Thursday, August 11, 2005
excuse me miss, will you punch this guy for me?
this just in from the australian government- they now want women serving on the front line as regular combat troops during war time operations. i guess the federal government figures they can't get enough men to fight. this is getting beyond ridiculous. do you remember when that little american girl was captured by iraqi troops in the very first days of this latest war in the desert? the entire united states was outraged. all battle plans were halted in preference for a search and rescue mission. in the end, the girl was released. now there hollywood has made a television mini-series on the whole fiasco.
in no way, am i arguing against women in equal roles to men. i am all for equality of men and women. my point is this- why are governments looking for more ways to promote wars, when they should be searching for more ways to prevent war? have male soldiers seen enough war? i know that the united states government is finding it difficult to recruit more soldiers. there has been an increase in financial incentives to get more young men to sign up for combat. there has even been mention of reinstating the draft.
imagine if they spent as much effort trying to prevent fighting and wars, as they do starting and continuing wars? unfortunately, war is big business. just ask dick. afterall, he is a war profiteer. does the word "haliburton" ring a bell? so most of the people making the decisions to go to war, are in reality making more money for themselves at the expense of the dead soldiers and dead innocents. for every bullet that is used, that means dollars in their pockets. just ask dick (don't bother asking bush, because he doesn't really have a clue what is going on).
my suggestion is to send out the politicians and decision makers who vote for war, to fight the wars. let these mental midgets fight it out on the battle fields. the rest of us can stay home to mow the lawn or go to the beach for a surf, because we have much more important things to do that pick a fight. encouraging women to fight is not going to solve anything. they don't want to fight anymore than the men do.
in no way, am i arguing against women in equal roles to men. i am all for equality of men and women. my point is this- why are governments looking for more ways to promote wars, when they should be searching for more ways to prevent war? have male soldiers seen enough war? i know that the united states government is finding it difficult to recruit more soldiers. there has been an increase in financial incentives to get more young men to sign up for combat. there has even been mention of reinstating the draft.
imagine if they spent as much effort trying to prevent fighting and wars, as they do starting and continuing wars? unfortunately, war is big business. just ask dick. afterall, he is a war profiteer. does the word "haliburton" ring a bell? so most of the people making the decisions to go to war, are in reality making more money for themselves at the expense of the dead soldiers and dead innocents. for every bullet that is used, that means dollars in their pockets. just ask dick (don't bother asking bush, because he doesn't really have a clue what is going on).
my suggestion is to send out the politicians and decision makers who vote for war, to fight the wars. let these mental midgets fight it out on the battle fields. the rest of us can stay home to mow the lawn or go to the beach for a surf, because we have much more important things to do that pick a fight. encouraging women to fight is not going to solve anything. they don't want to fight anymore than the men do.
