"PO, hand me my clue-bat..."
You could just see LCdr Thompson saying that after reading this letter in the Toronto Star the other day about a U.S. deserter denied asylum in Canada:
When I read it, I was tempted to make a comment here myself. After all, it's been awhile since I've gone on a good rant. But reading LCdr Thompson's rebuttal in today's paper, I'm glad I didn't; he did a much better job of it than I would have:
Hear, frickin' hear.
I hope all would-be soldiers learn from the sad case of Corey Glass. Do not join the military to do community service, to do charity, to learn a trade or to get university tuition credit. Do not believe the promises made by military recruiters...
When I read it, I was tempted to make a comment here myself. After all, it's been awhile since I've gone on a good rant. But reading LCdr Thompson's rebuttal in today's paper, I'm glad I didn't; he did a much better job of it than I would have:
Why is the military painted as dishonest or even evil because recruiting campaigns emphasize the benefits of military service (education, travel, adventure, etc.)? The ads that have been circulating in recent years are true and accurate – an observation based on more than 25 years of service.
Every job has aspects that are less than pleasant, yet we do not admonish trade schools for not mentioning that plumbers sometimes end up covered in raw sewage. Anybody who joins the military thinking they're only going to do humanitarian work isn't paying attention.
It should be no secret that the military goes in harm's way and occasionally uses force to carry out government policy. To reap the benefits of military service, but then cut and run when things start to heat up, is reprehensible and Canadians should want nothing to do with it.
Did Corey Glass not realize when they handed him a gun during training that military service was more than filling sandbags during a flood? Not only has he turned his back on a voluntary commitment, he has now forced someone else to go in harm's way in his stead.
I do think the killing of men, women and children is abhorrent, but indiscriminate killing is not what professional armies do. Some things are worth defending and if that means using force, including deadly force, to stop those who would behead a teacher, then so be it. It's that simple. [Babbler's bold]
Hear, frickin' hear.
posted by Babbling Brooks at 10:15 a.m.
6 Comments:
Especially when you sign up for the Combat Arms.
That's COMBAT Arms.
Not Huggy Warm Comfy Fur Arms.
What is amazing is how much traction and attention these deserters get in Canada.
Zero sympathy.
Two points here:
I don't think I'm alone in being really tired of all these hard left neo-liberals with an anti-military hatred and agenda.
My experience has been that one can't reason these people into reality. Nor does citing the history of free peoples needing armed forces to protect and preserve their freedom get through to them.
I finally gave up trying to debate or change the minds of people like the first letter writer. Someone once said that you can't reason anyone out of an opinion that he/she didn't arrive at by reason in the first place. Quite true.
Secondly, IMO deserters are cowards and criminals. They may even be glib in rationalizing their desertion. Nevertheless, despite what Canadian supporter "progressives" may say or write, I wouldn't expect them to be contributors to Canadian society. By desertion, they've shown their lack of moral fiber. More likely, a large percentage of them will be welfare service claimants of one type or another.
Dave, I probably tend more towards your side of the political spectrum than say, Jack Layton's. Having said that, I don't believe all "progressives" should be tarred with the same brush on the desertion/cowardice/military support issue.
Canadians of all political persuasions, including socialists, fought our national enemies in both world wars. Marc Garneau, a former naval officer, ran for the Liberals in the last federal election, and I know quite a few good people in the CF who wouldn't vote for a Conservative even if that was the only choice on the ballot.
Having said that, a good portion of the modern Canadian "left" is morally bereft when it comes to issues of armed conflict.
For a thoughtful look at what's wrong with the Canadian "progressive" political scene, I'd suggest Terry Glavin and Stan Persky (follow the links in the post for the whole piece, which is really worth reading) - here's an excerpt:
I'd go farther, and say identity politics has supplanted the politics of solidarity, and the national self-loathing associated with "cultural relativism" has wholly undermined progressive internationalism. Along the way, the counterculture left also jettisoned the old, bedrock progressive conception of human rights as universal rights. And a crude and irrational anti-Americanism—which, paradoxically, owes far more to American counterculture politics than to Canadian progressive-nationalist politics—is a big part of it, too...
Dave: Also see Terry Glavin's comment (first one) at this post at "Daimnation!".
And see this post based on Mr Glavin too:
"A knife to the heart of the mindlessly ideological left"
Thanks again for the Gooney Bird/Globemaster photo!
Mark
Ottawa
Well call then teeth arms.
Just a measure of how little we spend of defence I guess.
But it means we fight.
Babbling and Mark, thanks for the links to those other posts and comments. Thoughtful, interesting reading.
Sorry if I got a bit over the top in my earlier comment. You're right that I shouldn't be stereotyping people, that is unhelpful and unfair to some folks.
(Glad you enjoyed that photo, which also reminded me of my AF days. :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home