I think assumptions, despite what has been said on the bad news bears, are a pretty regular part of life.

WE usually call them 'expectations' and they arise from past experiences. Some just come from rhetoric and gossip though and those are the types to avoid.


For instance, I noticed today, there is an assumption that because someone is 'enlisted' they are 'standing up for our rights'.

although many in the military dont have jobs that put them in any harm whatsoever and never see combat or any situation which could be said to be 'standing' up for our rights.

Not saying I dont appreciate military, just that there is a broad tendency to lump all military together as being patriotic or making sacrifice for others,, although this just isnt the case across military enlistment.


On the flip side is the assumption that those on welfare are lazy and undeserving and not working hard, when certainly many 'welfare' recipients work as hard or harder in their lives than the average office worker who can sit on their behinds all day....


Which assumptions have you noticed? are they good assumptions? or are they inconsistent assumptions?

So, you're assuming that because someone in the military may not be in harm's way or combat, they're not standing up for our rights?

exactly

no more than any citizen with the same job in the civilian world, anyhow,,

That's definitely not an assumption I'd make or consider to be a good assumption.

I try hard to stay away from making broad assumptions, as they're not going to be correct for everyone. But, it happens sometimes.

I think we agree, as I belive its a BROAD Assumption that being enlisted = standing up for the rights of others,,,

some enlisted must do so, and others never have to,,,

Well, I guess if you assume you know exactly what every enlisted member of the military is doing, then you can make that assumption. I don't know what every single enlisted person is doing, so I can't assume that just because they're not on the front line in harm's way, that they're not standing up for our rights, freedoms and country in some way.

Wow just read this and the only thing that came to mind is WTF!!!

First of all our Military no matter what area they serve either it be on the front line or the one pushing the pencil to make sure they get the supplies they need. They are all important and joined in order to serve this country. To assume they are not standing up for our rights is down right Un-American in my book...

By knowing several in the Military within different branches and all holding down different jobs. From the front line to the pencil pusher they joined because they believe in the Rights this Country and withhold those beliefs in every area they serve within the Military.

As far as the flip side I can pretty well be right on the money to say those on welfare does not work as hard as those with a 9-5 job even if they are sitting on their azz. Now do I assume they don't deserve to be on welfare no I don't. Even though it is a given fact that many admit they want work cause they can get more off the system and stay home.


But then to assume that what one does or for the reason they do it one can never know the full answer to that unless they are that person.

I think msharmony is being misunderstood here when she points out,
"there is an assumption that because someone is 'enlisted' they are 'standing up for our rights'."

With that, she is basically saying that not every single enlisted soldier may be standing up for our rights. That's very different than saying none of them are.

maybe when you join the military, you will understand that SUPPORT and LOGISTICS are just as important as the combat missions... combat personnel have to eat, they need ammo, water, they need scouting to know whats going on, they need clothes and supplies, and people to fix and replace equipment. It is a team effort, not just the combat people.

doesn't matter, shes wrong either way. doesn't matter why they enlisted, they still have a job to do. and the job is necessary, no matter how little it may seem. whether they just want a check or a place to live, they are still standing up for our country.

Okay, I guess I disagree than because I believe people should believe in what their doing regardless of the outcome of any given situation.

A wise old man once told me "Never assume, you just make an a$$ out of u and me"

I guess some just assume that when they sign that dotted line they know if they are going to be on the front line or safe from harms way. Reality of it about 85% most likely have no clue where they may end up. But....regardless they know when they sign that paper they may in fact be putting there life on the line.

Shhsh my dad was in the drove the Ambulance in the Korean War and still got shot....Where my brother was in the Military there was no war so no front line. Does it make a difference that one went to war and the other did not? Nope for they both went in to protect this Country and Stand up for those Rights we all dearly love.....

Yes, but she's making the assumption that those who aren't in combat or immediately in harm's way aren't standing up for our rights. That's just not an assumption I'd be able to make. They choose to serve for the country and are doing whatever they need to do, whether it's being on the front line or not.

I totally agree that it doesn't make a difference if one went to war and the other worked behind the desk. In either case people will have their own motives for joining.

I am saying I cannot make an assumption just because they joined the army I know exactly what lead them to this, and how they feel and think about being in the army. Maybe they don't believe in war, maybe they had to and have no opinion at all, maybe they are patriotic and wanted serve the country....

I may have misunderstood msharmony myself, I don't know, but that is what I think.

Although she is not just saying that, yes if that's what she is saying I don't agree with that part. You;re right, it doesn't matter if they are on the front line or not. Either way we don't know. One would assume it's to serve the country but I can't assume that.

Maybe she can explain her first post so we can understand more what her actual assumptions are.

I hear ya but when it comes down to it no one can assume for what reason anyone joined the Military. Bottom line they all know they could be giving their life for this Country. For we can never assume when and where there will be a war.

But in the end it is still a nice thought to know they are there Standing up for our Rights & our Freedom.

And those in the military are choosing to be there. So we at least know that they have chosen to potentially risk their lives for others. Whether they have to end up doing that, we all can't guess at that.

what i wanna know is why it is that because they are in harms way in a place 1000s of miles away that it is considered standing up for our rights

those stationed in the country are doing more for our citizenship than those fighting in a country that is not even an ally of ours

how do those doing the bidding of a congress or president overseas stand up for our rights

they would be standing up for the people of this country more if they refused to go overseas unless that country outright attacked us if there are terrorist groups there send in a covert team os snipers and pick them off 1 by 1

the terrorist won the 9/11 battle the us went into deep debt fighting wars and dropped the credibility of the us economy below the best in the world and the lost jobs from many being pulled into active duty thus not b n able too pay bills

fuel prices go up because of the instability of the area thus causing the loss of expendable income and then some which leads again too not b n able to pay bills

then comes the trillions in give aways to get the economy moving

this is just my opinion which dont count for much

but hey what do i know