Military, Politics, Society

Poll: Do You Think We Should Have A Military Parade In Washington?

images-3The United States has long rejected the holding of military parades featuring tanks, missiles and other heavy weapons as a symbol of authoritarian regimes like the Soviet Union, North Korea and other countries.  We commonly have parades with marching military and military bands in Washington.  What we generally have not done is add heavy weaponry — the signature display of so many of the history authoritarian enemies of this country (though, as some have pointed out on this blog, there have been exceptions where tanks or missiles were present in inaugurations).  Trump’s desire for military equipment at the presidential inauguration was reportedly rejected by the Pentagon as running counter to the long traditions of the country.  Now Trump appears to be close to getting such a parade, modeled on the Bastille Day parade. A military official told The Washington Post is quoted as saying“The marching orders were: I want a parade like the one in France.” (The current results show 77 percent against such parades with around 800 polled.  The Army-Navy Times is reported opposition at 89 percent).  Opposition is also coming from Republicans who are calling it “cheesy” and “wasteful.”  The Navy Seal who killed Osama Bin Laden has called it “third world bulls**t.”

Ironically, as many on this blog know, I am a military history buff and love to review both vintage and modern weaponry.  However, I like our tradition in not holding such military parades. Our military has long maintained its apolitical and professional distance in our system. We celebrate and honor our military but do not use heavy weapons as props.  We also avoid the high costs associated with such parades.  However, people of good faith can disagree and I wanted to ask the blog about the consensus (if any) on this issue below.

381 thoughts on “Poll: Do You Think We Should Have A Military Parade In Washington?”

  1. Yet another completely irrelevant topic dominating our discussion. Absent from the discussion – imagine that – is the part about how Chuck Schumer and other leading Democrats just a few years ago proposed military parades. It wouldn’t cost a lot of money to pull off – there are more than 15,000 military personnel stationed within an hour of DC.

    The parade I want to see is the one made up of formery Hillaryistas and FBI/DOJ officials wearing orange and headed for sentencing in a federal court.

  3. L4D/ HAL 9000,.
    – I’ve read JT’s columns and have commented on them for about 3 years.
    That was at the end of the Inga/ Annie postings here; I didn’t see the years? of her / their posts before I showed up here.
    That’s why I haven’t joined in on the comments about the possibility or likelihood that you are Inga/ Annie.
    The ones with more “seniority” here did have more of a history with her, so their observations are largely based on a history of her posts that I’m not familiar with.
    The only link that I suggested in connection with you was with regard to one of your ( possible ) ancestor, Hal 9000.😃

    1. actually, at or NEAR the end of the era of posts by “Inga/ Annie”…..I did see some of her posts.

    2. I started on this blawg in July of 2017 when I wanted to find out if Trump could pardon himself. So I never read anything posted by Inga or Annie. Nevertheless, I’m positively convinced that I am neither Inga nor Annie. And I know for an absolute fact that anonymous is not Elaine, because anonymous says so, and because anonymous couldn’t lie her way out of a paper bag if her life depended upon it.

      P. S. Have you ever seen anyone else but me typing while riding a unicycle while pedaling on stilts?

      1. “And I know for an absolute fact that anonymous is not Elaine, because anonymous says so, and because anonymous couldn’t lie her way out of a paper bag if her life depended upon it.”

        Best comment made by Diane since July 2017.

        1. Ah yes, dear Allen. Why am I not surprised.

          I’m not Elaine, of course. And I do have an affinity for the truth — which is typically thought to be a good thing. But make of it what you will.

          L4D dances circles around you. That I know.

          1. I don’t care who you are anonymous. Diane said it right this time “anonymous couldn’t lie her way out of a paper bag if her life depended upon it.”

            Whether you have an affinity for the truth or not is not at issue. The question is whether or not you have the capability of decerning truth and knowing the difference between fact and fiction.

            “L4D dances circles around you. That I know.”

            That you are able to say this affirms your lack of intellectual capability. I’m sure you are a nice woman and if married a good wife. Outside of that, I think you are of limited nature.

              1. He fooled me. I honestly thought that Allan was paying you a compliment.

                P. S. Good pun. I’m so jealous.

                1. “I honestly thought that Allan was paying you a compliment.”

                  In this quote, anonymous, Diane is reaffirming her statement, “anonymous couldn’t lie her way out of a paper bag if her life depended upon it.” She is a good friend?

                  Did you note how in this statement Diane writes “I honestly thought”? There is no reason for her to have used the word “honestly” unless all her other comments have been dishonest. You are dealing with a tricky woman, anonymous, so tricky that she fools herself all the time.

              2. “anonymous couldn’t lie her way out of a paper bag if her life depended upon it.”

                It’s OK for you to agree with Diane. In fact, it is OK for you to say that was a stupid comment made by Diane. Chose your own poison, but this is not my nonsense because I merely quoted Diane’s comment.

                1. Allan, who can see the forest for the trees, said:

                  “…this is not my nonsense because I merely quoted Diane’s comment.”

                  No, I see a lot of words that are yours — and not L4D’s or “Diane’s.”

                  So, again: Just more Allanonsense.

                  1. As Diane says, “anonymous couldn’t lie her way out of a paper bag if her life depended upon it.”.

                    3. “I think that she meant that as a critism of anonymous.”

                      Tom, I don’t know how Diane meant it nor did I propose whether it was criticism or not. It was, however, the truth. Anonymous is a bit simple.

                    7. Why should you have the last word, anonymous? You don’t offer anything.

                      “As Diane says, “anonymous couldn’t lie her way out of a paper bag if her life depended upon it.”.

                      “So says gotta-have-the-last-word Allan:”

                      The problem is that the statement was made by Diane, not Allan. I am copying Diane’s statement much like you copy almost everything you post. Does that offend you or does what Diane said offend you?

  4. Yes let’s do the parade!
    We are just another s…hole country. Quit pretending that we are anything else.

  6. Good news from the Army Times:

    “Poll: Do you support Trump’s military parade in Washington?

    “As of Thursday afternoon, more than 51,000 readers had responded. The majority, 89 percent, responded “No, It’s a waste of money and troops are too busy.””

    1. I don’t have an opinion on this poll, but when reading the numbers of any poll one has to have an understanding of how the poll is performed, the questions used, the method of voting, one vote per person or more, selectivity, etc.

      In this particular poll, I think the questions are poor. The no response included the words, “troops are too busy.” What soldier doesn’t believe he isn’t too busy? If the yes response included ‘it would highlight the needs of our soldiers for better protective gear’ one might have seen a complete reversal of the numbers and more. IMO, there was an asymmetry in the questions and that can lead to bad results. The second thing I found was how the vote was cast.There is a lockout mechanism, but it can easily be bypassed. Though I am not sure the votes I placed counted I was easily able to quickly vote multiple times and I did so voting equally for yes and no each time being brought to the next question. If my vote counted it might not even reflect the vote of military personnel. In an eight hour day, I could have easily voted a couple of thousand times or more.

      Should this poll be used as evidence of a soldier’s preference? No. Assuming I were able to vote so many times this poll is meaningless. One should also consider that it could be a push poll which tries to use polling as a method to sway opinions. We see that all the time from the politicians that send us surveys and then ask for a donation at the end. The lesson of this particular question is no, I am too busy for a parade, but it could have been yes, we need the funds and the public will recognize the need if we have a parade.

      1. The Army Times poll (and for those unaware, The Army Times and the other versions for the other services are considered to be tabloid by military personnel…they are the National Inquirer but with a military angle) was based on whoever went to their online edition and clicked on option or the other on their webpage. In theory someone could spend all day clicking the same option over and over again and you’d never know.

        1. Well, best to tell it to our host, then. He’s the one who first brought the Army Times poll into the discussion:

          Jonathan Turley, in his posting: “The current results show 77 percent against such parades with around 800 polled. The Army-Navy Times is reported opposition at 89 percent). Opposition is also coming from Republicans who are calling it “cheesy” and “wasteful.” The Navy Seal who killed Osama Bin Laden has called it “third world bulls**t.””

          Follow the links.

    2. Are you aware The Army Times (as with the Navy Times, Air Force Times, and Marine Corps Times) is regarded by military personnel as a tabloid rag no different from the crap you see on the checkout stand (that’s where it is sold on military bases by the way…alongside National Inquirer and etc in the checkout lines at the stores). The poll itself was completely unregulated. Anyone – military or not – could go to their website and “vote” as many times as he or she or ze wanted.

      1. Well, best to tell it to our host, then. He’s the one who first brought the Army Times poll into the discussion:

        Jonathan Turley, in his posting: “The current results show 77 percent against such parades with around 800 polled. The Army-Navy Times is reported opposition at 89 percent). Opposition is also coming from Republicans who are calling it “cheesy” and “wasteful.” The Navy Seal who killed Osama Bin Laden has called it “third world bulls**t.””

        Follow the links.

        1. Turley may have posted it but you repeated it. Since you are quick to name people (ike the SEAL that violated his creed by cashing in on a highly sensitive mission) that tow your line, why not also acknowledge those that have supported the idea of a parade? Chuck Schumer is among them.

        2. Anonymous, it is important for you, Turley and everyone else to realize how polls, studies etc. are performed. Just repeating a poll or study is meaningless unless you understand how it is done and what the results mean. Consider this comment part of your education.

      1. Linda’s good at parroting what others have told her to say but to thick to comprehend the words she promulgates. I mean, if Trump was really a dictator wouldn’t agents have seen her online behavior, tracked her down, and put her in a camp somewhere?

        1. She is like a windup doll that one winds up, it says a few words and then becomes mute.

        2. Well, AndrewWS, you just pointed out the potential “silver lining” of a dictatorship.
          Despite the obvious benefit, probably not worth installing a dictatorship, even with that benefit.😄😂

  8. Rand Paul spot on – shut it down in Afghanistan

    “A military parade in the nation’s capital? The last military parade in Washington was in 1991, after our victory in the first Iraq War.

    Though the martial image of high-stepping soldiers is not one I tend to associate with our nation’s Founders’ distrust of a standing Army, I’m not against a victory celebration.

    So I propose we declare victory in Afghanistan, bring home our 14,000 troops and hold a victory parade.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/02/07/sen-rand-paul-trump-s-military-parade-is-good-idea-if-bring-troops-home-from-afghanistan-first.html

    1. Good for him. T rump has increased the troops and dropped a big bomb over there. Get out. Da secret wars and drone attacks are on da increase. Stop da madness.

    1. The Afghanistan War: Legal or Illegal?

      When can a war be legal?

      1. Self-defense
      2. Authorization by the U.N. Security Council

      The invasion of Afghanistan was not for self-defense.
      Authorization was not given by the U.N. Security Council.

      Therefore by not meeting either point of criteria the War on Afghanistan is ILLEGAL.

  10. No. This just doesn’t fit our heritage and our American culture. I am not anti military. This just seems like something that is done in countries that we always end up fighting a war against.

  11. We have a long history of not honoring our vets – anyone remember the Bonus Army?

    “As many as 20,000 former soldiers and their families had converged on Washington in the summer of 1932, the height of the Great Depression, to support Texas Congressman Wright Patman’s bill to advance the bonus payment promised to World War I veterans. Congress had authorized the plan in 1924, intending to compensate the veterans for wages lost while serving in the military during the war. But payment was to be deferred until 1945. Just one year earlier, in 1931, Congress overrode a presidential veto on a bill to provide, as loans, half the amount due to the men. When the nation’s economy worsened, the half-bonus loans were not enough, and the unemployed veterans now sought the balance in cash. Known as Bonus Marchers, they came in desperation from all across the nation, hopping freight trains, driving dilapidated jalopies or hitchhiking, intent on pressuring Congress to pass the legislation. The administration vehemently opposed the measure, believing it inflationary and impractical given the $2 billion annual budget deficit.”

    http://www.historynet.com/the-bonus-army-war-in-washington.htm

  12. Glad to see your readers on the whole have more sense then the group that normally populates your comments section!

    1. “Why can’t others manage to do such a simple search?”

      …And your conclusion is?

  14. Trump says that he wants this parade to “honor” the military. Only someone with no real military experience would think that soldiers like to march in parades, let alone feel “honored” by having that opportunity. It’s a pain in the ass. Putting on a large military parade requires days or weeks of mind-numbing rehearsals by the participants; it’s not something to look forward to.

    1. Maybe we can create safe spaces for military members who are too traumatized to participate.

  16. I want an anti war protest in DC. To protest the wars in the muddle east and Afghanistan.

    For its, one, two, three, what are we fighting for?
    Don’t ask me I don’t give a damn!
    Next stop is Viet Nam..

    And its five, six, severn, open up the Pearly Gates.
    Ain’t no time to wonder why….
    Whoopee we’re all gonna die!

  18. I can’t believe we are expected to discuss this fodder given the things we are learning about the DOJ and FBI.

    Realistically here’s why might happen. Two of our living Presidents are advanced in age. Chances are, they won’t be with us too much longer. I could see the Carter or GHW Bush funeral then also consisting of not a parade but a military procession given both men’s service.

Comments are closed.