Reddnet Scribbles

Last night, a young man claiming to be a U.S. soldier threatened to "hurt" me because he disliked an opinion I had expressed in a conversation with someone else.

In most "conflicts", especially ones that don't quite go to physical blows, there is always a lot of "stuff" that you "wished" you'd said.

While I can't go back and change the confrontation now, the internet does let me say what I should have said after the fact.

So listen up Captain Hypocrite!

For my readers that weren't there and have no idea what happened, let me describe the situation leading up to the confrontation.

I was having a long and protracted discussion on a variety of political and economic issues with several people at a Waffle House.

Normally, this is a bad idea, but I know this group of people pretty well. They are genuinely interested in politics and economics and so I am not reluctant to contribute to their discussions when they solicit my input.

This was not a heated discussion, it wasn't a particularly controversial topic, and there wasn't any hostility involved. At the time the conflict broke out, we were discussing various viewpoints on why the "news media" doesn't show more details about ground conditions in Iraq or Afghanistan.

I was expressing my opinion that a large part of the reason is the same as it always has been. War is a very ugly business. Bad things happen, atrocities take place, and people die on both sides. There are heroes and villains on both sides. It is simpler for the American people, and the media itself, to just believe that our soldiers are all heroes and that all the bad guys are just evil bastards. We all "know" that the reality is much more complex, but people tend to just simplify war down to "we are good, they are bad". So the news media doesn't really have an interest in telling the deeper story, and the American people don't really have an interest in facing the ugly reality that is war. Everyone is happyier that way.

I am not sure exactly how far into this I had gotten, but I was nearly done making my point when this young kid at a table nearby interrupted,

"Hey! Could you stop talking?".

His body language was very aggressive, but his expression was just arrogant, smug, and cocky. He didn't appear to be angry exactly, but his tone was exceedingly rude and belligerent.

The kid was sitting with 4 other people; a couple of really pretty girls and a couple of really pretty guys. Hell, they were all so pretty they could have been the cast for a high-school TV drama. They all appeared to be in the 16 to 18 range, but I'd guess that most were still in high school.

At this point I had no idea what his problem was. I was talking to a large group spread out across a few tables, and my voice is deep and tends to carry well. I thought perhaps I was just annoying him by being too loud.

I don't mind being asked to quite down... politely, but I don't take well to being asked rudely.

I said, "No, but you are free to leave if you like."

Then he pipes up with his actual complaint.

"Have you ever been to Iraq", he asks.

"No. I was in the service, but I haven't ever been to Iraq".

"Have you ever killed a man?"

"I will not answer that question", is my reply.

"Oh! So you haven't.", he assumes, "Then you don't know what you are talking about. If you don't stop talking, I'll hurt you.

He paused, for dramatic effect, then continued, "I've been to Iraq twice, and I've killed. You don't know what you are talking about."

He paused again a moment then said, "So stop talking so I can eat my meal in peace".

At this point I am very annoyed and was debating going off on the guy. But honestly, I could not really bring myself to actually believe his claims.

I served in the Navy, and I know a LOT of vets. People in any branch of the military tend to carry and conduct themselves a little differently than civilians. We call it "military bearing". It is hard to describe what this means exactly, but most people that serve display it, and they also learn to pick up on it when they see it in others. Combat vets usually have an additional quality that is even harder to describe.

This kid just didn't have these qualities.

I wouldn't have had trouble believing that he had signed up for a delayed entry program. I wouldn't be surprised if he had been in ROTC or one of the other pre-enlistment groups. I have a few close friends in the 18-20 range that are in a similar pre-duty limbo type program with the national guard right now.

But I had, and still have, serious doubts that he was actually a two tour combat vet.

And I was very specifically trying to ignore the threat that he'd "hurt me".

I decided that he wasn't worth going off on.

So, I told him, "OK, I'll stay quiet and let you finish your meal since you've already gotten your food.".

I kept to my word, mostly because I knew that if I didn't I was seriously going to blow up in this kid's face.

He obviously wanted a fight, but I ignored the table while they ate. I did hear several additional mentions of "hurting me". There was snickering here and there, and overall it was an obvious attempt to get me to respond so they could renew the conflict.

I didn't find it too difficult to ignore it all. It probably helped that I wasn't directly facing them where I was sitting though.

After the meal, they hung around out front of the building, pointing and generally acting like typical high-school bullies trying to "dare" me to come outside. Again... behavior that just doesn't fit what I've typically seen from vets, much less combat vets no matter how young they are nor how much they might be trying to impress their civillian friends.

They continued to hang around for about 15 minutes, but eventually left without a fight.

The idiocy of the whole "you haven't been there, so you don't know" argument was mostly what I had on my mind at the time.

There are some things to which that is a valid argument, and I've heard it used before... though I don't recall ever making any claims myself that have ever caused a vet to use that argument against me before. Nothing in the conversation we'd been having before even came close to being a justification for the "you weren't there" argument though.

The actual threats didn't bother me so much at the time though... I guess mostly because I didn't think he would actually do me any serious harm even if he did take a swing at me.

But after thinking about it later, it is the threat that I really regret not having challenged. Instead of letting it go unanswered, this is what I should have said:

"You claim to have sword the oath of service?

How dare you swear to protect and defend this nation, its people, and the freedoms granted by the Constitution of the United Stated; then turn around and threaten physical violence against one of the very same people you are sword to defend!

And for what? Because I use my rights to say things you don't approve of? Because I am not willing to apologize for using the very freedoms you say you have sworn to defend?

You, Mr. Defender of the Free-World, are a hypocrite. The words coming out of your American pie-hole bring dishonor and disgrace to yourself, and the uniform you claim to wear.

So go ahead and "hurt me" if you like. Show me just how serious you are to spread your version of democracy... bring some of your idea of freedom home if you will!

Don't worry about me, I'll look after defending my own freedoms from here out, thank you very much! I'd rather not have the likes of you to thank for them anyway."

So there... I've said it. Too bad it didn't occur to me to say it at the time.