I agree with many here that your friends are idiots.
A couple months ago, as a protest to the war, a group of students at my university decided to show that they didn’t agree with what our government was doing by POURING OIL ON THE LAWN in front of our Armory, where the Army and Navy ROTC’s are located. I have yet to understand how making those in the ROTC feel bad and how ruining the lawn actually accomplishes anything.
In my mind, those idiots at my school and your friends are of the same type.
Funnily enough, my father-in-law, a retired Lieutenant Colonel and Vietnam vet, also a rabid conservative, thinks this war is wrong and being fought for the wrong reasons.
I am reminded of something I’ve heard from various soldiers, usually in response to a flag-burning or similar, about how people should remember that many men (and some women) fought and died to enable us to have the freedom to protest. I can’t think of anything more disrespectful to their memories than to piss away those freedoms so dearly bought, just for the sake of “morale”.
Answer to the OP: yes, you can be against a government leadership’s policies yet support the military both as “the men and women in uniform” AND as a necessary institution that has a legitimate reason for having developed particular ways and means of doing things.
The expansion of definition, because you need NOT be a pacifist to oppose a particular war, or even specifically how that particular war is being conducted.
And back when I did my Reserve time, my attitude was that if called I will faithfully pursue my mission, to death if need be, but that I’d rather know where I stood than go in propped up by lies and illusions.
I don’t believe I ever said that citizens must suspend their critcal faculties. If, after an honest appraisal of the facts, a citizen feels that his conscience dictates protest, well, that’s one of the freedoms the military defends.
However, when deciding on a course of action, it’s important to have an understanding of the consequences, as well. If you decide to publically protest the war, I’ll assume you feel that the good that may result outweighs the negative effects. But make no mistake, there will be negative effects.
**
It’s swell that you are sorry, but that doesn’t make the effects of your actions any easier for those of us who have to deal with them.
Actually, if you’ll read my above post, I reference just such an investigation into the motives of the fighting soldier. The book, “For Cause and Comrades, why men fought in the Civil War”, is by James McPherson, a very highly respected military historian. He concludes that both belief in cause and support from home are both vitally important to morale and combat effectiveness. Which studies exactly are you referring to?
I’m interested to hear the source of your information. The references I have paint rather a different story. “America: A concise history”, by Henretta, Brody and Dumenil has this to say "Washington’s army retreated to Valley Forge…where about 12,000 soldiers and hundreds of camp followers suffered horribly.
“The army…now begins to grow sickly” a surgeon confided to his diary. “Poor food-hard lodging-cold weather-fatigue-nasty clothes-nasty cookery…Why are we sent here to starve and freeze?”
By spring, a thousand of his hungry soldiers had vanished into the countryside, and another 3,000 had died of malnutrition and disease, along with scores of camp followers. One winter at Valley Forge took as many American lives as had two years of fighting against General Howe."
You’re so very welcome, dear. And I am, of course, so grateful that you magnaminously grant your fellow citizens the right to make up their own minds. Big of you. Of course it would help just the teensiest bit if you hadn’t added the rider that anyone who disagrees and actually SAYS so openly just contributes to the death of soldiers.
Why, someone low-minded could, though I’m sure no one would, try to make a case that, in your scenario, anyone even questioning the government is behaving traitorously! After all, since McPherson–a really, really respected historian–claims such a direct, causitive link between the dastardly act of actually questioning governmental policies, openly, right out in public, and soldiers being killed in war, that by-gum proves it, right? No doubt about that one, no siree!
My, what an unsubtle little piece of blackmail, based on smoke and mirrors. But nice try anyway.
High school textbooks are not known for their rigourous attention to detail or factual accuracy.
There is NO common consensus about what happened at Valley Forge, and any source that pegs starvation deaths at a nice round number like 3,000 is either A) making it up, or B) getting the number from another textbook that’s making it up.
Please don’t put words in my mouth. Part of the reason my husband and I serve is to defend the right of citizens to question the government. And, if you note, in an earlier post I specifically said I don’t equate protest with a lack of patriotism. But whether you will it or not, public opinion has an effect of military performance. All I want is for people to take that into account when making their decisions.
And if you have access to reputable information that proves me wrong, please, feel free. Until then I choose to rely not only on personal experience, but on the opinions of people (including McPherson) who have spent their professional lives studying the question at hand.
It’s actually a reccomended reading from a graduate level history course, written by PhDs in the field. I’ll agree that historians can disagree on details, but there is a fairly common consensus in the field about what happened at Valley Forge. If you have references that say anything radically different, I’d be very interested to hear about it.
The soldiers didn’t have great food, or food in plentiful quantities, but they did not die of starvation.
There are many books on the Revolutionary War, and biographes of Washington which have the Valley Forge story in them, and I suggest you might want to check some of them out.
Never get your history just from one book. Read many, sort through what seems contradictory-- in this way, you can come closer to the truth.
I am against the war and find it to be a pitiful strategy for the pro-war (not all, I know) people use the idea that if you are against the war you are automatically against the troops, a very bad thing. But of course there are few “pro war” rallies, only “support our troops but let’s all kill Saddam” rallies.