I dusted off these two posts from my previous blog and placed them here after I read a couple of people over on Pissed on Politics [http://www.pissedonpolitics.com/] talking about rebelling against our government or, alternately, about our troops refusing to follow orders in Iraq or, if worse comes to worst, here at home if a rebellion were to begin in this country.
First, for the reasons given in the bodies of these 2 articles, I seriously doubt that a rebellion will begin here. We're simply not equipped to dissent against our government in the way suggested by the commenters.
Secondly, our military is even less likely than the norm to say, 'no' to authority. They have been rigorously trained to obey orders unquestioningly. In fact, in Iraq and Afghanistan, their lives depend on obeying now and, if necessary, asking questions later.
Given the situation as it stands, I wish this weren't so. But history and the 2 studies outlined below suggest that it is.
I Didn't Know He Condoned Torture
Mr. President: 'I was just following orders' was outlawed in Nuremberg.
Honest Scrap Award
The Costs of War
YES!
voter's map & post-election news
6 comments:
Gorby fell in Moscow, because Soviet troops refused to fire on Russian people. It would be nice were that were so here, but I remember Kent State.
yeah, TC--
me, too.
they were shot for ringing a bell.
Hi two crows,
it seems the links to your previous articles didn't come out in your post.
I will check back with the link you left in a comment on my blog.
For the record Two Crows, I am willing to figh and die for our country, if that means fighting against a tyrannical government such as BushCo's that continually violates our Constitution, then so be it.
Perhaps I am naive. Perhaps I am the only one.
But hell, if the Iraqis can hold our military at bay, then so can we.
What can I say, it's been a LONG 8 years. The sooner 2009 comes,the better.
I feel pretty confident in saying we'll get a Democratic President.
hey, Poli--
as to getting a Democratic President -- I think we
can all rest assured of that.
I just hope it's not too late by then. I can hear the gurgling now as all that used to be right with this country goes down the drain.
our country left much to be desired long before Bush came to power. now, it's becoming a fascist state.
Just a Democratic President is not enough. We also need a 60 vote majority in the Senate to enforce cloture. Then we need to hold those Democrats accountable.
hey, Tom--
tho you and I may agree that what you're proposing is what is needed, it's not been the norm in this country.
almost always, for whatever reason, the voters have split their votes between the WH and Congress-- giving one to one party and the other to the other.
likely this is because people don't trust either party enough to hand either one both branches at the same time.
whether this will swing the other way because people are fed up with the GOP or the voters will be afraid to entrust both branches to the same party again [even the dems] is anyone's guess at this point.
in fact, they DID split the vote during the 2000 election: the popular vote for pres went to Gore and the Reps got Congress.
I don't know why [and, given what happened in Ohio] even IF they voted to give both branches to one party in 2004. but, having tried that experiment for 8 years, with this result, they may not try it again.
Post a Comment