There’s always some kind of label, some ways to circle something an dismiss such a simple point. When I see someone call someone a ‘pussy’, or a coward, I usually find they likely are some chickenshit that hasn’t gone to war themselves. In fact, I see it all the time.

Now if someone with some er, ‘combat cred’, wants to call them a coward, well, I’m not likely going to say much. Valid opinion.

Mainly because I might know when to shut -my- mouthy pie hole in some cases.

So you’re keeping our girl down there, are you?

I lived for a few years in the Arctic, and still work in Nunavut and Nunavik for about a quarter of the year. Up north, the pantry starts at the front door and extends a few hundred thousand square kilometers and your dinner is on the hoof. Hunting is shopping, not recreation. So I have no problem with anyone’s gun collection, any more than I would with a collection of hammers - to me, a gun is just a tool. On the other hand, I have big problems with the Canadian government’s various botched attempts to regulate ownership.

Most ‘a youse guys ain’t worth losing the collection over…

;^ )

But I *can* give ya a hell of a history lesson down there in the Armory.

Has Wendy shown you the basement?

Oh, wait - I meant *this* pic of the basement!

As for the civility of our discussion…well, only an idiot would pick a fight with someone living in a place called Castle Aaaarrrgghh. And I may be a goddamn lefty, but I ain’t an idiot. (No, the terms are NOT synonymous.)

You took my point, though - as I was thinking when I hit “submit comment” on my previous… “I shoulda mentioned howcum nobody hits up non-player sportscasters with a ‘chickenhawk’ equivalent!”

Hey - we must be setting a near-record for non-troll discussion on a post of Wendy’s… and I bet “skinny dude” never came back to appreciate it!

I guess there are two interpretations of the writer’s intent in the context of this discussion, John.

The suggestion that one can’t have an opinion without personal experience is, of course, absurd - neither your government nor ours would function very well if we limited ourselves in discussion of public policy matters to areas in which we ourselves had professional expertise. I’m not a soldier, an economist, or a climatologist, but I have opinions in all those areas, and an obligation as a citizen to participate in the debate on those issues.

“Skinny Dude’s” comment, however, could also be interpreted as a not-very-well phrased restatement of the “walk a mile in my shoes” idea.

Certainly, one’s level of experience in a topic is a useful metric for evaluating what informs the opinion, but it doesn’t invalidate the opinion in and of itself - which is the usual purpose to which the term ‘chickenhawk’ is put.

The “chickenhawk” meme isn’t weakened by dismissive labelling, I’m afraid; nor is it invalidated because you, a veteran with combat experience, defend the original writer. I give your views weight (and some respect) because of your experience - however, that doesn’t increase my regard for the folks whose contempt for people in Long’s position is based on their own best guess about what they’d “do” in his position, flavoured with locker room juvenilia.

Having said that, I agree with most of what you say. Enlisting in the Armed Forces implies an absolute commitment to accept whatever role the Forces see fit to assign to you. Anyone who claims to have been surprised by a combat assignment, or who suddenly rethinks their moral framework when they find out they’re actually going to war, is an idiot, a liar, or a gambler who played the odds, lost, and are trying to get out of paying their debt.

Heh. Courage is defined as doing what you have to do in spite of being scared. Lack of courage is defined, among other ways, by shirking the responsibilities you signed on for - to include deserting the team of soldiers you trained with.

Mom and apple pie may get you into uniform - but it’s your buddies, and the ability to rely upon them, that get you through combat.

Pardon me if I suspect your analysis stems from a great well of experiential deficit.

Do everything possible to get out of it? What alternate universe do you live in where volunteer soldiers “do everything possible to get out of it” when it comes to being deployed? A smallish percentage of them do, certainly - witness our deserter.

Others will choose to not volunteer to deploy, preferring to wait until the rota selects them or their unit for a trip to the box.

The *worse* thing he’s being deceitful of is the betrayal of the trust of his comrades, which is the glue that binds small units together.

Oh, certainly they are probably better off without him - but you, sir, give our oath-breaker too much credit.

I won’t speak for anyone else - but if a woman soldier volunteered, and then backed out, she’s as faithless as a man. Innie or outie, your genitalia does not excuse you from the oath.

RG

And still managed to avoid going to Iraq.

And gets to wrap himself in his morally smug stance of “I only deserted because I might be a liability to my fellow soldiers” meme.

Heh.

Good riddance to bad rubbish with a childish understanding of the world.

As it is get this pussy out of my country.

DaWG
(not to be confused with Dr Dawg)

Canada doesn’t need anymore cowards, having three leftwing political parties ensure us a life time supply of cowards.

I’m not sure what you mean skinny dude, I was a military wife for twenty years I’ve done my time for hearth and country.