I'm sure some of them are, and I myself am going into the military, but it seems to be politically correct (for cons and libs) to call them heroes as a group.
I would say that most soldiers and policemen aren't in that profession because they're so incredibly altruistic and sacrificing. Yes, some of them display incredible bravery, but some of them are lazy, corrupt, or just everyday joes who really don't care.
So it bothers me when someone says that every one of them is a hero... because that's not true, and it degrades the true heroes that do exist.
No group is completely made up of heroes. Check out www.freeburmarangers.org -- they're a group of volunteer aid workers that trek into Burma's conflict zones to help the people there; but I'm sure that even some of them aren't truly in it for motives that are 'heroic.'
This is something that just bothers me, because it really does degrade the worthiness of people that really should be called heroes.
2007-03-20 12:55:00 · 10 answers · asked by Free Ranger 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Aparently, "DICK" recieved one too many tickets. Police officers, firefighters, and military personnel run towards danger when every instinct tell you to run the other way. There is nothing wrong with calling those group of civil servants heroes, because their job by their very definition demands heroism when called upon for help. Even the laziest cop will run towards gunfire to apprehend that perp. Even the laziest firefighter will save that baby from a burning building when called upon to do so. I see what you are trying to say, but I think you are wrong.
2007-03-20 22:23:16 · answer #1 · answered by Kenneth C 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a team wins a championship is the whole team not champions. Some players may not have even played but they are all champions. Some may even have other motives for being there bigger contracts but they are all still champions.
Anybody willing to put on a uniform and take an oath and are willing to protect people that cannot protect them selves. Are heroes until proved otherwise. That's my opinion anyways.
2007-03-20 13:18:12 · answer #2 · answered by epaq27 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Hero" is a term overused in the popular media in these days to describe almost anyone who does more than the average person. I think it's a sad commentary on contemporary society.
2007-03-20 13:15:15 · answer #3 · answered by mattzcoz 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No; They are heroes. Risking their lives for others? Why aren't they heroes?
Of course, like you said, there are some who aren't (i.e. Abu Ghraib). But the majority are.
2007-03-20 12:59:20 · answer #4 · answered by worldthoughts 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the fact that they are willing to put their life on the line for the safety of others makes them a hero, regardless of their motives for doing it
2007-03-20 14:05:19 · answer #5 · answered by krystal 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Risking their lives for us so that we can live day by day the way we do. I think they are very brave and should be called heroes.
2007-03-20 15:16:18 · answer #6 · answered by JG78 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, especially when you forget to call them selfless, and honorable!
oh by the way you forgot medics, teachers and those who work to help third world nations.
2007-03-20 13:20:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
as quickly as their company handlers desperate they needed deepest police and hearth companies and as quickly as they desperate they like to dip their hands into their retirement money.
2016-10-01 06:06:12 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO because they are and always will be.
2007-03-20 14:44:07 · answer #9 · answered by spiceygurls101 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES, it really bug me .....These guys are not heroes....they're call social nusiance.
These guys get too much pay, too much benefits and too much of every thing and they playing politics.
2007-03-20 13:36:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 6⤋