A hero can be many different things to different people. A soldier, a pacifist, a writer, a painter, a parent. It's impossible to pinpoint one thing. Soldiers who go into battle for any side are heroes to many. Not so much the cowards who send them there. For me it would be the great Martin Luther King Jr. The establishment couldn't handle his bravery.
the word hero for the troops is wrongly used as it's making out that each individual soldier that enters any war is a hero. the word hero only started to get over-used after the troops were sent to iraq/afghanistan in order to gain support for an unjust war. i'm not saying these troops aren't brave, but they can't be generalised as heros. it's certain actions that make a person a hero. on the whole, the british and american troops are going in a lot better armed and equipped than those that fought in the world wars. they are going in as the side with the better arsenal on their side. had they gone into countries with matching capabilites then they would be seen as braver troops than they are. whilst i may not see them as heros, i do feel that they should be treated with better respect by the government that sent them into these countries. in my opinion, anyone that has been sent in to fight for their country in battle should be set up for life, as they have risked their lives for that country. i respect any person's right to wear a poppy, but i don't think any individual or group should be shamed by others for not wearing one. the same can be said for others that view the wearing of a poppy as shameful.
The name of the charity "Help for Heroes" is, frankly, an embarressment. But the work it does is admirable. Anyone who is injured in the service of their country deserves to be well looked after, and any charity or organisation that raises funds to support disabled ex-service personnel gets my vote.
I should have said that to me a hero is someone who shows courage, humility, consideration for others above self and who is prepared to give everything for their cause and who does it for no recompense, monetary or other.
You strike me as the type who actually would endorse that nonsensical statement. As for the OP, I agree 100%. The word Hero is overused greatly, so much so that the word has been devalued beyond belief. Not everyone who puts on a uniform is a hero just for doing so and it ****ing grinds my gears when people have the epithet atttached to them when they have done **** all heroic. If a man or woman carries out an act of bravery at risk of their own life then they are heroic, not for swabbing a deck or manning a machine gun or doing their job. A common occurrence nowadays if when a young soldier dies is for his CO to say what a great man the deceased was, and how he was destined for promotion, and despite only being with his unit for 2 months he was already a legend or some such pish, even if he died in a road accident. All that service personel want is the truth, not some rewritten history which undermines the truly valliant.
It's the same with everything now when people die though - all sportsmen were superstars and legends and the crap ones would have been if only they'd got a lucky break (roughly translated as "if he'd left the bottle alone, learnt how to pass a ball to his own players and didn't need a sat nav to find the goal he could have been the next Pele), actors, actresses and authors were all geniusses and politicians were all gifted visionaries even if they treated their constituents like dirt and only sat in the House once every 6 months in order to vote themselves another 75% pay increase.
