2006-12-04 17:03:07 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
the troops in Iraq. There is no way that I could do what they do. I mean, what is the biggest risk a Hollywood celebrity faces on a daily basis, their Latte will be cold.
2006-12-04 17:11:12 · answer #1 · answered by shakes 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Troops serving in Iraq, of course.
2006-12-05 09:25:57 · answer #2 · answered by Tony M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The troops I admire the most. Anyone can become a Hollywood celebrity, but not everyone can become a part of out mighty military.
2006-12-05 02:07:14 · answer #3 · answered by jyone scotani 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't admire people for their occupation, but for traits that they display. Troops display courage and are servants who give to those they don't even know. There extreme philanthropy is the talk of the world. Hollywood celebrities who do there part with passion in helping those who are less fortunate are admirable.
Bono is a perfect example. He has helped raise aids awareness and is naturally giving.
2006-12-05 01:24:35 · answer #4 · answered by Professor Sheed 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Of course the answer to your question is I admire the British Soldier`s and all the other Soldier`s who are fighting in IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN, ten,twenty, a hundred times more than any celebrity. In answer to JC`s answer, I believe the person you compared our young British Soldiers and the other Soldier`s to is 20 years old, and that parent`s would not like their children going to war at that age, well where have you been,BRITISH SOLDIERS and the other SOLDIER`S from various COUNTRIES as young as 18 years old have and are serving in both IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN. How do I know, because my Daughter has already been to both countries on active service, and my Granddaughter and my Grandson are going to AFGHANISTAN next year. So maybe I am being Prejudiced, but remember most of the British Soldiers and those from other countries do belong to someone who like myself are VERY PROUD of them.
2006-12-05 03:01:39 · answer #5 · answered by madge 51 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Anyone who serves their country is to be admired, it takes a very dedicated and unselfish person to do so...but to compare them to celebrities is a bit silly...celebrities are celebrities because we make them that...they provide entertainment for us when we want to forget the worries of the world...and many of them provide entertainment for the troops as well...yes, they put their pants on the same way we do, but because of our infactuation with them they are continually scrutinized.....there are those who act like @sses, just like the non-celebs today, as long as they get attention for their bad behavior, they'll continue to act that way..but don't put them all in one catagory, it's not fair to the many talented and deserving who are great at what they do...
2006-12-05 01:50:46 · answer #6 · answered by kate 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Definitely the troops in Iraq! They're putting their lives on the line to give us the freedom to watch the celebrities making fools out of themselves. Besides...some of the celebrities don't support the troops. I don't see THEM out there protecting our freedom!
2006-12-05 01:07:01 · answer #7 · answered by wvmamaquack 2 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Depends on the celebrity and on the person serving in Iraq. Generally, I think the idea of going to war for your country is a great deal more heroic than being famous for entertaining people. I have heard about several things going on in Iraq, though, that are not very heroic. Also, there are celebrities that occasionally do heroic things (take Angelina Jolie for example). If I had to compare her to a U.S. soldier who was torturing war prisoners or killing women and children, or blasting rock music while bombing people, I would have to say that she is more heroic. On the other hand, it takes a lot more courage to risk your life and go to war than it does to be a celebrity.
Oh, and I have something else to add. Every person who gave an answer on here so far made some sort of a comment stereotyping celebreties as a bunch of lazy, latte drinking, U.S. Troop hating idiots, and that is only the case with a small percentage of them. Celebrities should not be put down for not going to war. Most people don't go to war, including regular people just like us. Does that make us lazy, selfish and stupid? Would you expect your daughters (of Lindsay Lohan's age) to go to war? MOST people don't want to risk their lives for any reason, which is why the people that do join the troops are so heroic. But that doesn't mean that those who choose not to are lazy or selfish. we all have our parts to play in life and why should we put down people who entertain us? Let me tell you, life would be a lot less interesting without the entertainment industry.
And in response to madge... I was referring to the comment made by wtfitfnguyen... about lohan and hilton holding guns and combat knives in the middle of battle. I was NOT saying that normal people (including girls) do not go to war. I was SAYING that many of them choose not to go to war, and that it is understandable that they wouldn't want to, and that this includes celebrities too. You completely misunderstood what I was saying. If you are still having trouble understanding, read what Kate wrote. She makes the point very well.
2006-12-05 01:15:52 · answer #8 · answered by J.C. 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Troops. Celebrities are nothing but common people raised above the levels of their intelligence and (usually) talent.
2006-12-05 01:10:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Troops of Course! They're fighting & dying so the idiot celebrities like Martin Sheen can have the freedom to voice their assanine opinions!
2006-12-05 01:10:03 · answer #10 · answered by mongoose 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋