13

It is an Honor and it is Humbling

Posted by mminnick 8 years, 5 months ago to The Gulch: General
32 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

President-elect Trump made the comment that it was an Honnor to lead the Armed Forces and it is also humbling. I could not agree more. The men and women of the armed forces are willing to put their life on the line to serve the wishes of the President of the United States. To realize that these same men ad women expect you to send them into harms way only in a just cause, one that is in the direct interest of the country and to keep the citizens of this great nation safe and free is humbling. They place great trust in the decisions of the President being correct and just. They do not expect to be court martialed for carrying out lawful orders of the Command structure acting on the order of the President. They expect for him to have their back just as any truly honest leader would.
That is humbling to any right thinking individual

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 8 years, 5 months ago
    I had really hoped the gravity of his office would begin to weigh on him and he would sober up a little (so to speak).

    This is a perfect example of this behavior. I hope it continues.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mminnick 8 years, 5 months ago
    In my life time there have been two presidents that I thought totally despised the armed forces regardless of what they said in public. You could tell from the way they acted when the military was present in the day to day aspects of their lives. They were William Jefferson Clinton and Barak Hussein Obama. Watch tape and films of how they walk away from Marine 1 and how they act toward the honor guard present. Especially Billy boy. The disdain and contempt are obvious. It is not as obvious for HRH but look at the body language.
    I don't see that with Mr. Trump Perhaps it is there and I willfully turn a blind eye, but I just don't see it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 8 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Tribes were at war and they created city-states which were constantly at war. They aggregated into kingdoms and had bigger wars. War justifies countries and alliances which have finally lead to threats of wars so large that they have to be contrives on a smaller scale to retain control of potentially free men. Civilization will commence when we attain a position where states, as we know them, are no longer necessary. For that to occur we will need to avoid blowing ourselves up.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 8 years, 5 months ago
    President Obama said just about the same things many times, most recently, addressing the Central Command and Special Command in Tampa, Florida, where he received many cheers and hoo-ahs from the troops, here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZm6x...

    But I doubt that that will make you a fan of the President.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 8 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Civilization is the invention that you call "organized societies." Individuals do aggress. But I agree that highly organized warfare required highly organized societies. However, to make civilization the cause of war is wrong.

    In fact, essentially, civilization - literally urbanization; "citi-fication" - brought an interesting lack of aggression. Cities bring strangers, even nominal enemies, together. Cities develop new cultures and new languages. The patois or creole that we call English pretty much was invented in London.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 8 years, 5 months ago
    Without organized societies, there could be no wars. Governments, even those created to defend and protect individual rights, increase the risk of wars. To be the leader of one of the largest governments with the most powerful armies, that the world has ever known is truly an honor and it is humbling to know that your responsibility is to use that power for protection of rights, not personal glory or the advancement of ideologies.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo