December 27, 2003


Yes, that spelling is intentional. Before I explain it, I'm making an announcement: This URL is now my official blog base. I was going to wait until my BlogSpot posts were archived, but why should I do that? I want to post here now. I have a list of my personal favorite posts written over at the other blog, and according to Sitemeter, everyone who has come there since I put it up has looked at more than one page (some looked at 5 or 6), so my Right Wing News link won't go to waste (have I mentioned that I'm linked on Right Wing News yet? I may have forgotten to mention that I'm linked on Right Wing News, so in case I forgot to mention that I'm linked on Right Wing News, I'll remind you that I'm linked on Right Wing News).

I'm still going to do a little tweaking when my archives upload, but I'm tired of CrapSpot, and I want out. Now. So I'm using this as my official blog from now on.

All right, now that I got that out of the way, I can go back to what I was going to write about. Click the extended entry for my thoughts about "chickenhocks."

Earlier tonight, I went to my younger brother's varsity hockey game. It was the first time I had been to a school hockey game in a couple years, I believe, so I had forgotten about some of the...atmosphere at these events.

Anyone who's ever gone to an athletic event where the parents of the players make up 95% of the audience knows what to expect. They yell. A lot. At their kids. And at other people's kids. And sometimes at the other team's kids. So, as I sat there listening to middle-aged women yelling...






...and other bits of information, I realized that some people could refer to these parents as "chickenhocks." They obviously want their team to win, and they show up to support them. They even yell things at them when they feel inclined.

However, the reality is that they probably wouldn't be able to do most of the things they want their kids to do. They stand up and yell "FASTER! FASTER!" but you know perfectly well that they wouldn't be able to skate even half that fast if they were on the ice.

In addition, they probably know that their kids can't even hear them. I used to play hockey (before I developed my current "weight problem"), and I can tell you that nobody hears what the parents are yelling. Nobody.

The parents may think they're helping, but they probably know this as well. They're just expressing themselves and getting into the game because it's their team, their child, and their pride on the line.

If they're allowed to do that, then why are these stupid "chickenhawks" accusations still being thrown at those of us who support the military and approve of the war in Iraq, but aren't actually members of the armed forces? It's my country, my fellow Americans, and my freedom on the line, so why shouldn't I be able to express my support of them and give my opinion of their progress?

This analogy goes a bit further, because just like the parents, I know that I probably wouldn't be able to handle the military (again, see "weight problem"). I respect them, and they're deserving of a lot more respect than me because they lay down their lives so I can sit here and write about it.

Unfortunately, for some reason, a few people have decided that this is wrong, and you should join the military if you support military action. That's idiotic. The parents at the game may have never played a sport, and they're certainly not capable of keeping up with the action.

In addition, their kids are the athletes, and they're the parents. There are different roles here. The people who are capable of playing the game play the game, and those who are too old, or in my case, too unathletic, simply sit in the stands and cheer on the team.

That's the way it works with military action. Those who are brave and strong enough to defend our country go out and do it, but that doesn't mean that us civilians can't cheer them on and even give our opinions of their actions.

We know that we're really yelling to ourselves, but why should we be criticized for that? The parents know that their kids can't hear them, but they have an opinion and they express it. In the same way, "chickenhawks" can think critically about the issue even though it doesn't really do that much good. It's called discourse.

You can also look at it this way: What would morale be like if the entire country was either anti-war or silent because they weren't fighting the war? It would be the same as having a hockey game where nobody showed up except fans of the opposing team.

What would happen to morale? It would hit rock bottom, because support is necessary. You have to know that there are people standing in the bleachers cheering you on, because it makes your job that much more satisfying.

In the same way, soldiers need to know that they're making people safer, more secure, and more proud to be Americans. If everyone who supported the war went off to fight it, there would be nobody left but protestors, and many of the people fighting wouldn't be fit to serve.

Now, I don't want to become the subject of a Tom Tomorrow strip and act like pro-war bloggers are somehow part of the military effort, but the chickenhocks analogy seems to suggest that support is fine as long as you realize that the people you support are doing a lot more than you.

The soldiers who are fighting in Iraq right now are stronger than me, braver than me, and certainly deserving of a lot more praise than I've earned in a lifetime, but that doesn't mean that some of that praise can't come from me. They're over in the Middle East fighting evil so that people like me don't have to fight it here.

And I would fight it here. Believe me. If those f***ing terrorists attack us on our own soil in any sustained way, I may just join the military, but that's a last resort. Until then, it seems to me that people who are totally cut out to defend freedom should do that, but somebody has to cheer them on and acknowledge that their sacrifices make us all better off.

Here's one more thing to think about: The people calling us chickenhawks think that we should join the military and experience it for ourselves before we form an opinion, but by their own logic, they should support the war and then use that experience to show why supporting the war is wrong. They've never supported the war, so who are they to judge those of us who do?

See how stupid that sounds? They think that joining the military will either back up our beliefs with experience or make us question them because we've experienced it, but they form an opinion without being in the military or being in favor of the war. It's the same leaky friggin' boat.

In any case, I know that my support really doesn't do that much to help us fight terror, but it's my country that's fighting, and I have a right to cheer them on from the sidelines.

My name is CD (well, my initials are), I'm a chickenhawk, and I'm proud of it.

Posted by CD on December 27, 2003 01:19 AM
Semi-Intelligent Comments

I'm so going to actually write comments in the morning. When I'm awake. And sober. Ok j/k about the last one... I think ;)

But I'll never teeeeeell

Posted by: dogtulosba at December 27, 2003 03:08 AM

Sober is good.

Now I'm worried about the nature of said comments, you being a military man and all.

Posted by: CD at December 27, 2003 04:04 AM


One one hand I say, yes, if you're going to talk the talk, then walk the walk. If you are "pro-war" then you should be willing to put your ass on the line. But, like you said, I don't know if I want a fat ass (w/ the most respect ;))covering me in a fox hole. Sorry, but we already have a problem with that and let's trim it where we can. That's also why the draft is a stupid idea. A volunteer Armed Force (usually) has people who want to be there.

But, let's use people's talents where we can. If you're a tree hugger, and want to help America by joing the Peace Corps and spreading the good news of America, then by all means...

If you can't run two miles to save your life, but are indeed mentally savy, then I'll have you on my side in an argument anyday.

That's why people have speechwriters and Public Affairs Officers. Because some people can talk better, while others shoot better and hell, others cook better.

I will never bash someone if they are in someway helping the cause with their "god-given" talents. But stay in your lane. If you can't shoot, don't threaten someone with a gun. If you call a liberal a dumbass and can't back it up, be careful, CD may not be there to help you out.

So sure, you can cheerlead or be a "chickenhock," but don't go too far out of bounds. We're here to protect and defend, but that includes the other guy too.

Posted by: dogtulosba at December 29, 2003 03:10 PM

That's more or less what I'm trying to say. Just because you have an opinion on something, you shouldn't have to personally demonstrate why you think that way.

I've also seen examples (and thought of them myself) of how silly it would be to say that only police officers should be able to give their opinion of how to combat crime, and only firefighters should be allowed to want fires extinguished.

At the same time, I realize that the people who do back up their opinions are doing a lot more and should, therefore, receive credit for it, even if others agree with them. That's why soldiers get medals and not bloggers, reporters, etc.

Also, like I said before, if the war came here and the terrorists decided to fight on our turf without immediately blowing themselves up, I would probably help to fight them off, but as far as preemptive attacks go, we have a trained military so that people like me who would probably get killed within a few minutes of shooting won't slow down everyone else.

Like you said, we have a volunteer army full of people who want to be there, and they're going to do a better job if they don't have to deal with a bunch of people who are only there to prove that they're not afraid.

(By the way, you may be interested to know that I was accused of being a "chickensh*t chickenhawk" by a military commenter on Mike the Marine's blog after I criticized Howard Dean's anti-war stance, and that's part of the reason I wrote this piece)

Posted by: CD at December 29, 2003 04:25 PM

By the way, you may be interested to know that I was accused of being a "chickensh*t chickenhawk" by a military commenter on Mike the Marine's blog after I criticized Howard Dean's anti-war stance, and that's part of the reason I wrote this piece.

I'm of the attitude: "hey, you can say what you want, but realize who is making the sacrifice so you can spout."

You seem to have a grasp on your place in the big bad world. Though a few push-ups probably couldn't hurt.

Additionally, joining the military doesn't automatically make you divine. Some join for the wrong reasons and when told they have to go to the sandbox, they end up "pregnant," "gay," or "mental." Yeah.

But I'm basically a newbie anyway and really don't have any pull. Just my own two cents.

Posted by: dogtulosba at December 29, 2003 05:42 PM

create your free blogs Because of its size my Mac doesnt have certain plugs in it and I was wondering if the apple store ha dex yellow pages Depends (somewhat) on whether or not you consider Yahoo!, Google, and/or MSN Live to be social netwo free web site submit Paste d files u want to share in d public folder, all files in that folder will be accessible on bot create free blogs So Im thinking of getting an iPhone but i have doubts about the internet use.Do I need to pay extr link exchange The simple answer is that out of the box they can only be used with BT Broadband.If you have a w

Posted by: Dmoz O at June 9, 2010 07:16 PM
< MTCloseComments old="10" >