on balance

[afansi]

Believers in the Liberal creed (no need to fume yet, Crazy Six, Tony Stacks and co) would have us believe that balance is a good thing. This philosophy has some pedigree. In the past there were those who didn't take an extreme position against slavery, but were able to weigh the economic benefits against the humanitarian consequences. More recently there were a few million South Africans who took a balanced view of Apartheid. After all Biko was a black supremacist and Mandela was a communist, and the country needed to protect itself against terrorists and black Marxist revolutionaries. When things change these milquetoast leopards simply change their spots and pretend they were against these injustices from the beginning.

US military colonialism in Okinawa, and the island's use as a platform and training ground to sustain its murderous empire are confronted with a similar degree of self-righteous cowardice by these holier than thou types.

[DougP]

Hi afansi, how are you today? Look its been a long day for me and the synapses in the brain just aren't firing at the moment. I think I am following you along the lines of the US always supporting the wrong side under the guise of liberation, freedom, justice, democracy etc. Always putting money on the corrupt party in a foriegn land because they'll do the Fed's bidding and cater to the US corporations that have vested interest.. etc. I hope I'm following you so far on this.

It the last part about the self-righteous cowardice by these holier than thou types. that I'm not getting. Are you being facetious or do you mean literally holier than thou types?

Secondly I'm not too clear on where it is you're going with this, and believe me I'm trying to understand. Is this supposed to be a statement or something provocative that gets everyone thinking? Or, and pardon me if I'm wrong, is this an "in your face pig dogs!" post directed mainly at those in the military that frequent this site? Can you please clarify for me?

[okisteve]

Believers in the Liberal creed (no need to fume yet, Crazy Six, Tony Stacks and co) would have us believe that balance is a good thing. This philosophy has some pedigree. In the past there were those who didn't take an extreme position against slavery, but were able to weigh the economic benefits against the humanitarian consequences. More recently there were a few million South Africans who took a balanced view of Apartheid. After all Biko was a black supremacist and Mandela was a communist, and the country needed to protect itself against terrorists and black Marxist revolutionaries. When things change these milquetoast leopards simply change their spots and pretend they were against these injustices from the beginning.

US military colonialism in Okinawa, and the island's use as a platform and training ground to sustain its murderous empire are confronted with a similar degree of self-righteous cowardice by these holier than thou types.

Afansi, your anger is misplaced IMO, because the majority of posters here have their bread buttered (and very thick in some cases) by the US Government's committment to staying in the Far East. I would venture that for every 10 people who look like reactionaries to you, 9 are only trying to make a living and only one is a superpatriot warmonger.

[afansi]

Hi afansi, how are you today? Look its been a long day for me and the synapses in the brain just aren't firing at the moment. I think I am following you along the lines of the US always supporting the wrong side under the guise of liberation, freedom, justice, democracy etc. Always putting money on the corrupt party in a foriegn land because they'll do the Fed's bidding and cater to the US corporations that have vested interest.. etc. I hope I'm following you so far on this.

It the last part about the self-righteous cowardice by these holier than thou types. that I'm not getting. Are you being facetious or do you mean literally holier than thou types?

Secondly I'm not too clear on where it is you're going with this, and believe me I'm trying to understand. Is this supposed to be a statement or something provocative that gets everyone thinking? Or, and pardon me if I'm wrong, is this an "in your face pig dogs!" post directed mainly at those in the military that frequent this site? Can you please clarify for me?

I always appreciate your civility, and sorry to hear you've had an exhausting day - I'll try not to add to it much further.

To put it simply, my point is that sitting on the fence is not the same as taking the moral high ground.

[Ammoyankee]

US military colonialism in Okinawa, and the island's use as a platform and training ground to sustain its murderous empire are confronted with a similar degree of self-righteous cowardice by these holier than thou types.

Three words Afansi... Eat a Dick!

[Muku]

Doug do you remember the exchange earlier today about Rachel and her "anti-US Military" posts?

Well I submit.....part two, or is it three, or ....what the hell, I think you follow my drift here.

US military colonialism in Okinawa, and the island's use as a platform and training ground to sustain its murderous empire are confronted with a similar degree of self-righteous cowardice by these holier than thou types.

I would say that in comparison to her posts this is even more "provoking". What do you think?

[DougP]

I can honestly see what you're trying to say now. Thanks for clearing that up. Your posts are often cryptic in nature and I'm guessing that's just your style. They come across with the approachable texture of a sea urchin at times. I think this is why you receive the kind of replies that you do, although I'm sure you some what expect it.:) As I am coming to better understand some of the things that you are presenting here and the reasoning behind it(still working on figuring out the motive) I can only hope you and others are able to meet half way. By that I mean in a way of understanding each other.

There is one inherent condition you will find among many in the military or among those who have served( I often suffer from this as well) This condition is that the military in many respects is a community and those who are in it or have been in it associate themselves with it on a very personal level. I know from experience that this is often a bad habit to get into. Because as soon as there is any criticism directed at the military, those who are in it become defensive(trained reaction perhaps). And when someone gets offended or becomes defensive they shut themselves off. So given this reality and being that many here are apart of that community might I suggest a more seemingly civil approach? Just offering an idea. And the same goes to those who read your posts. For that I would suggest taking a couple of deep breaths, letting it out, calming down, a glass of water or two and to try and read it again.
And again thank you for helping me better understand where you're coming from and where you're going with this. cheers.:)

[DougP]

Doug do you remember the exchange earlier today about Rachel and her "anti-US Military" posts?

Well I submit.....part two, or is it three, or ....what the hell, I think you follow my drift here.



I would say that in comparison to her posts this is even more "provoking". What do you think?

I'm going to get to the post above yours in a minute. Muku I actually took a little something from our conversation. I was hasty. Given the fact that Rachel does not have the "luxury" so to speak of having english as her first language, I was preemptive in my labeling her threads. I never once asked her what her intentions were. So I thought I'd try a different approach here and because of previous conversations with afansi, I was fairly sure it would bear fruit.

[Muku]

What has this got to do with religion?

[DougP]

What has this got to do with religion?

huh what?:ohmy:

Oh crap, yeah good point, forgot what section this was in... yeah long day indeed.:(

[DougP]

before more exchanges start flying around here let me reiterate the "no directly insulting other.... oh screw it.. refer to rule number 3 please.

[afansi]

Afansi, your anger is misplaced IMO, because the majority of posters here have their bread buttered (and very thick in some cases) by the US Government's committment to staying in the Far East. I would venture that for every 10 people who look like reactionaries to you, 9 are only trying to make a living and only one is a superpatriot warmonger.

One minor correction which doesn't particularly support my point: please don't forget the Japanese government is footing a large part of the bill for the nine out of ten posters you refer to.

That's one reason the US military feels it's sitting pretty here, since it can leave the Japanese taxpayers to foot the bill for their home away from home.

The Apartheid analogy still applies though ...

... I was just trying to make a living, I didn't really support it ...

Isn't that what 'the man' said?

[afansi]

What has this got to do with religion?

Well, I was wondering where to put it, but 'belief' seemed to fit the bill better than anything else.

[afansi]

before more exchanges start flying around here let me reiterate the "no directly insulting other.... oh screw it.. refer to rule number 3 please.

What's all that about?

[afansi]

Three words Afansi... Eat a Dick!

DougP - Sorry, now I see. Funny though, I'd have thought Ammoyankee would be on my side in this discussion. At least he is a man of principle.

[DougP]

afansi, I am often concerned with the apparent pitfalls of working for certain companies, organizations etc. The inherent dilemma this presents many is that by some degree we all fall into the machine somehow, and its even harder to dig your way out. There are very few professions out there that could be considered guilt free but unfortunately we as consumers can still contribute to the madness. For example, anyone who is a consumer of petrol or natural gases falls into this category. Without them and their contribution there is no demand. Without the demand there is no need for the supply and everything else that falls into place. Granted yes someone in the military plays a role more closer to the head of the dragon, but they would not be there(or here in this case) if it wasn't for the demand which drives the need for their jobs existence. This is something that each of them(assuming they are well aware of all of this) has to weigh in on the need to support their family. We can't all be freelance geologists or teachers. This of course is something I must face every time I air my opinion on what I think is wrong with my country. The irony of the fact that I work on a base far away from American shores yet I myself am a minarchist/libertarian does not escape me.
Yes, although you may view it as wrong I do value the ability to put food on the table for my family above my own dignity and convictions.

[afansi]

Afansi, your anger is misplaced IMO, because the majority of posters here have their bread buttered (and very thick in some cases) by the US Government's committment to staying in the Far East. I would venture that for every 10 people who look like reactionaries to you, 9 are only trying to make a living and only one is a superpatriot warmonger.

One minor correction which doesn't particularly support my point: please don't forget the Japanese government is footing a large part of the bill for the nine out of ten posters you refer to.

That's one reason the US military feels it's sitting pretty here, since it can leave the Japanese taxpayers to foot the bill for their home away from home.

The Apartheid analogy still applies though ...

... I was just trying to make a living, I didn't really support it ...

Isn't that what 'the man' said?

[okisteve]

One minor correction which doesn't particularly support my point: please don't forget the Japanese government is footing a large part of the bill for the nine out of ten posters you refer to.

That's one reason the US military feels it's sitting pretty here, since it can leave the Japanese taxpayers to foot the bill for their home away from home.

The Apartheid analogy still applies though ...

... I was just trying to make a living, I didn't really support it ...

Isn't that what 'the man' said?

Maybe my intended meaning was not clear - everyone feels like they have to justify their existence and what they do, and not believe they are victims of a bad economy stateside or pawns of the military industry. The 10% of active warmongers use Security to justify the US presence at forward bases and their personal choice to join the military. The 90% support troops and contractors might speak out more loudly but also need to justify hanging on here until something better comes along. I'm not defending the Apartheid analogy or "orders are orders," for that matter, just seeing things as they are.

[Bones]

As posted by Okisteve:

Maybe my intended meaning was not clear - everyone feels like they have to justify their existence and what they do, and not believe they are victims of a bad economy stateside or pawns of the military industry. The 10% of active warmongers use Security to justify the US presence at forward bases and their personal choice to join the military. The 90% support troops and contractors might speak out more loudly but also need to justify hanging on here until something better comes along. I'm not defending the Apartheid analogy or "orders are orders," for that matter, just seeing things as they are.

That was a pretty good response, Steve.

As for myself, I don't have to justify my reason for being here. Paid for it out of my own pocket. Living off of my earnings, get no subsidies, other than my retirement check.

And I really hate to hear from idiots, who have not read their contracts.

All of those complainers out there, go back where you came from.

Case, closed.

NBTP