Scott Olson, the spark that lights a fire in the USA?
This is a discussion on Scott Olson, the spark that lights a fire in the USA? within the Intros & Off Topic forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; The Arab Spring is credited to have started in Tunisia when a bankrupted businessman set himself alight in protest of ...
Scott Olson, the spark that lights a fire in the USA?
The Arab Spring is credited to have started in Tunisia when a bankrupted businessman set himself alight in protest of the system which has bankrupted him.
Has America just witnessed a similar seminal moment with the critical injury of 2 tour Iraqi vet Scott Olson? According to accounts, Olson had joined the Occupy Cleveland Protest and was in the front when the Police came to clear the protest site. In the affray, Olson was struck on the head at short range by a tear gas cannister and suffered a fractured skull. Other protesters that went to his aid appear to have shot at with baton rounds or similar.
The incident has reverberated throughout the Veteran Community with Veteran Associations officially joining the Occupy movement in droves.
Previously the Occupy movement could have been dismissed as a harmless collection of middle class pacifists and anarchists. If large numbers of veterans start to join, this could change rapidly.
Historically, major change has often followed the return of large numbers of disgruntled soldiers from unsuccessful wars abroad to find significant economic hardship combined with the widespread perception of rampant corruption along the elite and disenchantment with the prevailing system.
In America all the pre-requisites are lining up and look to be falling into place. Could an organised army of hundreds of thousands of Vets really push the US over the brink?
Last edited by Sampanviking; October 30th, 2011 at 08:33 AM.
Reason: spelling mistake
A quibble: the Tunisian wasn't a bankrupted businessman, but a young man trying to support his family by selling fruit & vegetables in the street. Saying that his protest was against the system that bankrupted him is inaccurate. It was, quite explicitly, against abuse of power by officials & his personal humiliation at their hands.
A quibble: the Tunisian wasn't a bankrupted businessman, but a young man trying to support his family by selling fruit & vegetables in the street. Saying that his protest was against the system that bankrupted him is inaccurate. It was, quite explicitly, against abuse of power by officials & his personal humiliation at their hands.
With respect Swerve, I would say an incredibly petty quibble and more to do with semantics than substance, especially given the tangential relevance to the main topic.
If "Young Self Employed Small Business Owner prevented from trading by corrupt officials and hence going broke because he cannot trade, sell his stock and repay his creditors" makes you happier, then so be it, as I am happy to comply and the net result remains the same. I am sure he did not take the drastic action he did just because he had a bad hair day. He must have been wholly unable to see any way back from where he was and articulated the fears and frustrations of the general population
It also paints the young man as closer to ex Marine Olson than say a middle aged exec like me.
It is though the question of no way back that is critical to the opening post questions and the effect of a large number of veteran professional military personnel in the US arriving at that place and being energised by the Olson incident.
The Arab Spring is credited to have started in Tunisia when a bankrupted businessman set himself alight in protest of the system which has bankrupted him.
Has America just witnessed a similar seminal moment with the critical injury of 2 tour Iraqi vet Scott Olson? According to accounts, Olson had joined the Occupy Cleveland Protest and was in the front when the Police came to clear the protest site. In the affray, Olson was struck on the head at short range by a tear gas cannister and suffered a fractured skull. Other protesters that went to his aid appear to have shot at with baton rounds or similar.
The incident has reverberated throughout the Veteran Community with Veteran Associations officially joining the Occupy movement in droves.
Previously the Occupy movement could have been dismissed as a harmless collection of middle class pacifists and anarchists. If large numbers of veterans start to join, this could change rapidly.
Historically, major change has often followed the return of large numbers of disgruntled soldiers from unsuccessful wars abroad to find significant economic hardship combined with the widespread perception of rampant corruption along the elite and disenchantment with the prevailing system.
In America all the pre-requisites are lining up and look to be falling into place. Could an organised army of hundreds of thousands of Vets really push the US over the brink?
I've seen little real respect for the Occupy movement here. A achnowledgment that yes they are angry and there are some things to be angry about but overall very little. And the vaste majority of military service members active and retired i've known and talked to just laugh at them mostly.
While most would support their anger at the economy and the bailing out of wallstreet and other corperations listening to them some are radical socialist communist but most simply have no idea what they want besides im angry want money.
In addition to that most of them arent well attended considering the size of the cities they are in and the size of other movements like the tea parties and such.
----------------------------------
BTW i dont believe there is likely to be some type of armed movement but pray to god there isnt or the world will probably collapse. The US dominates trade and if we have a CW it will decimate the country and the world.
We arent the Arab world please dont compare us to it.
With respect Swerve, I would say an incredibly petty quibble and more to do with semantics than substance, especially given the tangential relevance to the main topic..
"Bankrupt businessman" gives readers a false impression. It isn't even true: he wasn't bankrupt, though he was in financial difficulty, with debts which it would have been hard for him to repay.
Nobody reads "businessman" & thinks of a young street trader. "In protest at the system which bankrupted him" gives a false impression of what happened. It doesn't make anyone visualise beatings, public humiliation, smashing or confiscation of his goods, or being ignored when he complained to senior officials about those illegal acts.
Your words would lead on to think of bureaucratic measures bankrupting a man in a suit, not violence against a young street trader. That's not an incredibly petty quibble.
But yes, I'm sure he did take his action because he was unable to see any way out of his situation.
I think US media is hoping this will spark something bigger but it's not. Even though I'm active duty I'm also a member of several vet organizations and I think it's a far stretch to say they are "joining the OWS crowd" because of this incident. My obvservations are the OWS people are so far and away removed from being the type of person "typically" we have in our military the potential for 100's of thousands of vets joining isn't even remotely possible. Yeah at first the headline that caught my eye was a 2 tour vet was seriously injured. He wasn't injured because he was a vet, he was injured because he was at the OWS rally. Big difference there to me and my veteran brothers.
Again I think there are military folks past and present that have and or will support the OWS movement but they are not the "typical" joe and are far outnumbered by those that are repulsed by the way the OWS movement has behaved, quite poorly IMHO.
This is not even close to being sustainable. We need to pull out of all 138 countries and go to work on America. We aren't the British Empire of the 1800's. We aren't the ancient Romans.
Post deleted. Someones nationality or veteran status does not give anyone a magical insight into the issues being discussed. If you cannot comment in a civilized manner your posts will be deleted and if you keep it up you will be banned.
No matter what you think of OWS or its sub movements they are not scum or the dreggs of society and no one should be dismissed as such.
If you do not like what is being discussed on this international forum and cannot post in a civilized manner go somewhere else.
You have been warned and do not reply to this post.
Last edited by AegisFC; November 29th, 2011 at 11:26 AM.
In America all the pre-requisites are lining up and look to be falling into place. Could an organised army of hundreds of thousands of Vets really push the US over the brink?
The typical US service member tends to be right-of-center, politically unsophisticated, and deeply suspicious of protest movements of any kind. The later I think is in part a legacy of the anti-war movmement of the 1960s. Most of my co-workers use terms like "dirty hippies" or even "commies" (yes - still a pejorative label in the US military) when ever they refer to the OWS folks (which is not very often). I also think that as a rule the very idea of civil disobiedience is something of an anethma to the military mind. A Soldier looks at the OWS protestors and sees a bunch of lazy, dirty, good for nothing hippies who apparently have nothing better to do than to make a mess of public spaces, beat drums, smoke dope, and collect welfare while they (the Soldier) is out busting his or her ass keeping the hippies safe to have their stupid protests. While clearly the reality is something quite different, that describes the typical knee-jerk reaction of a lot of military folks. This is more true among the career military folks (typically older, more conservative, more buy-in to the "military" outlook) than the younger kids, but of the younger kids in the military have very little interest in politics at all.
It will take something much bigger than one or two vets being in the wrong place at the wrong time to see any wide spread military/veteran support for OWS.
That being said, there US military isn't completely politically homogenous. There are a few of us here and there who are left-of-center, and support at least the ideas behinds the OWS movement (that we don't want our democracy to be for sale to the corporate board with the most advertising dollars to spend on buying...I mean "supporting" their preferred candidate for office.... ). ;
Just a disclaimer - I am generalizing and simplifying pretty heavily here, but I've been in uniform for 22 years, and I think overall it's a pretty accurate description of how a large number of enlisted and non-coms feel. I won't comment on the officers - because God only knows what they think :p
Just a disclaimer - I am generalizing and simplifying pretty heavily here, but I've been in uniform for 22 years, and I think overall it's a pretty accurate description of how a large number of enlisted and non-coms feel. I won't comment on the officers - because God only knows what they think :p
-Adrian
I was in uniform as well and still work with mid-level enlisted and senior enlisted squids every day and their attitude towards OWS is much different than the retired vets I work with. In the discussions I've heard had has been a lot of humor, feigned indifference or guarded support and just about everyone (cranky old tea party leaning vets included) despise John Pike.
________________
"The beatings will continue until morale improves." Forum rules, read them!
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,131
Threads:
Moved to off-topic. Given the non-military nature of the discussion this is where it belongs. Please continue the discussion here in a civil and intelligent manner.
You know the riots, drugs, and crime have probably killed OWS for now atleast. They need to figure out what it stands for. No more camping out in the Parks for months thats just annoying, dangerous, and costly. The tea party got alot of power by just obeying the law. Not only that they were clean....which hasn't been so with the OWS.
Right now it just seems to be a band of lawless angry college kids who can't or Wont get a job.
