall. It really makes me feel loved to know how much you appreciate my placing my life on the line, by complaining that I did it.

We all care how our tax money is spent, but when our country is at war with an enemy that has no boundaries or borders, you should be careful that you do not complain so loudly that the fighiting comes into your own backyard.

That was the point of the original post.

I have not complained about anything regarding the substance of this thread. But to suggest that only people who were in the military can complain about foreign policy is nuts. That's like saying that only people who work for the EPA can complain about environmental policy. Besides, shouldn't we qualify your logic and only allow people who were actually shot at in a war complain. Everyone is thankful for our freedom and the sacrfice our troops make and have made, but some of the people in this forum have gotten a little too self righteous.

I understand just fine, Bill. I understand the exceptionalism of the people in this country, and the glory of our unique American political and social philosophy. At least people who are bothering to complain are interested in the political process and the goings on in this country. Besides, most people are not complaining about the military proper, but rather the objective of our foreign policy. You are turning this into a discussion about military criticsm, and that is not the case.

Bill, I don't post my personal information on the internet -- there are too many wackos who are looking for that kind of information. If you want I will send you a personal email with my contact information. I'm not trying to fight with anyone on this board, and I did not start this thread. Plus I don't think I've said anything particulary controversal.

Stack has a good point. Maybe only military personnel should pay taxes, then no one but them can say how their taxes are spent.

Not to impune the enormous sacrifice our soldiers have made, but serving and protecting one's country means more than just military service. How about domestic police? Firefighters? Those that provide the tools the military uses? Those that house, feed, and care for the children of defense contractor workers? Those that pay the bills for the military? Are they not serving their country?

I notice in your post you implied you stood on the wall in defense of the GOVERNMENT, as opposed to our COUNTRY. Do you not see a distinction between the two? Would you accept that even though one of the jobs of government is to protect the country, often the country needs protection from its government, (hence the Bill of Rights, et. al.)?

Of course the vast majority respect and admire those that stand on the wall, who put themselves there at the request of their government. That some in this country take issue with the *why* and *where* our soldiers are on the wall isn't indicative of a lack of appreciation of their sacrifice, but more of a difference of opinion from those that put them there in the first place.

The point is that we, all of us, have a responsibility to serve our nation, to keep it alive and well. The military, fire, police, business, teachers are all needed to provide for the nation's welfare.

The military is a special case as it requires youth. Most of us can serve in the military and then later, in one of the other roles that you mentioned.

The problem with a "professional military" is the division that is formed between the military and the population at large. That is not a good thing. The population is more willing to expend the military and to think of them as "they" rather than "us."

The draft, which is still >Not to impune the enormous sacrifice our soldiers have made, but serving and

Last map I saw, Michigan was still part of the USA.

I have to chime in and agree with Matt here.

I personally feel that every citizen has an *obligation* to contribute to our country in one way or another. Sure, it can be done in many ways, but the largest fraction of our current population has made zero attempt at even the remotest inkling of a contribution. Instead they just glom on the commitment and sacrifices of the smaller fraction. Heck, we can't even get half of the shlubs in this country to show up and cast a ballot on election day! I'll bet if it was a pre-requisite for collecting welfare or social security benefits we could get some killer turn-outs!

But I certainly do not agree that one has to have served in the military to have, and voice, an opinion on foreign affairs. Just contribute in some fashion. And the only one who knows if you have or not for sure is yourself...

-Fred W

6 year Navy vet ('76 - 81) & registered republican (who votes his personal conscience, not some foolish party line...)

Very well said. Excellent points all around. I might add that this whole issue of military service only arose as a way to avoid addressing substantive issues. Rather than address factual inaccuracies in their posts, a few individuals dodged by making military service an issue. Nobody has been complaining about the government in this thread, yet some people have acted like flags were being burnt and made it an issue of patriotism.

A rose is a rose, and a spade is a spade. Calling POWs another name shouldn't diminish their rights. These people aren't even being charged with "War Crimes". What has happened is that this Administration is using symantics to attempt to evade International Law.

What's good for the Goose is good for the Gander. I don't see a noticible impact on SSI happening from such mariages. More likely, problems will come from the current Admin trying to destroy the SSI program so that it will benefit the money lenders more than the recipients.