Forum Home | Login

Stars turn backs on America's troops in Iraq

terpfan1980

Join Date 08/2004

+13

Stars turn backs on America's troops in Iraq

As if we needed yet more proof that many of the so-called "stars" in Hollywood are nothing more than self-centered egomaniacs, how about this article that details that a lot of the Hollywood crowd are turning their backs on our troops in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Before I get ahead of myself here, let me say that some of the names of those that have been visiting our troops are a bit surprising at first, though if you know the history of some of them, perhaps it's not all that surprising. Either way, I'm glad that those individuals -- Robin Williams, Al Franken, and Henry Rollins as examples -- are placing the troops above politics and are visiting the troops via the USO shows. At least those individuals are trying to help support our troops, even as many others turn their backs on them and ignore them while they serve in missions many never really choose to be part of.

Original article snippet follows. Please see original for complete story. Headline is linked.

Stars turn backs on America's troops in Iraq

Danger and anti-war stance keep celebrities away

Shows now depend on Christian hip-hop groups

Jamie Wilson in Washington
Saturday December 24, 2005
The Guardian

During world war two American troops away from home for Christmas were entertained by Marlene Dietrich, Bing Crosby and the Marx Brothers. Even in Vietnam Bob Hope was guaranteed to put in an appearance. But soldiers in Iraq are more likely to get a show from a Christian hip-hop group, a country singer you have probably never heard of and two cheerleaders for the Dallas Cowboys.
Just as the seemingly intractable nature of the war has led to a growing recruitment crisis, so the United Services Organisation, which has been putting on shows for the troops since the second world war, is struggling to get celebrities to sign up for even a short tour of duty
It is a far cry from the days following the September 11 2001 attacks, when some of the biggest names in show business, from Jennifer Lopez to Brad Pitt, rallied to the cause. "After 9/11 we couldn't have had enough airplanes for the people who were volunteering to go," Wayne Newton, the Las Vegas crooner who succeeded Bob Hope as head of USO's talent recruiting effort, told USA Today. "Now with 9/11 being as far removed as it is, the war being up one day and down the next, it becomes increasingly difficult to get people to go."
Newton said many celebrities have been wary of going because they think it might be seen that they are endorsing the war. "And I say it's not. I tell them these men and women are over there because our country sent them, and we have the absolute necessity to try to bring them as much happiness as we can."
{ snip }
Some of the entertainers still willing to travel are die-hard true believers - rock musician Ted Nugent carried a Glock handgun to shows in Iraq last year and said in a radio interview that he manned a machine gun on a Humvee. But many of the USO's regular performers are fierce critics of the war, among them the comic and star of Good Morning Vietnam, Robin Williams, who told USA Today he would like to return to the Middle East in the spring for what would be his fourth tour since 2002. "I'm there for the [troops], not for W," he said in a reference to the president. "Go, man. You won't forget it. You'll meet amazing people," is his message to stars that ask him about the tours. But the comedian said he mostly tries to keep politics out of the show after he did a few jokes about Bush's brainpower at a base in 2003 and got a chilly reception.
Other critics of the war who regularly perform include the leftwing comedian Al Franken (who is headlining the current tour along with Christian hip-hop group Souljahz) and the punk legend and actor Henry Rollins, one of the Bush administrations most vocal critics.
The tradition of beautiful women thrilling the troops has continued - although while Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russell showed up in Korea and Vietnam could boast Raquel Welch, in Iraq they have had to make do with sometime pop singer and reality TV star Jessica Simpson.

... more at original article please see original for complete story.

politics

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

drmiler:

But look at it this way. Do "most" liberals support the war in Iraq? Nope. Since the answer is no, would it not be safe to assume that for the most part those joining the military currently are "not" liberals? Human nature says that if it's something you don't agree with, it's something you won't get on board with.

Military service is not defined by the war in Iraq.

The enlistment oath reads:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

There is no clause requiring agreement with the war in Iraq or any specific military action. You don't have to approve of the war in Iraq to faithfully serve or support and defend the constitution of the United States, and you certainly aren't required to be a registered Republican.

While I agree with you to the extent that service members tend to be conservative, there's still A LOT of room for liberal service members and for those who are otherwise opposed to the war in Iraq. I've met quite a few myself.

As I stated above, Fahrenheit 9/11 was a big hit at Bagram last year (it was even shown as an MWR movie). Service members are not easy to pigeon hole politically, and in fact, the politics don't matter, as orders are not theirs to question, but simply to carry out.

Successfully updated karma reason!

you are pathetic. i didn't say i couldnt google for an answer. i said i'd tried but hadn't been able to find anything reliable. later, when i did find what appeared to be evidence of one trip to afghanistan by the oxycontin kid (who seemed unclear how many days he'd been gone), i mentioned that.

either put up or shut up.

Yes you did. Recheck your answers. SO you put up or shut up. Doc Miler already has shown you up. NOw do you want to run and cower?

Successfully updated karma reason!

did find what appeared to be evidence of one trip to afghanistan by the oxycontin kid

Note the compassionate liberal! Compassion for everyone as long as they goose step in their own direction! Heil caesar Apiary!

Successfully updated karma reason!

drmiler: But look at it this way. Do "most" liberals support the war in Iraq? Nope. Since the answer is no, would it not be safe to assume that for the most part those joining the military currently are "not" liberals? Human nature says that if it's something you don't agree with, it's something you won't get on board with.

Military service is not defined by the war in Iraq.

The enlistment oath reads:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Sorry Tex but I do know what the oath says. It has not changed since I took it in 75. You are correct in they do not usually question orders. At least the good ones don't. And no the Iraqi war does not define military enlistment. Nor does enlistment guarantee approval of the war. However my statement stands on it's merits. During this war which "most" liberals do "not" support, you will not find many joining. BTW, I'm not making a "blanket" statement here or before either. Both times I put qualifiers in the reply.

Successfully updated karma reason!

kingbee

Join Date 04/2004

+42

I told you to google it and you said "I can't {child whine}". Fine, dont. But the facts are out there for anyone who wants to look at it.

Recheck your answers. SO you put up or shut up

either provide a direct full quote where i said i can't google it--as oppposed to:

. you might wanna provide me with a link (if you can find one) cuz i can find nothing other than several mentions of limbaugh visiting afghanistan in 2005--all from the same source cuz the wording is exactly the same, none of them providing any details, dates or other verifiable facts

and:

so far, you've told me to google for an answer i can't find.

even tho i noted:

it does appear as if limbaugh did go to afghanistan early in 2005. i found something where he kept referring to a trip but didnt seem too sure how long he'd been there or how many live reports he'd broadcast.

or i'm afraid we'll have to concur you're doin what you always do when your account of things is shown to be incorrect.

speaking of which, i thought you were gonna provide some facts here. guess not.

Well,unlike kb, I will actually tell you. They have

that's the kinda claim you can take to the bank.

Successfully updated karma reason!

kingbee

Join Date 04/2004

+42

Note the compassionate liberal!

if i were with the state department, i'd be examining his application to go to world's largest opium supplier, too. if he were a recovering alky, how compassionate would it be to send him to the liquor store?

Successfully updated karma reason!

kingbee

Join Date 04/2004

+42

Miler already has shown you up.

according to miler, limbaugh is still waiting for approval and he's yet to come up with verifiable evidence of hannity goin anywhere.

i found limbaugh's account of a trip to afghanistan in early 2005 (altho, as i said, he sure didn't seem to know how long he'd been there or how many remote broadcasts he'd done).

this is really sad, dr guy. watchin you self-destruct, i mean.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Daiwa

Join Date 07/2001

+351

whatever limbaugh, hannity, o'reilly and coulter do is no different than what franken does.

Actually, Franken is pretty damn funny standup comic. I enjoy his stuff still, though I'm pretty much 180 degrees away from his political positions. Sort of the same way I enjoy Bill Maher; even when he's goring conservatives he's funny, too.

Despite the inevitable leftist jibe that Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Coulter must be comedians since they are a joke, they have no standup gigs on their resumes. Since the USO has remained intentionally non-political, I certainly understand their lack of interest in political commentators.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Successfully updated karma reason!

according to miler, limbaugh is still waiting for approval and he's yet to come up with verifiable evidence of hannity goin anywhere.

Sorry but you'd better go back and re-read my posts! I said he waited for 2 years to "get" approval not that he was still waiting for it. And I already told you that I could find no verifiable proof on Sean. What ya want a signed confession? As far a Rush goes...what difference does it make how many times he went or for how long? Like I said before he did on "his" dime, not someone elses.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.

There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!

View all recent posts

Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top

Stardock Forums v Server Load Time: Page Render Time: