JIMinFL wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
JIMinFL wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ers040908.html

What's your point?
If they helped bring that war to an early close shouldn't they be
honoured?

Honoring cowardly acts is not the American way. I'm surprised that Canada
feels differently.

Cowardice had nothing to do with it. People went because they had the
balls to stand up to their political, religious and personal
convictions. They didn't like the reasoning for the war, realized it
was absurd that we were there, and didn't just lemming-like join
because everyone tells them that it's honorable to your country to go
kill a bunch of innocent people.

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JIMinFL wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
JIMinFL wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ers040908.html

What's your point?
If they helped bring that war to an early close shouldn't they be
honoured?

Honoring cowardly acts is not the American way. I'm surprised that Canada
feels differently.

Cowardice had nothing to do with it. People went because they had the
balls to stand up to their political, religious and personal
convictions. They didn't like the reasoning for the war, realized it
was absurd that we were there, and didn't just lemming-like join
because everyone tells them that it's honorable to your country to go
kill a bunch of innocent people.


It had nothing to do with "joining". It was draft evasion. Those that
violated the law and ran to Canada or elsewhere were in the minority, for
sure, but they caused others to be called up to replace them who otherwise
may not have been called. If one was willing to take the time to prove
being a true conscientious objector, there were programs to allow you to
serve the country in other ways other than the military. Even those of us in
the military had limited options. My best friend served in the fleet
marines as a Navy corpsman, caring for the injured and saving lives. He
never carried a rifle. This was by choice because he didn't believe in
killing.

Most of us that were subject to the draft during the 60's were products of
the American culture of the 50's. That culture taught us that military
service was an honorable duty, along with patriotism and a sense of unity of
purpose. By the late 60's things had changed. The drug culture was in full
bloom, the sexual revolution was well underway and the overall thinking was
"me" rather than "us". So, I don't buy all the crap about draft dodgers
being generally categorized as being spiritually and/or morally opposed to
the Vietnam War or our government's actions. They were, with some
exceptions, more interested in themselves and their personal interests. In
a sense this selfish philosophy produced a whole new group of lemmings.

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JIMinFL wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
JIMinFL wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ers040908.html

What's your point?
If they helped bring that war to an early close shouldn't they be
honoured?

Honoring cowardly acts is not the American way. I'm surprised that
Canada
feels differently.

Cowardice had nothing to do with it. People went because they had the
balls to stand up to their political, religious and personal
convictions. They didn't like the reasoning for the war, realized it
was absurd that we were there, and didn't just lemming-like join
because everyone tells them that it's honorable to your country to go
kill a bunch of innocent people.


It had nothing to do with "joining". It was draft evasion. Those that
violated the law and ran to Canada or elsewhere were in the minority, for
sure, but they caused others to be called up to replace them who otherwise
may not have been called. If one was willing to take the time to prove
being a true conscientious objector, there were programs to allow you to
serve the country in other ways other than the military. Even those of us
in the military had limited options. My best friend served in the fleet
marines as a Navy corpsman, caring for the injured and saving lives. He
never carried a rifle. This was by choice because he didn't believe in
killing.

Most of us that were subject to the draft during the 60's were products of
the American culture of the 50's. That culture taught us that military
service was an honorable duty, along with patriotism and a sense of unity
of purpose. By the late 60's things had changed. The drug culture was in
full bloom, the sexual revolution was well underway and the overall
thinking was "me" rather than "us". So, I don't buy all the crap about
draft dodgers being generally categorized as being spiritually and/or
morally opposed to the Vietnam War or our government's actions. They
were, with some exceptions, more interested in themselves and their
personal interests. In a sense this selfish philosophy produced a whole
new group of lemmings.

RCE


If you (and I mean specifically YOU, not some theoretical "other") were
absolutely sure that a war was wrong, would you still serve?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JIMinFL wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
JIMinFL wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ers040908.html

What's your point?
If they helped bring that war to an early close shouldn't they be
honoured?

Honoring cowardly acts is not the American way. I'm surprised that
Canada
feels differently.

Cowardice had nothing to do with it. People went because they had the
balls to stand up to their political, religious and personal
convictions. They didn't like the reasoning for the war, realized it
was absurd that we were there, and didn't just lemming-like join
because everyone tells them that it's honorable to your country to go
kill a bunch of innocent people.


It had nothing to do with "joining". It was draft evasion. Those that
violated the law and ran to Canada or elsewhere were in the minority, for
sure, but they caused others to be called up to replace them who
otherwise may not have been called. If one was willing to take the time
to prove being a true conscientious objector, there were programs to
allow you to serve the country in other ways other than the military.
Even those of us in the military had limited options. My best friend
served in the fleet marines as a Navy corpsman, caring for the injured
and saving lives. He never carried a rifle. This was by choice because
he didn't believe in killing.

Most of us that were subject to the draft during the 60's were products
of the American culture of the 50's. That culture taught us that military
service was an honorable duty, along with patriotism and a sense of unity
of purpose. By the late 60's things had changed. The drug culture was in
full bloom, the sexual revolution was well underway and the overall
thinking was "me" rather than "us". So, I don't buy all the crap about
draft dodgers being generally categorized as being spiritually and/or
morally opposed to the Vietnam War or our government's actions. They
were, with some exceptions, more interested in themselves and their
personal interests. In a sense this selfish philosophy produced a whole
new group of lemmings.

RCE


If you (and I mean specifically YOU, not some theoretical "other") were
absolutely sure that a war was wrong, would you still serve?


At the time .... yes. It was a duty, not a choice.

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JIMinFL wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
JIMinFL wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ers040908.html

What's your point?
If they helped bring that war to an early close shouldn't they be
honoured?

Honoring cowardly acts is not the American way. I'm surprised that
Canada
feels differently.

Cowardice had nothing to do with it. People went because they had the
balls to stand up to their political, religious and personal
convictions. They didn't like the reasoning for the war, realized it
was absurd that we were there, and didn't just lemming-like join
because everyone tells them that it's honorable to your country to go
kill a bunch of innocent people.


It had nothing to do with "joining". It was draft evasion. Those that
violated the law and ran to Canada or elsewhere were in the minority,
for sure, but they caused others to be called up to replace them who
otherwise may not have been called. If one was willing to take the time
to prove being a true conscientious objector, there were programs to
allow you to serve the country in other ways other than the military.
Even those of us in the military had limited options. My best friend
served in the fleet marines as a Navy corpsman, caring for the injured
and saving lives. He never carried a rifle. This was by choice because
he didn't believe in killing.

Most of us that were subject to the draft during the 60's were products
of the American culture of the 50's. That culture taught us that
military service was an honorable duty, along with patriotism and a
sense of unity of purpose. By the late 60's things had changed. The
drug culture was in full bloom, the sexual revolution was well underway
and the overall thinking was "me" rather than "us". So, I don't buy all
the crap about draft dodgers being generally categorized as being
spiritually and/or morally opposed to the Vietnam War or our
government's actions. They were, with some exceptions, more interested
in themselves and their personal interests. In a sense this selfish
philosophy produced a whole new group of lemmings.

RCE


If you (and I mean specifically YOU, not some theoretical "other") were
absolutely sure that a war was wrong, would you still serve?


At the time .... yes. It was a duty, not a choice.

RCE


I guess this describes what I see as duty:

"To be a patriot, one had to say, and keep on saying, " Our country, right
or wrong," and urge on the little war. Have you not perceived that that
phrase is an insult to the nation?"
-- Mark Twain, Glances at History

I believe it's treasonous to go along with the mob when the mob is wrong.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JIMinFL wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
JIMinFL wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ers040908.html

What's your point?
If they helped bring that war to an early close shouldn't they be
honoured?

Honoring cowardly acts is not the American way. I'm surprised that
Canada
feels differently.

Cowardice had nothing to do with it. People went because they had the
balls to stand up to their political, religious and personal
convictions. They didn't like the reasoning for the war, realized it
was absurd that we were there, and didn't just lemming-like join
because everyone tells them that it's honorable to your country to go
kill a bunch of innocent people.


It had nothing to do with "joining". It was draft evasion. Those that
violated the law and ran to Canada or elsewhere were in the minority,
for sure, but they caused others to be called up to replace them who
otherwise may not have been called. If one was willing to take the
time to prove being a true conscientious objector, there were programs
to allow you to serve the country in other ways other than the
military. Even those of us in the military had limited options. My
best friend served in the fleet marines as a Navy corpsman, caring for
the injured and saving lives. He never carried a rifle. This was by
choice because he didn't believe in killing.

Most of us that were subject to the draft during the 60's were products
of the American culture of the 50's. That culture taught us that
military service was an honorable duty, along with patriotism and a
sense of unity of purpose. By the late 60's things had changed. The
drug culture was in full bloom, the sexual revolution was well underway
and the overall thinking was "me" rather than "us". So, I don't buy
all the crap about draft dodgers being generally categorized as being
spiritually and/or morally opposed to the Vietnam War or our
government's actions. They were, with some exceptions, more interested
in themselves and their personal interests. In a sense this selfish
philosophy produced a whole new group of lemmings.

RCE


If you (and I mean specifically YOU, not some theoretical "other") were
absolutely sure that a war was wrong, would you still serve?


At the time .... yes. It was a duty, not a choice.

RCE


I guess this describes what I see as duty:

"To be a patriot, one had to say, and keep on saying, " Our country, right
or wrong," and urge on the little war. Have you not perceived that that
phrase is an insult to the nation?"
-- Mark Twain, Glances at History

I believe it's treasonous to go along with the mob when the mob is wrong.


It isn't that black and white. Most of Congress, both sides, originally
voted for the invasion of Iraq. The Vietnam War started as a noble cause.

Can you imagine a country where a serious call to arms is met with
individual decisions to respond or not, based on their approval or
disapproval of the cause?

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
...

At the time .... yes. It was a duty, not a choice.

RCE


I guess this describes what I see as duty:

"To be a patriot, one had to say, and keep on saying, " Our country,
right or wrong," and urge on the little war. Have you not perceived that
that phrase is an insult to the nation?"
-- Mark Twain, Glances at History

I believe it's treasonous to go along with the mob when the mob is wrong.


It isn't that black and white. Most of Congress, both sides, originally
voted for the invasion of Iraq. The Vietnam War started as a noble cause.

Can you imagine a country where a serious call to arms is met with
individual decisions to respond or not, based on their approval or
disapproval of the cause?

RCE

You're suggesting that because Congress (aka "a bunch of self serving
scumbags") thinks something's a good idea, I should, too? Unbelievable. I'm
thankful that I'm above being a sheep. As far as "a call to arms", that's
too general a statement. Psychiatrists have numerous terms for those who are
OK with killing people for no good reason. Psychopath is one of them. As I
explained earlier, I doubt that many people couldn't see that after Pearl
Harbor and Hitler's expansion, something needed to be done. And, there was a
president who didn't make it a hobby to insult peoples' intelligence.

Every war is different.

basskisser wrote:
JIMinFL wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
JIMinFL wrote:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...ers040908.html
What's your point?
If they helped bring that war to an early close shouldn't they be
honoured?
Honoring cowardly acts is not the American way. I'm surprised that Canada
feels differently.

Cowardice had nothing to do with it. People went because they had the
balls to stand up to their political, religious and personal
convictions. They didn't like the reasoning for the war, realized it
was absurd that we were there, and didn't just lemming-like join
because everyone tells them that it's honorable to your country to go
kill a bunch of innocent people.

They could have gone to jail like Muhammad Ali. Instead they ran as fast
as they could to Canada to hide.