's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

Patriotic Grandstanding Takes a Ghoulish Turn.(6 posts)

Patriotic Grandstanding Takes a Ghoulish Turn.czardonic
Mar 13, 2003 3:34 PM
Seems that some of our more patriotic countrymen would like to dig up the graves of American soldiers killed in WWI and WW2 and currently laid to rest in France and bring them back to the US.

Oh, and they feel that the government should finance this perversion.
redneck yahoosmohair_chair
Mar 13, 2003 4:15 PM
If these idiots knew anything about American military cemeteries in France, they would know that Americans buried there are buried in American soil. Believe it or not, after the war, they actually shipped American soil over to France, Luxembourg, Italy, Tunisia, etc.

These idiots would also know that there are 11 American cemetaries in France covering WWI and WWII, and that's an awful lot of bodies. In almost all cases, next of kin specifically requested that their sons and daughters be buried there. Somehow I don't think the relatives of the dead feel the same way as these redneck yahoos.

I sure hope France doesn't ask for the Statue of Liberty back.
I am always amazed at the ability of our species to...rwbadley
Mar 13, 2003 5:40 PM
come up with these type of ideas. Many folks are nationalistic to the point of absurdity. This digging up remains idea really takes the cake.

In Reno a restaurant recently made news for dumping out bottles of expensive French wine. This was obvously a publicity stunt, as it nailed them huge business. What an example... I would like to have been there, I would have sucked it up off the ground given half a chance! ;-)

A French restaurant here just opened a month ago after extensive remodeling (used to be an Italian place) These poor bstards are going to suffer the rath of some moron(s) I would wager. I intend to go there just to check it out, give 'em some business and thumb my nose at the whole idea of this French bashing. I think in jest it's ok to poke a bit of fun; but really, come on here....

Patriotism takes many forms. One I have some problem with is the dual American flags on the back of the extremely large gas guzzling chariot. I saw an older jacked up 4X with the huge tires and flags a flyin'. As it motored down the road I couldn't help but notice the grimy cloud left in it's wake. These Bubba's are usually the type to drive with the gas pedal mashed to the floor. They are the first to give the cyclists a hard time for being on the(their) road. I know it would pinch a bit, but I do think it may be a good idea to jack the energy prices up a bit more, to encourage fuel conservation. I would like to see some of these prcks walk a bit and get 'em off the road.

What makes me nervous is our Bubba in the White House. A shining example of all I tend to rail against...

Started off OK, but...hycobob
Mar 13, 2003 6:10 PM
If I remember its still within ALL of our rights to own a big ol' gas guzzlin' pickup. Those flags he/she had waving were his, yours and mine; next time you see that truck raise your right hand and salute. That move just might be the thing he talks about all day. You don't have to like it, but thats part of what makes America great. And remember, when gas prices go up, so does the cost of everything else; its not likely to make people cut back on driving anyway. Now's a good time to remember that just like you don't care for the sitting president, there are a lot of Americans who didn't care for the last president either. Who, by the way, did his fair share of sending our troops out to "indian country". He just didn't bother replacing what he spent and now we have to scramble.
Started off OK, but...rwbadley
Mar 13, 2003 10:16 PM
Thanks for your input. I have no quarrel with showing pride or saluting a symbol of the US. Indeed, we live in a society made great with our diversity. I AM proud of that. Each of us has the freedom to show their patriotism or otherwise as they see fit. This is part of that freedom we should not take for granted.

Our standard of living is very high, we are indeed fortunate. This high living standard has been built on the hard work of our ancestors, and our proximity to vast untapped resources.

If our freedom allows us to waste those resources, shouldn't our patriotism give us cause to conserve? The mark of patriotism during WWII was not toss it, trash it, and use it up! It was recycle, salvage; and make do, or do without! Why should the driver of the 8 mpg gas guzzler get more admiration than the person choosing to express his desire for strong community and country in a less polluting and wasteful fashion?

A hum-vee loaded with our finest young men and women doing a tough job defending our country will bring a tear to my eye. I prefer you not attempt to impugne my dedication or patriotism to our country by trying to link my prior reference to 'bubbas in the 4x' to that. They do have the freedom to exhibit how they desire, when they (and not just they,to be fair) play games with my health and safety and think the flag on their rig makes it OK, then I refuse to give them respect they might otherwise deserve.

Actions will speak louder to me than the exhibition of our national symbol on a vehicle that requires our continued heavy reliance on a finite commodity that keeps us at the mercy of (insert favorite target here). You're right about higher energy costs hitting all sectors of the economy. I disagree with your belief that higher costs will not encourage conservation.

The 'last president' attempted to do his job to a high standard. Just as this current one is attempting. I disagree with your inference that the US military was left high and dry. During the years from '92-'00 many military advancements were achieved by funding, research and development. These advancements allow the US to create wide spread carnage or pinpoint destruction on a scale unrivalled in history. All the while keeping our own fighting men and women relatively safe.

I have no disregard for that 'last president' that are based on his attempts to relieve a European area of a wacked out despot, if that is what you are refering to. Why we chose not to do the same in Africa could be point of debate. If you believe that 'last president' was wrong to do this, why would you think 'this president' is more right? That simply reeks of hypocrisy, sir.

My reference to the current occupant of the White House in a less than glowing fashion is my opinion based on a multitude of observations. I don't subscribe to some knee jerk depiction of 'this president' as a man that is 'Just and Good and Right', based on something simple like; we believe there has not yet been a dallyance in the oval office, and, there has yet to be a costly witchhunt such as Whitewater.

I believe every administration serves interests, their own and those they choose to serve. The choices they make are what define their success or failure. Time will tell if in the long run the correct choices were made. One thing you can say about the 'last president', he was fairly elected by popular vote -twice.

The states(wo)man who proposed this:torquer
Mar 14, 2003 8:16 AM
Did a Google search on the Congresswoman, and from the first real news article (not election returns or press releases):

"One of Brown-Waite's longtime supporters, Janey Baldwin, said the newly elected congresswoman lost (her home county)Hernando because of isolated incidents that included (husband) Harvey Waite being caught by a deputy stealing (opponent) Thurman's campaign signs several weeks before the election."

Still, I prefer that these yahoos are busying themselves with this stuff (and renaming "frenchified" foods) rather than repealing reproductive rights, funding intrusive domestic intelligence programs etc.