I saw this over at Boots and Sabers, it’s quite the powerful statement but, it has racial undertones when considered in the light of another recent post on the Black in Business blog.
It would be interesting to see what Black In Business’s opinion is on this considering his recent post on why he blogs. He states:
In this country, we have barriers between us based on skin color. This barrier makes it hard for us to respect and trust each other.
So my question is this: Does his statement then indicate that this message is more powerful and trustworthy for the black community because of the source?
I personally find this message universally powerful, credible and trustworthy. I understand the goal is for race not to matter but, where we stand right now, I think it’s important that everyone reach out to there own community in this way to maximize the impact of any message.
I will look forward to anyones response (and hopefully his).
Side note: He recently reviewed Gop3.com through our Political Grind Network connection. Thanks!
Last 5 posts by Brandon- The Graphic Effect of High Taxes and Spending, Move on out! - June 16th, 2010
- Live from the 2010 Wisconsin GOP Convention - May 22nd, 2010
- Republican Party of Wisconsin State Convention 2010 - May 21st, 2010
- Charts: Artificial American Recovery? - April 15th, 2010
- Liberal Professor to Teach FUELMilwaukee "Government 101" - April 14th, 2010
My reaction:
Not sure why you think this has “racial undertones.” Because he is Affrican-American? Do you think he might also be one of the millions of gay people who served in the military?
Frankly, I think this is an incredibly naive rant that is contradicted by his own experience. He goes on about his service on an aircraft carrier, and states they could get through the long haul because they knew there was an end to their service and a return home. Of course, a huge problem right now is that the government is forcing people to remain in the military against their will and beyond the terms of their engagement. There are a hell of a lot of people who are not there willingly.
Then he freaks out claiming the media isn’t giving the numbers of “enemies” killed, and goes on and on about killing people equals victory. How simplistic and sad. The fact of the matter is that the media is reporting on a daily basis the horrific toll on innocent Iraqi civilians, and is also reporting the deaths of insurgeants as the information is available. But Bush and his gang refuse to release accurate information. We don’t get to hear, for example, about people being taken to other countries and tortured until they confess to everything from JFK to 9-11. If I took any one of you for 12 months and had unfettered ability to do whatever I wanted to you, you damn well bet that by the end of that time period, you would confess to being Osama’s lover and co-conspirator.
He continues his tirade by talking about roadside bombs. How many of those were present prior to the invasion? What would he be willing to do if the US were invaded by Iraq? And then we have a bizarrre statement that there must have been weapons of mass destruction, and the fact that the troops didn’t find any evidence of such weapons should not be used against Bush or the troops. I agree with half of that statement.
If this is the best you can dig up as a “powerful” statement, it is no wonder Bush and his gang have the lowest approval rating of any President this century. When are you going to remove your blinders?
I have not watched the video yet since I’m in the library without headphones. I had not heard that the government was forcing people to stay in the military beyond the terms of their engagement. How are they able to do that?
thanks for the mention and the opportunity to debate, I will comment but it will be later when I can watch the viedo. I can’t wait. Compelling. By the way, how did you like the Time cover with Ragan crying? Are these 2 situations related?
It is called “Stop Loss.” The military has the right to keep people longer than their commitment, and actually can recall people who have been discharged from service and completed their terms of service. Thousands of terms have been extended against the will of the person, and so far several hundred have had to leave their civilian life after they thought they were done with the military. Note that these are NOT people who are in the reserves or some other capacity. They completed their service, went home, started work and families and then get the letter ordering them back.
It’s an ugly situation, but my understanding is that stop loss is something that is part of the contract that anyone signs when they enlist. I suppose there are many people who never imagined it would be enforced when they signed up, but they signed nonetheless.
Correct. It has not been used in the past. This is only a small point of this guy’s weird argument, but kind of paints the picture that he is completely ignorant about what is happening in this conflict. that is bolstered by his additional claims about weapons of mass destruction, body counts, and more. I think calling this a “powerful” argument is silly. The guy knows nothing, and I have a sneaking suspicion that based on the title of this post, the author was so excited to see an African American rant in Bush’s favor that he completely glosses over the fact that this guy is a moron.
1. All of my friends who are in the military state that they were fully aware of the “Stop loss” policy and still chose to sign up.
2. The argument this man presents is coherent and spot on, just because you disagree does not make him a “weirdo” or a “moron”. I disagree with you and do not call you any of those things.
3. I got excited about this video because it makes sense and highlights many of the issues that are often ignored or derided by liberals like yourself.
I appreciate your input and thank you for your readership.
Brandon
I just can’t get too worked up over stop loss if it was part of a contract the servicemen signed. It has been used before and if they were going to be upset over it being used again they should not have joined.
You are losing the point. The guy in the video makes a big deal of being in the military and how the one thing that got them through it was knowing they were going home after X tour of duty. Whatever. He obviously is unaware of the stop loss problem. Just like he is apparently unaware of virtually everything else he rants about. To consider his argument “powerful,” is to ignore the numerous instances of his ignorance or inability to connect the dots.
I find it fascinating that he claims that the “one thing” that got him and his comrades through their tour was the knowledge that they would be going home, rather than the supposed knowledge that they were defending their freedoms, their country, or their families, or any of that other high-minded nonsense we’ve been told our soldiers are fighting for.
In this case the skin color dose not affect my opinion. The fighting man has to be prepared for extended duty, my brother got an additional 6 month in Viet Nam and did not bitch about it. I was unable to watch the entire vedio because it bored me. I wonder do you think there is no racial problem in this country?
A key in business is to understand the vision of the company and how you can impact the company objective. It helps when you understand the benifit to you if you accomplish the goal. Bush’s problem is his troops are wondering what is the goal and how do they benifit. If our brave troops white and black felt the USA was in danger and their good service would save their familes then the additional time would not matter. The point is this is an unethical war that fewer and fewer people understand or support. Bring home all the troops
HIs argument is “spot on?” Seriously, identify one argument he makes that is supported anywhere by any evidence. It is a rambling rant that is internally contradictory. And the point of the stop loss issue is his bizarre failure to recognize that which got him through his military time is not afforded to current military. You’re completely missing the point. And yes, you are presenting this because the guy is African American, and that is demeaning (“I have Black friends, I swear. There’s the one guy at the grocery store..”). Find someone with a coherent point.
He said he would have a plane ride home, off the boat. On the boat was less dangerous than on the ground. His evidense is not supported by the Media. Too many people believe everything the Media says. They don’t want you to know the truth, because that would turn you off to them.