DrPainMD: DrBenway: DrPainMD: The more we call these guys "heros," the more likely that we'll keep having more wars and more people sent home in body bags. There's hasn't been a challenge to our national sovereignty since the War of 1812. Let's call these guys what they really are: chumps and cannon fodder. The guy was a sucker to throw his life away in a war that had absolutely nothing to do with defending this country.He began his career in WWII. Was he a chump then, too? Was everyone who died in that war a chump? Show your work.See the bolded/underlined line, above. If we had stayed out of WW1, WW2 never would have happened. If we hadn't done everything we could to get the Japanese to attack (which, according to the "pre-emptive" strike supporters, was totally defensive [google: flying tigers]), we would have had no excuse to enter WW2. There's nothing defensive about building and maintaining an empire, and politicians don't care how many people die helping them achieve their political/financial ambitions. So, yes, those who fought in WW2 were also chumps.
vicioushobbit: saturn badger: vicioushobbit: Seems we have a difference in opinion in the definition of "hero."I consider anybody who willingly gives their life to save another a "hero," and in military situations, even when it's on orders, when one guy dies, there's a damn good chance he did something to save somebody in the process. I consider any firefighter, policeman, or soldier who dies in the line of duty a hero, because they go to work each day knowing there is a good chance they might not come home.I wonder what you consider "above and beyond,", what you consider a "hero."In this story the person involved didn't willingly give their life for anyone so I'm guessing your definition of hero does not work here. We have a disconnect to when you say when every firefighter, policeman or soldier who dies in the line of duty he is a hero. I go along with your idea that if someone willingly gives their life to save someone else they achieve hero status.But not everyone who dies in the line of duty is a hero. So a roof falls on a firefighter and kills him. Is he a hero if he is not dying to save the life of the puppy crying in the corner? Or is he if he is trying to save the puppy? I know this is splitting stupid straws but you get my point or I hope you do.Just choosing a dangerous profession and getting killed while doing it does not make them a hero for doing so. I do admire those who do though.My definition of hero has been bolded so you can see that yes, i do consider this guy a hero.A firefighter gets in her truck on his way to a call and knows that she can die from a number of hazards. But she goes anyway. I don't care if she's going because of a paycheck, because the pay ain't that great. Most of them do it because they know if they don't answer the call, people will die. I've known several volunteer firefighters in my life, and I wish I had the determination they do.I don't care if the police officer got his uniform just because he thought it had a gr ...
Thelyphthoric: Oldiron_79: Thats like Jurassic Bark level sad and touching.No.As much as I like that show and as much as that episode touches me, one situation involves real people and the other is a cartoon.
Oldiron_79: Thats like Jurassic Bark level sad and touching.
cameroncrazy1984: Touching story, but would have been nice to know the circumstances of his disappearance.
Want more stories with less ads? Try
It's what the cool kids are doing.It's also how we pay the bills.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Sep 26 2017 09:07:38
Runtime: 0.184 sec (183 ms)