Why Win-The-War.com Won't
See the Rules of the Website.Our goal is to win the war. It is not to promote any other agenda whatsoever. For the purposes of this campaign, we are neither Democrat nor Republican.
Please share your ideas freely. We will succeed faster if we learn from each other.
THE FOLLOWING ABUSES ARE CAUSE FOR IMMEDIATE BANISHMENT FROM THE SITE
[ . . . ]
3. Crying "chickenhawk" (use of the exact word not necessary) [ . . . ]
And here's an example, a comment from a Real American:
Actually, if a mere 10% of the people who voted for George W. Bush and who are eligible to serve would sign up, the military forces of the US could probably double in size, and the military wouldn't even have to actively recruit any more.
July 25, 2007 | Tam Resta
The duty to defend the country and help the nation achieve victory when it chooses to go to war falls on everyone's shoulders.
Yelling "chickenhawk" is not an argument. It is an ad hominem attack.
It is also something you don't yourself believe. You don't believe that, in order to vote for war, you have to have served or you have to sign up to serve. We are not in a country where only soldiers and veterans make the decisions of war and peace.
You can yell chickenhawk and I can yell chickendove, but we'll both be avoiding the argument.
July 25, 2007 | Josh Levy
OYE Comment: Well, Josh, it appears that you label as the "chickenhawk argument" anything that, even remotely, seems to suggest that those eligible to serve who support the war set a good example for the rest of us by volunteering for military service.
Isn't this what military recruiters do every day? They speak about many things, including the nobility of U.S. objectives in Iraq and the lifetime leadership opportunities of military service, to encourage Real American Patriots to find the courage within themselves to Be A Man! Enlist!
Banning epithets like "chickenhawk" is one thing; Our Founder, General J.C. Christian, Patriot, took your suggestion a long time ago and created the term "Yellow Elephant" which is now not party-specific.
By banishing an idea, i.e., banning anyone who even suggests that military recruitment focus first on those who support what our country is trying to do in Iraq, you're ensuring that your entire campaign will not succeed. Maybe that's what you want.
We certainly hope that this is not a metaphor for Our Nation.
posted by OYE @ 7/27/2007 09:56:00 AM
3 comments
3 Comments:
The "chickenhawk" argument is not a fallacious ad hominem attack unless the accuser says the chickenhawk's arguments in favor of the war are invalid because of his unwillingness to fight it.
Arguments for or against the war stand or fall for different reasons.
That said, those who argue for the war (and are young enough and strait enough to fight it), can have their credibility or sincerity or their courage questioned. Doesn't mean they're arguments are wrong about supporting the war.
nonsequitur-
You're quite right.
The issue here concerns respect for the opinions of those who support the war as long as "other people" actually fight it.
Anyone can have any opinion, or none at all, but respect for one's own opinions must be earned.
The American people certainly can question the credibility, sincerity and courage of such individuals when deciding whether to respect their opinions.
We're actually trying to enhance their credibility by asking war supporters eligible to serve [healthy heterosexuals 41 and under] whether they have considered volunteering for military service. Their response is relevant to the topic.
Thank you for your comment.
No what you are doing is trying to silence those who dare take you on. The military was designed to be led by civilians. The military is there to defend free speech among many other things. Interesting your goal to silence speech when the military is there to make sure it exists. Nice try children . Grow up. By your logic we should not have Presidents with control over the military right? Can Obaman or Hillary ever choose to send the military into war. Down deep you and I know your game.
Post a Comment
<< Home