I read this reply in the "Who Annoys You" thread of the 2000s.  It disturbed me enough to make poltical commentary, thus I needed to transfer my reply here in this new topic:


El Rushbo aka Rush Limbaugh...I will not get into why...

All the self-proclaimed 'experts' that say the Airbus A380 will be a bust...people said the same thing about the Boeing 747....

Peaceniks. They want to put F-16's out of business. I am an F-16 fanatic..I love to see them flying. I can't imagine airshows without the USAF Thunderbirds and their colorful F-16's...yes they're warplanes....but to an aviation nut and airshow adrenaline junkie...they ROCK.  Same for the Navy Blue Angels and their F-18 Hornets. As well as the F-117 Nighthawk Stealth FIGHTER(not STEALTH BOMBER as some people make the mistake of calling it!) and the F-22 Raptor.
oh yeah I forgot the F-14 Tomcat. I will miss it too when the Navy retires it.

Sorry if I made anyone who wants peace angry...I'm just an airplane and warbird nut.


It's fun to look at all that gleaming aircraft standing in the hangar in all their patriotic glory, it's thrilling to see those sexy planes fly maneuvres at the airshows, but never lose sight of what a war plane is for.  Never, ever, forget what happens when these planes carry out the missions they are diesigned for:
As one historian and WWII veteran puts it:
...I dropped bombs on Hungary. I remember the raid on Pilsen. A lot of planes went over. I remember reading about the raid after the war. It was described by Churchill in his memoirs as, Well, we bombed Pilsen and there were very few civilian casualties. Then I was in Europe years after that, sometime in the mid-1960s, in Yugoslavia. I ran into a couple from Pilsen. Hesitantly, I told them that I had been in one of the crews that bombed Pilsen. They said, when you finished the streets were full of corpses, hundreds and hundreds of people killed in that raid. It was only after the war that I began to think about the raids I had been on. The thing about being in the Air Force and dropping bombs from 35,000 feet is that you don't see anybody, human beings, you don't hear screams, see blood, see mangled bodies. I understand very well how atrocities are committed in modern warfare, from a distance. So there I was doing these things.
--Howard Zinn
Bombardier, historian, anti-war activist

DRESDEN: FEBRUARY 1945
http://www.profindpages.com/Img/dresden_victims.jpg

I'm sorry to be insensitive to anybody's nerves here.  This is a comparitively gentle picture of the results of warfare from the air.  It is relatively free of details.  The pictures I could show you of the agonized faces of the eviscerated but still alive, of the bodies torn asunder in living color, of the burns, the wounds, the amputations, the terror, the destruction, and the grief depict human misery beyound our comprehension.
This is the kind of image the Bush Administration is actively suppressing from the media.  The Bush Administration intimidated the media from showing even the flag-draped coffins of dead soldiers.

Our president is the chickenhawk deserter from the National Guard who got dolled up in a jet fighter uniform he had not the merit to don, and declared "victory" on the kind of aircraft carrier he never set foot on during combat.  Like Ronald Reagan, who spent WWII making jingoistic movies in Hollywood, war to Bush is about dominance, vainglory, and triumphalism.  Neither Bush nor Reagan could care less about the hell-on-earth their weapons of war created.  They want you too to bask in the glory of our gleaming hardware and proud soldiers in their formal fatigues.  If we fall for these Leni Riefenstahl-style honey drippings we lose perspective on the reality of war, and a slice of our own humanity!

A bomber, a jet fighter, a tank, and an assault vehicle are not engineering feats we as spectators should admire.  They are not orbiting satellites or Formula 1 racing cars.  They are WMD and into us they should strike dread, not excitement.  When they are used , the suffering of our fellow human beings is incalculable.

I have alway said Rush was three quarts short of a dozen, now this confirms it....  ::)

Rush didn't glorify war planes, though I don't doubt he has.  A member of inthe00s did.  I was harsh in my reaction.  I'm sure she didn't mean to be insensitive to the victims of warfare.  My forceful reply was meant to distinguish the weapons of war from NASCAR, Formula 1, Harleys, and other "sexy" vehicles.

Oh yes, those war planes are so horrible.

I wish I could live life through rose colored glasses, and see how the world is not a dangerous place.  I wish I could live in a world where people are not trying to kill each other.  I wish that weapons were not needed to protect us from other humans.

However, that is not the case.  WWII was horrible, but Hitler, Musilini, and Tojo forced the war on the rest of the world.  If not for "war planes", the death toll in former Yugoslavia would have been much higher.  Slobodan Milosevic gave us (and the UN) no choice but to use them to stop his genocide.

It is just like a quote I heard often when I was in the Marines:  "Pray for peace, but prepare for war".  Maybe someday we will advance enough that it will not be nessicary, but that time is not yet here.

Max, I am a little confused, here.  Where did you get "sexy" from?  I didn't see in her post where she thought they were sexy.

Although, I do see the point you were making.

What's wrong with admiring the beauty of an airplane? ???

Growing up some of my fondest memories are when me and my cousins would put together our favourite model airplanes. She wasn't glamourizing the destruction that these aircraft have caused, but admiring the beauty that they possess (just how do you spell that dang word?).

Where do you stop with this? Am I not supposed to not want a 1970 Chevy Chevelle because it is a gas guzzler and contributes to the destruction of the environment? Am I wrong for finding beauty in my 12 gauge or my 9mm because they might be used to kill someone in war?

Yes. I am a screaming liberal who loves his guns, and muscle cars. :o ;)

Max, you over-reacted. Mushroom, the bombing of apartment buildings in Kosovo, the saturation bombing of the residential areas of Dresden when the war against Germany was all but over, and the napalming of unarmed villages in Vietnam should not be condoned as engaging an enemy anymore than the Blitz on London or 9/11 should. You can't argue that Hitler's V2 campaign was abominable, and then suggest that levelling Dresden was ok because Germany was our enemy. You can't condemn Milosevic's death squads at the same time your own planes are firing missiles into residential buildings in the name of "peace". It would be fine if wars were only fought between armies, but they're not. They're waged by armies against civilians.

No rose-colored glasses.  On the contrary, the wearers of rosey lenses reside in the supporters of an adiminstration that beats on one of the weakest, most benighted nations of the world--Iraq--and then suppresses the view of the consequences.

I'm not saying airstrikes are never necessary.  I am saying the weapons of war are not objects to celebrate.  If they are needed, let us bear in mind the human suffering involved in accomplsihing a necessary military route.  If we are using the weapons of war not to secure our nation, but to line the pockets of the rich corporate-imperialst class, we are indeed committing atrocities.  Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.  The Right will make up stories in which they did from now 'till domesday.  Ditto Iraq and WMD.

I chose an old picture of Dresden rather than a new picture of Iraq so as not to goad even more angry responses from the Right.
Speaking of, We can all be glad the Nazis didn't win the war.  That doesn't make the celebration of the firebombing of Dresden a healthy response.

Governments lie about war casualties.  If you are watching the Iraqi occupation on American televison, you are seeing an extremely sanitized and nationalistic version.  It's deceptive if not an outright lie.

If you want to admire WMD, that's your right.  Our jingoistic media won't remind you of the truth about what happens when these weapons do their job, so I will. 

Read between the lines.  If you don't see the sexualization of the "warbirds" in what Ms. Tonystewartetc. wrote, then you have a lot to learn about psychology!
:P

<<confused as well.

I agree with Tony that they ARE magnificent to watch. I also agree with Mushroom. Yes, they have caused mass destruction, but they have also prevented mass destruction. Some "war planes" were not only used to drop bombs, they were used to drop necessary supplies to troops in a matter of minutes/hours when it may have taken days to reach with a land-vehicle.
Yes..and also to civilians in war-torn countries...Maxwell seems not to recognize that WW2 transports were used during the Berlin Airlift to get food and other supplies to West Berlin during the Soviet blockade...they even dropped packages of CANDY to kids there!

No rose-colored glasses. On the contrary, the wearers of rosey lenses reside in the supporters of an adiminstration that beats on one of the weakest, most benighted nations of the world--Iraq--and then suppresses the view of the consequences.

I'm not saying airstrikes are never necessary. I am saying the weapons of war are not objects to celebrate. If they are needed, let us bear in mind the human suffering involved in accomplsihing a necessary military route. If we are using the weapons of war not to secure our nation, but to line the pockets of the rich corporate-imperialst class, we are indeed committing atrocities. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The Right will make up stories in which they did from now 'till domesday. Ditto Iraq and WMD.

I chose an old picture of Dresden rather than a new picture of Iraq so as not to goad even more angry responses from the Right.
Speaking of, We can all be glad the Nazis didn't win the war. That doesn't make the celebration of the firebombing of Dresden a healthy response.

Governments lie about war casualties. If you are watching the Iraqi occupation on American televison, you are seeing an extremely sanitized and nationalistic version. It's deceptive if not an outright lie.

If you want to admire WMD, that's your right. Our jingoistic media won't remind you of the truth about what happens when these weapons do their job, so I will.

Read between the lines. If you don't see the sexualization of the "warbirds" in what Ms. Tonystewartetc. wrote, then you have a lot to learn about psychology!
:P
And I hope you KNOW that an airshow with all CIVILIAN aircraft would be dead BORING...how many airshow nuts go to see Cessnas,Piper Cubs,and Beechcrafts...

and don't think all biplanes and barnstormers would work nowadays..

BTW Jet airliners would never exist without the military jets proving it could work...Prove to me that a jet AIRLINER was on the drawing boards before the Germans unveiled the Me-262..or that jet travel was even thought of then other than science-fiction stuff...

BTW I sleep well at night KNOWING our Air Force is there to protect us.

And this world is not all love,peace,and harmony and NEVER WILL BE. It cannot happen in this world the way it is.

Thanks, glad y'all understand what I was trying to tell ye!
See y'all at the Dukes of Hazzard!

Thanks, glad y'all understand what I was trying to tell ye!
See y'all at the Dukes of Hazzard!
Let's agree to disagree.

Thanks, glad y'all understand what I was trying to tell ye!
See y'all at the Dukes of Hazzard!


Was this really necessary, Max?  So you two have different opinions on the matter..so what?  That isn't a call to treat her like hers doesn't matter.  Opinions are opinions, not right or wrong. 

Thanks, glad y'all understand what I was trying to tell ye!
See y'all at the Dukes of Hazzard!


How did we go from warplanes to bazookas?

Was this really necessary, Max? 
Nope.

Was this really necessary, Max? So you two have different opinions on the matter..so what? That isn't a call to treat her like hers doesn't matter. Opinions are opinions, not right or wrong.
I wonder if Max has any respect for those who choose to serve in our military....since he thinks everything in the world is peace, love, flowers, and joy....

This whole thread reminds me of an incident that happened several years ago. A friend of mine and I were at a street dance in Lincoln, and we met these two girls who worked with my brother. We were making small talk and getting along fine, when the subject came up of what we did for a living. My friend mentioned that he worked in construction, and immediately one of the girls started yelling at him and telling him what a horrible person he was for destroying the environment, yada, yada, yada. I was so shocked at her response and her hostility that I was rendered speechless, but my friend did the right thing in this situation, which was to laugh in her face.
    Normally I respect your opinions, Max, but I think you're being a little harsh (and more than just a tad self-righteous, I might add). Granted, I can see where Tonystewart's dig at "peaceniks" (which I'll admit, was rather unnecessary) might have set you off, but the whole thing about "sexualizing" airplanes?  Please. That's going too far. So she likes military aircraft. What's sexual about that? What's wrong with going to a museum or air show and admiring these machines for the sheer elegance of their design?
    I haven't heard so much guilt-tripping since the last time I set foot in a Catholic church.

This whole thread reminds me of an incident that happened several years ago. A friend of mine and I were at a street dance in Lincoln, and we met these two girls who worked with my brother. We were making small talk and getting along fine, when the subject came up of what we did for a living. My friend mentioned that he worked in construction, and immediately one of the girls started yelling at him and telling him what a horrible person he was for destroying the environment, yada, yada, yada. I was so shocked at her response and her hostility that I was rendered speechless, but my friend did the right thing in this situation, which was to laugh in her face.
    Normally I respect your opinions, Max, but I think you're being a little harsh (and more than just a tad self-righteous, I might add). Granted, I can see where Tonystewart's dig at "peaceniks" (which I'll admit, was rather unnecessary) might have set you off, but the whole thing about "sexualizing" airplanes?  Please. That's going too far. So she likes military aircraft. What's sexual about that? What's wrong with going to a museum or air show and admiring these machines for the sheer elegance of their design?
     I haven't heard so much guilt-tripping since the last time I set foot in a Catholic church.

I don't know, maybe I'm the one with the Freudian issues! Hrrrumph...
:-really looks like.  darnit, they didn't even want us to see flag-draped coffins!
I think America needs to see that 22 year-old infantryman all charred and eviscerated in the sand.  That's what war is.   
If it has to be done, it has to be done, but if you show the artillery firing and not the results, you don't have a report, you have a propaganda campaign.
Here's the rub.  It didn't have to be done.  America is prosecuting a dirty war, and a war it will never win, just like Vietnam.  You can say I don't respect the men and women in uniform.  You can contradict me when I say you're wrong.  But I don't give a ****!  Said soldier blown to bits in the desert held a rifle, not a pen.  It is all the politicians in Washington who signed off on this rotten campaign that caused that soldier to wind up dead. 
Every man and every woman who joins the armed forces understands death in combat is a risk.  It is a risk I would have taken.  I would have joined the armed forces, but my health did not allow it.  I don't fall into the category of "peacenik," but you know what?  Even if I was it wouldn't make me unpatriotic and it wouldn't mean I disrespect our fighting forces.
If the leaders filter through their media mavens the message that you must support a military campaign in order to be a decent citizen (ie. respecting our troops, loving your country) and YOU the citizens buy into it, you have given up democracy and signed on to fascism.
And if you think you don't like that statement, I like it even less!  Don't want to be fascist?  Reconsider the war--government--patriotism ligature.

I don't know, maybe I'm the one with the Freudian issues! Hrrrumph...
:-really looks like.  darnit, they didn't even want us to see flag-draped coffins!
I think America needs to see that 22 year-old infantryman all charred and eviscerated in the sand.  That's what war is.   
If it has to be done, it has to be done, but if you show the artillery firing and not the results, you don't have a report, you have a propaganda campaign.
We want the challenge, we wand the adventure, we want to be able to say that we are the elite of the military. 

This is the kind of hypocracy that really sets people like me off, but I am just shaking my head.

Maxwell, you really don't have a clue, do you?  You seem to think that everybody in the military is a deluded fool, who blindly followed this administration into a war.  You seem to believe that the military is stupid, and it is the "American People" that need to wake it up out of it's Rip Van Winkle slumber.

Well, let me speak to you for those that are dirty, tired, and roasting in the sand.

Everybody in the military is a volunteer.  We do not have a draft.  And are you ready for this?  Most of those in the Infantry want to be in the Infantry!  That's right, we volunteer for it.  We want to be the best, we want the challenge, we want the adventure, we want to be able to say we are the elite.  And we all sign up with open eyes.

I remember watching them pull bodies out of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon in 1983.  And as a Marine, my reaction was sheer outrage.  And that was shared by everybody in my platoon.  I even remember seeing a Gunnery Sergeant cry when he realized that they were being pulled out afterwards.  You see, to us it hurt morale, because we saw it as a failure.  I am sure that Soldiers felt the same way after the pull out of Somallia.

Showing pictures of bodies is obscene, and the only purpose is propaganda.  Remember, that "22 year-old infantryman all charred and eviscerated in the sand" which you go into detail about has a family.  Do you really think that is how he should be remembered?  And by the way, did you know that showing pictures of war dead is against the Geneva Convention?  That's right, is can be a war crime.  But when it is done in the interest of propaganda (excuse me, news) I guess it is excused.

If you wonder why the Military holds the "Peace At All Cost" fringe in contempt, it is largely because they hold the military in contempt.  They speak over and over about "accepting the culture of others", yet ignore the fact that the military (past and present) has it's own culture.  It is largely one of pride in the country, pride in the service, and pride in themselves.  Then somebody comes along and tries to tear them apart to make some obscure political point that only themselves and others like them understand.

Now I can understand your dislike of romanticizing weapons of war.  I myself do not like them, but they are a nessicary evil.  And at the same time, they can be fascinating in themselves.  Who honestly can look at an F-117, and wonder how such a plane can even fly?  Who can watch a Harrier or an A-10 in flight, and not marvel at the manuvers they do?  It is like watching an acrobatic display.

But the things you want to do are nothing short of evil.  You want to traumatize our military and their families, just to further your political goals.  I am sure you have never sat in the mud in the middle of the jungle thousands of miles away from your home and family.  You have never sat in the desert, waiting for that CH-46 to bring you food and water (and hopefully mail).  You never sat inside a troop transpot ship that was built before you were born, wondering when you would next see land.  I (and thousands like me) have done that.  And the thought of people who never served useing the death of somebody like that for political purposes is disgusting.

This whole thread reminds me of an incident that happened several years ago. A friend of mine and I were at a street dance in Lincoln, and we met these two girls who worked with my brother. We were making small talk and getting along fine, when the subject came up of what we did for a living. My friend mentioned that he worked in construction, and immediately one of the girls started yelling at him and telling him what a horrible person he was for destroying the environment, yada, yada, yada. I was so shocked at her response and her hostility that I was rendered speechless, but my friend did the right thing in this situation, which was to laugh in her face.
    Normally I respect your opinions, Max, but I think you're being a little harsh (and more than just a tad self-righteous, I might add). Granted, I can see where Tonystewart's dig at "peaceniks" (which I'll admit, was rather unnecessary) might have set you off, but the whole thing about "sexualizing" airplanes?  Please. That's going too far. So she likes military aircraft. What's sexual about that? What's wrong with going to a museum or air show and admiring these machines for the sheer elegance of their design?
I haven't heard so much guilt-tripping since the last time I set foot in a Catholic church.
As someone whose father was a World War 2 veteran...some supporters of 'peace' get my goat...Yes it's wonderful to have a peaceful world...but I'm also realistic..some of the skirmishes going on in this world right now have gone on for over TWO THOUSAND years...namely Israel vs the Arab world...the Arabs wish Israel would just get wiped off the map...while the Israelis have to deal with almost DAILY acts of terrorism! And if one thinks that a dictatorship is benevolent....or that a country's citizens can oust a dictator without the help of others...and without harm to those citizens involved (by a dictator finding out and having them killed for TREASON)..is in their own mental Six Flags park! Give me ONE reason why we should have let Saddam stay as the tin god Dictator of Iraq...or tell me convincingly that Iraqi citizens could have overthrown him WITHOUT ANY MILITARY MEANS...BTW Saddam KILLED his own citizens via mustard gas..is Iraq deserving of a nutjob like that!?!

And I have no doubt in my mind that Al-Qaida would attack us again IN A HEARTBEAT if our military was not on guard against them...Hey the CIA and FBI seem to not handle the job well.....

We want the challenge, we wand the adventure, we want to be able to say that we are the elite of the military.

This is the kind of hypocracy that really sets people like me off, but I am just shaking my head.

Maxwell, you really don't have a clue, do you? You seem to think that everybody in the military is a deluded fool, who blindly followed this administration into a war. You seem to believe that the military is stupid, and it is the "American People" that need to wake it up out of it's Rip Van Winkle slumber.

Well, let me speak to you for those that are dirty, tired, and roasting in the sand.

Everybody in the military is a volunteer. We do not have a draft. And are you ready for this? Most of those in the Infantry want to be in the Infantry! That's right, we volunteer for it. We want to be the best, we want the challenge, we want the adventure, we want to be able to say we are the elite. And we all sign up with open eyes.

I remember watching them pull bodies out of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon in 1983. And as a Marine, my reaction was sheer outrage. And that was shared by everybody in my platoon. I even remember seeing a Gunnery Sergeant cry when he realized that they were being pulled out afterwards. You see, to us it hurt morale, because we saw it as a failure. I am sure that Soldiers felt the same way after the pull out of Somallia.

Showing pictures of bodies is obscene, and the only purpose is propaganda. Remember, that "22 year-old infantryman all charred and eviscerated in the sand" which you go into detail about has a family. Do you really think that is how he should be remembered? And by the way, did you know that showing pictures of war dead is against the Geneva Convention? That's right, is can be a war crime. But when it is done in the interest of propaganda (excuse me, news) I guess it is excused.

If you wonder why the Military holds the "Peace At All Cost" fringe in contempt, it is largely because they hold the military in contempt. They speak over and over about "accepting the culture of others", yet ignore the fact that the military (past and present) has it's own culture. It is largely one of pride in the country, pride in the service, and pride in themselves. Then somebody comes along and tries to tear them apart to make some obscure political point that only themselves and others like them understand.

Now I can understand your dislike of romanticizing weapons of war. I myself do not like them, but they are a nessicary evil. And at the same time, they can be fascinating in themselves. Who honestly can look at an F-117, and wonder how such a plane can even fly? Who can watch a Harrier or an A-10 in flight, and not marvel at the manuvers they do? It is like watching an acrobatic display.

But the things you want to do are nothing short of evil. You want to traumatize our military and their families, just to further your political goals. I am sure you have never sat in the mud in the middle of the jungle thousands of miles away from your home and family. You have never sat in the desert, waiting for that CH-46 to bring you food and water (and hopefully mail). You never sat inside a troop transpot ship that was built before you were born, wondering when you would next see land. I (and thousands like me) have done that. And the thought of people who never served useing the death of somebody like that for political purposes is disgusting.
My father enlisted voluntarily in the Navy after the attack on Pearl Harbor...he KNEW full well that 1)he would have to wound and possibly KILL other human beings and 2)that HIS OWN LIFE could have been taken. But he also knew that the Japanese as well as Hitler were a threat to this world...Hey I wonder if Maxwell knows there were Nazi U-Boats off the coast of New Jersey.....those same U-boats were taking out our ships in the Atlantic...

I'd like to address Tonystewart's original post, the one that got this whole thing started. In your post, you blamed the "peaceniks" for wanting to put the F-16 "out of business." This couldn't be further from the truth. You've got to remember that the F-16, while being a particularly good-looking airplane, is also a 30-year old design that is most likely obsolete by today's standards. How do "peaceniks" factor into this? I mean, the F-4 Phantom was also in service for many years and it too had to be eventually phased out. And why? Because a bunch of protesters picketed the gates of some Air Force base and demanded that it be immediately taken out of service? No. It had simply outlived it's usefulness. Just like the F-16 has.

I'm just trying to be fair here.

Now why don't you and Max kiss and make up.  :)

I'd like to address Tonystewart's original post, the one that got this whole thing started. In your post, you blamed the "peaceniks" for wanting to put the F-16 "out of business." This couldn't be further from the truth. You've got to remember that the F-16, while being a particularly good-looking airplane, is also a 30-year old design that is most likely obsolete by today's standards. How do "peaceniks" factor into this? I mean, the F-4 Phantom was also in service for many years and it too had to be eventually phased out. And why? Because a bunch of protesters picketed the gates of some Air Force base and demanded that it be immediately taken out of service? No. It had simply outlived it's usefulness. Just like the F-16 has.

I'm just trying to be fair here.

Now why don't you and Max kiss and make up.  :)
SOME peaceniks don't understand the need for a MILITARY to protect this country and keep us safe from wackos like Osama. SOME peaceniks want to cut the budget for warplanes to protect our skies. Yes to protect us...the Air Force and Air National Guard keep the peace here...and also do non-military stuff like bring down drug-smuggler planes...as well as search and rescue.

We want the challenge, we wand the adventure, we want to be able to say that we are the elite of the military. 

This is the kind of hypocracy that really sets people like me off, but I am just shaking my head.

Maxwell, you really don't have a clue, do you?  You seem to think that everybody in the military is a deluded fool, who blindly followed this administration into a war.  You seem to believe that the military is stupid, and it is the "American People" that need to wake it up out of it's Rip Van Winkle slumber.

Well, let me speak to you for those that are dirty, tired, and roasting in the sand.


Deluded fool?  I didn't say that.  You know I didn't say that.  I did say I would have joined the military, and I wasn't whistling dixie.  I would have.  I suffered from severe depression, and so did my entire body.  I was very sick in my late teens and early twenties.  I simply wasn't well enough to go. If I was in the military during the first Gulf War, I would have done my duty.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the rest of the chickenhawks were healthy young men who did their d@mnedest not to serve.

As far as me being "evil" for insisting the public see the gory truth about war, I say no way! 

It is not out of respect for the families of the men and women in uniform that the administration doesn't wants the face* of war obscured.  If they respected the families, they'd bother to show up at a few funerals of our fallen soldiers.  The don't because they're afraid.  They don't want the chalkboard theory they've deluded themselve into believing to be influenced by gristle and grief.  So **** them.  If they want to send our best, brightest, and most loyal to die in a war for private profit, the should at least have the stones to own up to what they've done.

*I don't mean the literal faces of dead soldiers. The producers could mosaic the faces.

The military should be there to protect us from real and present threats to our country, not as a mercenary force for corporate America.  Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, and he hated Al Qaeda.  The neocon lapdogs make specious claims about Iraq-Osama connections, but no serious source credits them.

However--you'll believe what you want to believe.

Who thinks there should not be any military anyway?  Its supposed to be some group of "peaceniks", but who?  Maybe theres a small group of hippies in San Francisco who only have half a brain left from all the drugs they did in the 60s, or maybe some hippie wanaabee slackers in there 20s who are just protesting to be rebellious.  But I don't think there any serious movement.

I also don't get why some people think anybody who thinks the war was a bad decision is against the military.  The military doesn't decide when to go to war.  And to say that doesn't mean you think people in the military are stupid and blind and deluded fools.  Its not there job to decide whether they agree with the decision to go to war anyway.