• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Chickenhawk".....Hollow Criticism?

Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I was pondering the label of "chicken hawk"....someone (generally male) who advocates military adventurism, but never has or will personally serve in harm's way.
I say it's bogus.
Why?
Let's compare 2 different kinds of hawks to see if there's any significance:

John McCain v Hillary Clinton
Both favor riding into conflicts with guns blazing.
McCain has been there & done that.....so he's a hawk
Hillary has not.....so she's a chickenhawk.

Does he have greater wisdom or knowledge about the matter than she? He has certainly experienced war from a direct participant's perspective....having shot at the enemy, been shot at, been captured & tortured. Meanwhile, Hillary was balancing college & brewskies....& (to her credit, IMO) advocating against the war. On the surface, McCain would seem to have the more valuable experience. But he wasn't leading or strategizing....he was just a soldier enduring the horrors of war. Hillary undoubtedly knows what happened in that war, despite not experiencing it. McCain's service might give him caution about entering into wars, but he is a hawk nonetheless. If the net result of different service records leads them to the same agenda, why does it even matter if one is a chickenhawk?
 
Last edited:
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
One does not have to jump off a cliff to know that jumping off a cliff may not be good for one's health. Of course, it's not the fall that's the problem but the sudden stop at the end.
 
Lyndon

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
So if McCain, who I supported in 2008, believe it or not, was president, do you think we would be involved in a much bigger war than we are now?? PS I supported McCain because I believed he was more liberal than Obama, still do I think, I did not support Romney though.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Lyndon said:
So if McCain, who I supported in 2008, believe it or not, was president, do you think we would be involved in a much bigger war than we are now?? PS I supported McCain because I believed he was more liberal than Obama, still do I think, I did not support Romney though.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's a single war that McCain hasn't tried to get us into, and that ain't much of an exaggeration.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Lyndon said:
So if McCain, who I supported in 2008, believe it or not, was president, do you think we would be involved in a much bigger war than we are now?? PS I supported McCain because I believed he was more liberal than Obama, still do I think, I did not support Romney though.
Click to expand...
It's hard to make predictions about an alternative present. But I'd say there'd be a much greater risk of war with Iran.
 
Lyndon

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
I think If Hilary was president we would already be at war with Iran, the only Republican that doesn't seem to want war with Iran is Rand Paul. Absolutely scary, an upcoming presidential election with only two horrible choices, doesn't look good.
 
Sunstone

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Revoltingest said:
I was pondering the label of "chicken hawk"....someone (generally male) who advocates military adventurism, but never has or will personally serve in harm's way. I say it's bogus. Why? Let's compare 2 different kinds of hawks to see if there's any significance:

John McCain v Hillary Clinton
Both favor riding into conflicts with guns blazing.
McCain has been there & done that.....so he's a hawk
Hillary has not.....so she's a chickenhawk.

Does he have greater wisdom or knowledge about the matter than she? He has certainly experienced war from a direct participant's perspective....having shot at the enemy, been shot at, been captured & tortured. Meanwhile, Hillary was balancing college & brewskies....& (to her credit, IMO) advocating against the war. On the surface, McCain would seem to have the more valuable experience. But he wasn't leading or strategizing....he was just a soldier enduring the horrors of war. Hillary undoubtedly knows what happened in that war, despite not experiencing it. McCain's service might give him caution about entering into wars, but he is a hawk nonetheless. If the net result of different service records leads them to the same agenda, why does it even matter if one is a chickenhawk?
Click to expand...

To argue that Chickenhawk is a bogus term because there are Hawks is like arguing that willful ignorance is a bogus term because there is ignorance.
 
oldbadger

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Revoltingest said:
....not what I'm arguing.

To clarify, I don't see that hawks who served any more legitimacy than "chickenhawks".
Click to expand...

Indeed........ Here is a perfect example of a brilliant war leader and tactical decision maker. ............. who was a teacher before she entered politics. Folks will try and stamp on political contenders any way they ca, these days.

Golda Meir born Goldie Mabovitch, May 3, 1898 – December 8, 1978) was an Israeli teacher,kibbutznik, politician and the fourth Prime Minister of Israel.

Meir was elected Prime Minister of Israel on March 17, 1969, after serving as Minister of Labour and Foreign Minister.[2] Israel's first and the world's fourth woman to hold such an office, she was described as the "Iron Lady" of Israeli politics years before the epithet became associated with British Prime MinisterMargaret Thatcher.[3] Former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion used to call Meir "the best man in the government"; she was often portrayed as the "strong-willed, straight-talking, grey-bunned grandmother of the Jewish people".[4]

Meir resigned as prime minister in 1974, the year following the Yom Kippur War.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
article-2535709-1A7D371000000578-703_964x531.jpg

Actual sign a few miles from me.
 
F

freethinker44

Well-Known Member
Lyndon said:
So if McCain, who I supported in 2008, believe it or not, was president, do you think we would be involved in a much bigger war than we are now?? PS I supported McCain because I believed he was more liberal than Obama, still do I think, I did not support Romney though.
Click to expand...
You mean John "100 more years in Iraq" McCain? Yeah, I'm sure his first order of business would have been to end both wars if he was elected. :rolleyes:
 
Politesse

Politesse

Amor Vincit Omnia
I think the charge is not so much that one has to fight a war to understand its implications, as that it is much easier to send someone else to their deaths than yourself. To accuse someone of being a chickenhawk is to accuse them of cowardice, not ignorance. It is more relevant, perhaps, for that generation which was subject to a military draft (that Old Money could seemingly excuse you from). That said...

I'm not sure name-calling is, in general, the best way to conduct a democracy.
 
Lyndon

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
I wouldn't consider someone who has served in the military any more likely to start a war, especially if they had been held prisoner, but who knows???
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Revoltingest said:
article-2535709-1A7D371000000578-703_964x531.jpg

Actual sign a few miles from me.
Click to expand...
Funny, as my wife and I were just at Milford High School yesterday, as one of my granddaughters was in dance competition there, and we ate at the Palate restaurant for dinner. We're east-siders, so we had to get shots before going over on that side of town. :p
 
robtex

robtex

Veteran Member
Revoltingest said:
I was pondering the label of "chicken hawk"....someone (generally male) who advocates military adventurism, but never has or will personally serve in harm's way.
I say it's bogus.
Why?
Let's compare 2 different kinds of hawks to see if there's any significance:

John McCain v Hillary Clinton
Click to expand...

I will buy your premise on chicken-hawks vs hawks but as a sidenote

H Clinton is sorta back and forth on war--I am not sure I but into the idea that she is a "war hawk". I would be apt to lump her more in the middle of the peace-war debate.

Hillary Clinton on the Issues
John McCain on the Issues

Out of curiosity did Rand Paul put that idea in your head?

Rand Paul: Hillary Clinton Is A 'War Hawk'
 
Lyndon

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
Hilary Clinton is more of an interventionist in foreign policy than Rand Paul, yes. And no I'm not supporting Rand Paul, but I feel he wouldn't be the worst choice if a Republican were elected.
 
Last edited:
LuisDantas

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Maybe one should consider whether there is evidence of accepting having relatives of appropriate age conscripted or enlistered before telling a hawk from a chickenhawk?
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
robtex said:
I will buy your premise on chicken-hawks vs hawks but as a sidenote
H Clinton is sorta back and forth on war--I am not sure I but into the idea that she is a "war hawk". I would be apt to lump her more in the middle of the peace-war debate.

Out of curiosity did Rand Paul put that idea in your head?
Click to expand...
I don't recall ever reading anything Rand Paul wrote about Hillary. (I'm not all that interested in this newcomer.) My opinion of HIllary (a hawk relative to me & mine) is based upon her proffered advocacy & her voting record.
 
Lyndon

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
Well my opinion is if the American people want a president from the right side of politics as it appears they may, I would rather see a Libertarian, than a Republican. Republicans and Democrats are what has gotten us into this mess, maybe its time to consider other options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top