Grandmother charged with fatally beating 4-year-old while girl's mother was serving in Iraq

staff ^ | 5/20/03 | staff

[A. Pole]

We are not stingy or greedy, we just try to enforce a work ethic so our country doesn't end up like most Western European nations.

How the Western European nations ended up? Do they send single parents to war?

[SJSAMPLE]

No. Your comment about the US being "stingy and greedy" brought up that point, not the notion of sending single parents to war. Socialized countries (France, among the most aggregious examples) have eroded the concept of "responsibility" of the individual for their own sustenance. It doesn't take much to see what that's brought, socially and economically.

The US armed forces does not send single parents to war. We send soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines to war. But, because of political (PC) pressures, single parents (single FEMALE parents) are allowed to enlist. Many of these enlistees see the armed forces as nothing more than a paycheck, without the realization that they may be called to fight.

If we excuse every single parent from the combat theater, what's their purpose? The purpose of the soldier is to make ware, PERIOD. If they cannot fulfill that goal, then why are then allowed to join or remain in the armed forces?

Every soldier has to pull their own weight. The second they display their inability (or unwillingness) to do this, they should be (and often are) separated from the service. Joining that Army and then crying when you're deployed is not acceptable.

[kulot]

From all the comments on this post it is clear that so many things could have prevented or greatly reduced the probability of this tragedy:

1. The child being brought up in a married household.

2. Allowing a woman of child bearing age in active duty combat. Not just a mother, but a potential mother, since pregnancy can easily be used as a means of discharge and, as was earlier stated, this can hurt the cohesiveness of the military unit.

3. Extended family available, but not a substitute for the mother.

[GoRepGo]

How tragic!! - no mercy for the grandmother

Surely by now, the Red Cross has been able to bring the mother home from the war. As to why the other children are in foster care; it could stem from basic CPS protocol and perhaps an on-going investigation into the children's well-being and safety.

I pray that this family is soon reunited.

[A. Pole]

If we excuse every single parent from the combat theater, what's their purpose? The purpose of the soldier is to make ware, PERIOD.

Being a parent (especially a mother) is more important than being a soldier. American will not make a good Sparta and even Spartans would find it very shameful to send mothers of small children to war.

It is a shame when the rich men avoid military service while preaching about "responsibility" to the poor single parents.

[SJSAMPLE]

Then we agree that single parents (especially women?) shouldn't be in combat. So, by extension, they shouldn't be in the military (or in deployable Military Occupational Specialties (MOS's)).

However, you comment about "rich men" betrays you. The military is not about rich or poor, white or black (or yellow or brown). It's about VOLUNTEERS who decide to enlist and, if required, fight and die.

"Poor single parents" have the same responsibilities as "rich men", but their inability to realize their responsibilities is what causes their poverty. Not the greed of others.

[A. Pole]

However, you comment about "rich men" betrays you. The military is not about rich or poor, white or black (or yellow or brown). It's about VOLUNTEERS who decide to enlist and, if required, fight and die.

Come on, most of those "volunteers" are induced by poverty. Name me a liberal if you wish, but I would rather spend money on education and job training than on foreign adventures and development of weapons.

"Poor single parents" have the same responsibilities as "rich men", but their inability to realize their responsibilities is what causes their poverty.

Or not being born with silver spoon and not having influential parents who will help you to avoid the service.

[Sergio]

Quote: "Or not being born with silver spoon and not having influential parents who will help you to avoid the service."

...avoid the service? No one has had to "avoid the service" since we went to an all volunteer force in the late 70's or early 80's.

Best Regards

Sergio

[SJSAMPLE]

Let's see;
I was paying my way for college when I decided I didn't want to start life as an accountant. So, I joined the Officers Corps and accepted a commission. I neither had a silver spoon nor influential parents.

You're really dating yourself if you think service still has to be "avoided." There is no draft, so differments aren't needed.

If poverty is an inducement to joing the military (and it's only one inducement), then why isn't it bad if poverty is an inducement to pump gas, wash cars or wait tables? Every enlistee has choices, but the smart ones use their service as a means to a college education. I used my GI Bill to get my Masters Degree in Business Administration.

It's a little alarming, but very telling, that you seem to think military service is a calling of last resort. Also, if you think spending has anything to do with a quality education, you've got a lot of research to do. The areas of the country with the highest spending (NYC and Washington DC, among many) have some of the lowest standardized scores and graduation rates.

[A. Pole]

It's a little alarming, but very telling, that you seem to think military service is a calling of last resort.

A last resort for mothers with small children, for sure! I am surprised that you and so many people cannot see it.

As someone said - the civilisation can be aware that it is in process of decline, but only to the extent it did not decline yet (use analogy with Altzheimer). Looks like we are getting blind.

[kcvl]

A last resort for mothers with small children

How about not having children until you can afford them?

[A. Pole]

A last resort for mothers with small children

How about not having children until you can afford them?

What if woman got seduced (promised marriage) and abandoned? What if she is a widow? Will you be able to say such things into the face of orphaned children?

Or are you recommending abortions?

BTW, if enough people cannot "afford" children, should the population be replenished by Third World immigration? (to support economy for childless retirees). Or maybe you propose the euthanasia too?

I start to understand how the decline of Rome worked. But even Rome did not send mothers of small children to war. Do you think that God approves it?

[kcvl]

I don't think God approves of women keeping their legs spread at the sight of every man either. How about some PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. I am NOT required to pay for your "mistakes". Although the taxes that I pay will tell a different story. I guess you could call me one of those "rich" people who you don't seem to think deserves MY OWN MONEY. You sure as hell don't deserve it.

[A. Pole]

I don't think God approves of women keeping their legs spread at the sight of every man either. How about some PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. I am NOT required to pay for your "mistakes".

So how does it justify sending mothers of small children to war?

[kcvl]

How about they DON'T enlist?! That is NOT the only choice they have!

[SJSAMPLE]

Hey, I'm no fan of having single mothers in the military. But these women have found themselves in a position of needing to care for their children. That said, I much prefer their honorable service to the long, slow misery of living on welfare.

[A. Pole]

How about they DON'T enlist?! That is NOT the only choice they have!

They? What about the children? They did not enlist. Are you for freedom of abortion? Children are not being consulted before being aborted.

[A. Pole]

But these women have found themselves in a position of needing to care for their children. That said, I much prefer their honorable service to the long, slow misery of living on welfare.

If you insist, why not to grant the welfare for single mothers of SMALL children? Why not to provide public works for mother of older children instead of army? After all the army is the public work socialist institution beside being the main tool for aggrandizement of the state.

The militarised state is much more dangerous to your wealth and your freedom than the welfare families.

[kcvl]

They, the parents, are RESPONSIBLE for "the children". They, (it took two of them to make "the children") have other options besides joining the military to make a living. I wasn't one of the "they". I am NOT responsible for thier children, the parents who bred them are. If they couldn't afford them, they(the breeders) shouldn't have been playing house. They also are responsible for taking out life insurance policies, making arrangements for unseen costs of raising children. It is not my responsiblity to make a living for them or their children. I worked two jobs as did my spouse to save for our future. It is not my responsiblity to work for you or your children, that belongs to you and the other breeder.

[A. Pole]

If they couldn't afford them, they(the breeders) shouldn't have been playing house.

Breeders?! Are you a homosexual?