(March 5, 2017 at 8:22 am)mlmooney89 Wrote:(March 5, 2017 at 4:46 am)pocaracas Wrote: This is the sort of thing that always leaves me puzzled.
How was he defending the U.S.A. in Yemen?
Or are the U.S. military proponents of the god old fashioned "a good defense is an offense"?
As for the wife... I wonder how many other wives, children and husbands are out there grieving their family members who died while serving in the U.S. Military... And how many of those get such a presidential invitation.
If not all, then how was this case different to warrant such an invitation?
Poca that question infuriates me and I refuse to answer it again. Saying that a soldier didn't give his life for his country is the quickest way to get on my shit list. And no military family member thinks it's plausible to honor every fallen soldier like that yet we need to honor them in honoring the ones we can. This gentleman was not only a Navy Seal (arguably one of the best... Groups I reckon you could call them but I'm biased because my father was an Army Ranger and we joke that Navy Seals have heroes too and they are the Rangers but that's just inner military joking) but he has multiple bronze stars meaning that he earned a deceased hero's welcome home. No good soldier (or equivalent ie marine, air man, etc) would begrudge a fallen soldier that just because they didn't get one. My father wasn't honored by the president but I felt no less pride in everything he stood for and did in his life standing there next to his flag draped coffin.
I guess I knew that was coming...
Maybe I'm biased... maybe my definition of defense is wrong... maybe you're biased for being in a military family...
but... my understanding is that when you defend a country, you are in that country defending it from an invading force.
When you're in some other country... unless that other country asked for your help (in which case you're there to defend that other country, not your own), you are an invading force, not a defending one.
My qualm was with the wording "defending your country" and not with any heroism or honor or ability to follow orders that the individual person had.
I'm sure there's some gray area in what concerns international terrorism, but can terrorists pose that much of a threat to a country like the U.S. that you'd have to hunt them down in every corner of the world?
I guess I'm questioning the whole approach (from the politicians to the military top brass), but also the likely biased patriotic view that Americans are fed (by those in power) so they can stand behind all these international military endeavors, instead of opposing them as invasions of other countries.
