Disgusted With US Foreign Policies, Defense Contractor Quits.

[Oozlefinch]

He did not simply provide coffee to employees or mopped floors. He actually performed services directly related to the military. Thus, he was a defense contractor. I don't care how you spin it.

No, you are guessing that based upon what he wrote. Nothing else.

Look, this guy was a Business Major, who was listed as a "manager" on a vehicle program. For all we know (literally, I am not making this up) he could have been in charge of no more then making sure that and travel documents were submitted properly and that the travel was paid and employees reimbursed.

He has yet to say what he did, or much of anything else. You are the one making guesses, I am simply saying "not enough information". You keep insisting he was doing something, when there is absolutely no evidence to support that.

 

[Wiggen]

He was not even a "contractor". He worked at General Dynamics as part of the engineering staff to improve the Stryker armored vehicle. If this counts as a "contractor", then I guess the cleaning staff who take care of the bathrooms are also "Defense Contractors" as well. As is the 18 year old that works on the Burger King on post.

Good for him, and I wish him well finding a job in Detroit.

And God knows we wouldn't want him working on making Stryker vehicles more resistant to IED's. He's obviously a clown.

 

[Geoist]

No, you are guessing that based upon what he wrote. Nothing else.

Look, this guy was a Business Major, who was listed as a "manager" on a vehicle program. For all we know (literally, I am not making this up) he could have been in charge of no more then making sure that and travel documents were submitted properly and that the travel was paid and employees reimbursed.

He has yet to say what he did, or much of anything else. You are the one making guesses, I am simply saying "not enough information". You keep insisting he was doing something, when there is absolutely no evidence to support that.

It is stated that he built Stryker armored fighting vehicles.

 

[Wiggen]

Assange is not a journalist, he's a kook. Manning is not a whistleblower, he's a traitor. Snowden is not a whistleblower, he's a traitor.

.

I think you've pretty well nailed it.

 

[Wiggen]

It is stated that he built Stryker armored fighting vehicles.

You've pretty well established you don't want American troops involved in wars being transported in effective vehicles that might give them some chance of survival against roadside bombs. We get it.

 

[Geoist]

You've pretty well established you don't want American troops involved in wars being transported in effective vehicles that might give them some chance of survival against roadside bombs. We get it.

What makes you say that?

 

[Strucker]

What makes you say that?

Because criticism of government is construed as "not supporting the troops." In the usual formulation.

 

[Oozlefinch]

It is stated that he built Stryker armored fighting vehicles.

He also states that he is a "Vehicle Commander". Your point is?

Besides, look at his own letter, the very last part. Here, let me highlight it for you:

I was only a foot soldier, and am now a low level clerk. However, I have always believed that if every foot soldier threw down his rifle war would end. I hereby throw mine down.

Does that sound like he builds anything? The guy is a Business Major, not an Engineer. I honestly doubt he built anything. His background screams "clerk", his job position "Project Management" screams clerk, he is just a clerk.

I once had a job title of "Maintenance Management", do you think I did any maintenance? Do you think I even saw the equipment being maintained? Do you think I even dealt with the individuals who did the maintenance?

The answer is no to all of those questions. I pushed paperwork that the Maintenance Clerks passed on to me, so I could type it into the big database that the Marine Corps uses to track it's maintenance system. That is probably similar to this clown and his "Project Management" position.

But no, rereading his own statement, he does not say he "built Stryker fighting vehicles". He specifically claimed that he was only a clerk.

 

[Wiggen]

What makes you say that?

Your effusive, almost orgasmic reaction to the 'defense contractor' story. But of course I could be wrong.

 

[Wiggen]

Because criticism of government is construed as "not supporting the troops." In the usual formulation.

Well, when you don't support the building of vehicles that are designed, among other purposes, to keep troops alive when encountering IED devices, that pretty much defines 'not supporting the troops'. I know, it's complicated logic but try and follow along.

 

[BMCM]

Please explain how he wasn't a defense contractor. Because others have only thrown red herrings so far.

Was he paid directly by the DOD/Military, as in a direct contract with the DOD/Military?

Was he paid by the company?

The first would be considered a Defense Contractor. The second would simply be an employee of the Defense Contractor.

 

[cpwill]

First, I'm not saying he's "special". That's your dismissive label. I'm fine with him being Joe Nobody.

Then why did you object to it? Your argument seems emotional in nature rather than reasoned.

Second, our participation in the political process does not begin and end with the vote. We have a voice. We have a right to redress of grievances. We have a right to protest. And we have a right to speak freely within a free press.

Sure. And he's free to do so. No one ever said he didn't. If you like, I could now point out that we also have 10 original Amendments to the Constitution which we call the Bill of Rights, and that we have three branches of government which divide power between the executive, judicial, and legislative bodies, and put out a bunch of other stuff that no one disagrees with, but which by raising I suggest the strawman that you do.

You can dismiss one person out of hand if you like, but the fact is that there is a groundswell building amongst us "nobodies". And if you don't understand the massive impact we nobodies can have, you need to take a closer look at history... starting the magna carta, then with our own revolution, the french revolution, right up to the revolutions happening right across the arab world.

Again, you are on the wrong side of history... but then, if you are ignorant of it, you can remain blissfully unaware and blithely dismissive.

:lol: I find it really entertaining that you end with that statement after giving that list. :mrgreen: Tell me more about all the nobodies who forced the British Crown to sign the Magna Carta. Oh, wait! They were all aristocrats. Our own revolution, similarly, was led by our elites.

I'm not discrediting the crowd-sourcing of protest, or the increased ability of groups to coalesce over electronic mediums in a lateral manner. But you don't seem to really understand what it is you are arguing.

 

[Fiddytree]

I'll chime in with my usual, "RT is an upgraded Youtube channel for media credentials" reply, and not bother with the rest of the story. I know, it's not favorable to the leftists, but I don't care.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Then why did you object to it? Your argument seems emotional in nature rather than reasoned.



Sure. And he's free to do so. No one ever said he didn't. If you like, I could now point out that we also have 10 original Amendments to the Constitution which we call the Bill of Rights, and that we have three branches of government which divide power between the executive, judicial, and legislative bodies, and put out a bunch of other stuff that no one disagrees with, but which by raising I suggest the strawman that you do.



:lol: I find it really entertaining that you end with that statement after giving that list. :mrgreen: Tell me more about all the nobodies who forced the British Crown to sign the Magna Carta. Oh, wait! They were all aristocrats. Our own revolution, similarly, was led by our elites.

I'm not discrediting the crowd-sourcing of protest, or the increased ability of groups to coalesce over electronic mediums in a lateral manner. But you don't seem to really understand what it is you are arguing.

Nice try, trainwreck... see the sig at the bottom.... spin proof. Laughable that because YOU don't understand what I'm talking about, that you try to put it off that I don't understand what I'm talking about.... LMAO...

The Barons of the Magna Carta WERE the nobodies of the day, in comparison to the crown, it's dukes, princes and so on. Serfs were less than nobodies.

As for our revolution... again, when talking of elites.. one has to speak of Lords and representation. No rep = nobody. Further more, influential writers of the day like Locke were indeed nobodies in your sense of the word. The fact that any of the men who led the revolution could be in any way considered "elites" is a radical departure from former paradigms. If in England, none of them would have amassed any of the wealth they were able to in the colonies. None of them held title.

 

[cpwill]

Nice try, trainwreck... see the sig at the bottom.... spin proof. Laughable that because YOU don't understand what I'm talking about, that you try to put it off that I don't understand what I'm talking about.... LMAO...

The Barons of the Magna Carta WERE the nobodies of the day, in comparison to the crown, it's dukes, princes and so on. Serfs were less than nobodies.

:doh

The Barons of the Magna Carta were not nobodies, neither were the wealthy landowners and merchants who fostered much of our own Revolution. You are desperately backtracking because you made an ill-informed appeal to emotion by trying to tie not taking a guy who attempts to make himself into a Narrative because he quit his job into opposition to liberty.

You made a stupid argument. :shrug: It's not exactly the first time. Let me know when and if you have something pertinent to the topic instead of getting offended and tilting at strawmen.

 

[Occam's Razor]

:doh

The Barons of the Magna Carta were not nobodies, neither were the wealthy landowners and merchants who fostered much of our own Revolution. You are desperately backtracking because you made an ill-informed appeal to emotion by trying to tie not taking a guy who attempts to make himself into a Narrative because he quit his job into opposition to liberty.

You made a stupid argument. :shrug: It's not exactly the first time. Let me know when and if you have something pertinent to the topic instead of getting offended and tilting at strawmen.

What an arrogant POS...

It's all a matter or perspective. Nothing to do with backtracking or emotions. You on the other hand cherry pick one point and claim to refute the whole argument as stupid?. This was my original post...

So Joe Average American's views and opinions don't count? People like you have always been on the wrong side of history. Too bad more "nobodies" didn't stand up to or speak out against Stalin, Nazis, the British Empire, and on and on.

The US has overthrown no less than 13 governments in the last century, half of these were democratically elected governments who decided to nationalize their own resources and industries and that the US replaced with tin pot dictators who were some of the most abusive of human rights, often in the name of commercial interests.

We are operating our foreign policy rooted in the Wolfowitz doctrines, regardless of which party is in power. We have a military industrial complex that is heavily vested in these doctrines of perpetual war to the tune of at least 1/3rd of our national budget, energy/resource industrial complex that stakes claims on the sovereign resources of other countries...

In the entirety of human history, there is not one case of a super power who has waged wars of conquest to gain or maintain dominance at the expense of foreign powers and their people that did not eventually turn on it's own people. This is EXACTLY the reason every single founder warned against having a perpetual standing army as being far more dangerous to our liberties than any foreign threat.

This is not opinion, it's historical fact, historical constant. It hasn't changed in 5000 years because human nature has not changed within that time. The best we could do to counter this human nature was to construct a gov't model full of checks and balances, and empowering every nobody with a voice not to be silenced by those in power.

Cheers to all the nobodies out there taking a stand!

The pertinent points are in bold, which you wisely avoided. And you accuse ME of emo responses? please. If you can't address the topics and can only try to discredit the poster... that is the height of EMO...

Now then, the crown absolutely viewed the colonists as nobodies, or they'd have been issued titles and representation. Period. Sorry you can't grasp that. Interesting that you left out the french revolution, and the uprisings happening in the arab world... but of course, that would screw your attempt to personally discredit through cherry picking. You are a weak debater. Lame tactics. Not only is this not the first time you've resorted to these tactics... it's your stock and trade.

 

[cpwill]

What an arrogant POS...

It's all a matter or perspective. Nothing to do with backtracking or emotions.

:doh Those aren't pertinent points. They have nothing to do with the discussion. Look, I can do it too:

...The Great Leap Forward (simplified Chinese: 大跃进; traditional Chinese: 大躍進; pinyin: Dà yuè jìn) of the People's Republic of China (PRC) was an economic and social campaign by the Communist Party of China (CPC) from 1958 to 1961. The campaign was led by Mao Zedong and aimed to rapidly transform the country from an agrarian economy into a communist society through rapid industrialization and collectivization. The campaign led to the Great Chinese Famine.Chief changes in the lives of rural Chinese included the introduction of a mandatory process of agricultural collectivization, which was introduced incrementally. Private farming was prohibited, and those engaged in it were labeled as counter revolutionaries and persecuted. Restrictions on rural people were enforced through public struggle sessions, and social pressure, although people also experienced forced labor.[SUP][1][/SUP] Rural industrialization, officially a priority of the campaign, saw "its development ... aborted by the mistakes of the Great Leap Forward."[SUP][2][/SUP]
The Great Leap ended in catastrophe, resulting in tens of millions of excess deaths.[SUP][3][/SUP] Estimates of the death toll range from 18 million[SUP][4][/SUP] to 45 million,[SUP][5][/SUP] with estimates by demographic specialists ranging from 18 million to 32.5 million.[SUP][4][/SUP] Historian Frank Dikötter asserts that "coercion, terror, and systematic violence were the very foundation of the Great Leap Forward" and it "motivated one of the most deadly mass killings of human history".[SUP][6][/SUP]
The years of the Great Leap Forward in fact saw economic regression, with 1958 through 1962 being the only period between 1953 and 1985 in which China's economy saw negative growth. Political economist Dwight Perkins argues, "enormous amounts of investment produced only modest increases in production or none at all. ... In short, the Great Leap was a very expensive disaster."[SUP][7][/SUP]
In subsequent conferences in 1960 and 1962, the negative effects of the Great Leap Forward were studied by the CPC, and Mao was criticized in the party conferences. Moderate Party members like Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping rose to power, and Mao was marginalized within the party, leading him to initiate the Cultural Revolution in 1966....

Now, why don't you respond to that, oh mr people-power mass-line-advocate?


Oh. Wait. Because it's an idiotic strawman argument. Sort of like your post above.

Now then, the crown absolutely viewed the colonists as nobodies, or they'd have been issued titles and representation. Period. Sorry you can't grasp that

"nobody" in the context of this thread (you would be aware of this if you'd bothered to read the conversation you were responding to) is defined as "worthy of media attention". I'd say the leaders of a rebellion that took away the 13 colonies pretty much fit that bill.

Interesting that you left out the french revolution, and the uprisings happening in the arab world... but of course, that would screw your attempt to personally discredit through cherry picking. You are a weak debater. Lame tactics. Not only is this not the first time you've resorted to these tactics... it's your stock and trade.

:shrug: the arab street has been the best case (thus far) of a crowd-sourced revolution. Even then, those with heirarchal organization have won out over those who chatter over facebook. Witness that the SCAF has basically told the Tamarod movement in Egypt how it is going to run Egypt, and invited them to either play along or go pound sand. Prior to that it was the Muslim Brotherhood (who had organization) winning out over disparate opposition elements. Revolutions tend not to replace elites with "people power", but rather with new elites, most of whom tend to be disaffected elites from the old order. Like, for example, our founders.

 

[Ikari]

As the bloated State continues to grow, we start to see more people within the system pushing back. Kudos for Brandon Toy for making this tough decision.

we use a lot of contractors and mercenaries; I think on some level the amount the government can use should be restricted.

 

[Oozlefinch]

we use a lot of contractors and mercenaries; I think on some level the amount the government can use should be restricted.

By his own words, he is actually neither. He said himself he was nothing but a "low level clerk".

I do not know about others in here, but I would hardly call a "low level clerk" a contractor nor a mercenary.

 

[Thoreau72]

Call him what you will, but clearly he has a strong conscience, and the courage of his convictions. Bravo, I say.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Call him what you will, but clearly he has a strong conscience, and the courage of his convictions. Bravo, I say.

He was all that he says he was, a low level clerk, likely with a dead end job. It sure sounds like he hated his job, and is well sunk in Loosertarian Beliefs and talking points.

I bet he just got disgusted with his dead end job and wanted to make some kind of stupid statement as he was leaving.

I also wonder if he has some terminal disease, like a brain cloud.

 

[Geoist]

Your effusive, almost orgasmic reaction to the 'defense contractor' story. But of course I could be wrong.

How do you get "orgasmic" out of it? :roll:

I never said I oppose new technologies or having a military in general. I oppose our neo-imperialist policies pushed by the military industrial complex. Or is the world black and white to you too?

 

[Geoist]

Well, when you don't support the building of vehicles that are designed, among other purposes, to keep troops alive when encountering IED devices, that pretty much defines 'not supporting the troops'. I know, it's complicated logic but try and follow along.

Actually it's simplistic logic to the extreme. But I don't expect less from the neo-cons.

 

[Geoist]

Was he paid directly by the DOD/Military, as in a direct contract with the DOD/Military?

Was he paid by the company?

The first would be considered a Defense Contractor. The second would simply be an employee of the Defense Contractor.

Where do you get your definition?

 

[Wiggen]

How do you get "orgasmic" out of it? :roll:

I never said I oppose new technologies or having a military in general. I oppose our neo-imperialist policies pushed by the military industrial complex. Or is the world black and white to you too?

Yet your opening post says the opposite. You admire some junior level operator who decided he was no longer willing to work on providing safe vehicles for U.S. Servicemen. Any time somebody uses the phrase 'neo-Imperialist policies' when referring to the United States they self identify themselves as Far Left extremists who are embarrassed to be americans.