Government service does not just mean joining the military learning to fire a gun, strangle someone with a wire and being placed on the front lines. As soon as aptitudes are taken into account the government is (just barely) smart enough to redirect folks towards agencies best suited to their skills. As often as not they'll funnel folks into non-combat roles and, for those with mental aptititude who join up in the military services will be given a bee-line straight towards the officer fast-track on the non-combat side of a desk.
Equating military service with qualification for debating war strategy or political policies is exactly the opposite of the way things work. The folks least likely to be qualified to discuss policy objectives, political benefits and national strategy are out there on the front lines -and they always have been. Alexander, Hadrian, Napoleon, Eisenhower, Patton et al almost never fought on the front lines but waged war from the back lines.
Military service is swell and fine, but it acts merely as an example of allegiance, often of patriotism, sometimes devotion and but seldom as a qualification for role of strategist or policy-hawk.
And if we are going to start qualifying talking about taxes, I suggest we compare the number of agents appointed to any/all respective tax audits and for those who have skated by must display a copy of their Black American Express Card. (With the numbers blotted out of course ;-)
Current Events » in reply to Ode to a fat cat...........
Nice try.
The whole thread (51 posts)
- "Marines: Allegations undercut us"
- Deja vu all over again
- More careful consideration of this matter from Insty...
- Sherman's dictum.
- Rape and Murder are OK with you?
- This is why...
- re: This is why...
- want to stop war?
- re: want to stop war?
- re: War is a continuation of politics by other means
- re: want to stop war?
- re: want to stop war?
- want to stop war?
- re: This is why...
