Massachusetts Law Professor Calls Care Packages for U.S. Troops 'Shameful' Read more

[PixieStix]

Who the fuck cares?

Apparently Ravi couldn't care less

 

[Ravi]

Who the fuck cares?

Apparently Ravi couldn't care less

Actually I could, but it would take too much effort.

 

[Si modo]

Who the fuck cares?

Apparently Ravi couldn't care less

A lot of liberals hate the troops.

 

[California Girl]

You sure are a fucking idiot.

Because he posted an image without really commenting on anything?

Oh the humanity!

No, because he's a fucking idiot.

 

[marcell]

Several things about the good professor that comes to mind here, one is that the young men and women that are overseas getting these care packages are there doing a job that not only defends his rights to make such comments but are also doing a job he himself does not have the courage to defend. Let me be clear, while one's ability to be able to speak as they wish given to them by the constitution and cherished by all is exercised daily in this nation and by the professor who teaches the very law it is based on, he fails to recognize that that constitution survives because for over 200 year's young men and women have defended it with their lives. their limbs and often times with little more than a thank you and sometimes not even that. So if the good professor had to defend the very rights he is exercising I am sure he would be the first to advocate for a care package.

I'm sorry, but I insist. It was not the men making wars that guaranteed the constitution. Clever leaders and an open minded people, tired of the old world's opression, did it. Wars can only kill democracy. Remember the napoleonic wars. The french revolution was already starting to sink... when the wars started, the republican revolution was destroyed and buried. USA has what is necessary to ensure freedom. There are no needs for wars.

marcell, look Wars in general a mean nasty business and the best War ever fought was the one you avoided and spent a career trying to avoid. My contention is a simple one, the young men and women who fight them, especially now, are people who make a decision on their own to do so and as such it is no indication that they love the idea of killing but more so the idea that to defend liberty and vigilence in the defense of those who cannot defend themselves helps avoid war and eventually leads to peace.To send a package to a love one, or those that are for the most part defending the liberties that those enjoy is not an overt act of supporting war it is acknowledging that the person you are sending the care package too is taking on the burden with their life and limb of keeping the nation in which you live safe. You see, the generation of sailor, soldier, airmen, and marine, that is currently invloved in conflict the world over is different in that the nations that send them there are for the most part not involved other than the familes of the members that are there. Take our nation for instance, we have cut our taxes over the last 10 years while fighting 2 wars not raised them nor do we have a draft, so the nation as a whole has no connection to the young men and women defending it. The simple act of sending a care package is not an endorsement of the act of war rather it is finally taking part in supporting those that defend it even if the reasons they are there are something you and I may not agree with.

Ok, I got it. Send some packages and that stuff would make them happier, I guess. But there would be a better way to avoid this kinda situation: getting out of middle east. Leaving them alone. Then USA can use its own soldiers to defend USA's lands. I know that it's hard for the soldiers. But we can't say that they are saving american people. Most of them are compelled to go to war. The politicians are the ones that should go and fight the wars they start.

But it all should start with american people protesting against these wars, that doesn't give anything to you.

 

[The T]

A Massachusetts law professor has created a campus firestorm with an email to colleagues that declares it would be "shameful" to send care packages to U.S. troops "who have gone overseas to kill other human beings."
Michael Avery, a professor at Suffolk University Law School, sent a five-paragraph email to colleagues in response to a school-wide appeal for care packages for deployed soldiers, Fox affiliate WFXT-TV reports.
"I think it is shameful that it is perceived as legitimate to solicit in an academic institution for support for men and women who have gone overseas to kill other human beings," Avery wrote.


Read more: Massachusetts Law Professor Calls Care Packages For U.S. Troops 'Shameful' | Fox News











He should go fuck himself.

We should draft his ass and send him overseas into the battlezone...In the meantime? He can go fuck himself, with relish.

 

[Dot Com]

You sure are a fucking idiot.

...says the resident idiot

 

[Dot Com]

Who the fuck cares?

Fox N00z viewers

 

[marcell]

Several things about the good professor that comes to mind here, one is that the young men and women that are overseas getting these care packages are there doing a job that not only defends his rights to make such comments but are also doing a job he himself does not have the courage to defend. Let me be clear, while one's ability to be able to speak as they wish given to them by the constitution and cherished by all is exercised daily in this nation and by the professor who teaches the very law it is based on, he fails to recognize that that constitution survives because for over 200 year's young men and women have defended it with their lives. their limbs and often times with little more than a thank you and sometimes not even that. So if the good professor had to defend the very rights he is exercising I am sure he would be the first to advocate for a care package.

I'm sorry, but I insist. It was not the men making wars that guaranteed the constitution. Clever leaders and an open minded people, tired of the old world's opression, did it. Wars can only kill democracy. Remember the napoleonic wars. The french revolution was already starting to sink... when the wars started, the republican revolution was destroyed and buried. USA has what is necessary to ensure freedom. There are no needs for wars.

Having a strong military is a deterrent from any pissant country from say, South America, even thinking about invading our country and/or changing our way of government and Constitution.

South America? hahahahahahaha What are u talking about. South America use to have its own problems and wouldn't surely be even close to invade USA. Besides, there are no wars in South America. The problem is South America is another.

But I agree that a country must have a strong military force, so that no one would want to invade it. But we all know that it doesn't work this way. Strong armies all over Europe started two massive wars. I think this is why they're always affraid.

You must have a big army, but u don't need to use it to invade countries from the other side of the world and tell them what they need to do. If there is a country that accepts slavery, so, according to USA, they are a free nation, so they have freedom to have slaves. Funny eh?

 

[PixieStix]

Let do something "really shameful" everyone

AnySoldier.com

I have sent packages to Soldiers and Marines in the past. It is time I do it again. It was so cool. They would email me back pics of the stuff they got with big smiles on their faces!

 

[uscitizen]

I disagree with the guy but perhaps he is a true pacifist?
Jesus never encouraged/endorsed anyone to kill another.
A few in the world would let someone kill them before they would take a life to defend themselves.
just a few. Thankfully.

 

[marcell]

Several things about the good professor that comes to mind here, one is that the young men and women that are overseas getting these care packages are there doing a job that not only defends his rights to make such comments but are also doing a job he himself does not have the courage to defend. Let me be clear, while one's ability to be able to speak as they wish given to them by the constitution and cherished by all is exercised daily in this nation and by the professor who teaches the very law it is based on, he fails to recognize that that constitution survives because for over 200 year's young men and women have defended it with their lives. their limbs and often times with little more than a thank you and sometimes not even that. So if the good professor had to defend the very rights he is exercising I am sure he would be the first to advocate for a care package.

I'm sorry, but I insist. It was not the men making wars that guaranteed the constitution. Clever leaders and an open minded people, tired of the old world's opression, did it. Wars can only kill democracy. Remember the napoleonic wars. The french revolution was already starting to sink... when the wars started, the republican revolution was destroyed and buried. USA has what is necessary to ensure freedom. There are no needs for wars.

Bush Senior and Bush Junior are the only two republicans to ever take this country to war, the rest where all democrats. So dont act like it's warmongering republicans that have done it throughout time.
Also, you are wrong in one aspect of thought, had it not been for Americas men and woman putting on the uniform this country would have died many years ago through invasion or even worse, from within by crooked politicians, Remember the oath "Defend against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC"?.
So yes, by serving they protect that constitution and our liberties and always have.
Willow, from one Vet to another...tell your grandson thank you for his service.

I agree that the country needs a strong military force, so USA could defend itself from many threats and consolidate its territory. And even remembering the Monroe Doctrine (opposing to European intentions to interfere on american independences)... you couldn't have this doctrine without a strong army. But if USA keeps itself away from the wars, the world will have its opinion completely changed... but I don't thing that it's going to happen anyway.

 

[California Girl]

Let do something "really shameful" everyone

AnySoldier.com

I have sent packages to Soldiers and Marines in the past. It is time I do it again. It was so cool. They would email me back pics of the stuff they got with big smiles on their faces!

Good plan. I shall send a care parcel or two just for the craic of it. And, maybe I'll email the good Professor and tell him I'm doing it for him.

 

[paulitician]

Show love to our Men & Women in our Military. Don't allow politics to stop you from showing that love. Respect & Honor them.

 

[WillowTree]

Let do something "really shameful" everyone

AnySoldier.com

I have sent packages to Soldiers and Marines in the past. It is time I do it again. It was so cool. They would email me back pics of the stuff they got with big smiles on their faces!

 

[WillowTree]

There are lots of decent noble people in the world. Too bad the pig named manifool didn't choose to be one of them.

 

[Navy1960]

I'm sorry, but I insist. It was not the men making wars that guaranteed the constitution. Clever leaders and an open minded people, tired of the old world's opression, did it. Wars can only kill democracy. Remember the napoleonic wars. The french revolution was already starting to sink... when the wars started, the republican revolution was destroyed and buried. USA has what is necessary to ensure freedom. There are no needs for wars.

marcell, look Wars in general a mean nasty business and the best War ever fought was the one you avoided and spent a career trying to avoid. My contention is a simple one, the young men and women who fight them, especially now, are people who make a decision on their own to do so and as such it is no indication that they love the idea of killing but more so the idea that to defend liberty and vigilence in the defense of those who cannot defend themselves helps avoid war and eventually leads to peace.To send a package to a love one, or those that are for the most part defending the liberties that those enjoy is not an overt act of supporting war it is acknowledging that the person you are sending the care package too is taking on the burden with their life and limb of keeping the nation in which you live safe. You see, the generation of sailor, soldier, airmen, and marine, that is currently invloved in conflict the world over is different in that the nations that send them there are for the most part not involved other than the familes of the members that are there. Take our nation for instance, we have cut our taxes over the last 10 years while fighting 2 wars not raised them nor do we have a draft, so the nation as a whole has no connection to the young men and women defending it. The simple act of sending a care package is not an endorsement of the act of war rather it is finally taking part in supporting those that defend it even if the reasons they are there are something you and I may not agree with.

Ok, I got it. Send some packages and that stuff would make them happier, I guess. But there would be a better way to avoid this kinda situation: getting out of middle east. Leaving them alone. Then USA can use its own soldiers to defend USA's lands. I know that it's hard for the soldiers. But we can't say that they are saving american people. Most of them are compelled to go to war. The politicians are the ones that should go and fight the wars they start.

But it all should start with american people protesting against these wars, that doesn't give anything to you.

While in a way you have outlined a little of what I have said in that if there is no stake other than sending those to War in terms of a draft or taxes to pay for it then that lends itself to apathy on the part of the American people for the most part when it comes to the ultimate consequences for being there. Look at Vietnam for instance many will argue the reasons for it ending, but I will submit to you that because most if not all the American people had an interest in that war of some kind then that led some to disagree with it it terms of protests which they have every right to do, and eventually led to it's end. My point is that the soldier, sailor, airmen or marine's motives are not those of random killing,war or hurting others, but rather they believe in wearing the uniform of their country that their actions will eventually lead to a safer place for themselves, their family, nation, and world. All one need to do is look at a anti-war protest to see that, even there you will find former members of the service, so why then should someone call into question the actions of these young men and women who do the work that none will do and go where they are told, in doing so at least we as Americans belittle ourselves. As far as being where we should not be, I would submit that while that may be true in some cases, still in others, there are several nations on this earth where American blood has been spilled by those same young people for no other reason other than to do what they felt was the right thing to do to make the world a safe place, a very good example of this is the 1000's of Americans buried at the cemetary in Normandie. While I agree, every nation should be allowed to choose it's own destiny and as such it should never be up to the United States or any nation to choose it for them, do not fault the young men and women who are far from home and putting themselves in danger to make the world a safer and more peaceful place for everyone.

 

[California Girl]

I'm sorry, but I insist. It was not the men making wars that guaranteed the constitution. Clever leaders and an open minded people, tired of the old world's opression, did it. Wars can only kill democracy. Remember the napoleonic wars. The french revolution was already starting to sink... when the wars started, the republican revolution was destroyed and buried. USA has what is necessary to ensure freedom. There are no needs for wars.

marcell, look Wars in general a mean nasty business and the best War ever fought was the one you avoided and spent a career trying to avoid. My contention is a simple one, the young men and women who fight them, especially now, are people who make a decision on their own to do so and as such it is no indication that they love the idea of killing but more so the idea that to defend liberty and vigilence in the defense of those who cannot defend themselves helps avoid war and eventually leads to peace.To send a package to a love one, or those that are for the most part defending the liberties that those enjoy is not an overt act of supporting war it is acknowledging that the person you are sending the care package too is taking on the burden with their life and limb of keeping the nation in which you live safe. You see, the generation of sailor, soldier, airmen, and marine, that is currently invloved in conflict the world over is different in that the nations that send them there are for the most part not involved other than the familes of the members that are there. Take our nation for instance, we have cut our taxes over the last 10 years while fighting 2 wars not raised them nor do we have a draft, so the nation as a whole has no connection to the young men and women defending it. The simple act of sending a care package is not an endorsement of the act of war rather it is finally taking part in supporting those that defend it even if the reasons they are there are something you and I may not agree with.

Ok, I got it. Send some packages and that stuff would make them happier, I guess. But there would be a better way to avoid this kinda situation: getting out of middle east. Leaving them alone. Then USA can use its own soldiers to defend USA's lands. I know that it's hard for the soldiers. But we can't say that they are saving american people. Most of them are compelled to go to war. The politicians are the ones that should go and fight the wars they start.

But it all should start with american people protesting against these wars, that doesn't give anything to you.

Honey, you can't even get sig pics to work. Why the hell would anyone take the rest of your bullshit seriously.

You clearly lack the IQ required to post with grown ups. Might I suggest you head to the Romper Room and play with Rdean?

 

[MikeK]

I have served in a war zone, have you? I speak from experience, do you? While I agree, we have done all that we could do and need to bring the troops home, I also understand that you cannot let 3000 Americans be murdered without a devastating response to the enemy. The only person in this room jerking anybody off is you.

You "served in a war zone?" What exactly does that mean? You were in World War Two? Because that happens to be the last time America was at war. But if you mean you found yourself in a place in the Middle East where people were killing each other my question to you is why did you sign up to go there? My thinking holds that ever since the Vietnam debacle was foisted on America by its corrupt and incompetent government the only acceptable reason to enlist in the military is when the nation is under direct and immediate threat.

I joined the Marine Corps in 1956 for two reasons; I was 1-A (draft eligible) and would have been called up anyway, plus the ethos of the heroism and sacrifice of WW-II was still fresh in the collective memory of America. I truly believed the only reason I would be placed in harm's way would be defense against an aggressive nation -- and I was ready and willing to serve that purpose.

Luckily I was separated and my inactive reserve obligation expired before the Vietnam adventure started. I realized from the start it was unnecessary and I became an active protester. I was right then and I'm right now.

If you feel you are entitled to some special recognition or gratitude for allowing yourself to be used by a excessively militaristic and corporatist government the only thing I can say is you're lucky if you came home with all your parts.

 

[WillowTree]

I have served in a war zone, have you? I speak from experience, do you? While I agree, we have done all that we could do and need to bring the troops home, I also understand that you cannot let 3000 Americans be murdered without a devastating response to the enemy. The only person in this room jerking anybody off is you.

You "served in a war zone?" What exactly does that mean? You were in World War Two? Because that happens to be the last time America was at war. But if you mean you found yourself in a place in the Middle East where people were killing each other my question to you is why did you sign up to go there? My thinking holds that ever since the Vietnam debacle was foisted on America by its corrupt and incompetent government the only acceptable reason to enlist in the military is when the nation is under direct and immediate threat.

I joined the Marine Corps in 1956 for two reasons; I was 1-A (draft eligible) and would have been called up anyway, plus the ethos of the heroism and sacrifice of WW-II was still fresh in the collective memory of America. I truly believed the only reason I would be placed in harm's way would be defense against an aggressive nation -- and I was ready and willing to serve that purpose.

Luckily I was separated and my inactive reserve obligation expired before the Vietnam adventure started. I realized from the start it was unnecessary and I became an active protester. I was right then and I'm right now.

If you feel you are entitled to some special recognition or gratitude for allowing yourself to be used by a excessively militaristic and corporatist government the only thing I can say is you're lucky if you came home with all your parts.

are you parsing words or just plain forgetful,, cause I remember reading about Vietnam and The Korean War.. which I believe came after world war 2...