Posted on 08/11/2004 3:41:24 AM PDT by Former Military Chick
In an interesting exchange at the Democratic convention, Michael Moore asked Bill O'Reilly whether he would sacrifice his son to capture Fallujah. The question caught my attention because our youngest son had just returned from discussing post-college options with a Marine recruiter.
This type of question is designed to be difficult to answer -- and judging from O'Reilly's response, it was. This is because it is a rhetorical device and not a substantial question at all. This is true in four aspects.
First, it has the high standard of "sacrifice." No normal parent is prepared to sacrifice his child for any reason or objective, including military objectives. The same could be said of any desirable objective. Would you, for example, sacrifice your child to expand health care to the uninsured? Or even, in the customary example, to save the life of another of one's own children? It is hard to imagine any objective for which one would sacrifice one's child.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Opinion Focus: Sacrificing for Fallujah?
Jeff Bergner
Senior Fellow at the German Marshall Fund, Former Staff
Director of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Wednesday, August 11, 2004; 2:00 p.m. ET
Michael Moore has raised more than a few questions to the public over the past months. One of those questions was posed to Bill O'Reilly, host of Fox's talk show The O'Reilly Factor. "Would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other thirty brutal dictators on this planet?"
Jeff Bergner, senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, notes that Moore's question was actually not a substantial question at all. According to Mr. Bergner, it was merely a rhetorical device that offers no practicality in a society where decisions about children, war and policy do not come in absence of deep consideration.
Jeff Bergner will be live online at 2 ET on Wednesday, August 11, to discuss Michael Moore's question and what it means to sacrifice your son to capture Fallujah.
Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.
As a retired Marine, I can tell that there are risks, called a soldier's risks, but no everyone goes to combat. Your odds of getting killed in a car crash probably FAR outnumbered getting killed in combat. Indeed, I have had FAR more close calls in training ops and in the civilian world than the 6 months I did in the Gulf War part one.
I really like the movie, "13th Warrior" and in it, a viking says to Antonio Banderas' charatcer, about fighting/dying, "The old faather (Odin) wrote the skien of your life long ago. Go hide in a hole if you want, you wouldn't live on instant longer."
Lastly, in regards to your son, my father did WW2, in the Pacific, from 7 Dec, 41 to 15 Aug, 45 without a scratch! And in a unit that suffered 25% KIA! Many, many times, he told me, he was very close to death, yet he made it through. He always felt, as do I, "when it's your time to go, it's your time."
No parent would exchange the certain death of a child for any piece of real estate. Wars are not usually about that. They are about murdering dictators and tyranny and a concept of protecting your own liberty and security and the greater safety of those you love.
Michael Moore wouldn't risk a mosquito bite. He is the ultimate ungrateful coward.
Sure, if my son was Michael Moore...
It is my understanding that the chances are much greater that the parents of Fallujah would lose their sons in much greater numbers.
Somebody should ask Moore if he would sacrifice his child for a hamburger.
Because sending your child out to fetch one across the street might end in that child's death.
Same logic, same stupidity.
"In an interesting exchange at the Democratic convention, Michael Moore asked Bill O'Reilly whether he would sacrifice his son to capture Fallujah."
A typical liberal oversimplification of a complex issue and and an ad hominem question which bears little relevance to the subject at hand.
No American should be sacrificed "for Fallujah".
Fallujah should have been given the WW2 treatment we gave Dresden, with far more justification. It should be pounded into dust from the sky, and probably would have, had the State Department, under the aegis of Colin Powell, who feels appearing at a Republican Convention is beneath him, not intervened in what was being planned by our military.
The issue isn't Fallujah anyway.
The issue is America and the lunatics in Fallujah, Najaf, Iran, and similar places who want to kil American civilians and consider that perfectly acceptable as a means for achieving their goal of totally destroying Western Civilization and Ayatollahizing the west.
What goes around SHOULD come around, and blasting a few thousand of THEIR civilians into dust in order to get the message across of not screwing with us, is, in my opinion, a fair echange for sparing the lives of American servicemen.
Take that, Michael Moore.
IMO Rush made the best point on this; the whole premise is wrong. We're not sending our sons & daughters to "be sacrificed"; we're sending our troops to kill THEM. IAW, like Patton said, roughly paraphrased....go make the other bastards die for their country.
Why wait for the kid to grow up? Democrats would sacrifice them 18-23 years earlier.
True. The real question is: Do we have a Republic worth dying for?
My answer: I don't know. Probably not.
Michael Moore's cheap rhetorical trick is aimed at scoring points in an argument but fails to really win the argument (much like his movies). How would Michael Moore respond to a yes? How would Michael Moore respond to a no? Does anyone really care? I for one, do not and hope I won't have to be subjected to that show.
Michael Moore's standard procedure is to use these kinds of implausible rhetorical devices. I watched him for 10 minutes on Bill Maher's show and that was all I needed to make that assesment. I wonder if he knows how to argue any other way?
My daughter is a Marine, serving at an air base north of Fallujah.
My son is in the Army Guard, and leaves in 6 weeks for Iraq.
Does that count as a 'yes' vote?
I want them to return healthy & happy. But even more, I want them to serve honorably.
You risk death every time you drive the 405 in LA. Might as well risk it for something worthwhile.
The abortion altar.
First thank you for YOUR service to our country. I agree with your post. There are risks. For those that believe this is a just war, or a good American will SUPPORT their son/daughter going to war.
Asking this question to OReilly was well odd. Nobody chooses to go to the recruiters and say SIGN up my child now I want him her to go. It is their choice and unless there is a draft, well, a family will support their child defending our country.
I have no son's nor daughters. That notwithstanding, sacfaficing my son/daughter "for" Faluja is absolutely out of the question. Unless my beeber is absolutely stubed the question amounts to:
"Am I willing to obliterate each and every inhabitant within the city limits of Faluja, despite my son/daughter falling on the field of battle in the process."
Most likely there's stubing needing of my beeber, but I echo a resoundingly "YES!!!!!"
I'm not impatient concerning the Iraqi Cematery that's billions of square miles, the U.S. Marines will get the job done. Oh, did I forget to stuber the beeber? Sorry, the U.S. Army is enmassed around that hell hole. Can anybody spell "siege"? Well, we don't call it siege anymore because neither ABC, CBC, NBC, CNN nor Fox has any patience for that shit. Now we call it annihiliation. Got it?
Hey, Iran, your're stupid beeber thing with England, France and Germany? Well it just got stubered. Now its our turn (and their NOT going to help your sorry asses).
It's a totally unfair question because I don't OWN my daughter (I don't have a son.) But if SHE decided to join the military, as I did, I would certainly support her in that decision. If she got killed, I'd mourn terribly but I'd be proud of her service because it's a job that needs to be done.
I thought O'Riley answered it pretty well though saying that he'd sacrifice HIMSELF.
Would You Sacrifice Your Son for Fallujah? Michael Moore would rather see Al Qada flying planes into buildings, blowing up bridges, and someday nuking American cities. It's not a question. It's a choice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.