That Aud Smell Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 For me personally it has to do with the seemingly never ending stream of BS "support our troops" moments that pervade daily life now. Every sporting event now is some opportunity for a big corporation to ask us to thank a soldier for their service. It's embarrassing for me as a civilian, because I know that our vets aren't getting the support they actually need in terms of medical care, financial assistance, etc. Thank a vet, let them know you care! What a sham. This country doesn't really care about its vets. Sorta calls to mind how the Bills earned ~$700K for their in-game events "thanking the troops." (Thanks, Russ!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/03/16/opinion-no-room-for-sense-of-entitlement-among-veterans-and-military-families/ Sorta calls to mind how the Bills earned ~$700K for their in-game events "thanking the troops." (Thanks, Russ!) Good stuff. It's all very contrived and it greatly ignores the injustices that actually occur within the veteran population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/03/16/opinion-no-room-for-sense-of-entitlement-among-veterans-and-military-families/ Amen to Lt. Colonel Duffy. His is a much appreciated perspective, especially his thoughts on the collective post-Viet Nam guilt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/03/16/opinion-no-room-for-sense-of-entitlement-among-veterans-and-military-families/ There are some good points in there we've. They're buried in a bunch of crap, but there's a few in there. Good stuff. It's all very contrived and it greatly ignores the injustices that actually occur within the veteran population. There's not a whole lot of injustice within the veteran population. The injustice, sometimes perceived injustice, is more Oden than not due to laziness or ignorance of the individual, neither of which is acceptable. Amen to Lt. Colonel Duffy. His is a much appreciated perspective, especially his thoughts on the collective post-Viet Nam guilt. I agree with you on the post-Vietnam guilt, not sure we agree about much else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Sorta calls to mind how the Bills earned ~$700K for their in-game events "thanking the troops." (Thanks, Russ!) The NFL, TV networks, movie theaters, etc, nor the countless other media outlets shouldn't feel bad for receiving part of the ~ $700m the military spends on advertising each year. Why should they? Perhaps we should feel bad for the phony sense of "honor" we bestow before sporting events. We just can't stand the thought that somehow our deep show of appreciation and honor was bought and paid for by the military. This isn't directed at you Smell, but this phony sense of outrage is symptomatic of the phony exhibits of appreciation we partake in to make ourselves feel good about how much we honor our service men and women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 The NFL, TV networks, movie theaters, etc, nor the countless other media outlets shouldn't feel bad for receiving part of the ~ $700m the military spends on advertising each year. Why should they? Perhaps we should feel bad for the phony sense of "honor" we bestow before sporting events. We just can't stand the thought that somehow our deep show of appreciation and honor was bought and paid for by the military. This isn't directed at you Smell, but this phony sense of outrage is symptomatic of the phony exhibits of appreciation we partake in to make ourselves feel good about how much we honor our service men and women. Well stated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 The NFL, TV networks, movie theaters, etc, nor the countless other media outlets shouldn't feel bad for receiving part of the ~ $700m the military spends on advertising each year. Why should they? Perhaps we should feel bad for the phony sense of "honor" we bestow before sporting events. We just can't stand the thought that somehow our deep show of appreciation and honor was bought and paid for by the military. Maybe we're talking past each other. Like most, I found the NFL's handling of that undisclosed paid military advertising to be deceptive and misleading. Par for the course for the NFL, I suppose. And I don't feel badly about any phony sense of honor at pro sporting events, nor do I bestow it on sporting events. Rather, the leagues and teams embrace that segment and promote it through their various "platforms." I'm sure there are times it's done in an effort to honour people worthy of recognition. Most of the time, though, I think it's a product of the league or the team looking to build and improve their branded image by affiliating with another desirable "brand" (I beg forgiveness for characterizing military servicemen and women thusly). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 I'm a little worn out on all the fake patriotic BS. I want this stuff to mean something again. Try living in the south. Somehow home to the super patriots even though they are the only part of the country to actually commit treason and they still celebrate a war they lost with re-enactments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 This isn't directed at you Smell, but this phony sense of outrage is symptomatic of the phony exhibits of appreciation we partake in to make ourselves feel good about how much we honor our service men and women. I'm not sure what you're saying. What phony sense of outrage? And, while I'm at it, what phony exhibits of appreciation? The ones that the DoD paid the NFL to stage at team stadiums? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/03/16/opinion-no-room-for-sense-of-entitlement-among-veterans-and-military-families/ "but the big difference today is that we veterans all volunteered" Not necessarily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 "but the big difference today is that we veterans all volunteered" Not necessarily. Is there anyone on active duty today who was part of the last draft in the 70s? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 I'm not sure what you're saying. What phony sense of outrage? And, while I'm at it, what phony exhibits of appreciation? The ones that the DoD paid the NFL to stage at team stadiums? Yeah, everybody is throwing shade at the League for these displays, but the DoD is just as much to blame, possibly more so. Extreme patriotism is the strongest recruiting tool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Yeah, everybody is throwing shade at the League for these displays, but the DoD is just as much to blame, possibly more so. Extreme patriotism is the strongest recruiting tool. For my part, I have no problem at all with the DoD advertising through whatever media or outlets they think best. My issue with that situation was how the NFL was only too happy to pass off its association with that paid advertising as something more altruistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted May 31, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 I didn't think I'd be controversial (this time)! The distinction between the two holidays is accurate. I'm grateful to those who cleared my muddy post. I'm also grateful we can recignize two different opportunities to be thankful, my sloppy lack of distinction notwithstanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Is there anyone on active duty today who was part of the last draft in the 70s? Even if there are, they have long since reenlisted voluntarily so yes, we all volunteered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 (edited) Maybe we're talking past each other. Like most, I found the NFL's handling of that undisclosed paid military advertising to be deceptive and misleading. Par for the course for the NFL, I suppose. And I don't feel badly about any phony sense of honor at pro sporting events, nor do I bestow it on sporting events. Rather, the leagues and teams embrace that segment and promote it through their various "platforms." I'm sure there are times it's done in an effort to honour people worthy of recognition. Most of the time, though, I think it's a product of the league or the team looking to build and improve their branded image by affiliating with another desirable "brand" (I beg forgiveness for characterizing military servicemen and women thusly). Why was it deceptive and misleading? Would knowing that the military paid for these exhibitions before hand impact anything? If so, what and how? The NFL never should have felt ashamed in the first place. Why did they feel ashamed? I submit it's because we all know it's not an organic outpouring of appreciation, that it's manufactured, and the league didn't trust is with that knowledge. Edited May 31, 2016 by K-9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#freejame Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Is there anyone on active duty today who was part of the last draft in the 70s? In 2012 I had a medical officer who was drafted in Vietnam, but I don't think he was drafted. One of the few who were left in active duty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Why was it deceptive and misleading? Would knowing that the military paid for these exhibitions before hand impact anything? If so, what and how? The NFL never should have felt ashamed in the first place. Why did they feel ashamed? I submit it's because we all know it's not an organic outpouring of appreciation, that it's manufactured, and the league didn't trust is with that knowledge. Did anyone really not know that they were payed for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Did anyone really not know that they were payed for? Good question. Sure seemed like people didn't know when they castigated the NFL for having the audacity to accept money from the military in exchange for pregame tributes, etc. I think it's because we found out it wasn't genuine or organic which tells me we thought it was which further tells me we just can't stand the thought of devoting all that affection, otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 There are some good points in there we've. They're buried in a bunch of crap, but there's a few in there. There's not a whole lot of injustice within the veteran population. The injustice, sometimes perceived injustice, is more Oden than not due to laziness or ignorance of the individual, neither of which is acceptable. I agree with you on the post-Vietnam guilt, not sure we agree about much else. I think either you missed my point..... or maybe you thought it was part of the crap. The only disrespect that occurred here was in your head. You expected something that wasn't something for you to expect. Yes, things have changed since 9/11. The reaction to troops coming home post-9/11 was, as stated in the article, an overreaction based on guilt of what happened post-Vietnam. What is happening now is a return to normal, not a return to disrespect. Noone is spitting on soldiers. Noone is calling them baby killers and animals. We are treating you like normal people. Righteous indignation over a return to normal is misplaced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 @ N'eo: You, sir, should not feel the need to apologize, and I regret if I made it seem as though you should. Your purity of heart around here is well known and equally well established. @ Hank: That is what I figured - thanks. Not sure what Chz meant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 Why was it deceptive and misleading? Would knowing that the military paid for these exhibitions before hand impact anything? If so, what and how? The NFL never should have felt ashamed in the first place. Why did they feel ashamed? I submit it's because we all know it's not an organic outpouring of appreciation, that it's manufactured, and the league didn't trust is with that knowledge. The league doesn't trust us with that knowledge. Hoo boy. I'll try to be succinct: The NFL nurtures, massages, and manipulates a brand worth many, many billions of dollars. A key element of that brand is patriotism, pride in nation -- the idea that football has supplanted baseball as America's game. So when that entity is putting on spectacles or performances honouring the nation's military, it is trading on the noble sacrifices that service men and women make, and is therefore impliedly doing so without seeking profit in return. There is good cause why there was a hue and cry when the NFL's profiteering off the military was exposed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 The league doesn't trust us with that knowledge. Hoo boy. I'll try to be succinct: The NFL nurtures, massages, and manipulates a brand worth many, many billions of dollars. A key element of that brand is patriotism, pride in nation -- the idea that football has supplanted baseball as America's game. So when that entity is putting on spectacles or performances honouring the nation's military, it is trading on the noble sacrifices that service men and women make, and is therefore impliedly doing so without seeking profit in return. There is good cause why there was a hue and cry when the NFL's profiteering off the military was exposed. Hoo boy, indeed. The military chose the NFL as an advertising avenue, not the other way around. And the NFL isn't the only big business that wraps itself in the flag. Everybody from Coke to Coors to Chevy likes to trumpet the same tune with waving flags and syrupy Sam Elliot voice overs. Why do you think that is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) Fair enough that the NFL isn't the only brand to wrap itself in the flag. And, as I said above, I have no issue with DoD advertising with whomever it likes. But if Budweiser's parent company were to put on a July 4th spectacular honouring the men and women of the U.S. military, televise that thing on ABC, and it was later learned that DoD had paid Bud (dubbed "America" this summer) for doing so, there would be blowback, and justly so. Because the troops are a cause, one that is treated as charitable and nonprofit (and noble) in nature. So if you're a for profit enterprise honouring them, consumers will reasonably infer that the enterprise is doing so as a give back of sorts. If the situation is otherwise, and it's not disclosed, that's hypocritical. Edited June 1, 2016 by That Aud Smell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 I think either you missed my point..... or maybe you thought it was part of the crap. The only disrespect that occurred here was in your head. You expected something that wasn't something for you to expect. Yes, things have changed since 9/11. The reaction to troops coming home post-9/11 was, as stated in the article, an overreaction based on guilt of what happened post-Vietnam. What is happening now is a return to normal, not a return to disrespect. Noone is spitting on soldiers. Noone is calling them baby killers and animals. We are treating you like normal people. Righteous indignation over a return to normal is misplaced. I know exactly what your point was, and you know exactly what I think of your point. I can understand what Aud's point was. And I respect his thoughts/feelings/opinions on the subject. Elevens post rubbed me the wrong way. So what. Again, I stand by my post, zero given. Don't like my opinions? Who gives a ? Eat a bag of moose knuckles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.