Anti-war train drivers refuse to move arms freight
Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:11:40 -0500
Ok, well-argued points with an intelligent conclusion. I do not want to
paint anyone into any camp. Their own statements do that most of the time,
and you make balanced, articulate arguments. You also seem to have extensive
military experience, as I had already gathered. However, I do wonder about
people who are obsessive about following military technology, as I find it
kind of sick. I have zero military experience, and have no interest in it. I
am also not an expert on weapons or tactics, by any stretch of the
imagination. You are, I respect that. Many people like to throw out things
like " Let's blow up Korea and see how Kim likes a LAWS rocket", thinking
they sound tough and cool because they know the name of a piece of weaponry,
all the while they are eating skittles between keystrokes, and flipping over
to porn in their other browser window. Those are the people I am sick of.
The ones who see it as just a big video game, you do not seem to be one of
those and I respect you for it. My problems are much less with the military
and its people than with the corporate processes, politicians, and brainwash
media that make war palatable to many Americans. Nothing you have said has
changed my opinion on that.
>From: James Rogers <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: Anti-war train drivers refuse to move arms freight
>Date: 14 Jan 2003 17:13:49 -0800
>On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 15:33, Al Diablito wrote:
> > Nice summation of your attitude to the troops. By the way, like Mr.
> > what are your war plans? When are you deploying? You seem to be really
> > military hardware in a geek sort of way. Back it up, man. What are you
> > waiting for?
>Let me paint the picture for you:
>I am currently both a business and engineering exec in Silicon Valley,
>and am an engineer and scientist by education and trade. I dabble in
>networking, media, and some substantially more esoteric businesses. I'm
>not particularly geeky nor do I play a geek on TV, though my technical
>skills are on par with the best of 'em.
>I used to be a Light Infantry/SpecOps grunt in the U.S. Army for a
>number of years. I still have many friends currently or formerly in the
>employ of the military. I know the inside of the military as well as
>anybody, and have spent much time under the stars with an assault rifle.
>I also used to work for the Department of Defense many years ago at
>contractor and research facilities in various capacities. My apparently
>being a "military hardware geek" is the result of actual experience, not
>because it is some sort of hobby for me. I do keep track of new
>technological developments, but only when people point them out to me.
>I don't need you to tell me what being a soldier is really about, or the
>"real" motives of the people that surround the military. I've already
>been there and already done that, from the military side, from the
>civilian side, and from the business side. The military side is quite
>competent, the civilian side is a mixed bag, and the business side is
>competent but expensive (in part because of the problems dealing with
>some of the morons that linger in the civilian DoD). And having trained
>with many foreign militaries, I would not trade a berth in the U.S.
>military for that of any other country. The U.S. military places very
>high value upon the lives and morale of its soldiers; I wish I could say
>the same about most other militaries.
>I don't suppose that you, in your infinite wisdom and experience, can
>shed light on some aspect of this entire process that I somehow missed
>in my years of service?
>I am not a particularly hawk-ish person, especially since I personally
>know what is at stake, but I do recognize that military force is a
>legitimate tool when solving some problems. The problem is that you
>pigeonhole everyone into two camps, and me not being a kneejerk
>extremist of one type makes me a kneejerk extremist of another type in
>your worldview. Get a grip.
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*