Trump responded to McCain’s comment that Trump “brought out the crazies” at a recent conference speech, by hilariously mocking McCain’s status as a “war hero”.
“He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”
Apparently the supposed libertarian Matt Welch at Reason.org takes umbrage at that statement. When captured and held prisoner in a war, Welch feels resistance makes a “hero”. But is a mass murderer who is rebellious toward prison guards a “hero”? Is a killer who resists arrest a “hero”?
Welch seems to suggest that an inveterate war monger as well as inveterate mocker and insulter of other people (see here, here, here, here and here for examples) deserves decent treatment rather than mockery, and he suggests that the mere act of resistance and being rebellious while held prisoner makes one a hero. I find this laughable. While such actions and behavior can certainly earn one a reputation of being tough, heroic is in another ball park altogether.
In order to be a hero, one’s action must be able to be classified as being morally righteous, or at the very least morally acceptable. But McCain was a soldier in an illegal and immoral war (the war in Vietnam), in a country the United State had no business being in. His actions of killing people were the result of aggression, not defense. You don’t go half way around the world to some third world country to “defend yourself.”
Did McCain fight for his country? In the way that this stupid euphemism is generally used, yes he has. Did he put his life on the line? Yes he did.
But the first applies also to war criminal nationalists who don’t question the morality of the war they participate in, not merely genuine war heroes that genuinely are fighting to defend their countries against aggression. And the second applies also to criminals the moment they choose to engage a line of ‘work’ that may result in a confrontation with the police. So these things mean little when deciding the heroic status of a person.
Does Welch realize that he is basically engaging in a form of nationalism, by calling McCain a ‘hero’? Does he care? Or is he merely spouting the usual Beltway ‘libertarian’ crap that enables him to come across as ‘reasonable’ to the establishment?
Because it begs the question: why would a libertarian even care that some GOP moron insults another GOP moron, about his status as a “hero” in what was an immoral and illegal war.
Matt Welch cares, while real libertarians are simply shrugging their shoulders at the sight of one evil, authoritarian statist insulting another.