Orange Duce

[DMac]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

[MDlaxfan76]

MDLF76:
Did you actually read what you posted above?

Webster doesn't deal with why 19th century understandings of the word "nationalism" changed so significantly from simply "loyalty and devotion to nation" to the "and" aspect, as in "ALSO INCLUDES", the negative aspects.

Well, it's because the term proved so immensely damaging as various dictatorships invoked "nationalism" as "loyalty" to the leader, and downright evil leaders at that.

That does not eradicate the positive results which nationalism produced in US history, or British history, for that matter.

...& spare me the 1970's Ivy education anti-imperialism rap or a recitation on the evils of manifest destiny.
Look at the nations of the world that have not developed as sh!t holes.

Der’ it is.

yup

[seacoaster]

Only here, only now:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... mas-party/

"Ahead of Christmas Day, President Trump’s reelection campaign launched a website featuring videos of talking points it said supporters can use to “win an argument with liberal friends, relatives and snowflakes” over the holidays.

As Republicans and Democrats have become more divided in recent years, plenty of attention has been paid to navigating political talk over the holiday season — and the question of whether it should be avoided outright. That’s only intensified this year, amid Trump’s impeachment largely along party lines.

Publicized on Christmas Eve, the Trump campaign’s contribution to the conversation is distinctly Trumpian, with its domain name of snowflakevictory.com and its references to the “Russian hoax,” the “fake news media” and the “Democrats’ radical agenda.” And, as with Trump’s rhetoric, it contains statements that fact-checkers have characterized as false or misleading.

The website includes sections titled, “There was no quid pro quo, Democrats always obsessed with impeachment” and “BIG GOVERNMENT SOCIALISM.” Each contains a video of a campaign official delivering pro-Trump arguments in front of an American flag graphic. Triumphant music plays in the background.

“Family holidays,” a smiling woman says in one of the clips. “Full of love. Full of laughter. And full of the inevitable conversations with the family liberal who just does not want to believe how great America is doing with President Trump in office.”

Remarkable? Not really. This is the playbook, updated a bit, from 1933.

[CU88]

Too funny, you have done nothing to dispute the facts that I have posted. Instead you have attacked me with threats of physical harm and drug another institution into the discussion. Attack and deflect. You are the classic example of the Big Green Ego; where no one is as good or knows as much as those who have served in the US military. Woe be those who dare to besmirch the Big Green Ego!

[MDlaxfan76]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.

At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.

[DMac]

Too funny, you have done nothing to dispute the facts that I have posted. Instead you have attacked me with threats of physical harm and drug another institution into the discussion. Attack and deflect. You are the classic example of the Big Green Ego; where no one is as good or knows as much as those who have served in the US military. Woe be those who dare to besmirch the Big Green Ego!

Wow, my apologies, 88, I've thought all along that your screen name was an indicator of your being a Cornell University graduate, class of 88. Obviously I was mistaken....smartest people in the world and all that, ya know. I'm not seeing that with what I'm dealing with here.
Fortunately, my threats to you of physical harm are in print, so you can go back and quote them when I tell you you're full of schidt and that never happened. Go back and dig that little morsel up.
I drug another institution in, meaning when I referenced the article about the white supremacy stuff going on at Cornell University? I did, but is that against the rules? I wouldn't call it a deflection, I'd call it a grander view.
You think what you think about the military boys and girls, that aint gonna change. You live in the right country to tell them they're a deplorable lot who deserves to be spat upon, gotta love this country, eh?

[MDlaxfan76]

Too funny, you have done nothing to dispute the facts that I have posted. Instead you have attacked me with threats of physical harm and drug another institution into the discussion. Attack and deflect. You are the classic example of the Big Green Ego; where no one is as good or knows as much as those who have served in the US military. Woe be those who dare to besmirch the Big Green Ego!

Wow, my apologies, 88, I've thought all along that your screen name was an indicator of your being a Cornell University graduate, class of 88. Obviously I was mistaken....smartest people in the world and all that, ya know. I'm not seeing that with what I'm dealing with here.
Fortunately, my threats to you of physical harm are in print, so you can go back and quote them when I tell you you're full of schidt and that never happened. Go back and dig that little morsel up.
I drug another institution in, meaning when I referenced the article about the white supremacy stuff going on at Cornell University? I did, but is that against the rules? I wouldn't call it a deflection, I'd call it a grander view.
You think what you think about the military boys and girls, that aint gonna change. You live in the right country to tell them they're a deplorable lot who deserves to be spat upon, gotta love this country, eh?

I guess you didn't consider my post immediately above, DMac?

How about you guys tone it down a notch?
At least for the next 48 hours?

Seriously, happy holidays to all.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Merry Christmas to all and be safe.

[DMac]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
Am glad to feel your ire, MDlax. Irritating when someone is spreading that kind of horseschidt around, no? You know my rants about Ivy League etc were directed and one Ivy and why they were. You'll remember I was the one who distinguished The Big Green Ego as not being Dartmouth.

So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.
My valid arguments need no bolstering.
Insecurity? You're misreading that one, you've played psychologist with me before and been wrong as you are now. Have you seen the Cornell ad? It's a recruiting ad that says this is where the smartest people in the world go. My comments are nothing more than antagonistic prodding with that ad in mind because I'm certainly not dealing with one of the smartest people in the world here. Got it, Dr. Psych?

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.
You know I know that, MDlax, and you know the reason for the stereotype rantings. Kind of like the stereotype rantings about those in the military CU88 has been going on, and you also know it was directed at him.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. So what you're saying here is that some people's career choices are more money motivated than others.I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.You figure CU88 feels the same way about his skinhead classmates who chose the ROTC route?

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.
Considerable overlap being the key words there.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.
See CU88
At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.
You've said this several times. An insecurity?

I didn't read your post before I posted mine.

Yes, Happy Holidays to all.

[CU88]

Merry Christmas to all and be safe.

Right back at you and yours.

Merry Christmas!

[MDlaxfan76]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
Am glad to feel your ire, MDlax. Irritating when someone is spreading that kind of horseschidt around, no? You know my rants about Ivy League etc were directed and one Ivy and why they were. You'll remember I was the one who distinguished The Big Green Ego as not being Dartmouth.

Actually, I believe I first noted that CU88 wasn't speaking about Dartmouth, and he followed to confirm that as well. As I've said, there are some ex-military folks on these threads who do seem to think that their experience makes them superior to others. I think that's what CU88 was referring to.

I do understand your pushback, I just think the Ivy stuff is not helpful to your position. Yes, antagonistic.

So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.
My valid arguments need no bolstering.
Insecurity? You're misreading that one, you've played psychologist with me before and been wrong as you are now. Have you seen the Cornell ad? It's a recruiting ad that says this is where the smartest people in the world go. My comments are nothing more than antagonistic prodding with that ad in mind because I'm certainly not dealing with one of the smartest people in the world here. Got it, Dr. Psych?

I'll stand by my "psych" assessment. It reeks of insecurity to attack someone for thinking they're smarter than you when they haven't suggested that they are at all.

No, I haven't seen the Cornell ad, it sounds like some sort of farce as I'd be surprised that any of the Ivies would advertise that their students are 'smarter', regardless of whether they're very, very selective in that regard.

But even if not a farce, why put a dumb ad on all Cornell alums? Did CU88 make that claim about himself?
If so, I missed it.

Push back on any over simplifications any of us make about the military...please do. Your perspective is valued.

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.
You know I know that, MDlax, and you know the reason for the stereotype rantings. Kind of like the stereotype rantings about those in the military CU88 has been going on, and you also know it was directed at him.

I understand the intent.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. So what you're saying here is that some people's career choices are more money motivated than others.

Of course. Some folks go where they can make the most money. Some go where they think they can do the most good. I don't assume that those choosing the money path out of college are necessarily 'inferior' to those making other choices. I'm a capitalist, and believe that these pursuits in the overall do a lot of 'good', moreover I know many financially successful people who do an enormous amount of good, directly, both in their volunteer services and in the their financial support. So, I look at the individual's life course, not this particular choice as dispositive.

The military choice may or may not be made for financial reasons, depending really on where someone is coming from. Is it to get out of their small town, see some of the world, gain some marketable skills, or is it primarily out of a patriotic sense of duty...or all of the above? Again, I'd look at the individual choice and path.

But where I guess I'm not willing to go is to assume that the choice to go into the military is necessarily more honorable than any number of other paths, nor even that most military service is actually a sacrifice relative to other choices available to them. I do think, nevertheless, that those of us who do not put ourselves in life threatening situations on behalf of others should honor those individuals who actually do. And their families. Whether that's those who serve in war zones or potential hot conflict zones, or police in such situations, or firemen, or first responders or those who serve in refugee camps, etc., they deserve our respect and appreciation.

I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.You figure CU88 feels the same way about his skinhead classmates who chose the ROTC route?

I don't know which post to which you refer, however I doubt he or I or you would feel good about, or acclaim, any skinheads unless they are rebuking former beliefs. ROTC is not necessarily such a rebuke.

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.
Considerable overlap being the key words there.

Yes, of course. My point being is that neither are monolithic.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.
See CU88
At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.
You've said this several times. An insecurity?

Nope. I'm quite fine with folks multiple ways of serving their communities and country. I don't disdain any such choices.
But yeah, there's a quite apparent attempt by some to suggest that the military path is superior.

I didn't read your post before I posted mine.

Yes, Happy Holidays to all.

Best to you and yours, and to all our fellow posters!

[cradleandshoot]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
Am glad to feel your ire, MDlax. Irritating when someone is spreading that kind of horseschidt around, no? You know my rants about Ivy League etc were directed and one Ivy and why they were. You'll remember I was the one who distinguished The Big Green Ego as not being Dartmouth.

Actually, I believe I first noted that CU88 wasn't speaking about Dartmouth, and he followed to confirm that as well. As I've said, there are some ex-military folks on these threads who do seem to think that their experience makes them superior to others. I think that's what CU88 was referring to.

I do understand your pushback, I just think the Ivy stuff is not helpful to your position. Yes, antagonistic.

So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.
My valid arguments need no bolstering.
Insecurity? You're misreading that one, you've played psychologist with me before and been wrong as you are now. Have you seen the Cornell ad? It's a recruiting ad that says this is where the smartest people in the world go. My comments are nothing more than antagonistic prodding with that ad in mind because I'm certainly not dealing with one of the smartest people in the world here. Got it, Dr. Psych?

I'll stand by my "psych" assessment. It reeks of insecurity to attack someone for thinking they're smarter than you when they haven't suggested that they are at all.

No, I haven't seen the Cornell ad, it sounds like some sort of farce as I'd be surprised that any of the Ivies would advertise that their students are 'smarter', regardless of whether they're very, very selective in that regard.

But even if not a farce, why put a dumb ad on all Cornell alums? Did CU88 make that claim about himself?
If so, I missed it.

Push back on any over simplifications any of us make about the military...please do. Your perspective is valued.

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.
You know I know that, MDlax, and you know the reason for the stereotype rantings. Kind of like the stereotype rantings about those in the military CU88 has been going on, and you also know it was directed at him.

I understand the intent.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. So what you're saying here is that some people's career choices are more money motivated than others.

Of course. Some folks go where they can make the most money. Some go where they think they can do the most good. I don't assume that those choosing the money path out of college are necessarily 'inferior' to those making other choices. I'm a capitalist, and believe that these pursuits in the overall do a lot of 'good', moreover I know many financially successful people who do an enormous amount of good, directly, both in their volunteer services and in the their financial support. So, I look at the individual's life course, not this particular choice as dispositive.

The military choice may or may not be made for financial reasons, depending really on where someone is coming from. Is it to get out of their small town, see some of the world, gain some marketable skills, or is it primarily out of a patriotic sense of duty...or all of the above? Again, I'd look at the individual choice and path.

But where I guess I'm not willing to go is to assume that the choice to go into the military is necessarily more honorable than any number of other paths, nor even that most military service is actually a sacrifice relative to other choices available to them. I do think, nevertheless, that those of us who do not put ourselves in life threatening situations on behalf of others should honor those individuals who actually do. And their families. Whether that's those who serve in war zones or potential hot conflict zones, or police in such situations, or firemen, or first responders or those who serve in refugee camps, etc., they deserve our respect and appreciation.

I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.You figure CU88 feels the same way about his skinhead classmates who chose the ROTC route?

I don't know which post to which you refer, however I doubt he or I or you would feel good about, or acclaim, any skinheads unless they are rebuking former beliefs. ROTC is not necessarily such a rebuke.

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.
Considerable overlap being the key words there.

Yes, of course. My point being is that neither are monolithic.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.
See CU88
At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.
You've said this several times. An insecurity?

Nope. I'm quite fine with folks multiple ways of serving their communities and country. I don't disdain any such choices.
But yeah, there's a quite apparent attempt by some to suggest that the military path is superior.

I didn't read your post before I posted mine.

Yes, Happy Holidays to all.

Best to you and yours, and to all our fellow posters!

It never ceases to amaze me MD that the mainstream Republicans still let you play in their sandbox. Here is a little bit of knowledge for you from a lowlife old infantry soldier. In my platoon of 40 soldiers there were at least 6 GIs there because a judge gave them the option of military service or jail. That was not uncommon for young men in the south that found themselves in trouble with the law. These soldiers in my platoon were outstanding in their performance of duty. That was a result of discipline and their NCOs pushing them beyond what they thought they could achieve. No the military option is not always superior. I would guess that throwing these young men in jail would have been your option of preference? When it comes to issues involving our military you should pay more attention to OS. You continue to present yourself as a rectal orifice in these matters. My criticism of you does not mean I dont like you. It means you say stupid stuff that tells me you dont understand the military. Pretty sad for an alleged lifelong Republican.

[MDlaxfan76]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
Am glad to feel your ire, MDlax. Irritating when someone is spreading that kind of horseschidt around, no? You know my rants about Ivy League etc were directed and one Ivy and why they were. You'll remember I was the one who distinguished The Big Green Ego as not being Dartmouth.

Actually, I believe I first noted that CU88 wasn't speaking about Dartmouth, and he followed to confirm that as well. As I've said, there are some ex-military folks on these threads who do seem to think that their experience makes them superior to others. I think that's what CU88 was referring to.

I do understand your pushback, I just think the Ivy stuff is not helpful to your position. Yes, antagonistic.

So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.
My valid arguments need no bolstering.
Insecurity? You're misreading that one, you've played psychologist with me before and been wrong as you are now. Have you seen the Cornell ad? It's a recruiting ad that says this is where the smartest people in the world go. My comments are nothing more than antagonistic prodding with that ad in mind because I'm certainly not dealing with one of the smartest people in the world here. Got it, Dr. Psych?

I'll stand by my "psych" assessment. It reeks of insecurity to attack someone for thinking they're smarter than you when they haven't suggested that they are at all.

No, I haven't seen the Cornell ad, it sounds like some sort of farce as I'd be surprised that any of the Ivies would advertise that their students are 'smarter', regardless of whether they're very, very selective in that regard.

But even if not a farce, why put a dumb ad on all Cornell alums? Did CU88 make that claim about himself?
If so, I missed it.

Push back on any over simplifications any of us make about the military...please do. Your perspective is valued.

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.
You know I know that, MDlax, and you know the reason for the stereotype rantings. Kind of like the stereotype rantings about those in the military CU88 has been going on, and you also know it was directed at him.

I understand the intent.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. So what you're saying here is that some people's career choices are more money motivated than others.

Of course. Some folks go where they can make the most money. Some go where they think they can do the most good. I don't assume that those choosing the money path out of college are necessarily 'inferior' to those making other choices. I'm a capitalist, and believe that these pursuits in the overall do a lot of 'good', moreover I know many financially successful people who do an enormous amount of good, directly, both in their volunteer services and in the their financial support. So, I look at the individual's life course, not this particular choice as dispositive.

The military choice may or may not be made for financial reasons, depending really on where someone is coming from. Is it to get out of their small town, see some of the world, gain some marketable skills, or is it primarily out of a patriotic sense of duty...or all of the above? Again, I'd look at the individual choice and path.

But where I guess I'm not willing to go is to assume that the choice to go into the military is necessarily more honorable than any number of other paths, nor even that most military service is actually a sacrifice relative to other choices available to them. I do think, nevertheless, that those of us who do not put ourselves in life threatening situations on behalf of others should honor those individuals who actually do. And their families. Whether that's those who serve in war zones or potential hot conflict zones, or police in such situations, or firemen, or first responders or those who serve in refugee camps, etc., they deserve our respect and appreciation.

I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.You figure CU88 feels the same way about his skinhead classmates who chose the ROTC route?

I don't know which post to which you refer, however I doubt he or I or you would feel good about, or acclaim, any skinheads unless they are rebuking former beliefs. ROTC is not necessarily such a rebuke.

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.
Considerable overlap being the key words there.

Yes, of course. My point being is that neither are monolithic.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.
See CU88
At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.
You've said this several times. An insecurity?

Nope. I'm quite fine with folks multiple ways of serving their communities and country. I don't disdain any such choices.
But yeah, there's a quite apparent attempt by some to suggest that the military path is superior.

I didn't read your post before I posted mine.

Yes, Happy Holidays to all.

Best to you and yours, and to all our fellow posters!

It never ceases to amaze me MD that the mainstream Republicans still let you play in their sandbox. Here is a little bit of knowledge for you from a lowlife old infantry soldier. In my platoon of 40 soldiers there were at least 6 GIs there because a judge gave them the option of military service or jail. That was not uncommon for young men in the south that found themselves in trouble with the law. These soldiers in my platoon were outstanding in their performance of duty. That was a result of discipline and their NCOs pushing them beyond what they thought they could achieve. No the military option is not always superior. I would guess that throwing these young men in jail would have been your option of preference? When it comes to issues involving our military you should pay more attention to OS. You continue to present yourself as a rectal orifice in these matters. My criticism of you does not mean I dont like you. It means you say stupid stuff that tells me you dont understand the military. Pretty sad for an alleged lifelong Republican.

"rectal orifice, but doesn't mean "you don't like me"???
ok

Yes, certainly there have been 'recruits' who have had the rather stark choice of jail or military service.
I'm not all surprised that military service shaped these young men up.

Indeed, I suspect that If you had bothered to read my exchanges with DMac (not OS) over the past few days, you'd know that I've said very much the same about how military service can help with social biases and prejudices too. Nothing I've written should in any way suggest that I don't think military service can have a very positive impact upon young people.

It's exactly the sort of assumption you are making that others don't know or understand the military, where folks come from, the varying circumstances, the experiences they have, that is the sort of thing that is so off putting. Lots of us have family and friends with military experience. We respect that service. You and others are welcome to share your perspective and experiences, but please don't make the mistake of thinking you are actually imparting "knowledge" that others don't already know.

Perhaps instead of just knee jerking attacking me, you might actually point out where you disagree with me and why, or even, heaven forbid, where you actually agree with me.

BTW, what about being an "old infantry soldier" would make one a "lowlife"?
I'd never make that association, so why should you?

My bottomline is that there's much to recommend military service, and much for all of us to appreciate about those who have done so. But it does not translate to any sort of superiority, nor excuse any military member's or vet's disdain for those who serve their communities and country in other ways.

[cradleandshoot]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
Am glad to feel your ire, MDlax. Irritating when someone is spreading that kind of horseschidt around, no? You know my rants about Ivy League etc were directed and one Ivy and why they were. You'll remember I was the one who distinguished The Big Green Ego as not being Dartmouth.

Actually, I believe I first noted that CU88 wasn't speaking about Dartmouth, and he followed to confirm that as well. As I've said, there are some ex-military folks on these threads who do seem to think that their experience makes them superior to others. I think that's what CU88 was referring to.

I do understand your pushback, I just think the Ivy stuff is not helpful to your position. Yes, antagonistic.

So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.
My valid arguments need no bolstering.
Insecurity? You're misreading that one, you've played psychologist with me before and been wrong as you are now. Have you seen the Cornell ad? It's a recruiting ad that says this is where the smartest people in the world go. My comments are nothing more than antagonistic prodding with that ad in mind because I'm certainly not dealing with one of the smartest people in the world here. Got it, Dr. Psych?

I'll stand by my "psych" assessment. It reeks of insecurity to attack someone for thinking they're smarter than you when they haven't suggested that they are at all.

No, I haven't seen the Cornell ad, it sounds like some sort of farce as I'd be surprised that any of the Ivies would advertise that their students are 'smarter', regardless of whether they're very, very selective in that regard.

But even if not a farce, why put a dumb ad on all Cornell alums? Did CU88 make that claim about himself?
If so, I missed it.

Push back on any over simplifications any of us make about the military...please do. Your perspective is valued.

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.
You know I know that, MDlax, and you know the reason for the stereotype rantings. Kind of like the stereotype rantings about those in the military CU88 has been going on, and you also know it was directed at him.

I understand the intent.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. So what you're saying here is that some people's career choices are more money motivated than others.

Of course. Some folks go where they can make the most money. Some go where they think they can do the most good. I don't assume that those choosing the money path out of college are necessarily 'inferior' to those making other choices. I'm a capitalist, and believe that these pursuits in the overall do a lot of 'good', moreover I know many financially successful people who do an enormous amount of good, directly, both in their volunteer services and in the their financial support. So, I look at the individual's life course, not this particular choice as dispositive.

The military choice may or may not be made for financial reasons, depending really on where someone is coming from. Is it to get out of their small town, see some of the world, gain some marketable skills, or is it primarily out of a patriotic sense of duty...or all of the above? Again, I'd look at the individual choice and path.

But where I guess I'm not willing to go is to assume that the choice to go into the military is necessarily more honorable than any number of other paths, nor even that most military service is actually a sacrifice relative to other choices available to them. I do think, nevertheless, that those of us who do not put ourselves in life threatening situations on behalf of others should honor those individuals who actually do. And their families. Whether that's those who serve in war zones or potential hot conflict zones, or police in such situations, or firemen, or first responders or those who serve in refugee camps, etc., they deserve our respect and appreciation.

I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.You figure CU88 feels the same way about his skinhead classmates who chose the ROTC route?

I don't know which post to which you refer, however I doubt he or I or you would feel good about, or acclaim, any skinheads unless they are rebuking former beliefs. ROTC is not necessarily such a rebuke.

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.
Considerable overlap being the key words there.

Yes, of course. My point being is that neither are monolithic.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.
See CU88
At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.
You've said this several times. An insecurity?

Nope. I'm quite fine with folks multiple ways of serving their communities and country. I don't disdain any such choices.
But yeah, there's a quite apparent attempt by some to suggest that the military path is superior.

I didn't read your post before I posted mine.

Yes, Happy Holidays to all.

Best to you and yours, and to all our fellow posters!

It never ceases to amaze me MD that the mainstream Republicans still let you play in their sandbox. Here is a little bit of knowledge for you from a lowlife old infantry soldier. In my platoon of 40 soldiers there were at least 6 GIs there because a judge gave them the option of military service or jail. That was not uncommon for young men in the south that found themselves in trouble with the law. These soldiers in my platoon were outstanding in their performance of duty. That was a result of discipline and their NCOs pushing them beyond what they thought they could achieve. No the military option is not always superior. I would guess that throwing these young men in jail would have been your option of preference? When it comes to issues involving our military you should pay more attention to OS. You continue to present yourself as a rectal orifice in these matters. My criticism of you does not mean I dont like you. It means you say stupid stuff that tells me you dont understand the military. Pretty sad for an alleged lifelong Republican.

"rectal orifice, but doesn't mean "you don't like me"???
ok

Yes, certainly there have been 'recruits' who have had the rather stark choice of jail or military service.
I'm not all surprised that military service shaped these young men up.

Indeed, I suspect that If you had bothered to read my exchanges with DMac (not OS) over the past few days, you'd know that I've said very much the same about how military service can help with social biases and prejudices too. Nothing I've written should in any way suggest that I don't think military service can have a very positive impact upon young people.

It's exactly the sort of assumption you are making that others don't know or understand the military, where folks come from, the varying circumstances, the experiences they have, that is the sort of thing that is so off putting. Lots of us have family and friends with military experience. We respect that service. You and others are welcome to share your perspective and experiences, but please don't make the mistake of thinking you are actually imparting "knowledge" that others don't already know.

Perhaps instead of just knee jerking attacking me, you might actually point out where you disagree with me and why, or even, heaven forbid, where you actually agree with me.

BTW, what about being an "old infantry soldier" would make one a "lowlife"?
I'd never make that association, so why should you?

My bottomline is that there's much to recommend military service, and much for all of us to appreciate about those who have done so. But it does not translate to any sort of superiority, nor excuse any military member's or vet's disdain for those who serve their communities and country in other ways.

I got news for you skippy, there have been many times that I have used the RO terminology on my own 2 sons. I love them more than life itself. I will hand it to you that you can wax eloquently and construct a perfect sentence. You also have proven to me time and again while you opine otherwise, that you dont understand diddly squat about what it means to serve your country and the sacrifices made by so many. I know you love to read and I have a suggestion for you if you ever have the time. Bill Mauldin... The Brass Ring. George Patton hated him and the dog faced GIs he traveled with and drew his sketches about lived him like a brother. The adventures of Joe and Willie tell the story of what it is like to live the miserable life of an infantry soldier. The fact you had no freaking clue when I referenced myself as a lowlife infantry soldier speaks volumes to how little you know. Most any GI would know in a heartbeat what I meant.

[MDlaxfan76]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
Am glad to feel your ire, MDlax. Irritating when someone is spreading that kind of horseschidt around, no? You know my rants about Ivy League etc were directed and one Ivy and why they were. You'll remember I was the one who distinguished The Big Green Ego as not being Dartmouth.

Actually, I believe I first noted that CU88 wasn't speaking about Dartmouth, and he followed to confirm that as well. As I've said, there are some ex-military folks on these threads who do seem to think that their experience makes them superior to others. I think that's what CU88 was referring to.

I do understand your pushback, I just think the Ivy stuff is not helpful to your position. Yes, antagonistic.

So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.
My valid arguments need no bolstering.
Insecurity? You're misreading that one, you've played psychologist with me before and been wrong as you are now. Have you seen the Cornell ad? It's a recruiting ad that says this is where the smartest people in the world go. My comments are nothing more than antagonistic prodding with that ad in mind because I'm certainly not dealing with one of the smartest people in the world here. Got it, Dr. Psych?

I'll stand by my "psych" assessment. It reeks of insecurity to attack someone for thinking they're smarter than you when they haven't suggested that they are at all.

No, I haven't seen the Cornell ad, it sounds like some sort of farce as I'd be surprised that any of the Ivies would advertise that their students are 'smarter', regardless of whether they're very, very selective in that regard.

But even if not a farce, why put a dumb ad on all Cornell alums? Did CU88 make that claim about himself?
If so, I missed it.

Push back on any over simplifications any of us make about the military...please do. Your perspective is valued.

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.
You know I know that, MDlax, and you know the reason for the stereotype rantings. Kind of like the stereotype rantings about those in the military CU88 has been going on, and you also know it was directed at him.

I understand the intent.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. So what you're saying here is that some people's career choices are more money motivated than others.

Of course. Some folks go where they can make the most money. Some go where they think they can do the most good. I don't assume that those choosing the money path out of college are necessarily 'inferior' to those making other choices. I'm a capitalist, and believe that these pursuits in the overall do a lot of 'good', moreover I know many financially successful people who do an enormous amount of good, directly, both in their volunteer services and in the their financial support. So, I look at the individual's life course, not this particular choice as dispositive.

The military choice may or may not be made for financial reasons, depending really on where someone is coming from. Is it to get out of their small town, see some of the world, gain some marketable skills, or is it primarily out of a patriotic sense of duty...or all of the above? Again, I'd look at the individual choice and path.

But where I guess I'm not willing to go is to assume that the choice to go into the military is necessarily more honorable than any number of other paths, nor even that most military service is actually a sacrifice relative to other choices available to them. I do think, nevertheless, that those of us who do not put ourselves in life threatening situations on behalf of others should honor those individuals who actually do. And their families. Whether that's those who serve in war zones or potential hot conflict zones, or police in such situations, or firemen, or first responders or those who serve in refugee camps, etc., they deserve our respect and appreciation.

I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.You figure CU88 feels the same way about his skinhead classmates who chose the ROTC route?

I don't know which post to which you refer, however I doubt he or I or you would feel good about, or acclaim, any skinheads unless they are rebuking former beliefs. ROTC is not necessarily such a rebuke.

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.
Considerable overlap being the key words there.

Yes, of course. My point being is that neither are monolithic.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.
See CU88
At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.
You've said this several times. An insecurity?

Nope. I'm quite fine with folks multiple ways of serving their communities and country. I don't disdain any such choices.
But yeah, there's a quite apparent attempt by some to suggest that the military path is superior.

I didn't read your post before I posted mine.

Yes, Happy Holidays to all.

Best to you and yours, and to all our fellow posters!

It never ceases to amaze me MD that the mainstream Republicans still let you play in their sandbox. Here is a little bit of knowledge for you from a lowlife old infantry soldier. In my platoon of 40 soldiers there were at least 6 GIs there because a judge gave them the option of military service or jail. That was not uncommon for young men in the south that found themselves in trouble with the law. These soldiers in my platoon were outstanding in their performance of duty. That was a result of discipline and their NCOs pushing them beyond what they thought they could achieve. No the military option is not always superior. I would guess that throwing these young men in jail would have been your option of preference? When it comes to issues involving our military you should pay more attention to OS. You continue to present yourself as a rectal orifice in these matters. My criticism of you does not mean I dont like you. It means you say stupid stuff that tells me you dont understand the military. Pretty sad for an alleged lifelong Republican.

"rectal orifice, but doesn't mean "you don't like me"???
ok

Yes, certainly there have been 'recruits' who have had the rather stark choice of jail or military service.
I'm not all surprised that military service shaped these young men up.

Indeed, I suspect that If you had bothered to read my exchanges with DMac (not OS) over the past few days, you'd know that I've said very much the same about how military service can help with social biases and prejudices too. Nothing I've written should in any way suggest that I don't think military service can have a very positive impact upon young people.

It's exactly the sort of assumption you are making that others don't know or understand the military, where folks come from, the varying circumstances, the experiences they have, that is the sort of thing that is so off putting. Lots of us have family and friends with military experience. We respect that service. You and others are welcome to share your perspective and experiences, but please don't make the mistake of thinking you are actually imparting "knowledge" that others don't already know.

Perhaps instead of just knee jerking attacking me, you might actually point out where you disagree with me and why, or even, heaven forbid, where you actually agree with me.

BTW, what about being an "old infantry soldier" would make one a "lowlife"?
I'd never make that association, so why should you?

My bottomline is that there's much to recommend military service, and much for all of us to appreciate about those who have done so. But it does not translate to any sort of superiority, nor excuse any military member's or vet's disdain for those who serve their communities and country in other ways.

I got news for you skippy, there have been many times that I have used the RO terminology on my own 2 sons. I love them more than life itself. I will hand it to you that you can wax eloquently and construct a perfect sentence. You also have proven to me time and again while you opine otherwise, that you dont understand diddly squat about what it means to serve your country and the sacrifices made by so many. I know you love to read and I have a suggestion for you if you ever have the time. Bill Mauldin... The Brass Ring. George Patton hated him and the dog faced GIs he traveled with and drew his sketches about lived him like a brother. The adventures of Joe and Willie tell the story of what it is like to live the miserable life of an infantry soldier. The fact you had no freaking clue when I referenced myself as a lowlife infantry soldier speaks volumes to how little you know. Most any GI would know in a heartbeat what I meant.

Thanks for the book recommendation.

How about you just share what "Most any GI" would understand when calling an infantry soldier a "lowlife"?
I don't understand and I suspect lots of readers won't.

"dog faced GI's" I understood, though I'd have said a dogface is specifically an infantry soldier. Perhaps I'm mistaken?

DMac, it's the sort of comment bolded above made by cradle that rankles folks about the attitudes of some vets about others.

[cradleandshoot]

I got all that, Kismet, my point is exactly the same. 88 should listen to the people who have actually been there rather than spreading nonsense he read in an article or two. It absolutely goes both ways.

I've agreed with a lot of what you've written, DMac, however the rants about Ivy League etc are out of line IMO.
Am glad to feel your ire, MDlax. Irritating when someone is spreading that kind of horseschidt around, no? You know my rants about Ivy League etc were directed and one Ivy and why they were. You'll remember I was the one who distinguished The Big Green Ego as not being Dartmouth.

Actually, I believe I first noted that CU88 wasn't speaking about Dartmouth, and he followed to confirm that as well. As I've said, there are some ex-military folks on these threads who do seem to think that their experience makes them superior to others. I think that's what CU88 was referring to.

I do understand your pushback, I just think the Ivy stuff is not helpful to your position. Yes, antagonistic.

So, too are all the assumptions about others thinking they're smarter than you...that just reeks of insecurity and certainly doesn't bolster your valid arguments.
My valid arguments need no bolstering.
Insecurity? You're misreading that one, you've played psychologist with me before and been wrong as you are now. Have you seen the Cornell ad? It's a recruiting ad that says this is where the smartest people in the world go. My comments are nothing more than antagonistic prodding with that ad in mind because I'm certainly not dealing with one of the smartest people in the world here. Got it, Dr. Psych?

I'll stand by my "psych" assessment. It reeks of insecurity to attack someone for thinking they're smarter than you when they haven't suggested that they are at all.

No, I haven't seen the Cornell ad, it sounds like some sort of farce as I'd be surprised that any of the Ivies would advertise that their students are 'smarter', regardless of whether they're very, very selective in that regard.

But even if not a farce, why put a dumb ad on all Cornell alums? Did CU88 make that claim about himself?
If so, I missed it.

Push back on any over simplifications any of us make about the military...please do. Your perspective is valued.

I'm an Ivy League alum, so is my wife, so is my son, lots of buddies as well, so I've had some exposure to the diversity of folks who attend those schools. And it's truly far more diverse than the stereotype tropes you've been ranting about on here.
You know I know that, MDlax, and you know the reason for the stereotype rantings. Kind of like the stereotype rantings about those in the military CU88 has been going on, and you also know it was directed at him.

I understand the intent.

Lots of first generation college students, lots from lower socioeconomic families, lots from rural as well as urban and suburban regions. And quite a few of them go on to serve their country in the military.

When they do, it's an interesting choice as they are typically sacrificing substantially higher incomes, much less far safer professional lives, than they would have on a more traditional career path into business, law, medicine, government, non-profit, academia, etc. So what you're saying here is that some people's career choices are more money motivated than others.

Of course. Some folks go where they can make the most money. Some go where they think they can do the most good. I don't assume that those choosing the money path out of college are necessarily 'inferior' to those making other choices. I'm a capitalist, and believe that these pursuits in the overall do a lot of 'good', moreover I know many financially successful people who do an enormous amount of good, directly, both in their volunteer services and in the their financial support. So, I look at the individual's life course, not this particular choice as dispositive.

The military choice may or may not be made for financial reasons, depending really on where someone is coming from. Is it to get out of their small town, see some of the world, gain some marketable skills, or is it primarily out of a patriotic sense of duty...or all of the above? Again, I'd look at the individual choice and path.

But where I guess I'm not willing to go is to assume that the choice to go into the military is necessarily more honorable than any number of other paths, nor even that most military service is actually a sacrifice relative to other choices available to them. I do think, nevertheless, that those of us who do not put ourselves in life threatening situations on behalf of others should honor those individuals who actually do. And their families. Whether that's those who serve in war zones or potential hot conflict zones, or police in such situations, or firemen, or first responders or those who serve in refugee camps, etc., they deserve our respect and appreciation.

I've seen zero evidence that when a young man or woman makes that choice they are met with anything from their classmates other than acclaim for doing so. It's an admired and supported choice.You figure CU88 feels the same way about his skinhead classmates who chose the ROTC route?

I don't know which post to which you refer, however I doubt he or I or you would feel good about, or acclaim, any skinheads unless they are rebuking former beliefs. ROTC is not necessarily such a rebuke.

I think that the average high school to military recruit (not the academies) is choosing to enter the military with a somewhat different set of career options, so the military may well be a significant boost to that path forward. That said, the #1 recruiting territory, as I understand it, are current military families. Second, small town America.

The academies are somewhat different, stronger representation from suburban America.

So, are the demographics of the Ivy League and the military different?
Sure, but it's not as if there's not considerable overlap, especially with the academies.
Considerable overlap being the key words there.

Yes, of course. My point being is that neither are monolithic.

And there's certainly lots of respect for those who choose to enter the military and serve their country in this way.
See CU88
At least from the tone of some folks' posts, I'm not so sure there's reciprocal respect for those who choose to serve their country and their communities in other ways.
You've said this several times. An insecurity?

Nope. I'm quite fine with folks multiple ways of serving their communities and country. I don't disdain any such choices.
But yeah, there's a quite apparent attempt by some to suggest that the military path is superior.

I didn't read your post before I posted mine.

Yes, Happy Holidays to all.

Best to you and yours, and to all our fellow posters!

It never ceases to amaze me MD that the mainstream Republicans still let you play in their sandbox. Here is a little bit of knowledge for you from a lowlife old infantry soldier. In my platoon of 40 soldiers there were at least 6 GIs there because a judge gave them the option of military service or jail. That was not uncommon for young men in the south that found themselves in trouble with the law. These soldiers in my platoon were outstanding in their performance of duty. That was a result of discipline and their NCOs pushing them beyond what they thought they could achieve. No the military option is not always superior. I would guess that throwing these young men in jail would have been your option of preference? When it comes to issues involving our military you should pay more attention to OS. You continue to present yourself as a rectal orifice in these matters. My criticism of you does not mean I dont like you. It means you say stupid stuff that tells me you dont understand the military. Pretty sad for an alleged lifelong Republican.

"rectal orifice, but doesn't mean "you don't like me"???
ok

Yes, certainly there have been 'recruits' who have had the rather stark choice of jail or military service.
I'm not all surprised that military service shaped these young men up.

Indeed, I suspect that If you had bothered to read my exchanges with DMac (not OS) over the past few days, you'd know that I've said very much the same about how military service can help with social biases and prejudices too. Nothing I've written should in any way suggest that I don't think military service can have a very positive impact upon young people.

It's exactly the sort of assumption you are making that others don't know or understand the military, where folks come from, the varying circumstances, the experiences they have, that is the sort of thing that is so off putting. Lots of us have family and friends with military experience. We respect that service. You and others are welcome to share your perspective and experiences, but please don't make the mistake of thinking you are actually imparting "knowledge" that others don't already know.

Perhaps instead of just knee jerking attacking me, you might actually point out where you disagree with me and why, or even, heaven forbid, where you actually agree with me.

BTW, what about being an "old infantry soldier" would make one a "lowlife"?
I'd never make that association, so why should you?

My bottomline is that there's much to recommend military service, and much for all of us to appreciate about those who have done so. But it does not translate to any sort of superiority, nor excuse any military member's or vet's disdain for those who serve their communities and country in other ways.

I got news for you skippy, there have been many times that I have used the RO terminology on my own 2 sons. I love them more than life itself. I will hand it to you that you can wax eloquently and construct a perfect sentence. You also have proven to me time and again while you opine otherwise, that you dont understand diddly squat about what it means to serve your country and the sacrifices made by so many. I know you love to read and I have a suggestion for you if you ever have the time. Bill Mauldin... The Brass Ring. George Patton hated him and the dog faced GIs he traveled with and drew his sketches about lived him like a brother. The adventures of Joe and Willie tell the story of what it is like to live the miserable life of an infantry soldier. The fact you had no freaking clue when I referenced myself as a lowlife infantry soldier speaks volumes to how little you know. Most any GI would know in a heartbeat what I meant.

Thanks for the book recommendation.

How about you just share what "Most any GI" would understand when calling an infantry soldier a "lowlife"?
I don't understand and I suspect lots of readers won't.

"dog faced GI's" I understood, though I'd have said a dogface is specifically an infantry soldier. Perhaps I'm mistaken?

DMac, it's the sort of comment bolded above made by cradle that rankles folks about the attitudes of some vets about others.

Glad to share the meaning of the term to you MD. Whatever direction my company was marching in we would finish our hike down Longsreet Rd and turn onto Ardennes Blvd heading towards our barracks. The other soldiers as they observed us marching would bark and make all other sorts of comments to us. Line doggies... art arf... bow wow and such. We all took it as a badge of honor. Our NCOs would tell us that is the respect a bunch of ground pounding, low life, dog faced grunts get from the people who could not do the job we did. It is a self depracating term of respect we took as a term of endearment. I could use the term to any soldier whose MOS was 11 Bravo and they would understand what I was telling them in a heartbeat. I guess you just had to be there to understand.

[MDlaxfan76]

Good enough.

Ground pounding, dogface, and grunts don’t carry any of the negatives in common usage that lowlife does.

I’d just never use it to describe a soldier, any rank, any service unless very specific to an individual who deserves it.

But I get it that you guys embraced it.

[cradleandshoot]

Good enough.

Ground pounding, dogface, and grunts don’t carry any of the negatives in common usage that lowlife does.

I’d just never use it to describe a soldier, any rank, any service unless very specific to an individual who deserves it.

But I get it that you guys embraced it.

After a few weeks out in the boonies baking and sweating in the North Carolina sun, no showers,no clean clothes, faces covered with layers of camolauge grease paint we looked every bit like a bunch of lowlifes. I won't even mention how bad we smelled and how you get use to it after awhile. I was never bothered by all the names. We all had drill instructors that called us much worse.

[MDlaxfan76]

Good enough.

Ground pounding, dogface, and grunts don’t carry any of the negatives in common usage that lowlife does.

I’d just never use it to describe a soldier, any rank, any service unless very specific to an individual who deserves it.

But I get it that you guys embraced it.

After a few weeks out in the boonies baking and sweating in the North Carolina sun, no showers,no clean clothes, faces covered with layers of camolauge grease paint we looked every bit like a bunch of lowlifes. I won't even mention how bad we smelled and how you get use to it after awhile. I was never bothered by all the names. We all had drill instructors that called us much worse.

I spent 8 weeks straight canoe tripping northern Canada.

We did look and smell the 'lowlife' part, 8 week beards and hair, the only washing of clothes being a bar of soap and scrub brush against a rock.
Parents threw away the clothes.

No DI, though.

But carrying canoes, wanegans, packs on 9 mile portage through swamp and brush sure made wrestling season a success that year!

[DMac]

In retrospect I should have looked at 88's comments as just more floaters in the cesspool that is social media and let them go, but he got under my skin and I retaliated. My apologies for sinking to his level with my nasty comments. With very little effort one can find all kinds of articles about white privilege and racism in the Ivies just as the slanted nasty little articles he's printed here about the military. It's part of our history, all of ours.
Here's some stuff you can believe as it comes from one with a few years of personal experience...from the horse's mouth so to speak...about military recruiting. In '73 Adm. Zumwalt was the CNO, Vietnam was winding down and the draft was going away. We were going to an all volunteer military which changed the recruiting landscape tremendously. During the draft Air Force and Navy recruiting wasn't at all challenging as many chose those branches in order to avoid becoming an infrantryman in Vietnam. Admiral Zumwalt was a rather progressive thinker as far as military people go. He came out with many " Z Grams" and made some pretty big changes....growing beards, wearing civilian clothes while on liberty (including foriegn ports) and he had the foresight to open up recruiting duty to young people. Prior to this recruiting duty was made up of those doing their last couple of years before retiring, it was a cushy little job that required little effort as it was pretty much a take a number and I'll get to you shortly kind of business. This opportunity opened up just prior to my (and I do mean Just prior) enlistment coming to an end and I fully intended to get out when it did. My reenlistment bonus was $8K (lump sum) for four more years and when I looked into the whole package it looked pretty darn good to me. I put in for it to see what would happen. I had a clean record, was a pretty squared away sailor, had done a couple of out of the ordinary things, earned a couple commendations, was always spit and polished, and always kept myself in pretty top notch shape. Had to be interviewed by a couple of big shots with scrambled eggs and several bars (I've never been intimidated by one's rank...which doesn't mean lack of respect).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrambled_egg_(uniform)
Passed all that with flying colors and off to recruiting duty I went. I was an experiment and I doubt there was a younger recruiter in the country. Point being, the Navy wasn't looking for white supremacist types to go out recruiting for them, you had to be pretty squared away and fit the image they were looking for. I didn't let the CNO down either, as I never missed quota once in almost four years. I know what kind of people I put in the military and I know all about the demographics too. I put hundreds of people of all kinds of different colors and from many different kinds of backgrounds in the Navy. Met many of their parents and brothers and sisters too. These were the same kind of people you meet in the general population. Many of them chose the military as a stepping stone to college as the GI bill was pretty darn attractive at the time. I'd bet many of them became college grads a few years after they got out. I never put one person in who came across as a white nationalist/supremacist and never knew one recruiter from any of the other branches who came across as that kind of person either. The military isn't any more flawless than the civilian popultion but it isn't any more phukked up either. It's all pretty much the same. This BS 88 is putting out is ridiculous, don't worry about our military turning into a mob of skinheads, that aint ever going to happen. There are a whole lot of fine young men and women who make up our military.
You go ahead and hate them all 88, but again, rest assured they'll be there for you regardless of what you think of them.