I don't think Sam (or anyone on this list) fits into the chickenhawk 
definition.  From what I know - you have to be someone with the ability to 
shape policy that sends people off to war or someone that can directly send 
people off to war in order to fall into the category of chickenhawk.

Having said that ... I don't think that you need to be willing to serve in the 
military in order to have an opinion about what's going on and to be able to 
comment on it.

>From the wars that I can remember there have been those that I would not have 
>had a problem with serving in and others that I would.  In reference to the 
>former:

Gulf War I

In reference to the latter:

Viet Nam
Gulf War II

Not wanting to serve in Viet Nam or the current SNAFU does not mean that you 
lose the right to opinion.

Howie

--- On Thursday, July 28, 2005 9:07 AM, Larry C. Lyons scribed: ---
>
> Given that Sam is a classic chickenhawk, its really doubtful that
> he'll ever attempt to serve. Yet at the same he'll be frothing at the
> mouth to invade an ever expanding list of countries he fantasizes
> about. He is so brave when it comes to the lives of other people.
> 
> larry
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble 
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:166892
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to