One Paragraph
What is so important about certain creeds that we honor them and are offended when they are not treated with respect? ----- Matthew Continenti, Editor of the Washington Free Beacon sums it up in a single paragraph. "We are united in our creed of freedom and equality, and also by our habits, our manners, our national language, our territorial integrity, our national symbols such as the National Anthem, the Flag, And the Pledge of Allegiance -- our civic traditions, and our national story." Which is why kneeling when the Anthem is played or sung, or sitting during the pledge infuriates old codgers like me who have been taught to respect these things since childhood.
There is no good or bad in scenarios of this sort. Onlr good, better or best. You will never hear of me doing a put-down about the military or any competent force , the key is competent.
Get out of your head, if you can, the purely ceremonial parade marching, symbolic of the old combat formations of the eighteenth century. Just like the UK justices who have preserved their ridiculous powdered wigs dating from the same period, formation marching is more symbolic than anything else, retained for show. The real, important disciplinary training takes place on the firing range and in training simulations.
The effectiveness of mass formations moving in lockstep began to die with the advent of rifled musketry, and no military organization on the planet today uses the concept. The formation marching has been retained simply because it draws attention, and builds a sense of teamwork. Is a college marching band a collection of mindless drones?
There are times when I just gotta hit something to get out the rage that is infuriating me,I take that thing and beat on the bed with it until I'm sweating. Its good exercise and it beats the hell out of wrecking the house. Everything is so expensive nowadays. It was suggested to me by a shrink named Shulman, a buddy of Branden's..
You weren't alone..................
For starters, the absolute unquestioning obedience to orders is more the exception than the rule. Insightful commanders usually listen to subordinates "on the ground" who may have better information on the situation at hand. There is some tolerance for disobeying orders when circumstances make it the sensible decision. Commanders are supposed to respect the training and experience of junior officers and senior non-commissioned officers to carry out their mission in a manner suited to the real world situation, even if those actions may skirt the rules laid down. If there wasn't a recognition that respect has to go both ways, the American military forces wouldn't be as good at their job as they are. A military force made up of uninspired members treated as cannon fodder is an unquestionable disaster.
The most extreme recognition of individuality is the right to disobey an order that is in violation of the Constitution, or could be a war crime, as in a violation of the rules of the Geneva convention. That right is spelled out in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. "I was just following orders" is not a defense for any American, even the lowest ranking enlistee.
Like American society in general, the American military is made up of free individuals who willingly sacrifice some liberties to protect the republic when necessary. Hopefully we will never face the need to return to a conscript military, as the motivation of free individuals to serve is far more representative of American society.
Just a clarification.
Rockefeller Kakistokrats that he is ,is far better.
Kissinger remained at Harvard as a member of the faculty in the Department of Government and, with Robert R. Bowie, co-founded the Center for International Affairs in 1958 where he served as associate director. In 1955, he was a consultant to the National Security Council's Operations Coordinating Board.[25] During 1955 and 1956, he was also study director in nuclear weapons and foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. He released his book Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy the following year.[26] From 1956 to 1958 he worked for the Rockefeller Brothers Fund as director of its Special Studies Project.[25] He was director of the Harvard Defense Studies Program between 1958 and 1971. He was also director of the Harvard International Seminar between 1951 and 1971. Outside of academia, he served as a consultant to several government agencies and think tanks, including the Operations Research Office, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
Load more comments...