Can a WWII Veteran be Liberal?

[Libhater]

I mentioned earlier that my father has been a Republican all his adult life, and that he is a combat veteran of WWII. Every WWII veteran I've met from my extensive visits to veteran's hospitals etc are Republicans and or Conservatives. These Repubs/Cons chose their particular ideology because they viewed honor of and defense of America to be the first and foremost character trait among all the others combined.

The very nature of and fact to war(s) is that any sound and democratically run governments/nations will go to war to prevent further attacks on its homeland, and or to answer the call when their homeland was attacked. Such was the case against Hitler since he (Germany) declared war against America, and against Japan after they attacked us at Pearl Harbor.

These modern wars also find the Republican leaders answering the call once again to engage in them to uphold and honor the American tradition of utilizing our military might when called upon.

If current liberal leaders and former liberal military men like John Kerry and the late John Murtha himself are representative of what it means to be a liberal, then I truly suspect that there are zero liberal veterans from WWII still alive today. We do remember how Murtha sided with our enemies by trying to get our Marines convicted of murder. And we all remember the shameful past of Kerry as he spoke negatively of our Vietnam veterans--calling their acts worse than those carried out by Ghengis Khan, and with his eventual membership into VVAW (Vietnam Veterans Against War), where he sided with his fuck the established ho-in-tow buddy Jane Fonda, and when he became the traitor he is today.

So my question to you fine upstanding American members of this forum is.......Do you know of an American WWII veteran that calls or claims to be a liberal?

[RickSp]

You're joking right? Otherwise this is such a mindbogglingly stupid and profoundly ignorant question.

On the off chance that this is not a joke, have you ever heard of President John F. Kennedy? President Lyndon Baines Johnson? How about George McGovern? How about Senator Daniel K. Inouye, winner of the Medal of Honor, who is still serving in the Senate. Or Frank Lautenberg, now serving as a Senator from New Jersey. Does any of this ring a bell? Of the 115 Senators who served in WWII, 59 are or were Democrats.

Then there was Ronald Reagan, who never left the United States during the war. He did do War Bonds benefits however. Well, hoo haaa.

I can't get over feeling that this is all some sort of running joke designed to make conservatives look like knuckle dragging morons.

[Libhater]

[QUOTE=RickSp;754883]You're joking right? Otherwise this is such a mindbogglingly stupid and profoundly ignorant question.

On the off chance that this is not a joke, have you ever heard of President John F. Kennedy? President Lyndon Baines Johnson? How about George McGovern? How about Senator Daniel K. Inouye, winner of the Medal of Honor, who is still serving in the Senate. Or Frank Lautenberg, now serving as a Senator from New Jersey. Does any of this ring a bell? Of the 115 Senators who served in WWII, 59 are or were Democrats.

My question should have been more tailored to suit the ideological sway of our veterans by comparing liberal thought with military matters. But to address your examples: Kennedy was no liberal--he was a moderate dem at best. LBJ showed his liberal mindset with his botched and cowardly retreat policies of the Vietnam War. Don't know much about Inouye and Lautenberg, for I would have to see their voting records when it comes to military funding and total support of all military matters to make a sound judgement. Likewise, with the 59 dem senators; I would have to see their voting records on all military matters in order to pass an open-minded judgement.

[Chris the Chees]

Given that after WW2, Britain's veterans voted in the most 'liberal' government it has ever had, i suggest they most certainly can.

Indeed, in the course of my research into the Second World War, I have conducted numerous interviews with veterans; none of them struck me as overly conservative in their politics. But of course, in many instances they did not seem overly liberal. Like most people of any intelligence, and these individuals are very bright, they take a pluralistic approach to politics evaluating the situation before reaching a conclusion; not beginning with a dogma and applying that dogma to every scenario. That way an individual can, for example, take a general position of fiscal conservatism, but then come out in favour of various elements of the welfare state. but I wouldn't expect libhater to appriciate such nuances.

[Libhater]

Given that after WW2, Britain's veterans voted in the most 'liberal' government it has ever had, i suggest they most certainly can.

Indeed, in the course of my research into the Second World War, I have conducted numerous interviews with veterans; none of them struck me as overly conservative in their politics. But of course, in many instances they did not seem overly liberal. Like most people of any intelligence, and these individuals are very bright, they take a pluralistic approach to politics evaluating the situation before reaching a conclusion; not beginning with a dogma and applying that dogma to every scenario. That way an individual can, for example, take a general position of fiscal conservatism, but then come out in favour of various elements of the welfare state. but I wouldn't expect libhater to appriciate such nuances.

I would have to see a break down of the individual voting records of those voting in that 'liberal' government for Britain. Can you say with certainty that those veterans did the lion's share of voting for that liberal government? Your 'CONSERVATIVE' leader during WWII--Winston Churchill was considered one of the most intelligent militaristically-minded leaders of the 20th century.

You saw what happened shortly after the Vietnam War here in America; voters voted in the liberal Jimmy Carter to help make a shamble of the American economy. But those voting mistakes both here in America and over in Britain still don't account for the ideological differences of our conservatives supporting the military and those liberals supporting everything but our military.

[Chris the Chees]

Can you say with certainty that those veterans did the lion's share of voting for that liberal government?

The 1872 Secret Ballot Act means that we cannot, with certainty, make any pronouncements regarding voting trends in Britain. However, Attlee won 49.7% of the vote, and the Liberal Party won 9% of the vote, leaving the conservative portion of the vote at 36.2% with the rest going to other parties/independents. So, yes we can be sure that veterans voted Labour and Liberal, and did so in their millions. There is no way that the Conservatives could have lost so decisively had they not.

[Libhater]

The 1872 Secret Ballot Act means that we cannot, with certainty, make any pronouncements regarding voting trends in Britain. However, Attlee won 49.7% of the vote, and the Liberal Party won 9% of the vote, leaving the conservative portion of the vote at 36.2% with the rest going to other parties/independents. So, yes we can be sure that veterans voted Labour and Liberal, and did so in their millions. There is no way that the Conservatives could have lost so decisively had they not.

So the deduction I am left with from those facts tells me that all of Britain's veterans and current military men at that time represented most of the 36.2% of the voters then, thus the reason their votes got cancelled by the rest of the social/liberal/labour vote. I never said that Conservative numbers make up the majority of any faction, just that they make up the majority of the military personnel, both past and present for obvious ideological reasons.

[RickSp]

My question should have been more tailored to suit the ideological sway of our veterans by comparing liberal thought with military matters. But to address your examples: Kennedy was no liberal--he was a moderate dem at best. LBJ showed his liberal mindset with his botched and cowardly retreat policies of the Vietnam War. Don't know much about Inouye and Lautenberg, for I would have to see their voting records when it comes to military funding and total support of all military matters to make a sound judgement. Likewise, with the 59 dem senators; I would have to see their voting records on all military matters in order to pass an open-minded judgement.

This just gets more ridiculous. You deny Kennedy was a liberal? You may want to read President Kennedy's "On Being a Liberal." Perhaps he can explain it to you.

You appear completely unaware of Johnson's domestic policies which were indeed liberal and you are wholly ignorant of the records of Inouye and Lautenberg. I notice that you don't mention George McGovern, unquestionably a liberal and a decorated bomber pilot.

If you look at the list provided you will see many liberals who did indeed serve in World War II.

All you have demonstrated here is stupid militarism and ignorance. Are you sure this isn't a joke?

[Dodds]

So the deduction I am left with from those facts tells me that all of Britain's veterans and current military men at that time represented most of the 36.2% of the voters then, thus the reason their votes got cancelled by the rest of the social/liberal/labour vote. I never said that Conservative numbers make up the majority of any faction, just that they make up the majority of the military personnel, both past and present for obvious ideological reasons.

You do know George Orwell was in the military right? And you do know it was the right wing that the Allies where fighting against right?

[SoylentGreen]

I never said that Conservative numbers make up the majority of any faction, just that they make up the majority of the military personnel, both past and present for obvious ideological reasons.

That would make sense. The army is in the business of creating conservative clones who will march to one drum and obey without question.
Anyone showing individualism is a loose cannon and dangerous to the group mentality. They are either kicked out or upgraded to some special black op. company where free thinking and intelligent choices are required.

I imagine most ex soldiers though have the intelligence and personal fortitude to shake off the military strict conservative training, do not think for yourself lifestyle, the army promotes.

But of course there are the few exceptions who, not having what it takes to be a man without the protection of the army nanny state lifestyle or the ability to think for themselves and so always look to authority for direction.

[Libhater]

[QUOTE=SoylentGreen;754921]That would make sense. The army is in the business of creating conservative clones who will march to one drum and obey without question.[QUOTE]

No, the Army and or the military in general has formed a business (as you put it) to instruct young men and women in carrying out all facets of 'military' protocol. The military has strict rules and regulations so that we (America) get the best qualified personel to carry out the dictates of any and all military mandates. You probably wouldn't be too comfortable with having a dovish, pacifist-minded liberal queer boy doning the military uniform in time of war, would you? You see, the miltary seeks top shelf young men to carry out the duties of defending America, so that you libs will have the right and comfort to sit at home and create your next anti war sign or slogan, and to recruit as many useless societal dropouts and vermin to add to your group.

Anyone showing individualism is a loose cannon and dangerous to the group mentality. They are either kicked out or upgraded to some special black op. company where free thinking and intelligent choices are required.

That's right, recess is over, time to buck up or fade into the darkness. These offbeat 'individuals' as you put it usually find out the hard way of the commitment needed to be a military man. More times than not these individuals go AWOL and end up taking up space on a city corner holding a sign that says..."Veteran in need of food".

I imagine most ex soldiers though have the intelligence and personal fortitude to shake off the military strict conservative training, do not think for yourself lifestyle, the army promotes.

You finally got something right. Yes, most ex soldiers (including myself) had the intelligence and personal fortitude to shake off our military training to adjust to civilian life, but that's not what this is about. I'm talking about young men ages 17-32 or so who are just starting out in life and have full knowledge of the demands of the military, and in all cases where these conservative men consider it a priviledge to serve and honor America.

But of course there are the few exceptions who, not having what it takes to be a man without the protection of the army nanny state lifestyle or the ability to think for themselves and so always look to authority for direction.

Wow, Army nanny lifestyle? Where or how did you come up with that nonsense? We all know just who it is that lives and supports the big government nanny state, now don't we? Let me give you a clue. Its liberals!

[Sonart]

.

And let's not forget President Jimmy Carter, who graduated from the Naval Academy and served 6 years on submarines.

But to address your examples: Kennedy was no liberal--he was a moderate dem at best. LBJ showed his liberal mindset with his botched and cowardly retreat policies of the Vietnam War.

You are so full of crap... every liberal is a socialist in your book unless, when it's convenient, all of a sudden you're making distinctions between liberals and moderate Democrats. Except that Bill Clinton was far more moderate than Kennedy.

John F. Kennedy: On Being a Liberal

As to cowardly retreats, Johnson resigned in shame for getting us into a Vietnam war we couldn't win, but it was Nixon who actually did the fleeing.

But of all our Presidents, the one who fled in terror was Ronald Reagan. In 1983, Reagan thought it would be just the thing to interfere in the Lebanese civil war by plunking down a Marine Expeditionary force in the middle of Beirut Airport, surrounded on three sides by enemy held high ground, with no real means of defending themselves. And then, to sit there until some terrorists found the wherewithal to drive a truckload of explosives into the Marine's barracks and blow 240 of them to smithereens.

Whereupon St. Ronald promptly tucked tail and ran.

But then he restored his soldierly Republican image with the valiant invasion of Grenada, where we lost more troops than Clinton did after Bush's invasion of Somalia.

.