Reading about Congressman Murthas so called war record. I have made discussions here before about OBJECTIVE and SUBJECTIVE medals in the United States Military. About Wound Medals and how absurd the criteria can be for being awarded them. When I have had this discussion, I have been set upon by either women who have never served in the military and at best have had relatives who served, and men likewise. Or men who have served in some capacity who posit that any military awards must NEVER be questioned. Frankly, if you have never heard of a V Device to a Bronze Star you are not a valid participant in the discussion. Congressman Murtha faked his valour to become a United States Congressman. He isnt by far, the only one to do that. There is such a plethora of subjective medals available today and objective medals like the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart that could be well earned or could be little more than bumping your knee or having a minor cut that required no medical treatment and left knaught even a scar. You have to know that photos of men wearing uniforms with a chest full of subjective medals have been used in many a political campaign. When you get to the nubbins of it, the greater majority can say they served but cannaught describe one act of valour they ever performed in their service. The greater amount of servicemen are knaught even combat veterans. But holding Theatre Medals allows you to say I served in.... Whoopidity-doo. You were crew in a plane that landed in Saigon and you went to her best whorehouses on a weekend and flew out on a Monday and never saw the sh_thole again. Now you have a gong your chest proudly bears on Veterans Day and every civilian sees it and says Thank you for your service. without knowing how transparent the depth of that service was. It is part of a visual resume you use to get a foot-up on the competition because everyone who has served this nation is a HERO! Which is true to civilians. But a military hero has a higher standard or at least should. But like all things in our world, it has been dumbed down greatly throughout history and misrepresented for advantage. Some people believe that you should only be able to be POTUS if you have seen military service, whatever that is. Ronald Wilson Reagan saw military service but never saw a combat zone. He made war propaganda movies is what he did. It was service in strictly technical terms. Ted Kennedy would qualify if you demanded that a POTUS needs military service, yet he too never saw a flies speck of combat duty much less performed a recorded act of valour. Real heroes get lost in all the noise of inconsequential service deemed to be heroes for simply serving. True military Heroes are knaught everyday. They are Outstanding. It isnt about what unit you belong to. You might have been in the Navy Seals and been as unremarkable as Quartermaster Clerk James George Janos aka Jesse Ventura who crafted an elaborate service record he used to gain the Governorship of Minnesota when at best all he did was unremarkable service while riding the back of a storied military unit, as if being a member of it automatically gives you membership in the hall of Heroes. You might have been a driver of a supply truck and found yourself in combat one day and done a valourous act. The Victoria Cross, outside of America is considered to be the worlds most vaunted military medal. It does knaught come with promotion. Nobody in the military will offer you a single salute because your chest bears one for a single act of outstanding valour on one day. Certainly, it will knaught give you a leg up in the political game, even if for the office of Dogcatcher. Nor should it. Because the day you strip off that uniform and no longer live in barracks accommodation, you are a CIVILIAN running for Civilian Office and the playing field MUST be level. No advantage for service valourous or otherwise. If you wanted that, you should have remained a professional soldier. Your military record, valourous or simply service should never be a chip you cash in for advantage. And those who advocate that to serve as POTUS one MUST have served in uniformed service are knowingly or unknowingly advocating awarding advantage in the civilian world for military service. You can be a military gynecologist like Ron Paul, never served in any capacity other than gynecologist. Couldnt be further than valourous record of note. And heres the thing ... the vast majority of military positions are knaught tip of the spear but shaft.So while I wont be pleasing families of those who served, while I wont be pleasing some of those who served, no, I dont think service along should ever determine by any degree qualifications for any elected office up to and POTUS. With only a technical qualification to define Ronald Reagans military service, he was many times the better POTUS than nuclear submarine Commander James Earl Carter.
Posted on: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 13:43:53 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015