America needs to wage an American military intervention in America

Our politicians really support the troops. I mean, they say it all the time. They wear their ribbons and their flag pins, and they constantly talk about how our men and women in uniform are the best and brightest in the world. And how do they demonstrate their love and respect for our noble servicemen? Well, by finding every conceivable reason to keep them as far away from their own families and communities as possible. Our leaders “support” the troops by throwing them into every Godforsaken cesspool and war-torn hell hole across the globe, on impossible missions to accomplish murky and untenable objectives. They show their affection for our military members by sitting around all day thinking of ways to get them killed.

Oh, but their adulation for Marines, soldiers and sailors can’t end with simply using them as pawns in their sadistic geopolitical chess matches; they continue the love affair when (if) the veterans return home. At that point, these vets find their benefits cut, their voices silenced, and, for good measure, they end up on a Homeland Security terrorist watch list. No matter, I suppose, because they’ll soon be sent back overseas to fight against, or with, or for, or with but also against, the barbarian hordes in some other desert wasteland, all because the President ran his mouth and now needs to wage a war to avoid looking silly.

So when you hear some bloated, crusty, degenerate, establishment politician blabber about his “support” for our troops, please realize what “support” probably means in his universe. Please know that you are listening to a murderer. Maybe not a murderer in the legal sense, but in the sense of a man who would send other people’s sons and daughters halfway around the world to invade another nation, all for the sake of his pride, and for his politics, and for his foolishness, and for his blood lust. Like I said, not murder in the legal sense, but God doesn’t judge these things by man’s law.

I’ve got a proposal for those freaks in DC, who can’t seem to go five days without finding a reason to “intervene” in another country’s affairs, while our own nation descends further into bankruptcy and ruin: let’s have our military invade America for a change. I’m not talking about Martial Law. I’m talking about sending them in to occupy their homes, neighborhoods, and PTAs. Let’s have our service members intervene in their families, communities, and churches. Rather than shipping them off to the Middle East to hunt for Uncle Sam’s boogeymen, why don’t we ship them back to their own lives, where they have jobs and kids and bills and responsibilities? Instead of dropping them into the midst of another foreign civil war in search of more monsters to destroy, why don’t we put them back into their houses and allow them to be dads, moms, husbands and wives again? In other words, why don’t we send America’s military to the one place on Earth that could really use its help?

Whether or not Obama ultimately decides to clumsily back off of his Syria threats and pretend this whole thing never happened — a likely outcome, I think — my point still stands. In recent years we have completely abandoned even the pretense of caution, thoughtfulness and discernment; plunging ourselves into chaos and anarchy on every corner and in every rotting crevice of the map. And for what? For what? To bring “stability”? You call THIS “stability”? Please, never get into the business of bridge building, now that I’ve seen what passes for “stable” in your mind.

The men and women who join the service have talents and abilities unmatched by anyone else in the world, so what good has it done us to take these awesome people and disperse them haphazardly across the Earth, in an effort to maintain our confused and discombobulated pseudo-empire?

Don’t tell me that Syrian terrorists really “need” our military, don’t tell me that South Korea or Iraq or Afghanistan or Yemen or Jordan or Uganda or Egypt or Libya “needs” our military, I don’t want to hear it. WE NEED OUR MILITARY. Their kids need them, their spouses need them, their employers need them. We can not manage, monitor, or control the world. We never should have even tried, but we did and it hasn’t worked. The Roman Empire was undone by its imperialist ambitions after ruling the world for five centuries. We are disintegrating for similar reasons, except it only took us five decades.

I shudder when so many fools advocate for military “involvement” all over the planet, and then in the next breath they quote the Founding Fathers in order to make a point about a domestic issue of some kind. These qausi-imperialists have to be selective when they read about our Framers, so as to avoid quotes like this:

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” – James Madison

And this:

“Having seen the people of all other nations bowed down to the earth under the wars and prodigalities of their rulers, I have cherished their opposites, peace, economy, and riddance of public debt, believing that these were the high road to public as well as private prosperity and happiness.” – Thomas Jefferson

And this:

“A highwayman is as much a robber when he plunders in a gang as when single; and a nation that makes an unjust war is only a great gang.” – Benjamin Franklin

And this:

“It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” – George Washington

And this:

“[America] has . . . respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own. She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings . . . Whenever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.” – John Adams

We’ve betrayed and abandoned all of these ideas, but particularly that last one from John Adams. There is not a phrase or concept in that quote that even remotely holds true for the US in 2013.

Of course we are dumb enough to think these words don’t apply in “modern” times, anyway. We have bombs, and tanks, and the internet now, so the principles espoused by our Founders in regards to warfare can’t be relevant, right? Wrong. Not just wrong, but childish and stupid to a degree that borders on psychosis. Principles aren’t altered by technological advancements. If they were, then the Bill of Rights is also moot, every idea at the foundation of our country is antiquated, and we are no longer America in any meaningful sense.

A minority of politicians today will articulate foreign policy views that mirror our Founders, and how are they treated because of it? They’re mocked, booed and heckled. Meanwhile, the president can pick a fight with a foreign dictator, set conflicting and capricious ultimatums, build false narratives, wage a propaganda campaign, declare the power to go to war without congressional approval — all of this despite the fact that the security of our nation was never at risk — and the public will not treat him near as harshly as they treat a politician who counters his warhawking with a foreign policy philosophy similar to the Founders.

Whatever happens with Syria, we are still a nation perpetually at war. This means our best and brightest are perpetually being killed and maimed on foreign soil, when they could be here, at home, working, leading, living. I think we have reached a point where the military would cease to exist if it actually recruited honestly. How many would join if they were told the truth up front: “Come enlist, kid! You can look forward to being sent all over the Earth for reasons that have nothing to do with defending your home country; one minute you’ll be fighting psychopaths and terrorists, the next minute you’ll be helping them overthrow a government. You’ll become the pawns and scapegoats for bureaucrats in DC. You’ll be hired out like mercenaries to do the bidding of Saudi royalty. You’ll fight constantly, but rarely for reasons that make sense, and likely never to defend your own nation. You’ll be used, abused, and then –if you reach the end of your service alive — you’ll be abandoned and forgotten by the same government you dutifully served. But at least we’ll help pay for college (maybe)!”

Not much of a sales pitch, and that’s only because it’s actually truthful.

So that’s why I’m calling for an American military intervention in America. Let’s take a break from trying to run the world, and try our hand at running America. If we’re going to do that, we’ll need help from the skilled, disciplined and brilliant folks in our armed services. Here we suffer greatly from a leadership void, and that has everything to do with the fact that we keep our best leaders busy micromanaging the bedlam in foreign countries. We’ve got our own turmoil inside the US, and I think it’s time to send in the cavalry to deal with it. Not with guns and grenades, but with the skills and character they’ve developed and, to this point, been forced to waste on dragon-slaying missions overseas.

Enough is enough. Let’s try peace, sovereignty and prosperity for a few years, just to see how it feels. It’s worth a shot, isn’t it?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

76 Responses to America needs to wage an American military intervention in America

  1. Dina says:

    *Stands up and applauds* You sir, are a true patriot.

  2. Crystal says:

    From a military wife: AMEN! I need my husband at home!

  3. trethora says:

    defending them against the….what?

  4. condolf says:

    I agree 100% and let them keep their ammo.

  5. serenecolour says:

    It is very disappointing to say the least. What can we do to help this situation? Is talking about it enough?

  6. Barton says:

    That’s actually illegal (that’s why we have something called the National Guard that generally handles domestic issues). But I’m sure you know that; your use of hyperbole and ad absurdum arguments will serve you well if you end up at Fox News.

    • What’s illegal? For military members to be with their families? Did you really read this whole thing and interpret it as me advocating for a literal military occupation of America? Good Lord, do they not teach reading comprehension in schools anymore?

      • Barton says:

        “America needs to wage an American military intervention in America”
        “let’s have our military invade America for a change”
        “I’m calling for an American military intervention in America.”

        Quotes taken directly from your post.

        I know it’s eye-catching and controversial, which is the point, I’m sure. But it’s also the very definition of “hyperbole”; I suggest looking it up in a dictionary.

        (Or do they not teach that in schools any more?)

      • Bill says:

        I glad you felt it necessary to reply to this guy Matt. It disgusts me when someone either twists words or just skims an article and sees what they want..

      • @Barton “I’m not talking about Martial Law” reading comprehension, try it some time.

      • libertevolved says:

        Barton, what do you want exactly, other than to troll and argue semantics? You say you know what Matt meant but you stated (seriously, I might add) that what he was advocating was illegal. Any person who actually read the article would know that he was figuratively saying “Bring the troops home!”, not “Overthrow the government with its own military!” You’re either being disingenuous, silly, or willfully ignorant, none of which are desired here.

    • Ian Maphet says:

      Speaking of hyperbole and “ad absurdum” statements… *points at Barton’s comment*

    • Carlos Ranger says:

      Thank God you cleared that up! Matt is a very dangerous loon and of course he was supporting martial law and a literal “invasion” of the USA by its own military. Probably to enforce his fascist views on the rest of us, repeal child labor laws and chain women to ironing boards! I’m with you man, let’s put on our “Che” t-shirts and march!

    • cyberguy64 says:

      I absolutely love your implication that only right-wingers use hyperbole to make a point. It’s just so naive and adorable.

      • Barton says:

        That’s not what I’m implying. On the other hand, if you’re going to accuse so-called liberals of preferring to “shout slogans at you” or seeming like a “really vulgar bumper sticker” then it seems a little, well, hypocritical to engage in the same behavior, don’t you think?

        (You’re adorable, too! Love the icon.)

    • beriggs says:

      I love Fox News and so do a majority of viewers.

      • Patrick says:

        Multiple studies have shown that the more you watch Fox News, the less you know. It is not really a news program, but rather just a platform for regurgitating Republican talking points.

      • Jenna says:

        “I love Fox News and so do a majority of viewers.” That is like saying 60% of the time it works every time. I agree, the majority of Fox News viewers love Fox News.

    • Susan says:

      In case you have not noticed National Guard does not handle domestic issues, they are deployed and in foreign countries as much as full time military members!!!!

      • Jenna says:

        Susan, that is only half correct. While the National Guard does deploy along side of the Active Duty Soldiers; of the two, they are the only entity legally allowed to “handle domestic issues.” National Guard units are under the leadership and direction of their individual state Governor. Active Duty Soldiers are under the leadership and direction of the President. While National Guard Soldiers do augment Active Duty Soldiers “downrange”, the reverse does not hold true.

    • Thom says:

      I loved the article Matt and appreciated the open & honest ideas you explore here. Barton- your comment took me immediately to the same place that today’s ‘news’ programs do. Seems you’ve found their formula. First pick a few select statements and highlight them alone. Then completely twist their meaning, context and even the point of where they lead us and then get righteously indignant, throw in some version of the word ‘absurd’ or ‘insanity’ and fan the flames of us vs. them. It’s entirely legal for the military to be brought home and fulfill their roles as husbands, mothers, sons etc & many of us think that would do more good for the USA than sending them off to hellholes to enforce the economic and political aspirations of the few. Thanks again for the article Matt, I enjoy your ideas

  7. Kelly says:

    What happened to the end? Were you wacked? I wouldn’t be surprised in today’s America.

  8. Paul says:

    Write on!

  9. In Him Inspiration says:

    Amen!!!!! Very well said!

  10. Pingback: America needs to wage an American military intervention in America « THE BLACK KETTLE

  11. From my husband who fought in Iraq with the USMC,
    I agree with you nearly 100%. When Afghanistan first started, there were never more than 88 of our troops over there. Special, specific teams, They were there for a purpose and fulfilled their purpose quickly and efficiently. That’s what special teams are for. Sending numbers for the sake of numbers doesn’t increase efficiency, just death toll on both sides. Well written article.

  12. Jill Jones says:

    well said!!! though the last few words were left off…not sure what happened there, but i could extrapolate and extend it to say “defend them from the vagaries of politicians who haven’t a clue what defending ANYTHING is about.”

  13. Michael says:

    I don’t want our troops overseas as much as anyone but the sad reality is – bring our troops home to what? You said yourself our economy is in shambles and yet bringing home troops will ultimately accomplish 2 things… Put those same people on unemployment because there isn’t enough jobs, or they’ll end up taking back jobs they vacated to go overseas putting other people at work. I’ve never been a supporter of war except as a last resort, and I’ve never been a supporter of our gov’t putting its nose in the business of other country’s affairs. However gov’t doesn’t share my views and never has. Which is why we got into Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, etc. You have you understand the perspective gov’t shares… Wars create jobs. So if you can start them, or join in them, you’re putting people to work either in manufacturing war supplies and weapons, or sending them off to die.

    Americans overlook the fact that our gov’t is the leading creator of jobs in this country. Why is that exactly? Oh right. Because gov’t position is always to expand it’s reach and power whenever possible. Bigger gov’t need more people. Not less. Only smaller gov’t.

    • Michael,
      Who foots the bill? Who pays for those soldiers?

    • HP says:

      Bringing them home doesn’t mean unemploying them. That’s why we have a professional military, not a militia or full-time mercenaries. Bringing them home means continuing to pay and train them, so that they are ready when next we need to really defend ourselves or one of our allies from a true threat.

      • amj says:

        that statement is only true for the active duty troops who come home. the activated reservists and national guard troops who come home don’t continue to receive monthly paychecks, they go back to their civilian jobs IF they are lucky.

  14. Lane Ferrante says:

    Brilliant essay, Matt!!! Right on the money, as always. And, I think Barton skipped school the day they taught reading comprehension.

    • Barton says:

      You thought wrong. I get the point that Matt was trying to make, I just thought the “invade America” rhetoric was in poor taste.

  15. Peggy says:

    Bravo!!! *stands and claps*

  16. LukeP says:

    This is a good post. I kept waiting for you to bring some party-play whining into it but you abstained.

  17. Peace is such a wonderful notion! Thank you Matt for saying out loud what most of us just mutter to ourselves!

  18. Will says:

    “…the Bill of Rights is…moot, every idea at the foundation of our country is antiquated, and we are no longer America in any meaningful sense.”

    Congratulations. You just articulated the Obama doctrine.

  19. jumeirajames says:

    I think the notion of ‘world policeman’ was invented by the British, we were always off somewhere unpronounceable shelling their natives. It didn’t end well.

  20. psudrozz says:

    ““If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” – James Madison”

    Woodrow Wilson agrees

  21. “We can not manage, monitor, or control the world. We never should have even tried, but we did and it hasn’t worked. The Roman Empire was undone by its imperialist ambitions after ruling the world for five centuries. We are disintegrating for similar reasons, except it only took us five decades.”
    Couldn’t have said it better myself.

  22. Mike W says:

    A lot of people say they “support” the troops, but a majority of the troops support Ron Paul. Next time anyone hears anyone saying they support the troops, they should ask them if they support what the troops support. And I highly doubt fighting meaningless and unclear wars is something they like doing.

    • karen says:

      Mike I am sorry to tell you a small portion of the military support Ron Paul. Did you see his support percentage.

  23. Lilian says:

    “Principles aren’t altered by technological advancements.” <–Whoo!

    Nice selection of quotes from the Founding Fathers.

  24. Mariellen says:

    Very well written. I enjoyed your enthusiasm and have been thinking about some of your (well made) points. And I agree with so many of them. If I might comment with and opposing thought-what if we hadn’t taken part in overthrowing Hitler?

  25. Mark says:

    Context is a beautiful thing. Take words out of it and you get Barton.
    And by the way, I’m tired of being told that I am controlled by Fox News. I was a conservative before they were around.

    • Barton says:

      Sorry if someone is telling you that you’re “controlled” by Fox News. I certainly wasn’t saying anything of the sort. It’s sad to think of anyone being controlled by ANY news or media outlet; people need to learn to think for themselves.

      To repeat myself, since you may not have seen my reply previously, I get the context. I understand what Matt was trying to say; I don’t disagree with all of his points. I do, however, find that the “invade America” rhetoric was in poor taste given the timing.

      • J Kim says:

        I have to agree with your original comment. When I first read the title I was thinking, “holy crap, that’s illegal.” After reading the post I thought, “holy crap that’s going to suck.” If we brought all our service members home, civilians are going to complain how the military and the defense department is wasting money without seeing the bigger picture. Hell, there are folks out there right now that feel that. Those individuals fail to see how the defense spending factors into the lives of many across the States. It would be great if the US could be seen not as the world police. This country can’t win when it stays out of a situation and can’t win when it does get involved in a situation. Anyway, bottom line up front, having the service members home would not help ensure that those service members will be gainfully employed.

  26. Amy says:

    I always have to wonder what America would look like with our service members here – living there lives as the rest of us in this beautiful country they selflessly agreed to serve. How might that help the economy? And how might it help marriages? And how might it help the next generation?

    Excellent essay. A pleasure to read, as always.

  27. This is wonderful. Thank you.

  28. The truth of the matter is that by engaging ourselves in entangling foreign alliances we’ve unwittingly fed this beast they’ve instructed us to fight against. Terrorism has increased by 600% since we’ve gone into Iraq. Rag-tag groups of loose knit individuals who will descend upon any country in the region to kill for what they believe merely because they hate our presence in their land, Israel (they always have), or the other Muslem groups (Sunni vs. Shia). So we can meddle with these affairs and claim we need to get rid of big bad men where all the brown people live when in reality it’s for political favors, corporate profits and secret pipelines?

  29. Mandy says:

    As a military wife, I applaud you and agree wholeheartedly with what you’ve said. There’s nothing more I would like than for my husband to be home with his family where he belongs. As a realist though, it will never happen. Why not? Because war is profitable to a select few and they bend the ears of those in Washington more than any others. Power and money. The world revolves on it.

  30. wesirvine says:

    Here’s a fun fact:
    Those in control (world banks, elite rich folks) have this lustful desire for control and will go to any end to achieve some sense of global control. A stumbling block to this plan is strong communities. Which is made up of strong families.
    Reading the comments in this post I notice there are an awful lot of women who desire nothing more than the return home of there husband, lover, and father of their children. This will never happen. As will the gay and lesbian organization’s (which receive funding from the above mentioned) and the push of evolution (also funded) not cease.
    All of these create a breakdown of family and society.
    They won’t go away. they can’t.
    Global dominance relies on the breakdown of society.
    Believe it or not, there are some individuals out there that are more than happy to see your family destroyed as they see it as a furtherance of their cause.

  31. Mine says:

    You mentioned a few times in this story that the military members should go back to their jobs and pay their bills and all the domestic things civilians do. But I’m confused; are you suggesting disbanding all branches of the military? Because they’re out DOING their jobs. If they all quit, they wouldn’t have jobs to go to. This in turn would not allow them to pay their bills and take care of their families yada yada yada…it’s a real snowball effect.

    Also, I’m curious: were you ever in the service? This post reads like someone who has not, nor does it sound like someone who comes from a family with a strong military background. I could be totes wrong on this, so my apologies for the generalisations, but if you were in the service or had close relationships with people in the military field, you would realise how absurd this essay is… other than the intended effect of flag-waving and chest beating because you give the troops REAL support. Which is what you got, so….great writing!!

    • Ruby Craighead says:

      I took this article to be a bashing of the politicians and fake support shown by them, not a judgment on the enlisted. I did serve and the majority, like myself, were there because they couldn’t afford college and job outlook for an 18 year old is bleak, it was not a choice, but a last resort.

      • J Kim says:

        You did make a choice. You could have chosen to not enlist and live on the streets. You could have chosen to find support from your family. You could have chosen to apply for scholarships or grants. Don’t claim that the military was forced upon you. Take the suck that is your life and realize that everything you did as an adult was by your own choices.

  32. karen says:

    Last time I checked, this is an all volunteer Army. Soldiers made the choice to be a soldier for whatever reason…..job, college, retirement benefits…whatever. If they did this than they are subject to being sent to wherever our government sends them. If they did not want to subjected to this than they should not have made the choice to join. My husband was in the Army for 32 years and it was difficult. Deployment was awful but it was OUR choice to do the job asked and the choice to remain in the SERVICE to OUR country. Matt have you served? Once you have than maybe I would listen to your arguments.

    • StudentofTruth says:

      There is a huge difference between a desire to protect the freedoms we are promised by the Constitution and going to war on the whims of politicians. There are many politicians who are power-hungry and will use any fragment of an excuse to go to war. If you cannot see that then you are refusing to open your eyes. Blind acceptance of all instructions may be the duty of a soldier, but it does not make a good American. You do yourself a great disservice by refusing to research the nature and goals of our government as currently comprised. They (Democrats and Republicans) do not support nor value our Constitution, which is where your loyalty should lie.

  33. Bluejeanwifey-mommy to two +two of his says:

    as an ex military spouse… I think if you bring them all home there will be more work to do than if you simply let them do what they know.(most wives during a deployment wont say this, but after about 3-4weeks of off time they are ready for hubbies to go back to work) but whats this?! they are only trained in explosions or warfare….um… just me but I PERSONALLY am not looking for a civil war. There are OBVIOUSLY bigger reasons for intervening than we know of, let the voted leaders do their thing. Let us who are NOT in the military, training to blow “bad” guys up, do the work here in the homes and the streets. What about the MILLIONS of people here NOT doing the warfare, shouldn’t it be US? Do we honestly need to ask people who chose a different path to change because WE don’t want to do the work? Once again, do we need to control our military too? didn’t we elect people to do this? and didnt these people sign up KNOWING what our military does. and also, while yes many of us our young and dont understand what it will really mean, the ones who stay and truly support, don’t bash the military or president at all. They say: “I’m sad to see you go, be safe and come see me when your job is done. Make your life meaningful.You have those of us here back home who love you”. Without the constant intervening, we lose our stance of showing other countries how big we are (which is definitely important so they dont get any ideas) and all of those men and women trained only for warfare, will have no jobs, im sorry, but helping in PTA doesnt require a gun. However, I am fine with the soldier standing guard at school. i would love a unit for just that!

    • HP says:

      “They are only trained in explosions and warfare”…are you kidding me? No wonder you’re an EX military spouse. We’ve got lives and functions beyond blowing bad guys up (no quotes on that, thanks). We can have meaning to our lives without having to be in an overseas war.

  34. Bret says:

    Hey, “Barton”,
    I am a national Guard Soldier. I have spent 4 of the last 11 years in the Middle East. Try and keep up.

  35. David says:

    I have two thoughts on this. I do feel that if we see a legitimate place where a despot is killing innocent people we have a responsibility to help the same as I would help an old lady on the street if a purse snatcher was trying to rob her. It is the simple way to be a good neighbor. I’m not saying I support attacking Syria, just saying there are good reasons for getting involved when innocent lives are at stake.
    My second thought is that we don’t currently have enough jobs and aren’t creating enough jobs in this country to have all our military come home and go back to “work”. But there is work that can be done by them. I would like to see 50,000 US troops on the border with Mexico sealing it off. Once we accomplish this we can discuss how to handle everything else, but protecting the borders is a legitimate activity for our military and we could use it.

  36. Jessica E says:

    These are true words. Thank you. Until Americans wake up and realize that war is a racket, a very lucrative racket, our leaders will continue to deceive and kill. Anyone who wants proof that war is a big business and benefits the bankers and defense contractors needs to read, “Confessions of an Economic Hitman.” One of the greatest charades of our time is that these wars are to defend our freedom. The network war propaganda is sickening. I am thankful that with the rise of internet and social media the populace is awakening. Why is it that the troops overwhelmingly supported Ron Paul over any other candidate in the last election? They are fed up. Why does no one mention the alarming suicide rate among vets? Why does anyone believe that Obama is any different than George W. Bush? There is one party, people. Don’t believe the false right/left dichotomy. There is one party of warmongers who are not concerned in the least with the soldiers they send into hell. There is something called the Just War Theory (St. Augustine). Perhaps we all need to review it.

  37. Annie says:

    I love you man! I´m married, and I´m not even from the States, but this is what we (rest of the world) have been saying for a while now. Bush “pushed” Aznar and Blair into Iraq and Afghanistan, and now my country is nearly dying of hunger. I´m spanish, by the way. I watch the news and I cry one day out of to. Leave the armies home and give the money to the mothers, they will know what to do. They will feed their kids, and help their friends and family, and maybe some neighbour too. Nobody wants this, why don´t they listen? Why do we keep voting them? Thanks for writing what I would write if I had your talent.

  38. Theresa says:

    I am a pacifist. So, even though I am mad at Syria, I don’t condone violence. And it is not because of Jesus, it is because I am human.
    We ALL support the troops. It’s called taxes. We have an all volunteer force that would be put to better use here at home. BUT, that is NOT what they signed up for. They signed up to fight, so fight they must.

  39. Not much of a sales pitch, and that’s only because it’s actually truthful.

    No, it is not truthful. It is an opinion based upon your understanding of the facts. I don’t care if we agree or disagree, hell I think the world is a better place when people don’t walk, think or vote in blocs.

    It is good to question things, but let’s be real and not call opinion truth.

  40. Rachelle says:

    I have just come across your blog today, and whilst I generally do not have the same thoughts as you on most of the issues you discuss, I certainly agree with you on this one. Something that saddens me particularly is the lack of support and denial of post-war mental illness for the ex-servicemen and women.

  41. rfwizard2 says:

    As the late comic strip author Walt Kelly said: “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

  42. One_Man says:

    Awesome post, Matt. My wife just pointed me to your blog and I’m loving it. This is precisely the reason I left the military after 10 years of service, because I could no longer swallow the conscience grinder it had become. It’s different for everyone–and I laud other members for the sacrifices they make–but I couldn’t in good conscience continue with the likelihood of ordering men and women into harm’s way once I began to question whether those sacrifices were truly necessary.

    And you’re absolutely right, we need courageous, forthright leadership here–at work and at home–if we’re ever to right this terribly listing ship.

  43. CG says:

    “But at least we’ll help pay for college (maybe)!””

    Funny you mention that, I read that all the branches except the Navy have cut or done away with tuition assistance for now. And thats what what most join up for. Another slap in the face. Good job government!

Comments are closed.