Posted: 3/30/2003 6:05:22 AM EDT
|
Is it possible to support the Troops and not support the War? Is this just an intellectual's exercise with no practical reasoning behind it. |
|
Yes it is. Suppose the powers that be decide to send the troops off on some totally bogus mission. You simply start raising hell with the government that sent them off on this futile waste of their young lives, demanding that they be sent back home. At the same time you continue to treat the troops with the love and respect they deserve. My love for the troops is unconditional. My love for the powers that be is VERY conditional. "Support the troops...Bring them home!" can, in certain instances, be a VERY legitimate attitude IMHO. |
|
Quoted: Yes it is. Suppose the powers that be decide to send the troops off on some totally bogus mission. You simply start raising hell with the government that sent them off on this futile waste of their young lives, demanding that they be sent back home. At the same time you continue to treat the troops with the love and respect they deserve. My love for the troops is unconditional. My love for the powers that be is VERY conditional. "Support the troops...Bring them home!" can, in certain instances, be a VERY legitimate attitude IMHO. My practical side says the troops would have found a way to sound off about something bogus as they are informed citizens, with possibly a more vested interest than the average Joe. Probably my real point here is that the troops are doing a dirty job, i.e. killing if need be, and receiving a mixed message that says this is bogus would be very disconcerting and cause hesitation and risk lives. I had an argument over this with the head editorial writer for my local news paper, The Orange County Register (circ @ 300K) and he blithely wrote back that they were "big boys and girls and could handle a little free speech and dissent" To the paper's credit they have printed two long letters that have pummelled his views in the last two weeks. Guess that's my main point, killing's (or being killed) a big deal and the less conflict over the right and wrong of it allows the soldier to do his job and end the conflict as soon as possible. The other possibilities are wars that lose focus on victory and become meat grinders or revolution. |
|
How many times is this topic going to come up? I support the troops but I don't support the unconstitutional police action. Congress has not declared war on ANY country. Bush has NOT been given authority from congress to act as commander in chief of the armed force. Bring our troops back home now. Indict Bush. Oops, wait a minute. Inorder to indict Bush, we need a congress who understands the Constitution. I don't think they do. Now we are in trouble. |
|
Pelosi Praises U.S. Troops for Defending Immorality (2003-04-11) -- U.S. House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, today praised American troops for their "valiant performance during this immoral, illegal, wicked war." "I support the troops and oppose the war," said Rep. Pelosi. "I think our men and women in uniform made us proud in this shameful political exercise to distract attention from the economy and provide more money for Dick Cheney's former company. They are among America's finest, and it's a darn shame that they have risked their lives for the Bush regime, which will go down to the dustbin of history with the likes of Stalin and Hitler." Rep. Pelosi said U.S. troops should not let the "injustice of their cause prevent them from feeling proud about their service." "After all," she added, "I'm proud to be a liberal Democrat Congresswoman." [url]www.scrappleface.com[/url] Considering how long Vietnam divided this country, a few days of working over the subject shouldn't be too much to bear. From the standpoint of someone who thinks this is an illegal war, they should be [b]damn happy[/b] it is still being talked about. Valmet and a few others certainly think so and it is their right. |