OldGuy43
Garden Ornament
Yeah, I noticed.baymule said:Watch out OG, Austin Tx is one of the little fat boy's targets!
North Korea
- Thread starter Nyboy
- Start date
MontyJ
Deeply Rooted
Well said Oldguy, well said! Your previous post was right on the mark too.OldGuy43 said:
OldGuy43
Garden Ornament
Thank you. The last line of the Declaration of Independence I consider to be the most telling as to how dedicated they were to the cause of liberty:MontyJ said:
"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor."
That is exactly what the signers of that document were risking, everything. In English law, in 1776 high treason was punishable by being hanged, drawn and quartered (men) or burnt at the stake (women), or beheading (royalty and nobility). Treason was the only crime which attracted those penalties (until they were abolished in 1814, 1790 and 1973 respectively).
Kinda makes you proud, doesn't it?
MontyJ
Deeply Rooted
Yes it does sir. Yes it does. As does the shadow box I have that contains the flag that covered my grandfathers casket. He spent three years as a POW who was captured when Bataan fell. He was the greatest inspiration I ever had, and one of the best men I ever knew. It was because of him that I served 10 years in the US Navy.
digitS'
Garden Master
There are a great majority of pacifists who would strongly object to your characterization of their thinking that it is fine for someone else to take up arms on their behalf.OldGuy43 said:
You seem unlikely to have any respect for their convictions nor Kennedy's beliefs so suggesting them probably serves little purpose.
Steve
Smart Red
Garden Master
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
- Messages
- 11,303
- Reaction score
- 7,395
- Points
- 417
- Location
- South-est, central-est Wisconsin
Such a precious document!OldGuy43 said:
I love that line as well. I always brought up the order of importance the forefathers placed on the words as well. Life is first as not all that important. Fortunes is second. Imagine not providing support for your family when you're gone. Unthinkable to those of property and leadership. Sacred Honor is last and most important. Without honor a man was as good as dead.
In these days (in Washington and elsewhere) when getting caught is a greater crime than cheating or lying, it is hard for students to understand how valued honor once was.
Even knowing his life was on the line, John Hancock signed his name large and clear so King George could read it without his spectacles.
OldGuy43
Garden Ornament
You're right. I started feeling this way when Muhammad Ali, the professional boxer claimed that he was a conscientious objector.
On the other side Nathanael Greene was a major general of the Continental Army in the American Revolutionary War, and a member of The Society of Friends, aka the Quakers.
I also have heard of pacifist religions that, at their own expense trained young men in the medical field so that they could join the military as non-combatants. As such, they did risk their lives for their country without violating their principals.
On the other side Nathanael Greene was a major general of the Continental Army in the American Revolutionary War, and a member of The Society of Friends, aka the Quakers.
I also have heard of pacifist religions that, at their own expense trained young men in the medical field so that they could join the military as non-combatants. As such, they did risk their lives for their country without violating their principals.
Smart Red
Garden Master
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
- Messages
- 11,303
- Reaction score
- 7,395
- Points
- 417
- Location
- South-est, central-est Wisconsin
What OldGuy said.
I was just going to mention that many conscientious objectors served as medics before I say OldGuy's answer.
I was just going to mention that many conscientious objectors served as medics before I say OldGuy's answer.
OldGuy43
Garden Ornament
Thank you, Linn,
I owe it all to a man who, in my opinion was one of the greatest teachers to ever live. His name was Atile Chiti. He was a naturalized citizen having been born in Italy. His parents immigrated to this country when he was seven. He spoke and wrote seven languages fluently, a fact which he once proved by having a student read a random passage which he than simultaneously translated into one language verbally while writing a translation on the blackboard in a third. He could have made a much better living using this skill (He had been offered a job at the United Nations.), but he loved teaching.
I still remember my first day in his class in World History. I was a high school sophomore, and after introducing himself he announced that every day we would be changing seats so that we would get to know each other. We were astounded even more when he told us that, even though the school board disapproved he would teach using the "Socratic Method" and explained what that meant. He really got our attention when he said that we would not be memorizing a bunch of dates. Instead of learning when the Magna Carta was signed we would learn why. We would learn that history was not made up of isolated events. He wanted us to see the grand sweep and flow that was history.
Mr. Chiti did not so much teach as guide our discussions. He regularly would start a class by asking, What do you think about...?" and go to the back of the classroom and listen while we discussed, sometimes heatedly events in history. If we got off topic he didn't stop us. I asked him about that once, and got this response, "As long as we are learning everything is as it should be." He didn't emphasize the WE, but somehow you felt that he was learning along with you.
The only problem with having had Mr. Chiti at such an early age was that he spoiled you for all other teachers. Certainly, I've had other good teachers, but all fall short after Mr. Chiti, Most were pretty good but some, if it hadn't been for tenure were better suited to saying, "Would you like fries with that?" Mr. Chiti didn't teach facts. He taught you to evaluate them and see inevitable consequences. His was the class that you looked forward to.
To put it simply, he taught you to think for yourself.
I owe it all to a man who, in my opinion was one of the greatest teachers to ever live. His name was Atile Chiti. He was a naturalized citizen having been born in Italy. His parents immigrated to this country when he was seven. He spoke and wrote seven languages fluently, a fact which he once proved by having a student read a random passage which he than simultaneously translated into one language verbally while writing a translation on the blackboard in a third. He could have made a much better living using this skill (He had been offered a job at the United Nations.), but he loved teaching.
I still remember my first day in his class in World History. I was a high school sophomore, and after introducing himself he announced that every day we would be changing seats so that we would get to know each other. We were astounded even more when he told us that, even though the school board disapproved he would teach using the "Socratic Method" and explained what that meant. He really got our attention when he said that we would not be memorizing a bunch of dates. Instead of learning when the Magna Carta was signed we would learn why. We would learn that history was not made up of isolated events. He wanted us to see the grand sweep and flow that was history.
Mr. Chiti did not so much teach as guide our discussions. He regularly would start a class by asking, What do you think about...?" and go to the back of the classroom and listen while we discussed, sometimes heatedly events in history. If we got off topic he didn't stop us. I asked him about that once, and got this response, "As long as we are learning everything is as it should be." He didn't emphasize the WE, but somehow you felt that he was learning along with you.
The only problem with having had Mr. Chiti at such an early age was that he spoiled you for all other teachers. Certainly, I've had other good teachers, but all fall short after Mr. Chiti, Most were pretty good but some, if it hadn't been for tenure were better suited to saying, "Would you like fries with that?" Mr. Chiti didn't teach facts. He taught you to evaluate them and see inevitable consequences. His was the class that you looked forward to.
To put it simply, he taught you to think for yourself.
OldGuy43
Garden Ornament
Violating my own rule against posting before anyone responds to my previous post.
I'm watching the very first in the old "Victory at Sea" television documentaries, and that got me to thinking about the history of pre-WWII diplomacy. Next I got to thinking about why North Korea would dare to threaten the United States of America and it's allies. History gives us the answer.
It all began with the end of the Cold War, and the belief by some that a strong standing military was no longer a necessity. We could replace it with technology and spend less money, end the draft, spend that "wasted" money elsewhere and solve our disagreements with "diplomacy".
Yes, diplomacy works, but it works best when you negotiate from a position of strength. History has proven this simple but obvious certitude over and over. the Pax Romana, mailed fist hidden by a velvet glove and big stick policy are but a few examples of how well negotiating from a position of strength works.
Set the Wayback Machine for 1960. Can you conceive of any country harboring and giving aid to a group of people that would even contemplate committing an atrocity like 9/11 in that period, knowing that we had a trained and well equipped armed force that was larger than their entire population? Even the USSR never openly threatened us, they just hinted at it as did we.
A Hypothetical Situation:
An evil doer is threatening your family. Would you rather "negotiate" with him empty handed, or with your hand filled with a weapon larger and more devastating than the one he has?
There has been an arms race since the first caveman picked up a femur bone. I hope my side always has the biggest bone.
I'm watching the very first in the old "Victory at Sea" television documentaries, and that got me to thinking about the history of pre-WWII diplomacy. Next I got to thinking about why North Korea would dare to threaten the United States of America and it's allies. History gives us the answer.
It all began with the end of the Cold War, and the belief by some that a strong standing military was no longer a necessity. We could replace it with technology and spend less money, end the draft, spend that "wasted" money elsewhere and solve our disagreements with "diplomacy".
Yes, diplomacy works, but it works best when you negotiate from a position of strength. History has proven this simple but obvious certitude over and over. the Pax Romana, mailed fist hidden by a velvet glove and big stick policy are but a few examples of how well negotiating from a position of strength works.
Set the Wayback Machine for 1960. Can you conceive of any country harboring and giving aid to a group of people that would even contemplate committing an atrocity like 9/11 in that period, knowing that we had a trained and well equipped armed force that was larger than their entire population? Even the USSR never openly threatened us, they just hinted at it as did we.
A Hypothetical Situation:
An evil doer is threatening your family. Would you rather "negotiate" with him empty handed, or with your hand filled with a weapon larger and more devastating than the one he has?
There has been an arms race since the first caveman picked up a femur bone. I hope my side always has the biggest bone.
