This is a discussion on Chris Hayes: I'm 'Uncomfortable' Calling Fallen Military 'Heroes' within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Burns It is when it is said on TV the night before memorial day, and now on the internet for us all ...
Is everybody in the U.S. Armed Forces a hero? That's really his point if you think about it.
It's not really that mean.
I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on Earth.--Steve McQueen
It's those same heroes who have given him the right to post his drivel.
Spirit...+1 my lady.We all feel pretty much like you do about this.
All men are equal...CC makes us equal-er.
I never heard his name in my life until I saw this thread. So I must be doing something right.
This fella failed critical thinking in high school.so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war
"Too refined by half", too clever by half.............too stupid. What an intellectual jerk.
I didn't know who he was before, and I still don't, and don't care.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ: Buy These Stickers Here
"A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon the world" Albert Camus
I think the term "hero" has been grossly misused since 9/11... for example, referring to the victims of the twin towers collapse lumped in the same breath with the courageous first responders as heroes. We need to differentiate between unfortunate victims and true heroes. The latter are easily distinguished by the simple fact that they took action to prevent (further) harm to the innocent
That said, I am outraged that some dweeb perched in front of a PC has the audacity to challenge the personal sacrifice and the authenticity of purpose of our military who have sacrificed so much for those of us sitting comfortably at home. We owe our surviving and our fallen soldiers, sailors and airmen a huge debt of gratitude.
AZCDL Life Member
NRA Patron Member
NROI Chief Range Officer
Whatever! Those who serve are heroes. Period. Those who die while serving, well they are super heroes. If your not willing to serve then be glad there are those who will and let's all honor them and give thanks!!
Our ability to be free, have rights, and live in the greatest country on earth are because of our military and the sacrifices given.
God bless them all!!
It's not a problem til they make it one!
He acknowledged the fact that there are true acts of battlefield heroics. I believe there are 10 MOH recipients since 9/11 and seven were awarded posthumously. I think it's fair to say those guys are legitimate heroes, and there are probably thousands more who have done things just as heroic in Iraq and Afghanistan, but it just didn't get documented properly.
So yes, many people being honored on Memorial day are heroes. However, HIS point is that some fallen servicemen are not heroes, which is somewhat logically, although maybe still disagreeable. Why he is arguing this point on Memorial Day is another story.
When I said "That's really his point if you think about it," I meant it kind of like: All sorts of people join the military for a wide variety of reasons. Some do it for honor, some for country, some for a way out, some to look good on a resume, etc. It's the way it is. I would probably argue that not everybody who joins the military is a hero in the way Jason Dunham is a hero. But if you do join the military, you get told what to do. You can't just say, "I won't go" if your unit is deploying to Afghanistan or Iraq, because that would make you a coward. So you go to Afghanistan, and you're not a coward, but that doesn't make you a hero. You have a job that doesn't put you in harms way, but one day you get sent out on a convoy and your truck hits an IED. You die.
Are you a hero?
That is how I interpret the video in the OP. I do not want to offend anyone. I'm about as big of a supporter of the military as one can be, but not everything is black and white.
He says this:I think that his problem is that he is equating one thing with another -I feel comfortable, ah, uncomfortable, about the word because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war. Um, and, I don't want to obviously desecrate or disrespect memory of anyone that's fallen, and obviously there are individual circumstances in which there is genuine, tremendous heroism: hail of gunfire, rescuing fellow soldiers and things like that. But it seems to me that we marshal this word in a way that is problematic. But maybe I'm wrong about that.
1) referring to someone who has given much - or all - in performing their duty to this country
2) thinking that this somehow romaticizes war
I feel that it is an attempt at giving a reasonable amount of respect to the men & women who have paid a certain price in their service to their country. I don't see the connection with justifying the conflict in which they were injured or died.
I have to go with my opinion, Mr. Hayes, that in your own words you are wrong about that.
"Historical examination of the right to bear arms, from English antecedents to the drafting of the Second Amendment, bears proof that the right to bear arms has consistently been, and should still be, construed as an individual right." -- U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings, Re: U.S. vs Emerson (1999)
If you can read this, thank a teacher. Because it's in English, thank a vet
I, too, think that the word "hero" is used far too often in today's society. It's overuse is making it cheap. But then again... words are cheap.
According to my dictionary hero means, "a person, .. who is admired or idealized for courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities."
There is an outstanding number of true military heroes that have fought and died (and even lived) while performing courageous, outstanding and noble acts.
Not to long ago I read about a Marine who left his helmet off to go and secure a ladder on a truck during a state-side pre-deployment workup. The ladder fell, crushed his skull and he died. Never saw a single day of combat. Never fired a single shot in defense of our nation.
Had he been working in a factory and his story were told he'd be just an average shmuck, labelled an idiot for not wearing his helmet.. he should have known better and that's why he's dead. But because he happened to die while under contract to the US Marine Corps suddenly he's a HERO!!!! who died for his country!!
Ehhh.. I guess if that's how you want to look at it. Okay. In which case, in my humble opinion, anyone who wears the uniform is a hero. Even the guy who through neglect or laziness failed to do his job and got other service-members killed... including himself. Or maybe the guy who died in a drunken car accident while home on leave. Just kind of makes me feel a little conflicted when I group those people along side people who jumped on grenades, carried wounded to safety and died going back for more, etc.
I think there is a difference.
Not everyone who joins the military is a hero. Not everyone who dies while in service to our country is a hero (at least not by the true definition of the word).
I think they should all be honored, certainly. I think they should all be remembered and appreciated for their willingness to serve (as this is a volunteer force and everyone with two brain cells to rub together knows what they are signing up for). When I hear of the fallen I don't sit down and analyze the details of the events leading up to their deaths to classify them. I appreciate their willingness to serve but I won't call every fallen service member a hero. Can't calling them American's be enough? Or honorable? There has to be some words that still hold some kind of meaning for us.
Words matter to me. Their meaning matters to me. I don't use "awesome" much because something has to inspire awe to be awesome. I use "cool" to describe things that are cold to the touch. I like to use the word "hero" to describe people who have gone above and beyond the call and done something...... heroic.
Maybe I'm wrong. And I'm already anticipating the dozens of replies I'm going to get telling me how unappreciative I am and how little I know about the sacrifices military men and women have to make every day and about how heroic it is to even sign that dotted line (or these days, put your finger in the box and give your biometric signature) and enlist. If you're idea of heroics is putting pen on paper (or a finger on a digital box) than it's an exceptionally low bar and it's all gravy from there on. I guess I have just a little higher standard for "heroic." (Them darn word meanings, again.) In which case we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I didn't know who this guy was before this thread (still don't). I guess I don't see what the fuss is all about.
I truly do appreciate all of the sacrifices that have been made for my country and my freedoms. My heart goes out to the men and women and their families who have lost their loved ones to our nation's service. I honor all of them. I think everyone who does or has signed that paper (biometrically or physically) has done an honorable thing and if they have died in that service they should be honored for it. And I will give hero-worship for heroes preforming heroic deeds.
I guess time has passed me by. I don't analyze each battlefield death to determine who died nobly and who went out screaming and crying for their momma with their body parts laying on the ground beside them. The end result is the same. Gone forever. I have stated my case and will leave this thread alone in the future. Happy Memorial Day Holiday fellow gun lovers.
If you can read this, thank a teacher. Because it's in English, thank a vet