How do you feel about this illegal act?

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparklingWaves Please go to http://youtube.com/watch?v=9uOVzQZYE6Y and http://youtube.com/watch?v=5VSDiiRJMcg. There is a movement called Reconquista. It means Re-Conquer or to take back in English. There is a movement that exists that many Americans are not aware of right now. There are those that feel that this is their country and that it was stolen by the white man. Therefore, they are not illegal aliens. The congress met the with Government of Mexico. Mexico wants the border to be open. The U.S. feels that Mexico wants this done to help their poverty. Also, please watch http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ersusa&h l=en

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo says we own that land.
Quote:

The treaty was signed by Nicholas Trist on behalf of the United States and Luis G. Cuevas, Bernardo Couto and Miguel Atristain as plenipotentiary representatives of Mexico on February 2, 1848, at the main altar of the old Cathedral of Guadalupe at Villa Hidalgo (today Gustavo A. Madero, D.F.), slightly north of Mexico City as U.S troops under the command of General Winfield Scott were occupying Mexico City. It was subsequently ratified by the United States Senate by a vote of 38 to 14 on March 10, 1848 and by the Mexican government on May 19, 1848.

I hate using wikipedia as a source, but I'm not fussed with sorting that out right now.

Mexican American war.
Mexican Cession.

We bought part of Arizona and New Mexico. We paid for that.

Of course Mexico wants the border to be open. Mexico stands to lose NOTHING and to GAIN unendingly if that border remains open, and would suffer greatly if it were closed.

Under the Immigration Laws of an established nation (the United States of America) they are illegal aliens, whether they like it or not.

 

[wolfsong]

Wars have been fought for land - many men on all sides have been killed. There is no takesy backsy's when it comes to countries.

 

[Shimmer]

If they want that land back, fine. Pay for it. Make a real offer based on what it is worth in today's dollars and see how that goes.
Texans? Dude, this state is THE most patriotic for itself state in the Union. We're all about Texas history, and it's unlikely any of us will ever forget the Alamo, Bexar, or San Jacinto. Mexico trying to take Texas back would be interesting.

 

[SparklingWaves]

Sorry my other link wasn't working. Here I am trying again. http://youtube.com/watch?v=9uOVzQ2YE6Y

 

[Shimmer]

Immigration gumballs.

Adding perspective, re: cost and reality of immigration, legal and not, in this country.

It's a bit long, but it's really really enlightening.

 

[redambition]

Someone damaging (and thus disrespecting) another country's flag because it was flying higher than (and thus disrespecting) the US flag?

Pot, meet kettle. That vet is no better than the people flying the flags.

If he respectfully removed it, then I'd happily stand up for his making a point. Seeing the way he sliced through the Mexican flag, and then made that aggressive speech just really made me think he's acting like an ass.

I'm all for treating flags with respect, especially the flag of your own country. I don't think it's appropriate to disrespect another country's flag.

on a side note, as it's disrespectful to fly another flag higher than the US flag on US soil... then isn't every flag raising ceremony during an international sporting competition held on US soil guilty of this disrespect if someone of another nationality gets a better podium position than an american?

funny thought to ponder.

 

[user79]

The looks on those 2 Mexican men standing around watching is priceless! 0o

 

[ratmist]

I have to say, I laughed a lot at this.

Flag burning, flag cutting, another-country's-flag-over-America's-flag... it all really kinda doesn't matter.

I don't see why Americans get hot and bothered about symbolism when there are millions more important issues around the country we could get bothered about. It just distracts from real issues.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redambition Someone damaging (and thus disrespecting) another country's flag because it was flying higher than (and thus disrespecting) the US flag? Pot, meet kettle. That vet is no better than the people flying the flags. If he respectfully removed it, then I'd happily stand up for his making a point. Seeing the way he sliced through the Mexican flag, and then made that aggressive speech just really made me think he's acting like an ass. I'm all for treating flags with respect, especially the flag of your own country. I don't think it's appropriate to disrespect another country's flag. on a side note, as it's disrespectful to fly another flag higher than the US flag on US soil... then isn't every flag raising ceremony during an international sporting competition held on US soil guilty of this disrespect if someone of another nationality gets a better podium position than an american? funny thought to ponder.

Understanding why he cut the flag out/downwould have to be best explained by how frustrating it is as a veteran of the United States military and foreign wars to see something that we're taught to defend and honor so intentionally and blatantly disrespected.
As for your question regarding the Olympics:
When the Olympics are held in the US, the US flag goes up first and is taken down last, and the flags are all either to be flown levelly or there is to be an arch type thing with the US flag at the pinnacle. It's simply a matter of honor and respect.

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfsong Thats one of the things I like about America - the govenment is as proud of its nationality as its people are and rightly so, its stronger for it. Its a shame that England (government, not the citizens) isnt so patriotic. Here the powers that be have repeatedly banned English/British flags from being put up in public areas so as 'not to offend those of other countries' - i.e. immigrants. This even happened on a Queen visit - the public werent allowed to have flags. This is PC to a stupid level IMO. If someone wants to visit/come to England, then fine by me, i have absolutely no issues with migrants/immigrants as the majority that move here do so to improve their life (many come from horrific environments and experiences). The economy is stronger for it. But they have come to BRITAIN, so they should expect the British flag and the British way of living. If they want to fly their own flags and live by their own way of life then fine by me also. However if they have issues with Britain and its people, they can choose a country they DO like. Simple.

Most people in the UK don't really give a damn because they're sensible enough to understand that flags - when they're just meant as a piece of fabric representing a country, being flown over a government building or someone's home - just aren't important enough to get in a twist over. It's a piece of fabric and a bit of colour. Can you explain to me exactly how someone is stronger for being passionate about a piece of fabric? I don't see how anyone is stronger than myself, for example, for being passionate about a piece of fabric when I'm just as likely to burn it on the principle that I'm allowed to burn it.

But just to take this apart a bit:

First of all, the English flag doesn't represent the UK. St George's Cross is the English flag, so if you fly that flag in Scotland or Wales, it's probably gonna piss off the locals. There are obvious historical reasons why. If you put it over a public space in England - say in Bradford or areas around Bristol - it can and will be perceived as an act of aggression against non-white people (whether immigrant or not) because of its prolific use by the BNP and other neo-Conservative groups operating in the UK.

Secondly, each of the flags representing the countries comprising Great Britain also represent each country's football team. So when you're talking about flags, you're probably also talking about football aggression. There are hundreds of pubs that ban football colours - and that means they automatically ban the flags. That's more to do with football agression than it is to do with the flag, lack of nationalism, or immigrant's feelings, etc.

Thirdly, I've never heard of an incident in Britain where a visit by the monarch coincided with a ban on British flags. Can you provide proof of that please? Because tying that into immigration sounds ludicrous and propogandist beyond words.

There are a lot of protocols in the UK about flags and when and where they can and can't be flown. But I've never seen anyone really have a problem with this in all the years I've lived here. Furthermore, when I lived in southeast London, near Brixton and other predominantly Afro-Caribbean areas, the main flag I saw all the time was Jamaica's - occasionally Brazil's, heh. Absolutely no one got into a twist about it.

 

[SparklingWaves]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer Understanding why he cut the flag out/down would have to be best explained by how frustrating it is as a veteran of the United States military and foreign wars to see something that we're taught to defend and honor so intentionally and blatantly disrespected.

I agree with this statement. This man put his life on the line for this country and that flag is not just a piece of fabric to him or me. He stated they didn't fight to put that flag up there. He did fight to keep that flag flying for us and that's the knife he had to use from war.

The other sites that I put on are telling you there are others that want your land that you are sitting on literally. They are willing to fight for it.

I didn't put up another site that showed how some were just walking up to white young men and hitting them in the back of the head with a baseball bat or one where they injured an African American child. They want this country. China wants this country. There are many other countries that want to take over our country. Freedom isn't free. It never was and never will be. It has taken much bloodshed to give us what we have today.

It bothers me that many people are losing their connection to each other, spirituality, and respect for their country. They are getting numb to everything. They just don't care about anything. That really concerns me. It's a recipe for an easy take over from another country or a dictator.

Personally, I would take that vet any day to watch my back than a spoiled person who doesn't even respect his fellow man. That vet knows what a love of country and his fellow American means. Thank you for fighting for me and my freedom. Thank you for standing up to the flip off to America by flying Mexico's flag over old Glory.

Yes, I am proud to be a free American. My ancestors fought and died on this ground & on the ground of other lands, so I can sit here and correspond with you. Thank you to them and a toast to all my fellow Americans that have and are currently serving.

We are free today, but we don't know what tomorrow brings. One day, we may cry for the sight of that flag.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratmist I have to say, I laughed a lot at this. Flag burning, flag cutting, another-country's-flag-over-America's-flag... it all really kinda doesn't matter. I don't see why Americans get hot and bothered about symbolism when there are millions more important issues around the country we could get bothered about. It just distracts from real issues.

There's the whole "Proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free" thing that really just isn't something many non-Americans wouldn't grasp.
We (as a nation) won our independence and fought and clawed through the industrial revolution, a civil war, reconstruction, annexation, settlement of the west, and inundation of immigrants to become what and who we are.
We're not perfect. We're not close to perfect...I won't even say that we are, but we're damned proud of where we've been and what we've done, and we've a right to be that way.
Service as a soldier instills a pride in one's country many people don't and can't understand.

 

[frocher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratmist Most people in the UK don't really give a damn because they're sensible enough to understand that flags - when they're just meant as a piece of fabric representing a country, being flown over a government building or someone's home - just aren't important enough to get in a twist over. It's a piece of fabric and a bit of colour. Can you explain to me exactly how someone is stronger for being passionate about a piece of fabric? I don't see how anyone is stronger than myself, for example, for being passionate about a piece of fabric when I'm just as likely to burn it on the principle that I'm allowed to burn it.

Could it be that they are more careful with displaying their flag due to the history of colonialism and what that means to much of the immigrant population? I understand that they may be trying to be sensitive to that, but to move to a nation and get angry over displaying the flag ridiculous.

If they feel that strongly about a symbolic representation of that country, perhaps they shouldn't move there. I think that kind of aggression has a deeper meaning. To become a citizen of a country is more than just enjoying it's way of life. It's literally pledging allegiance to it. It's not the scrap of fabric, it's what it represents.

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer There's the whole "Proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free" thing that really just isn't something many non-Americans wouldn't grasp.

I'm an American. I fully understand the concepts of nationalism and symbolism. I just don't allow myself to get involved with either of them if I can help it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer We (as a nation) won our independence and fought and clawed through the industrial revolution, a civil war, reconstruction, annexation, settlement of the west, and inundation of immigrants to become what and who we are. We're not perfect. We're not close to perfect...I won't even say that we are, but we're damned proud of where we've been and what we've done, and we've a right to be that way.

I'm not arguing with anyone's right to feel emotional one way or another about his/her nation's history, and I don't think anyone else is either. But equally, it's fair enough if someone wants to feel ashamed of certain aspects of American history and want to work towards making sure those mistakes are not repeated. Reflexive nationalism is a good thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer Service as a soldier instills a pride in one's country many people don't and can't understand.

I don't think there's any point in being competitive about nationalism and patriotism.

And honestly? Everyone gets it. Everyone understands the patriotism expressed by soldiers. That's the reason why the guy in the video was upset, and I think everyone understands that. In his mind, no American should ever disrespect the flag that way.

What's hard is when soldiers don't understand why their emotions and nationalism aren't universally mirrored in their fellow Americans.

My point is this: when civilians disagree and argue against:

whatever war we're currently involved in,
the foreign policies of the current administration,
wars in general (i.e. the pacifists),
an Amendment to ban flag burning,
more defense funding,
an Amendment for a National Language to be imposed (i.e. English),

one's patriotism is instantly called into question. It's a cheap shot because it's a lot easier to call someone's patriotism in question, or somehow belittle it, than apply critical thinking to these issues. I absolutely disagree with the idea that being a soldier means one's thoughts, emotions and arguments are somehow instantly more important or rational than anyone else's. But if a soldier - or anyone in the armed forces - wants to believe they care more about the country than the average civilian, that's his or her right. It doesn't make it true, or useful.

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by frocher Could it be that they are more careful with displaying their flag due to the history of colonialism and what that means to much of the immigrant population? I understand that they may be trying to be sensitive to that, but to move to a nation and get angry over displaying the flag ridiculous.

I have lived in the biggest cities in Britain, in areas where the majority of the population are immigrants (EU and Commonwealth), and I'm telling you, the display of British flags in general is not a problem.

The St George's Cross in England is a problem in some racially-charged areas of middle England because the BNP - some of whom have gained local seats in Councils - have taken on the St George's Cross as a sign of what they believe Britain should be: white, Anglo-Saxon, immigrant-free. It has become a sign of aggression against people they perceive should not be in the UK - that's anyone that isn't white, irrespective of whether or not someone was born and raised in this country. Look up the BNP and look up 'flag ban' on the BBC News website if you want more details.

It is unfortunate that the English flag has been incorporated into race this way, but it was absolutely deliberate by the BNP and other racially-motivated hate groups. The flying of a St George's Cross almost never means the English person is a racist - but it's been propogated as a symbol of 'White Britain', and because of this, some English people are ashamed of showing off their flag for fear that someone will get the wrong idea about their personal beliefs on immigration and race. Others don't care and will show off their flag if they want. In general, it isn't a problem, but because symbolism and nationalism can be powerfully manipulated, groups like the BNP can use the St George's Cross and basically ruin it for everyone. Yet another good reason to perhaps not instill so much emotion into a piece of fabric, and instead instill emotion into something else - like each other!

Quote:

Originally Posted by frocher If they feel that strongly about a symbolic representation of that country, perhaps they shouldn't move there. I think that kind of aggression has a deeper meaning. To become a citizen of a country is more than just enjoying it's way of life. It's literally pledging allegiance to it. It's not the scrap of fabric, it's what it represents.

Again, immigrants in this country don't have a problem with the British flag. Many of them are from Commonwealth countries and consider themselves to be part of the British diaspora. And not every immigrant is a citizen. Many 'immigrants' in this country (and a lot of the ones that end up being griped about on the news) are actually EU citizens. The EU regulations have meant that any citizen of the EU can move to another part of the EU and gain employment, vote, and generally take advantage of all the rights that a normal citizen within that country would enjoy. So no, they aren't going to bow to the flag or salute the bloody queen. And they don't have to.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratmist I don't think there's any point in being competitive about nationalism and patriotism. And honestly? Everyone gets it. Everyone understands the patriotism expressed by soldiers. That's the reason why the guy in the video was upset, and I think everyone understands that. In his mind, no American should ever disrespect the flag that way. What's hard is when soldiers don't understand why their emotions and nationalism aren't universally mirrored in their fellow Americans. My point is this: when civilians disagree and argue against: whatever war we're currently involved in, the foreign policies of the current administration, wars in general (i.e. the pacifists), an Amendment to ban flag burning, more defense funding, an Amendment for a National Language to be imposed (i.e. English), one's patriotism is instantly called into question. It's a cheap shot because it's a lot easier to call someone's patriotism in question, or somehow belittle it, than apply critical thinking to these issues. I absolutely disagree with the idea that being a soldier means one's thoughts, emotions and arguments are somehow instantly more important or rational than anyone else's. But if a soldier - or anyone in the armed forces - wants to believe they care more about the country than the average civilian, that's his or her right. It doesn't make it true, or useful.

When a soldier stands in front of a flag, podium, and representative of the US Military and says "I solemnly swear to uphold the Constitution etc. so help me God." and then sweats, cries, and bleeds for a nation, to have the symbol of all of that hard work disrespected like that, it HURTS.
Not acknowledging that work and that sacrifice is a HUGE slap in the face because our work was what guaranteed the protesters the right to protest in the first place.
I disagree with calling into question the patriotism of protesters, etc. but at the same time, I absolutely question the patriotism of the owner of the flagpole, and completely understand why it was such a harsh slap in the face for the veteran to view that situation.

 

[Dizzy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratmist And honestly? Everyone gets it. Everyone understands the patriotism expressed by soldiers. That's the reason why the guy in the video was upset, and I think everyone understands that. In his mind, no American should ever disrespect the flag that way. What's hard is when soldiers don't understand why their emotions and nationalism aren't universally mirrored in their fellow Americans. My point is this: when civilians disagree and argue against: whatever war we're currently involved in, the foreign policies of the current administration, wars in general (i.e. the pacifists), an Amendment to ban flag burning, more defense funding, an Amendment for a National Language to be imposed (i.e. English), one's patriotism is instantly called into question. It's a cheap shot because it's a lot easier to call someone's patriotism in question, or somehow belittle it, than apply critical thinking to these issues. I absolutely disagree with the idea that being a soldier means one's thoughts, emotions and arguments are somehow instantly more important or rational than anyone else's. But if a soldier - or anyone in the armed forces - wants to believe they care more about the country than the average civilian, that's his or her right. It doesn't make it true, or useful.

Why is their patriotism questioned? Because those people who burn the flag have usually don't understand that while they're trying to "make a point" that there's an uncountable number of people who fought just so they can burn that flag, so they can completely and utterly disrespect this country, so they didn't have to earn it themselves.

It's not that the opinions and emotions of former military matters more- it's that they understand it differently because they earned the rights that we take for granted. They CHOSE (because our military has been non-conscript since Vietnam ended) to give up a lot of their rights and endured more personal sacrifice than most people will ever realize to protect the rights and liberties of others.

And they've asked for nothing in return for that sacrifice.

Regardless of how you (general, not specific) feel about the current administration, war, defense funding, etc. that doesn't mean that you can't expect repercussion, most of the time verbally, from America's military community and their families.

Their patriotism is questioned because most of them don't realize the blood, sweat and tears that went into our flag, the symbol of our country. People had to EARN what we have, so when they disrespect our flag in any fashion, I see it as another couch commenter- someone who is too afraid or lazy to do anything meaningful (get involved working with think tanks, lobbyists, join programs similar to NY's NYPIRG, etc.).

There are more effective means of getting your point across than desecrating our flag. There are more effective means of working for change than desecrating our flag.

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dizzy Why is their patriotism questioned? Because those people who burn the flag have usually don't understand that while they're trying to "make a point" that there's an uncountable number of people who fought just so they can burn that flag, so they can completely and utterly disrespect this country, so they didn't have to earn it themselves.

No, that's the assumption made about people who burn the flag, or don't treat it with the deference that others believe it should be treated. Furthermore, I do not believe that when someone burns the American flag they are desecrating the nation. They are expressing themselves and they have a right to do that. Whether or not that right was bought by someone in the military, the military and the families of the military do not dictate what a non-military person can and cannot do to the flag, outside the boundaries of the law.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dizzy It's not that the opinions and emotions of former military matters more- it's that they understand it differently because they earned the rights that we take for granted. They CHOSE (because our military has been non-conscript since Vietnam ended) to give up a lot of their rights and endured more personal sacrifice than most people will ever realize to protect the rights and liberties of others. And they've asked for nothing in return for that sacrifice.

Here's another unpopular fact: what you're saying is not necessarily true for a lot of people who serve in the military. There are a lot of reasons why people serve. Many of my friends are doing it because they want to have a chance at a college education and have no other way of finding the money. Others are avoiding jail by doing time in the military. And still others like the military lifestyle or want a military career for themselves - the patriotism espoused is useful here, but not necessarily a prerequisite. My brother is being offered defense jobs all the time - and is constantly being asked to join the military despite his health conditions - and the only reason why he considers it is because the money offered is extraordinarily high. Defense - which I just call 'war' in my mind, is a very good business indeed.

The point is that there are many people who believe that whatever the military is or isn't, the administration in charge of the military has to be carefully examined every single day so that soldiers do not die needlessly and our country isn't embroiled in politics of which we should not be involved. Support the troops by all means, but being supportive means you still have the right to state your opinion and debate issues openly and honestly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dizzy Their patriotism is questioned because most of them don't realize the blood, sweat and tears that went into our flag, the symbol of our country. People had to EARN what we have, so when they disrespect our flag in any fashion, I see it as another couch commenter- someone who is too afraid or lazy to do anything meaningful (get involved working with think tanks, lobbyists, join programs similar to NY's NYPIRG, etc.). There are more effective means of getting your point across than desecrating our flag. There are more effective means of working for change than desecrating our flag.

My thoughts on this: I think it's heartbreaking for soldiers who begin to think their sacrifice was ultimately in vain because those that were in charge were arrogant, self-seeking and ultimately disregarding the Constitution by sending troops/money/weapons/etc where they never should have been in the first place. The choice left to a soldier (especially veterans for example) is to either cling to the patriotism and not question those in charge, or to get very hurt and angry and start calling for accountability.

I truly believe the administration has less regard for the soldiers and their feelings than the average member of the public. My mother worked in a Veterans Administration Hospital and saw the "loving" neglect of the government every day.

It may be extremely difficult to see love and patriotism in the eyes of someone who is dissenting and choosing to show that dissent by burning a flag, or going on a march advocating the withdrawal of troops, or being involved in organisations that seem to be undermining the military by advocating peace and non-violent change. But that does not mean that it isn't there. And it doesn't mean that those protesting haven't thought about the issues or are somehow ignorant of the feelings of the soldier or military families. It just means that they look past the feelings to find the real issues that need to be resolved.

 

[frocher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratmist I have lived in the biggest cities in Britain, in areas where the majority of the population are immigrants (EU and Commonwealth), and I'm telling you, the display of British flags in general is not a problem. The St George's Cross in England is a problem in some racially-charged areas of middle England because the BNP - some of whom have gained local seats in Councils - have taken on the St George's Cross as a sign of what they believe Britain should be: white, Anglo-Saxon, immigrant-free. It has become a sign of aggression against people they perceive should not be in the UK - that's anyone that isn't white, irrespective of whether or not someone was born and raised in this country. Look up the BNP and look up 'flag ban' on the BBC News website if you want more details. It is unfortunate that the English flag has been incorporated into race this way, but it was absolutely deliberate by the BNP and other racially-motivated hate groups. The flying of a St George's Cross almost never means the English person is a racist - but it's been propogated as a symbol of 'White Britain', and because of this, some English people are ashamed of showing off their flag for fear that someone will get the wrong idea about their personal beliefs on immigration and race. Others don't care and will show off their flag if they want. In general, it isn't a problem, but because symbolism and nationalism can be powerfully manipulated, groups like the BNP can use the St George's Cross and basically ruin it for everyone. Yet another good reason to perhaps not instill so much emotion into a piece of fabric, and instead instill emotion into something else - like each other!

Like it or not, these emotions are associated with the flag, any flag. Having strong emotions about something that symbolizes so much is natural. Because a KKK member holds up my flag and screams "white power" I don't feel any differently about it. It is a shame that flags are associated with racism. I don't think that ruins the flag for everyone.



Quote:

Originally Posted by ratmist Again, immigrants in this country don't have a problem with the British flag. Many of them are from Commonwealth countries and consider themselves to be part of the British diaspora. And not every immigrant is a citizen. Many 'immigrants' in this country (and a lot of the ones that end up being griped about on the news) are actually EU citizens. The EU regulations have meant that any citizen of the EU can move to another part of the EU and gain employment, vote, and generally take advantage of all the rights that a normal citizen within that country would enjoy. So no, they aren't going to bow to the flag or salute the bloody queen. And they don't have to.

I will paraphrase what you said in a recent thread, "I am a firm believer in the fact that just because you can doesn't mean you should." If you are a guest in another country you should respect it's traditions and mores. Going into another society, expecting to live there, and enjoy all the advantages that entails while simultaneously griping about it's nationalism is rude and wrong. If I were visiting Italy, Korea, Turkey or Tunisia I would expect to respect their societies. And if I were in England I would bow to the flag and salute the Queen, not because I have to, but because it is right and respectful of me as a guest.

 

[Shimmer]

I love when people talk about defense spending cuts. That generally means that people who, with families, are already at Public Assistance level of income, are going to make even less money.
It also means, generally speaking, that soldiers' housing on post is going to continue being outdated and underkept because the funding isn't there to update it every decade or so.
It also means that civilian doctors working for the military stand to make less money, therefore potentially compromising care for civilian dependents.
It also means that my brother, while rattling around in the sandbox in a 30 year old HMV is'nt likely to get new material protective gear. He can keep wearing vietnam era LBEs etc.
I love defense spending cuts. They're great.



Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 was passed by both the House and the Senate.

I'm not going to debate whether we *should* be there or not. That's pointless. We can armchair quarterback until pigs fly, but it's not going to change the fact that we ARE there. Protester's energy would be better spent finding solutions to pull the troops out of Iraq that won't be harmful to Iraq as a nation or our interests. Bitching and moaning about what is already done isn't going to solve anything.