I could have put this in the "this shit pisses me off thread", but fuck it, this deserves its own thread.
The Wounded Warrior Project is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to "honor and empower wounded warriors" of the United States Armed Forces. "The Wounded Warrior Project (WWP) works to raise awareness and enlist the public's aid for the needs of severely injured service men and women, to help severely injured service members aid and assist each other, and to provide unique, direct programs and services to meet their needs."
Now, this is a good cause. The American government has historically done a very poor job at supporting injured veterans. But I would never give these people a single cent of my money. Ever. And there's a simple reason for that: THEIR NAME FUCKING SUCKS.
Now, I'm a centrist in many regards, but overall I'm definitely to the right on the political spectrum. I’m all for the rocket’s red glare and bombs bursting in air, when such action is warranted. But this NPO's name makes me really fucking uncomfortable. Warriors? You're calling our troops WARRIORS? That sort of mentality is unacceptable. The term "warrior" has a certain connotation to it. To be a warrior is to go out and actively seek combat. Warriors are killers; that is their sole purpose. That’s not to say they are without honor or justification in their killing, but they are still nothing more than trained killers. Not only is this term an inaccurate and insulting way to describe our armed forces, but it plays right into leftist accusations that America is a violent, warmongering nation that is always looking to pick a fight.
Whoever named this organization ought to be fucking ashamed of themselves. You could have called them wounded soldiers. You could have called them wounded heroes. You could have called them wounded Americans. You could have any of several dozen less caustic terms than “warrior”. But you didn’t. So, fuck off and die. A lot.
The three greatest heels in history...Andy Kaufman, Triple H, and Dr. Jeebus
anorexorcist
Title: Polar Bear
Joined: May 21 2008
Location: The Cock and Plucket
Posts: 2131
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 03:08 am
Dr. Jeebus wrote:
I think you're reading way too much into this and they just the alliteration and how it rolls off the tongue.
This.
It's for a good cause, I'd support the soldiers either way. I don't see the point in boycotting the cause just because of the name.
Using a somewhat similar thought process, once might say "sydlexia" belittle dyslexia and those who have it. I don't think it does, but I think you get the point.
Ash Burton
Title: AshRaiser
Joined: Nov 10 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1044
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 04:38 am
But Johnny Damon is the spokesperson...that must be the real reason. You have a problem with the word warriors? Seriously? War = Warriors. Warrior = A man engaged or experienced in warfare. As for seeking out combat, that's what Marines do, we pray for that shit. I may be a Democratic Liberal but I pray to Crom for war every night with Yngwie blasting in the background. Cmon Syd, stop with this shit and clean out the attic please.
joshwoodzy wrote:
Ash is probably just home humping his SNES collection.
JoshWoodzy
Joined: May 22 2008
Location: Goshen, VA
Posts: 6544
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 07:54 am
The left has long bitched about the term warrior being used for our soldiers. I really don't care either way, I'm sure it's a fine organization. I do think it's kind of silly to use the word warriors myself, but it certainly doesn't upset me like it does most of the liberal left. Most countries already have a set opinion on us and I highly doubt that this will sway them more either way.
I think their whole idea is to set up a more honorable term at a time when less than honorable actions from our troops have come into light. I'm not gonna play into the lefts bullshit on that. They seem to think if .05% of our troops have participated in torture or rape that it will have a bad apple effect, trickling down into the lower ranks infecting everyone with torture and rape disease. That clearly isn't the case.
Optimist With Doubts
Title: Titlating
Joined: Dec 17 2007
Posts: 5042
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 09:32 am
It has been a lifetime struggle a never-ending fight, I say to you and you will understand that it is a privilege to fight. WE ARE WARRIORS!
JRA
Joined: Sep 17 2007
Location: The Opium Trail
Posts: 3475
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 10:17 am
Syd's real reason for being worried is sooner or later, this butthole is going to show up:
There are a lot of what if's in life Donny. What if I hit you really hard in the face, knocked yo shit to the back of yo skull? What if I....had you girl gargle my nuts? The fact remains, you are a fuckin mutant.
Knyte
2010 SLF Tag Champ*
Title: Curator Of The VGM
Joined: Nov 01 2006
Location: Here I am.
Posts: 6749
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 02:59 pm
Suvchu' tera'ngan Dogh. There are no wounded warriors! We crush our enemies or die in glorious battle trying to!
yay ghIqtal!
Nekkoru
Title: Polish Pickle Wench
Joined: Jan 25 2008
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 1319
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 05:30 pm
Kaplah?
Seriously, Knyte, if you start spouting Klingon at me I am going to use my leftist fist to punch you. In the ass.
I now bestow upon you the title of Most Awesome Person.
docinsano
Title: Boner King
Joined: Jan 08 2008
Location: Mpls Mini Soda
Posts: 2314
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 05:41 pm
I'd say a good replacement term would be the Wounded Defenders of America Project or the WDAP which rolls equally as nice off the tongue. Warrior just sounds a bit archaic and out of place in this day and age.
I'd say a good replacement term would be the Wounded Defenders of America Project or the WDAP which rolls equally as nice off the tongue. Warrior just sounds a bit archaic and out of place in this day and age.
It's two words and five syllables longer, and uses much harsher consonant sounds. Hardly rolls off the tongue as well.
The three greatest heels in history...Andy Kaufman, Triple H, and Dr. Jeebus
docinsano
Title: Boner King
Joined: Jan 08 2008
Location: Mpls Mini Soda
Posts: 2314
Posted:
Nov 30 2009 06:00 pm
Dr. Jeebus wrote:
docinsano wrote:
I'd say a good replacement term would be the Wounded Defenders of America Project or the WDAP which rolls equally as nice off the tongue. Warrior just sounds a bit archaic and out of place in this day and age.
It's two words and five syllables longer, and uses much harsher consonant sounds. Hardly rolls off the tongue as well.
But it sounds like a radio station: "Double-you Dee Eh PEE!" Say it once. Say it again. Don't be lazy and say it three times. Do it now!
For what its worth, we in the Army (and in the Marines--honestly don't know about Navy and Air Force) refer to ourselves as Warriors, regardless of the connotation. Boots are "Future Warriors," Cadets like myself are "Warrior-Leaders," and COs and NCOs often greet the troops with, "how you doing, Warriors?" At least for the Army, 'warrior' is interchangeable with 'soldier.' We're taught the Warrior's Ethos in boot camp, and are constantly reminded of it. Hell, the second line of the Soldier's Creed is, I am a Warrior" and it goes on to add that, "I am proficient in my Warrior tasks and drills." Its just part of the culture. Debate whether that's a good thing all you like, but I don't think its going away anytime soon. Way too ingrained. Therefore, Wounded Warriors not only sounds good, its perfectly appropriate. I say donate away for the cause, if nothing else.
Besides, warrior implies one who actively seeks battle? Well, that's what the armed forces does. We actively seek armed conflict at the orders of our superiors. Soldier's Creed again: "I stand ready to deploy, engage and destroy the enemies of the United States of America in close combat." If people don't like that, the disband the armed forces and rely on the UN Peacekeepers to keep us safe. *shrug* That's the only way its going away.
The three greatest heels in history...Andy Kaufman, Triple H, and Dr. Jeebus
username
Title: owner of a lonely heart
Joined: Jul 06 2007
Location: phoenix, az usa
Posts: 16135
Posted:
Dec 01 2009 11:35 am
Dr. Jeebus wrote:
Thorinair wrote:
How about "Saving Soldiers?" It rolls off the tongue easily, though I think there's already a group with this name.
That's also a bit of a misnomer, as "saving" implies something is being actively done to help them out in the field.
yeah, its called Rambo
Klimbatize wrote:
I'll eat a turkey sandwich while blowing my load
Greg the White
Joined: Apr 09 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3112
Posted:
Dec 04 2009 05:19 am
Warrior is a pretty dumb word. It just always brings to mind a bunch of violent, mindless apes with axes. What with its focus on how words will bring up certain connotations, the military seems like they would shy away from the term as it seems to imply that the forces don't do more than fight, when they'll actually be involved in peacekeeping, aid, or other non-combative functions.
So here's to you Mrs. Robinson. People love you more- oh, nevermind.
username
Title: owner of a lonely heart
Joined: Jul 06 2007
Location: phoenix, az usa
Posts: 16135
Posted:
Dec 04 2009 11:50 am
at any rate, i thought this was going to be about chris webber but whatev.
Klimbatize wrote:
I'll eat a turkey sandwich while blowing my load
Ash Burton
Title: AshRaiser
Joined: Nov 10 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1044
Posted:
Dec 04 2009 01:44 pm
Greg the White wrote:
Warrior is a pretty dumb word. It just always brings to mind a bunch of violent, mindless apes with axes. What with its focus on how words will bring up certain connotations, the military seems like they would shy away from the term as it seems to imply that the forces don't do more than fight, when they'll actually be involved in peacekeeping, aid, or other non-combative functions.
Warrior is only a dumb word to those who do not know its meaning. Its not a dumb ape, a stupid wrestler, or a Cowboy set out for destruction. It is one trained or experienced in war or combat. I think after a few years in two "wars" Marines can call themselves whatever the fuck they want. Same goes for the rest of the services. As for Marines, we are not a peace-keeping force, never have been, it is not in our mission statement.
Instead of having a problem with this nonsense we should have a problem with our Government straight bold face lying to us to get us into Iraq. I wish Jesse Ventura would swing by Texas and fucking body slam Cheney and Bush until they shat themselves.
"I don't have time to bleed..."
joshwoodzy wrote:
Ash is probably just home humping his SNES collection.
Dr. Jeebus
Moderator
Title: SLF Harbinger of Death
Joined: Sep 03 2005
Location: Wakefield, MA
Posts: 5228
Posted:
Dec 04 2009 02:51 pm
Greg the White wrote:
Warrior is a pretty dumb word. It just always brings to mind a bunch of violent, mindless apes with axes.
That's your own bleeding-heart liberal bias speaking. Warriors have often been revered throughout history. And why should the military shy away from calling people that go into wars "warriors"? It's hard to say from the outside, but I imagine calling them warriors would be much better for moral than calling them a "peace keeping task force" or something like that, since in MY mind that has the connotation of people who are sent to a foreign nation to be shot at and not defend themselves.
The three greatest heels in history...Andy Kaufman, Triple H, and Dr. Jeebus
SoldierHawk
Moderator
Title: Warrior-Poet
Joined: Jan 15 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 6113
Posted:
Dec 04 2009 03:26 pm
Dr. Jeebus wrote:
Greg the White wrote:
Warrior is a pretty dumb word. It just always brings to mind a bunch of violent, mindless apes with axes.
That's your own bleeding-heart liberal bias speaking. Warriors have often been revered throughout history. And why should the military shy away from calling people that go into wars "warriors"? It's hard to say from the outside, but I imagine calling them warriors would be much better for moral than calling them a "peace keeping task force" or something like that, since in MY mind that has the connotation of people who are sent to a foreign nation to be shot at and not defend themselves.
Exactly. The purpose of a military is not peacekeeping. Even when soldiers are sent on peacekeeping missions, we go with weapons loaded and in full battle rattle. Why? Because you don't send IN the military unless use of force might be necessary. That's what it exists for. And that's not to say the military doesn't do things like disaster relief because we do, but that's not our main mission. Our express purpose is to use deadly force to defend the country, and destroy those who are a threat to it. We're all trained as such, even if not all of us have seen combat. Like I said before, in the Soldier's creed one of the most emphasized lines has always been, "I stand ready to deploy, engage and destroy the enemies of the United States of America in close combat." That's a warrior, at least in my book. That creed isn't legally binding, but it does illustrate the mentality that just about every member of the military has. If they weren't ready to fight (and possibly kill, or die), they wouldn't (or shouldn't) have joined.
Also, I really, really wouldn't want to be the one to tell some soldier who was shot up in Afghanistan, or blown up by an IED in Iraq, that they don't qualify as a warrior. That would be asking for a fist and/or stump up the ass.
Please do bear in mind too, this comes from one of the biggest bleeding hearts on the forum, too.
