MSNBC Host "Uncomfortable" Calling Military "Heroes"

[GymRat]

First, I want to thank those of you who served. I have a son serving right now. He graduated at the top of his high school class and wanted to serve right away. He had a scholarship to Rice, and I talked him into getting his degree first. He completed his Junior year and enlisted anyway. He was desperate to be come a soldier.
Maybe it can be argued that the use of the word hero is a bit too much for each and every soldier. But, if perhaps there are any individuals who could use a little extra praise, let it be our soldiers. At the very least, does it really make someone uncomfortable to label a soldier a hero? Was it worthy of discussion on a news show on Memorial Day?

[nwarounder]

To me the individual soldiers are all heroes, fallen or alive. Talk about their dimwit fucking leaders and their idiotic policies all you want, but you need to leave the soldiers out of discussions like this and quit using them to make a political point. Some things are sacred for a reason, and this should be one of them.

[CuteOldGuy]

+1

[Laz]

I agree that the term "Hero" is way overused. However, the military personal volunteer to go where they know they could be killed or injured. They do this for the sake of the country and in many cases the people there that they try to help. It is easy to do something good when there is no real risk to yourself. But to do good while knowing there is a significant risk to yourself is heroic.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Here is a longer portion of the video.
http://www.examiner.com/video/msnbc-s-chris-hayes-uncomfortable-calling-fallen-military-heroes

Thanks Munch. The full version debunks what some on here are wanting to think. That is "The Liberal Press hates soldiers" , That was not at all what he was saying.

Chris Hayes is one of the better reporters around. I am not suprised that some of you righties do not have a clue as to which reporter digs for facts and hard questions and which ones just ride in on songs by Toby Keith and Lee Greenwood blaring in the background.

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Here is an analogy. On 9-11, the people who were in the Twin Towers when the planes hit were victims. The people on the airliner that crashed into that field were heros.

I think the people that overpowered the rag heads and brought the plane down in Penn did heroic action. The people in the Twin Towers and on the Planes were just victims IMHO. I saw nothing heroic there.

I am not sure I would classify joining the military as heroic. I think volunteering for a suicide mission heroic. I think many of you righties need to watch the Pat Tillman Story before you denounce anyone for offering up a mere discussion on any one subject. Many of you seem not to be able to distinguish the difference between a tragic death and an heroic one.

http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/08/20...dG1q454JVMeAqQ


When Heroism Means Finding Truth

By STEPHEN HOLDEN

Published: August 19, 2010




What soldier, anticipating his death in combat, wouldn’t want to be remembered as a fallen hero who gave his life for his comrades? What grieving family wouldn’t accept the official account, however fraudulent, of a son or daughter’s heroism, stifle their doubts, keep their mouths shut and be content to find some comfort in the ritual honors?

That was probably the assumption of the military brass who concocted a bogus account of the combat death of Pat Tillman, a football star and a casualty of so-called friendly fire in Afghanistan in April 2004 at age 27. The official story initially had him saving the lives of fellow soldiers during a mountain ambush by the Taliban. It was a flag-waving, “Rambo”-worthy feel-good fantasy that played well on television.
But as Amir Bar-Lev’s sorrowful, devastating documentary, “The Tillman Story,” reveals, not every soldier or every soldier’s family is willing to be so glorified

[CuteOldGuy]

The longer portion of the video simply reveals a table full of idiots. You can argue definitions all you want. When someone volunteers to take a bullet for me, s/he's a hero in my book, regardless of the merits of the conflict.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The longer portion of the video simply reveals a table full of idiots.

I thought you picked a mean Banjo in 'Deliverance', but you are not very attune to nuanced Philosophical Discussions.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...ail&FORM=VIRE7

[Doove]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I guess I can kind of see Hayes' point. Calling the fallen "heroes" would tend to lend legitimacy to the wars that have been fought, and recently, the legitimacy of our wars is at best, questionable.

Wait a minute, hold the phone!!

Aren't you the guy who started this thread?

Seems someone forgot that it was he who started all this phony indignation over the MSNBC comments.

[Iaintliein]

Originally Posted by GymRat

First, I want to thank those of you who served. I have a son serving right now. He graduated at the top of his high school class and wanted to serve right away. He had a scholarship to Rice, and I talked him into getting his degree first. He completed his Junior year and enlisted anyway. He was desperate to be come a soldier.
Maybe it can be argued that the use of the word hero is a bit too much for each and every soldier. But, if perhaps there are any individuals who could use a little extra praise, let it be our soldiers. At the very least, does it really make someone uncomfortable to label a soldier a hero? Was it worthy of discussion on a news show on Memorial Day?

My best to your son and family. It is not an easy path for either.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Doove

Wait a minute, hold the phone!!

Aren't you the guy who started this thread?

Seems someone forgot that it was he who started all this phony indignation over the MSNBC comments.

How quickly they forget!

[Little Stevie]

Originally Posted by Randy4Candy

Hmmm, at least, unlike you guys, he admits to maybe being wrong and might even realize that he's an overeducated priss. I also think that his worring about "rhetorical whatever it was" is far off of the mark. However, and unfortunately for your postulation, no one who is doing their duty that they volunteered for, and in the past were drafted into, qualifies to be a "hero." If everyone's a hero, then none really are. That is unless we're willing to trot out "superhero" in reference to the fallen, wounded and highly decorated. The troops deserve be greatly respected and commended for doing that duty, unlike during and after Vietnam. But, until Cheney, Bush and the Faux Media Machine started all of this over hyping, that term was reserved for those who performed above the ordinary level of all of the others who were doing their duty. In my way of thinking, the more heroic action by our current group of soldiers may be dealing with the repeated redeployments, lack of leave and being under armored. All of the things which happen fighting two wars on the cheap. But that's OK, we all got our tax breaks. Do you guys really think throwing out words makes up for not being willing to pay for our adventures? Now that's gutless and unpatriotic. Pay up or shut up.

Extremely well said, Randy4Candy. Over-using the word hero dishonors those who actually are heroes.

Obstructing the reinstatement of the taxes that would have paid for much of the war effort is EXACTLY the spineless evasion I would expect from a TPunk.

[Iaintliein]

So. IF the meme "if everybody is a hero then nobody is" is correct, I guess "if everybody is a racist then nobody is". Here we go with liberal sensitivities and statistics. Can anyone clarify the allowable number of heroes before the line is crossed and they are all no longer heroes?

[i'va biggen]

Heroes are the ones called "heroes" by their comrades who fought beside them or have had their lives saved by them.Not what the media or politicians call them.I have the highest regard for all who served,and I think we should say to them on their return"what can I do for you" not "thanks for your service" Was I a hero when I served? no just doing a job.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Iaintliein

So. IF the meme "if everybody is a hero then nobody is" is correct, I guess "if everybody is a racist then nobody is". Here we go with liberal sensitivities and statistics. Can anyone clarify the allowable number of heroes before the line is crossed and they are all no longer heroes?

I'm going to agree with you on this one. Being a hero is not always measured in the outcome, but in the willingness to go above and beyond. I am not going to say everyone in the military is a hero, for the military has some people problems of their own. But the majority who are volunteers certainly do not do it for thr money--they do it for far more heroic motives. To me that makes them heroes. Are there different levels? Yes. But the difference between the Purple Heart recipient and may who do not receive the award is measured in fate, not the heart or bravery of the person.

I don't know the newscaster so I won't comment on his intention. At a minimum it didn't sound good and he should at a minimum have worded it differently. I think he would have been wise to separate thoughts about a soldier's heroism from the righteousness of the war. The civil war had some real heroes in the field who died unknown and unremembered on both sides, as did the nazi army in WW II.

What bothered me the most is the "written appology", which almost always means an appology written by others and shoved in the mouth of the person who supposedly said it. If that was what happened here, I find that part to be cowardly.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Iaintliein

So. IF the meme "if everybody is a hero then nobody is" is correct, ?

IB it is more like giving all kids who play sports the same medal. Are you for that? Are they all winners? Did the kid who struck out ten times really do just as good as the kid who hit ten homers?

Is the Army Private who never left stateside pushing paper work just as heroic as the Marines knocking down doors in Fallujah?

Heroic things are left to fate. Some hero's never get the chance to be, does not mean they are bad people but to call them a hero does tend to devalue the actual meaning of the word.

Originally Posted by Iaintliein;2740676 I guess "if everybody is a racist then nobody is".

, Can anyone clarify the allowable number of heroes before the line is crossed and they are all no longer heroes?

There can be an infinite number of racist just like there can be a infinite number of hero's.

If your standard that anybody that applies for a job in the military is a hero then yes that racist analogy would be suffice. My standard is a bit higher. For instance the person who went crazy and shot his fellow Army mates is not a hero in my book , even though he did join the military.

Originally Posted by Old-T

But the majority who are volunteers certainly do not do it for thr money--they do it for far more heroic motives. To me that makes them heroes. .

The majority of school teachers do not do it for the money. Fishermen , the most dangerous job in the world do not do it strictly for the money but money is a factor , just as money and career advancement is part of a serviceman/woman equation.

What some of you leaning to the right might take into account is that some on the left do not think fighting an unjust war, heroic. They thought that folks that burned their draft card heroic! LOL

Stand in others shoes before being so harsh. The reporter that COG is ragging on is top notch. It is a difficult discussion. To some it would not matter how he worded it.

I pray all our troops make it home safely. No matter what side of the asile we sit, nobody would disagree with that.