Yes, accoding to a piece in the Weekly Standard. They answered the call to fight for liberty instead of tuning out and turning on. Confronted with a generation-defining conflict, the cold war, the Boomers--those, at any rate, who came to be emblematic of their generation--took the opposite path from their parents during World War II. Sadly, the excesses of Woodstock became the face of the Boomers' response to their moment of challenge. War protests where agitated youths derided American soldiers as baby-killers added no luster to their image. Few of the leading lights of that generation joined the military. Most calculated how they could avoid military service, and their attitude rippled through the rest of the century. In the 1970s, '80s, and '90s, military service didn't occur to most young people as an option, let alone a duty. But now, once again, history is calling. Fortunately, the present generation appears more reminiscent of their grandparents than their parents.n the 1960s, history called the Baby Boomers. They didn't answer the phone.
Read the rest here.
Monday, July 23, 2007
Is This Generation Better Than the Boomers?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
We can never discount the current generation, at least, the few than voluntarily go to defend our country.
Likewise, in our "boomer" generation, several answered the call even without being drafted, more than the public realizes.
Every generation has it few who answer the call and goes, while the majority stay behind and bellyache.
motor pool
LOL! Always, always always read Glenn Greenwald BEFORE you post propaganda like this.
Then you won't be embarrased.
As Greenwald rightly points out, you left out the Chickenhawk contingent; you know the people that later grew up to be Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and Billy Kristol (not the funny one).
BTW, can you answer me one question: is it really in the public interest to have our airwaves saturated by Republican propaganda?
Mumon, perhaps you should idle down your call of "chickenhawks." Lest you know, there are several Democrats who also did not serve, including the entire front runners in the current campaign.
Additionally, you have one long shot candidate that served 6 years in the Reserves from 1969 to 1975.
Since Reserve and Guard duty during Viet Nam made Republicans draft dodgers in 1988, 2000 and 2004, while Military Service had no bearing on ones ability to lead in 1992 and 1996, what does that make the Democrat candidate who only served in the Reserves during Viet Nam?
Don't worry about Republicans on Talk Radio. You NeoComs have the lamestream print media, Alphabet channels on TV, the vast majority of College Professors and High School Teachers. Oh, if didn't know, the NeoComs won the House and Senate in 2006. Guess "Republican Propaganda" isn't as strong as you all believe.
Chickenhawk is a political epithet used in the United States to criticize a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person is perceived to have actively avoided military service when of draft age.
Not to be confused with Mark Foley
Chickenhawk is a political epithet used in the United States to criticize a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person is perceived to have actively avoided military service when of draft age.
Correction. Chickenhawk is a political epithet used in the United States to criticize a Republican politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person is perceived to have actively avoided military service when of draft age.
Elsewise FDR would be your prototype chickenhawk. Never served. Certainly could have. Bigtime hawk. Meets the criteria four-square. But you never see or hear the dummycrats referring to FDR as a chickenhawk, now do you?
“Correction. Chickenhawk is a political epithet used in the United States to criticize a Republican politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person is perceived to have actively avoided military service when of draft age.”
WWI Draftees were registered on 5 Jun 1917, on 5 Jun 1918 and on 12 Sep 1918. This draft included males 21 to 30 who were not already serving in the military, regardless of their declared nationality. Men older than 30 and younger than 21 sometimes registered for the draft, but their registration was not required.
FDR was born January 30, 1882. On 5 Jun 1917 he was 35 years of age. Since there was no draft during FDRs life prior to WWI how did he seek to avoid the draft?
Spread Eagle, care to share with us how FDR was perceived to have actively avoided military service when of draft age.
BTW FDR and the five presidents before him had no military service.
From FDR's bio, "Roosevelt wanted to enter military service following the United States' entry into World War I in April 1917, but Secretary of the Navy, Josephus Daniels persuaded him to stay on. Roosevelt tackled numerous wartime projects as he acheived the post of Assistant Secretary of the Navy in 1913."
FDR Bio
Again, I'll put it to all, if Bush and Quayle serving in the National Guard during Viet Nam made them "chickenhawks," and draft dodgers, what does that make Christopher Dodd who served in the Reserves from 1969 to 1975?
I'll also put to all, why was Military Service so important to the ability to lead in 1988, 2000 and 2004, but it had no bearing on the ability to lead in 1992 and 1996?
Did Christopher Dodd miss meetings too?
I never considered Dan Quayle to be a Chickenhawk. I had friends during the Vietnam War that did the same thing and I thought nothing of it. I assume that they and Quayle kept their commitments.
Bush did not keep his commitment and went AWOL on the meetings. Chickenhawk may be too kind a term for that kind of conduct.
WWI Draftees were registered on 5 Jun 1917, on 5 Jun 1918 and on 12 Sep 1918. This draft included males 21 to 30 who were not already serving in the military, regardless of their declared nationality. Men older than 30 and younger than 21 sometimes registered for the draft, but their registration was not required.
Dood. I wasn't even thinking about WWI. Review 38 USC 101(6),which
provides in pertinent part:
"The term 'Spanish-American War' means
(A) the period beginning on April 21, 1898, and ending on July 4,1902,
(B) includes the Philippine Insurrection and the Boxer Rebellion,and
(C) in the case of a veteran who served with the United States military forces engaged in hostilities in the Moro Province, means the period beginning on April 21, 1898, and ending on July 15, 1903."
This is the law the VA uses to determine who was a veteran of the Spanish-American War. So, as you can see, a 17-18-19-20-year old FDR actually had up until mid-1903 to go to Cuba or to the PI and do his patriotic chore. He didn't. He left that to his remarkable cousin Teddy to uphold the family honor.
As for me, I know that by the time my 20th birthday rolled around I had at that point 7-1/2 months in Vietnam.
FDR is the quintessential prototype of a chickenhawk. Bedwetting leftards have to do pretzel logic to exempt him from.
You did not say whether you volunteered or were drafted. In any event, sorry you lost.
Hey spread em. The Spanish-American War began April 21, 1998 and ended February 6, 1899. FDR was 16 when the war began and 17 when it ended. The minimum enlistment age was 18. Teddy Roosevelt was 39. Playing the dumbass might work for you on other blogs, but it does not work here.
So if you're a "chickenhawk", as you call them, and you're the president or vice president, and you're attacked, does that mean you can't retaliate?
Hey spread em. The Spanish-American War began April 21, 1998 and ended February 6, 1899. FDR was 16 when the war began and 17 when it ended. The minimum enlistment age was 18. Teddy Roosevelt was 39. Playing the dumbass might work for you on other blogs, but it does not work here.
Another product of modern education, unable to read for content and comprehension.
As I posted above, 38 USC 101(6) is the federal statute that says when the Spanish-American War began and ended, and says when and where someone needed to serve in order to be considered a veteran of that war. By that law that war ended on July 4,1902, except those who fought in the Moro Province (Phillippines), where the war was officially ended on July 15, 1903. Can you comprehend that?
FDR was born on January 30, 1882, so on July 15, 1903, when the Spanish-American was over, he was 21 years, 5 months, and 16 days old. Can you comprehend that.
FDR was prime meat to serve in the S-A War. Except he didn't serve. He chickened out. A chickenhawk four-square. Given the way he later postured and preened and posed as assistant secretary of the navy and later ads president, he is probably the numero uno bigtime chicken hawk of all time. BIGTIME chickenhawk. BIGTIME.
You did not say whether you volunteered or were drafted. In any event, sorry you lost.
If that is directed at me, I enlisted directly out of high school when I was 18-years old, and spent 4 years and 4 months on active duty, 16 months of which was in Vietnam.
And I never lost a thing.
The only one I see here who lost anything is your parents who had the sad misfortune of ending up with the sorry likes of you as their supposed "son."
FDR ended WWII against Hitler and Japan and Bush has been fighting longer and still can't even clear the road from Baghdad to the airport.
tanglewood said...
FDR ended WWII against Hitler and Japan
Klatu said: No Tangleweed, President Harry Truman was President at the end of WWII against Hitlery and Japan.
I guess Boomers are better at History then this Generation.
You are correct and I apologize. At least you did not attempt to defend Bush. And don't forget
Andrew Johnson ended the Civil War.
Post a Comment