Meaning behind: “Thanks for keeping us free”

[Chuck Bao]

I’ve read that many times on this board when we give thanks or show respect to our fine men and women in the armed forces.

What does that mean to you in context of today and current geo-political realities?

I’ve been wanting to ask this question, but there is no way in hell I’d ask it and mess up some beautiful and poignant threads. So, I’m asking now.

I support our troops 100% and fully realize that they are being asked to put their life on the line everyday. Some are asked to make the ultimate sacrifice for our country, as are our police and firefighters. They have all earned our respect, repeatedly.

I know it may be a sensitive question since many here have served our country with honor and many have sons, daughters currently fighting for our country.

On the other hand, I hate catchphrases. And, this one sounds almost Orwellian, particularly with some of the measures taken for national security in the “War on Terror”.

Is it unpatriotic to ask these questions?

And, before I get neg speked to hell, at least I’m promoting discussion and deeper understanding of a phrase that should have more meaning and understanding instead of being a catchphrase.

[Jerk]

Well, let's put it this way...for every ROP'er that the U.S. Military puts into the dirt, that is one less ROP'er who can fly an airplane into a building full of civilians in NYC. The more we are attacked, and the more severely we are hit, will mean gov't response by "tightening security" and there is the potential to lose rights and freedoms when that happens.

[Chuck Bao]

Thanks for clarifying that Jerk. In those terms, I can understand.

I'm sure I'm not alone in worrying about our sons, daughters, cousins and friends on the battlefield. And, it would be a double loss if we were to lose our freedoms that they are fighting for.

I'm truly thankful for the brave men and women that are protecting us. I just hope great care is taken in not to put them unnecessarily in harms way.

[85Sooner]

In all honesty, I believe it refers to the global threats that have been against our way of life. Britain in the 1700's revolutionary war and war of 1812. WW1 and WW11. Since then Korea and Vietnam, the government has been the "People". IMO that is the problem. War is War and the men and women who have sacrificed have given us the opportunity to live in freedom. Unfortunately, many (by that I mean most) take our freedoms for granted, are uneducated in politics and the geo political environment. Sure , no one wants war..... that goes without saying, but being uneducated and igorant of the current geo-political forces in the world creates a situation in which victory to keep those freedoms will be impossible. (rise and fall of the roman empire)

To this point, the US has taken away rights and returned them (see Japenese internment) but since then we have become so politically correct and lilly livered that we may not ever have the backbone to stand up for our rights again. The more we import citizens from other countries who are not willing to assimilate, the softer we become and politicians will always take every advantage of that, scum bags that they are.

That is why I feel that we are on a long downhill slide. the war in Iraq, as the President said was going to be a long one and if one was educated on the Geopolitical state of the world makes sense. However the US population has decided that they don't want to wait! they want drive thru victory. It doesn't happen that way and we will eventually come to blows within. eventually unless another major attack happens.

Nevertheless the people in our military are doing what they were initially intended to do. protect our ability to practice freedom.

[SCOUT]

For me, it is more encompassing. The US military has fought time and again to protect our freedoms. It started even before it was a formal military and now continues each and every day. It is easy to point to major battles like Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, the Maginot line, the 38th parallel, and Saigon.

Those are truly historic but they are accompanied by thousands of day to day victories that will never receive attention.

I believe our Soldiers today are doing work that isn't receiving huge accolades but will be appreciated once history has had the time to recognize their real achievements.

I am grateful for their willingness and ability to fight for my freedom.

[StoopTroup]

I would have rather "The War on Terror" catch phrase have been a little more specific.

I like "The Al Queda Extermination Mission" and "Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden? - Bounty Hunt Edition" and my personal favorite...."Gulf War II"

[King Crimson]

GWOT.

[Chuck Bao]

I'm curious, though. Why isn't this "thanks for keeping us free" phrase used elsewhere in the world? Surely, those patriotic in the UK and Australia can use the same phrase. But, my British and Australian friends laugh at "thank you for keeping us free" as they would for "victory for the fatherland". This phrase is seriously double-edged.

[OCUDad]

But, my British and Australian friends laugh at "thank you for keeping us free" as they would for "victory for the fatherland". This phrase is seriously double-edged.Perhaps because neither Great Britain nor Australia required a War of Independence for its existence, they may not interpret "free" in quite the same way as Americans do?

I just thought I'd try that tack before the "screw the pansy-a$$ liberal leftist Brits and Aussies" crowd chimed in.

[Chuck Bao]

That's a good thought there, OCUDad. But, I assume the UK can go back even further or more recent with "thanks for keeping us free" arguments.

[Chuck Bao]

And, if we are giving respect, the British and Australians have a lot to respect. At least, I show respect for ANZAC day and their yearly observation at the cemetaries near the River Kwai.

[Okla-homey]

And, if we are giving respect, the British and Australians have a lot to respect. At least, I show respect for ANZAC day and their yearly observation at the cemetaries near the River Kwai.

Personally, I've always felt (having been invited to my fair share of ANZAC Day observances) that those observances have a major theme and a sub-theme. Of course, the major theme is about lamenting the great loss of Aussie and Kiwi life in the wars of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The sub-theme is that they are about lamenting the fact those lives were lost by patriotic young Australian and New Zealander men in the vain attempt to prop-up the British Empire -- and the fact they were killed or maimed while under-appreciated by their British commonwealth masters in the "old country" (See e.g. Boer War, Gallipoli, trench warfare on the WWI western front, WWII China-India-Burma Campaign, etc.)

[Okla-homey]

I'm curious, though. Why isn't this "thanks for keeping us free" phrase used elsewhere in the world? Surely, those patriotic in the UK and Australia can use the same phrase. But, my British and Australian friends laugh at "thank you for keeping us free" as they would for "victory for the fatherland". This phrase is seriously double-edged.

I would also offer this. If an American happens to be black, they owe a great debt to the US military because it was by sheer force of arms their enslaved ancestors were freed from their slave masters. That really is something that has only very rarely occurred in world history. To wit, a war to make men free, in stark contrast to the vast majority of world history in which wars were fought to subjugate other people.

Later, in the 1950's and 60's, that same military stood between the children and grandchildren of those former slaves and the civil authority in the former slave states who were intent on maintaining the "old order" of Jim Crow and segregation.

Finally, the notion that military service has kept us all free is no understatement. Particularly given the thwarted imperial designs of the Japanese, Nazi and Soviet empires in the twentieth century. Those empires were crushed by American guys with guns on thousands of battlefields around the world.

[Chuck Bao]

Thanks Homey, I’d totally missed the point about the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation. If there ever was an argument for “Thanks for Keeping us Free” that should be it.

Okay, that and the American guys with guns crushing the evil empire aspirations of the Japanese, Nazis and Soviets. While we are at it, we also need to give a “thanks for keeping us free” to all those housewives that worked on the assembly lines that made the bullets and guns and planes during WWII and thereafter.

These wars were all such noble and good causes, I agree.

But, what happens if a war turns out not to be a noble and good cause? Should we blame our brave young men and women? Of course not. Our troops are not responsible for setting policy.

The “thanks for keeping us free” seems to blur that important distinction between policy and much-needed support of our brave men and women in uniform, in my opinion.

We all have a part in keeping us free and that is voting for political candidates that represent us.

BTW, I very much appreciated your "go vote" post.

[Okla-homey]

But, what happens if a war turns out not to be a noble and good cause? Should we blame our brave young men and women? Of course not. Our troops are not responsible for setting policy.


I take one exception to the above statement. Inherent in doing your duty, is the notion that a soldier, sailor, airman or Marine is obligated to disobey unlawful orders. Otherwise, the Nuremburg charges would have been summarily dismissed on grounds that the defendants were just "doing as ordered."

That said, as you point out, it's not up to the individual military person to subvert or obstruct national defense policy, strategy, service doctrine, tactics, techniques or procedures.

His responsibility is limited in nature and extends only to refusing orders which he knows are clearly illegal. This obligation does NOT extend to refusing to obey orders with which he personally disagrees, or thinks are a "bad idea," or are likely to get him killed.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Hey mods, "to whom it may concern", somebody with stars to hand out should give this thread about 5.

[Bakasooner]

Chuck....

This is an amazing thread considering I just had this EXACT conversation with with someone yesterday....especially regarding the 'thanks for keeping us free' silliness. You only see it here...not in Canada, Australia, etc. Americans are so in love with themselves.

I'm in a similar position as you - ex-pat in Asia for many years and only last week returned to the US - and trust me.....the United States is full of cheesy catch phrases.

Endlessly annoying.

God Bless Our Troops!

[Ike]

I take one exception to the above statement. Inherent in doing your duty, is the notion that a soldier, sailor, airman or Marine is obligated to disobey unlawful orders. Otherwise, the Nuremburg charges would have been summarily dismissed on grounds that the defendants were just "doing as ordered."

That said, as you point out, it's not up to the individual military person to subvert or obstruct national defense policy, strategy, service doctrine, tactics, techniques or procedures.

His responsibility is limited in nature and extends only to refusing orders which he knows are clearly illegal. This obligation does NOT extend to refusing to obey orders with which he personally disagrees, or thinks are a "bad idea," or are likely to get him killed.

Agreed, completely, however despite the duty that every serviceman has to disobey unlawful orders, It can happen that a perfectly legit war and perfectly legit orders can further a bad cause, which is what I think was Mr. Bao's point to begin with.

[Chuck Bao]

Agreed, completely, however despite the duty that every serviceman has to disobey unlawful orders, It can happen that a perfectly legit war and perfectly legit orders can further a bad cause, which is what I think was Mr. Bao's point to begin with.

Actually, Ike, my point was supposed to be that we should think about what we are saying. I think that's it. Okay, that and I wanted to hear what you guys think because you are all way smarter than I am.

[Okla-homey]

Agreed, completely, however despite the duty that every serviceman has to disobey unlawful orders, It can happen that a perfectly legit war and perfectly legit orders can further a bad cause, which is what I think was Mr. Bao's point to begin with.

I refuse to acknowledge that being a force for freedom and against religious (or any other flavor) of totalitarianism can ever be a bad cause.

[Ike]

I refuse to acknowledge that being a force for freedom and against religious (or any other flavor) of totalitarianism can ever be a bad cause.

I somewhat agree, however, this may not always be the use it is put to. We cannot pretend to know the future.

[Chuck Bao]

Dammit to hell. Headline in today's newspaper: "Bush 'understands Thai coup'

We are still under martial law two months later and Bush understands?!??!!!

I'm better off staying on the football and basketball forums.

Go Lady Sooners!!!!