Freedom is not Free

[rez]

While in my friend’s car I noticed a shiny, transparent sticker in his window. Indulging myself, I read the witty catch phrase to appease my curiosity. The sticker said “freedom is not free.” I chuckled to myself and thought “that must be why it costs 3 dollars and 50 cents to buy such a sticker.” After the twin towers collapsed many of these popular catch phrases were being slapped on and stuck all over cars in America. Nobody cared about the gaudy look of the sticker because “patriotism” was the new fad at the time. Americans suddenly woke up and decided that “freedom is not free”; however, has any body ever wondered how much freedom costs or who would pay for it?

What do you guys think?

[fmadcows]

We all pay for it daily, taxes for instance. There are many ways we pay. There is no real cost I guess you could say its priceless, but we damn well keep paying towards it.

[Scribbler1]

Anericans DIDN'T suddenly "wake up". As always, they fell prey to the cheap slogan without understanding what it really is.

[gallo]

Well, of course, freedom for Iraqis isn't free. It is being paid for in American lives. But of course, I have the word of my President that we need to "stay the course" and "finish the job" in Iraq. I wonder why we didn't stay the course and finish the job in Afghanistan. Now we are fighting terrorism in Iraq (yet another foreign civil war), where terrorism wasn't a problem before we invaded, and still facing terrorism and another growing civil war in Afghanistan, where the real terrorists were trained. We bailed out on the war against terrorism because Dubya wanted to out do bushdaddy and topple Sadam.

But of course, freedom isn't free. Neither is imperialism.

[joseph2622]

Here is a poem I've read a long time ago and it seemed well suited for this thread.


Freedom is not free

It is the soldier, not the reporter,
Who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the soldier, not poet,
Who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the soldier, not the campus organizer,
Who has given us freedom to demonstrate.

It is the soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped with the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.

Anonymous

[Kuldeep]

Not only "freedom is not free" but not attainable in the real sense not matter how much you spend in whatever fashion cash, kind or efforts!!! Who has anyway attained complete freedom till now? I think none!!

Might be after the death one might be achieving, but how to confirm???

[Milton Bradley]

I don't intend to pay with my civil liberties. They already extort untold monies to wage that war, yet it never seems like enough.


Perhaps it's all a lie. ( The need for the money, that is )

[RickSp]

Freedom is is a birth-right that must be protected and if necessary fought for. Often as not the enemies of freedom are from within as well as without.

• Soldiers do not give us freedom of speech. They can protect our rights or violate them. Nothing more
  
• Soldiers do not give us freedom of the press. They can protect our rights or violate them. Nothing more
  
• Soldiers do not give us freedom to demonstrate. I have seen the bodies of students who demonstrated against an evil war, shot down by soldiers. Soldiers can protect our rights or violate them. Nothing more.
  
• If the flag is nothing more than a banner for military marching bands, then it is not worth burning. If it truly represents freedom then flame can do it no harm.

[MexicanHafty]

Quote by: rez “freedom is not free”; however, has any body ever wondered how much freedom costs or who would pay for it?

I'm sorry but freedom was never free. We have always paid for freedom with the lives of our soldiers. Those who bad mouth the soldiers, are basically bad mouthing our freedom. I do not Approve of bush's actions and saying in Afghanistan and Iraq, but if that is where is war is happening, at least it is not in NYC or anywhere else, on American soil. If someone should be complained about, it is our president, not our troops. I am ashamed to say I spent the last 9 yrs of my life in Texas, where women would camp outside bush's house and protest against our soldiers. I am ashamed that I am associated with "Oh, your from Texas?! You must be a Bush lover." With people being so judgemental that are just assuming. In fact Bush pisses me off a lot. Not to mention his vast usage of the word "Um" Which is basically saying, Umm, hold on I am making up something, umm, I cant read the prompter, Umm, dang I cant remember what I was going to say, umm so on and so forth. I lost respect for him on his Amendment, which failed, To ban gay marriage, based soulfully on his religion. What happened to Separation of Church and state. And Many will argue, But that is just for the state not to tell you what you can practice. That is taking it direct with no leaniancy, but if that was in the bible, I can say well It could mean this, or this, it depends on who is interpreting it.

Quote by: RickSp [*]If the flag is nothing more than a banner for military marching bands, then it is not worth burning. If it truly represents freedom then flame can do it no harm.[/list]

That is like saying. This is the book of God. It wont burn if God's word runs in it. Do churches burn? That represents freedom. The flag represent, the option of freedom. The fact that we are running under the flag should give us confidence that we should never fall! What is your definition of freedom?

Bray

[gallo]

Quote by: MexicanHafty ...where women would camp outside bush's house and protest against our soldiers.

I guess you weren't paying attention. The protests were against Bush and the waging of his war in Iraq. The difference isn't even subtle. I wonder how you missed it.

[Autolykos]

"Freedom is not free"?

Good Lord.

If by "freedom" one means "free will", then of course it's free. Free will is inalienable -- it can never be taken away.

- Rob

[MexicanHafty]

Quote by: gallo I guess you weren't paying attention. The protests were against Bush and the waging of his war in Iraq. The difference isn't even subtle. I wonder how you missed it.

I was saying how I was asshamed of being judged by the state I was in.

[grandpa]

Me: I think it's wrong to punish the innocent along with the guilty.

Patriotic American: But freedom isn't free. Anyway, civilians were given an opportunity to leave the city of Baghdad.

Me: I think you miss the point. When you launch a major attack on a country, people may not be able to flee in time or they may not be able to find a place that isn't being bombed.

Patriotic American: Well, civilians are bound to die in war. Freedom isn't free.

Me: But the fact that civilians die in war is an argument against war, isn't it?

Patriotic American: Your voice sounds gay. The flag is more than a piece of fabric. You're one of those fuckin' Commie Liberal Dem Queers. Support our troops!

Grandpa h.

[ibm]

of course freedom is not free. (it never was - unfortunately.) and it will not be free - most likely.

but it should be free. i see it as a born right of every human being.

imo post of the thread award goes to rick here. couldn't have said it any better by myself.

btw, i don't know why someone said the protests were against our soldiers. since apparently they were protesting against the war-mongers on capitol hill and in the white house. as such, they were protesting FOR our soldiers. the war in iraq is not for the protection of our freedom. quite to the contrary, the way this administration has led us, it's against civil liberty and thus our freedom.

[RickSp]

Quote by: ibm btw, i don't know why someone said the protests were against our soldiers. since apparently they were protesting against the war-mongers on capitol hill and in the white house. as such, they were protesting FOR our soldiers. the war in iraq is not for the protection of our freedom. quite to the contrary, the way this administration has led us, it's against civil liberty and thus our freedom.

I've never understood the argument that now we are at war we must the war effort regardless. This has nothing to do with "supporting our troops." Anyone who really wants to "support our troops" should do everything they can to stop our troops from dying in needless and immoral wars.

[grandpa]

Quote by: RickSp I've never understood the argument that now we are at war we must the war effort regardless. This has nothing to do with "supporting our troops."

"Because America is powerful, we must be sensitive about
expressing our power and influence."
---George Bush, 3/4/01

The same guy who said this seems to think that if we invade somewhere
people are morally obliged to welcome us with open arms. Well, we were welcomed with arms, anyway.

We're so sensitive about our power that now the U.N. anti-torture chief is suggesting torture in Iraq may now be worse than it was under Saddam.

Grandpa h.

[MexicanHafty]

Quote by: RickSp Anyone who really wants to "support our troops" should do everything they can to stop our troops from dying in needless and immoral wars.

Needless maybe, but where is Immoral comming from. What if we did find a mass production of weapons of mass destruction? Would you still call it pointless? Or given the fact that if we would just stop the war we are in, the families of the 3,000 that died in 9-11 would be Furious! Pointless absolutly not. Supporting our troops is to welcome them home. Send them things to remind them of the ones who loves them. Not to slander them and leave them out in the cold. They offered their lifes for the betterment of our society, So that we dont have to risk our own lives. Its not like the Army/ navy/ air force decided on who to fight. That is not the case! Support your troops, yes keep them safe, but is what they are there for, to keep us from dying.
Bray

I hate Bush with a passion, I don't think you can give a more arrogant man that much power.
Bray

[RickSp]

The war in Iraq is immoral because we invaded a counrty that never attacked us, killed tens of thousands of innocent civilans and laid waste to the country.

How can you connect 9/11 with Iraq? There is no connection except in the lies of the Bush administration. And our troops in Iraq are doing nothing to make us safer. They are dying for George Bush's vision of empire. The are not dying to keep us safe. The are just dying.

[whydoumockme]

Quote by: RickSp The war in Iraq is immoral because we invaded a counrty that never attacked us, killed tens of thousands of innocent civilans and laid waste to the country. How can you connect 9/11 with Iraq? There is no connection except in the lies of the Bush administration. And our troops in Iraq are doing nothing to make us safer. They are dying for George Bush's vision of empire. The are not dying to keep us safe. The are just dying.

ummm....do you guys know that it is no longer a war?.......i mean i'm just asking.......i thought a war can only be declared by the cenate......it sounds like you guys feel prey to the media propoganda........the situation has been declared a hostel one like 2 years ago....and i could have sworn more innocent people died because of suicide bomber and car bombs......i mean can you give me the numbers of how many innocents died by the hands of soldiers.....i mean and what do you consider an innocent?......if a 6 year oild girl is walking up to you with a hand grenade in her hand and the pin is gone.....what do you do?.......

[MexicanHafty]

Quote by: whydoumockme i could have sworn more innocent people died because of suicide bomber and car bombs......i mean can you give me the numbers of how many innocents died by the hands of soldiers.....i mean and what do you consider an innocent?......if a 6 year oild girl is walking up to you with a hand grenade in her hand and the pin is gone.....what do you do?.......

I agree with you. The troops are killing the innocent on purpose, They have to do what must be done. I am more concerned on what Americans not supporting what is being done, and instead of supporting our troops we shun them, for following their leader (The president). What can they offer us that we will take without criticism.
Bray