OT: Galactic sterilisation

[President_Elect_Shang]

I think what you are referring to is called the Department of Defense. AKA: DoD, that would be more accurate I think. As for the other side of your explanation I served for 11 years, and now my wife serves. With that said, and using an analogy since you did. It would be similar (in an analogy sort of way) to asking me to think that dogs are really cats and cats are really dogs. But it goes even deeper than that, what you are asking me to do is divorce myself from over a decade of first hand experience to substitute the concept of DoD for the concept of the military. Substitute a disembodied organization for a group of men and women that I know, that I served with, that I call my friends. If I stretch my understanding than I can see the point of view you are coming from, but I am sure you can appreciate mine? I will not undo what I have learned, and honestly since I have more first person experience I feel that you should at least give a few minutes consideration to revising your terminology. Not to say that I am telling you that you need to or even that you must. No, that would way out of lines for my beliefs, I would never dream of imposing my will on another. But simply that it would not kill you to try a little. As for my part I agree to ask others to clarify whether they mean DoD or military (the men and women) before I offer my opinion.

[President_Elect_Shang]

Bump for my buddy Fyron, who has posted elsewhere since mine, but must have just overlooked this thread.

[Fyron]

Don't be so impatient. Those Posts took very little time to write and could be squeezed in between turns for various PBW games.

You do not have to classify "the military" as the Department of Defense (assuming you are talking about US military in particular) in order to still not have it be directly about the soldiers personally. Doing so certainly helps in some regards, but it is not necessary. "The military" does not equal "the soldiers" any more than "the government" equals employees of various agencies.

Now about cats and dogs... "the military" is "cats" and "the soldiers" are "dogs" (for purposes of reference to your post only, no real connection with either animal). Two separate entities that should not be confused.

Of course, there are some soldiers that deserve to be made fun of (such as Jessica Lynch), but that is another issue.

I understood your point of view from the beginning. I have been trying to portray the other point of view (the less "sensational" one). If I did not understand your point of view, how could I hope to explain another to you?

[President_Elect_Shang]

It is very easy to debate a point without understanding the other persons point. I see where you are coming from with your Version of the cats and dogs analogy, but I sense that you missed mine. Mine was that a cat is a cat and a dog is a dog, nothing to do with soldiers or military, which is why it was an analogy. In my framework (of the cat and dog) you are asking me to reverse the names. I am very disheartened by what seems to be a lack of compromise on your point, and an attempt to prolong this debate so that you can avoid reaching a compromise. Do you agree to meet me half way or not Fyron?

[tesco samoa]

JurijD I am not too sure about that. I think there is alot of truth in what Fryon stated about one nation in Europe. Germany tried it before using a military conquest. This time it is the corportations and governments attempting to do it in an economic conquest. I hope it happens. As a strong economic Europe is good for the world.

[tesco samoa]

Funny I think European History would have been very different if Napoleon III had backed down from Prussia in 1870. France would not have lost Alsace-Lorraine. 2 world wars have been fought over the fall out of that event.

[Narratio]

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
Funny I think European History would have been very different if Napoleon III had backed down from Prussia in 1870. France would not have lost Alsace-Lorraine. 2 world wars have been fought over the fall out of that event.

Been reading the second "What if" eh? A Good book I must say.

[ January 09, 2004, 12:22: Message edited by: Narratio ]

[Fyron]

It is quite possible that we have reached a cultural impasse here with our terminology. The terminology is not so important, as the concept is. Call it what you wish, but just keep in mind that there are many people that mean the organiztions of the military rather than the specific soldiers in it when they use the term "the military."

[President_Elect_Shang]

First I am not sure what you mean by cultural impasse, it just sounds to me that you are digging for a means to avoid saying yes or no to my question. Secondly if I am to assume that my speculation is correct than I can see that you are incapable of meeting me in such a simple request. Opinions are based upon the growth and learned experiences a person passes through in ones life. If you can not compromise than you can not grow or learn. It would have been very simple for you to have said:

You may have a point; I will take it into consideration.

[Rob]

Grr.. seems I forgot my old login password and the system doesnt seem to have the correct e-mail address for me. Anyway.. I was mostly a lurker so it doesnt matter.. Im nobody anyone here would know anyway

As for election results.. Its one of my pet peeves when people spout off numbers with no backing documentation. So.. here are some numbers relevant to some of the um... arguments going on here.

Election 2000
Total cast votes: 105,405,100
Bush 50,456,002 votes, 47.87%
Gore 50,999,897 votes, 48.38%

Total Electoral Vote = 538
Total Electoral Vote Needed to Elect = 270
Bush 271
Gore 266

Sources
Official 2000 Presidential Election Results
CNN 2000 Presidential Election Results

So, Yes, Gore won the popular vote by 543,895 votes. That was 0.51% of the votes cast which falls well within the margin of error for the voting machines used throughout most of the US.

The reality is that the election was so evenly split that neither Bush nor Gore could claim a clear victory in the popular vote. This split was mirrored in the state of Florida where the final results for Election 2000 were determined. Both political parties pulled out all the stops to manipulate the vote counts in that state. It so happens that the LAW and voting standards agreed on BEFORE the election started were upheld in the state, giving Bush the edge necessary to win. It was the right decision to make at the time even if the voting standards were not optimal. To do otherwise would be to invite chaos. Hopefully, the problematic standards experienced in Florida in 2000 have been rectified for the next election.

Now, moving on to the so called "Extinction" and "Slaughter" of the Natives by "Americans". I happen to BE one of those Natives.. or at least a decendent of one. My mother is Cherokee and we are both very much alive and well. I also happen to be Greek by ancestory as well. I will admit that the traditional culture of my Native American ancestors is not practiced much anymore due to being absorbed into the "European" culture of my OTHER ancestors. All of which has evolved into a new culture that the rest of the world calls "American".


And finaly, on the topic of the military and morons, I have a comment. The popular concept of a military full of morons is rather.. well.. moronic in itself. To make the assertion that the only people who re-enlist in the military are people of lesser intelligence is incorrect. The people who re-enlist are simply the people who have found that the military lifestyle suits them. It says NOTHING about their level of intelligence. The same incorrect assumptions are made about Sports Stars. It is automaticaly assumed that talent at playing football (or any other physical sport) means the person is intellectualy challenged. As if playing sports is a less desirable job, only suitable for people unable to learn to do a more usefull job.. like software engineering.

I guess what I am saying is that choosing a Military lifestyle does NOT make the person "Stupid." The reason some people think that it IS stupid is pretty simple to figure out realy. Humans have a tendency to think that anyone who thinks differently than they do, must be stupid. Therefore, those people who think that the military is a bad choice of career (those who serve one tour of duty) conclude that people who think otherwise (Lifers in Military Speak) MUST be stupid.

Rob