Nathan, I'm not picking on you, just using what you said for commentary.
Quote:
I believe a hero is someone who will stand up for the rights of others and the good of mankind. To me a hero has to be of higher standerd and nothing less. A hero is someone that gives up his dreams to protect others. General Doolittle is always one of my favorite heros. A man that could do anything and prove anything.
Interesting choice of words. "Favorite" when it comes to heroes, indicates that the definition of a hero is very subjective. Standing up for the rights of others, higher standard and nothing less, giving up dreams to protect others, a man who could do anything and prove anything. Well how about Gandhi? Comparing Doolittle to Gandhi is probably a stretch in many people's minds. But they both, through their actions, lived according to what you wrote.
Quote:
Sorry, I am not much into the human side of a hero. Are you guys talking about if like a guy that picks up a hooker or something? Then no I will not think highly of him. He has a responsiblility to be a rolemodel and should try to live to the highest standard of that.
Doolittle was a consummate womanizer in his life. Gandhi was a strict but understanding moralist who lived a life of restraint not for anybody else's benefit, but for his own. It is a side of him that not even many Hindu's know about. So do we ignore the faults of Doolittle and his kind and put him on a pedestal and create an idea of who he was to subvert his true life? Unfortunately, that is what is done on a regular basis. We forget about the total humanity of a person, and make them into an ikon with no emotions, decisions, just the fate to be a hero.
How about Charles Lindbergh? Prior to WWII, and even up until the beginning of the war, he was a leader in the isolationist movement. He resigned his commission from the AAC in 1941, for numerous reasons, but mainly over Lend-Lease. After that, he was blocked from returning to the military. There is a big revisionist movement to paint him as a military hero during WWII, but his political actions prior to the war cost him his chance to do real combat. Moral choice and FDR's spurning aside, when he traveled to the field, he was greeted as a hero by the people he met. He was the earliest and foremost aviation hero to many of the people he came across. How did they think of his moral choices to go against the war at the time? Did it matter a that point? I don't think it meant anything to the airmen at that time.
Making ethical decisions is not easy. And in the context of changing situations, you run the risk of becoming a person outcast from the mainstream. These decisions are the very basis of a person going down the road to becoming a hero, but are the same ones which can later undo you in a very public eye. So I am advising against not paying attention to the human side of a hero- there is more to be learned about than just the heroic actions which often become the total sum of the public view of a person.