Soldiers do not protect freedoms, citizens do.

[jpgray]

If protecting freedoms were what our soldiers have been so busy doing, the Patriot Act wouldn't have been passed. You'd think having the largest defense budget in the world, one that outstrips all our near competitors COMBINED, would ensure that our freedoms would be pretty damn safe, but as we have seen these past years they are not. In fact that bloated defense budget has helped to bring us to the opposite pass--our freedoms are being sold away to the highest bidder day in and day out in Washington.

Freedoms aren't protected by soldiers--soldiers do what politicians tell them to do. The presence of soldiers throughout history has not been an accurate barometer of protected freedoms, but an active, empathetic and aware citizenry has been. There is respect and dignity to be had in the soldier's profession, but let's not pretend the armed forces are something they aren't, let's not foist off on them our own responsibility. Freedoms are protected by you and I--the citizens and people. We are the ones who have the Constitutional responsibility and capacity to hold our leaders accountable for their actions--a soldier's chief responsibility is to follow orders.

I find the extreme glorification of the military to be a heavy stumbling block in getting our domestic act together. The Commander in Chief can simply send them wherever he likes, muzzle them, and then demand that everyone 'support the troops'. The 'troops' themselves have no way of countering this move without dying in large numbers or being disgraced, and the administration can easily accuse all those who express dissent of making the country vulnerable to attack and having a lack of patriotism.

Our freedoms begin and end with the active work of the citizenry. Ben Franklin didn't say we have 'a Republic, if you can keep it' to a soldier in the Continental Army, he said it to Mrs. Powell.

Not sure if I will incite flames or not, but I am sick of this concept because it is baldly inaccurate and encourages abdication of our own responsibilities. I am not at all anti-soldier, but I am against using them as propaganda pawns.

[LisaLynne]

1. You won't get flamed from me ...

It's been a long time since our freedom as citizens was threatened by an outside source as dire as the one we face right now from within our own government. I think part of that attitude comes from the idea that communism was spreading and the action we took in Vietnam was to prevent communism from coming here. The whole domino effect thing, I guess.

I, too, would NEVER diminish the sacrifice our soldiers make. I can not begin to imagine what they are facing in Iraq right now. They are facing their own horrible ordeal. We, on the other hand, are fighting to preserve an America that they will recognize when they come home. I hope we can at least do that for them and ourselves!

[stopbush]

2. Great ideas in there. Keep it up! n/t

[DBoon]

3. Lawyers and activists protect our freedoms

Soldiers protect our sovereignty. Big difference.

[The Traveler]

4. Both have their role

in a properly functioning Democracy. The citizen defends principally against domestic enemies of freedom (specifically individuals or interests within this nation determined to achieve excessive power), and the soldier defends principally against foreign enemies of our nation.

It appears to me that today the domestic enemies present a greater danger to the Constitution and to the national security and welfare than foreign enemies. Which, when you think about it, is a rather heavy statement, for there are serious threats originating from abroad.

In general I am in agreement with your post ... but I must add something. The military is inevitably a necessary tool of the fascist state, both to extend its power abroad and contain the impulses of its citizenry. It would be unwise in the extreme for certain ambitious individuals in this country to presume that the spirit of the "citizen soldier" is extinct, or that the purpose of the Order of Cincinnatus has been entirely forgotten.

[crickets]

7. Thanks for mentioning the Order of Cincinnatus

I looked it up. Among others, the words, "double-edged sword" come to mind.

[Leilani]

5. While I disagree with EVERYTHING this administration has done

& in no way support imperialistic wars, I believe the military, being used in its proper defensive role is needed.

When we were attacked at Pearl Harbor,our military was definitly needed.

When the citizens of Germany did NOT protect Jews, it was up to our military to defeat the Germans. Our soldiers freed prisoners at Aushwitz, Dachau, Buchenwald, etc.

And finally, Switzerland, perhaps the most peaceful & neutral country in the world, maintains an army with mandatory service required of all citzens.

But I agree with you that it is the responsibility of the citizens to maintain their freedom from an oppressive government.

[jpgray]

6. I shouldn't have been so exclusive

The military does play an important role, but without an active citizenry, no number of soldiers will keep a society safe. In other words, the people are the key factor, not the soldiers.

[anchorsaweigh7903]

8. I beg to differ, JP

It's a combined effort between the government, it's citizens and the military to maintain freedom. It's a higher version of "checks and balances".

Without the Military, invading forces with different idealologies would come into our land, and alter us in a way we MIGHT not want to be altered.

The government leads the military into battle against forces they think may prove fatal to the nation's interest (or in this case, to their interests).

and the citizens. The citizens are the most integral part of freedom, they voice their opinions/write documents, etc, etc. They are the only people that can speak their minds freely and get away with it,as opposed to the government and military, there are dire consequences to speaking your mind.

So in a sense you are psuedo-right, but wrong in the same aspect. It's a team effort, are you holding your part in the team?

[el_gato]

15. The history of the usage of federal troops will show you

that the U.S. military is the strongarm of the corporate elite.

Yes, people sign up with good intentions but those that are in
the decision making realm are ne'er-do-wells. It's been that
way for 200 years.

[JSJ]

9. we must reject military solutions to problems created by...

...private interests- like the last 40 or so armed conflicts the US has initiated against peoples unable to adequately defend themselves. Not to say the US hasn't gotten it's fucking ass whupped in many of these 'shows'.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JSJ]

11. nice stalinistic attack- truth is there's too much praise for the troops..

...and precious little critical thinking about them- as your little rw rant demonstrates.

[T Town Jake]

12. Uh-huhhh...

...go right on believing that, trooper...most of us see right through such palpable horseshit, and call it for what it is...old "Uncle Joe" Stalin notwithstanding...<snicker>...

[el_gato]

16. You don't speak for anyone but yourself T Town.

So you can take your "most of us" line and go somewhere else.

[skooooo]

17. It's not that there's too much praise for the troops..

..it's that there's too much emphasis on the military. When you talk about the troops, you are talking about individuals and I don't think we can praise them enough.

However, I think what you are trying to say is that politicians act like the only thing that protects our freedom is military might, and that indeed is just plain wrong. So, I understand quite well what JSJ is trying to say and in that regard, I agree with him/her.

Many, many people protect our freedoms - teachers, lawyers, social workers, police even.

[jpgray]

13. If you have a case to make against my post, feel free to make it

If you just have innuendo and name-calling to offer--that's something else, isn't it?

[BeFree]

14. Exactly

Armed forces are the biggest threat to liberty. A standing army, as we have seen with bush's use of it in Iraq, is the gravest threat to human life mankind has ever known.

It is the citizens responsibility to come to the aid of his country in the time of need. If a country can't rally it's citizens to protect itself from threats, that country is doomed anyway.

Especially when a budget of 400 Billion is expended upon the standing army, the army is way away from being a protector, and is become a danger to it's populace.

Of course, our country has become afraid of the bogeyman and in so doing has placed it's security in the hands of the few whilst taking on a lynch-mob mentality.

I fear for my country.

[Rainstorm]

18. I beg to differ

It was the French citizen that talked about how bad it was that the Germans were occupying their country. However, it was the American and British soldier that sacrificed at Normandy that kicked the Germans out of France. When the French military failed the French citizens lost their freedoms. When the American and British military succeeded then the French citizens regained the freedom of the Press, freedom to vote, freedom of speech etc.

Citizens are good at talking but when it comes time to back up the talk you had better have dedicated military people. Talk is cheap, actions count. It is the military that is the "action" branch of our government.

[gratuitous]

19. Uh huh

And when the people of El Salvador lost their freedom, it was the military that backed the dictators that took that freedom away. When Father Romero was assassinated, it was the military that armed the assassins. And when 46 were massacred at Acteal las Abejas, it was the military using other methods with impunity due to isolation.

Nuevo Yibeljoj, El Mozote, Kent State, Jackson State, Chicago, the Anaconda mines, Haymarket. The list is pretty long for misuse of the military to abridge the rights of the people in furtherance of despotic power.