Bear-Nenno doesn’t have to cite numbers or polls he merely stated the fact that there are Americans who actively wish American soldiers to die in Iraq,and there have been postings to that effect on this very M.B.
As to what you describe as an urban legend about U.S. soldiers returning home and being spat on ,if you take the time to look through some news footage of that era you’ll not only find plenty of examples of that but a lot worse .
I remember watching it on t.v. at the time and wondering how a nation could do that to its own soldiers who weren’t even volunteers at that.
I completely support the right of people to express their disapproval of a war against the government even if I personally disagree with them.
But it is indefensible to take it out on the poor bastards who are having to fight the war and who most probably dont wish to be there in the first place.
I personally am an ex Brit. soldier who thinks that we shouldn’t have gone in to Iraq and that we were lied to about WMDs.
I like to quote Voyager’s amendment to Godwin’s Law: “Godwin’s Law no longer applies when they start building concentration camps.” Or in other words, when people start doing some of the things that the Nazis actually did, it’s not invalid to point that out.
I’d also like to point out that one important part of preventing something like Nazism from rising again, is recognizing and stopping a slide in that direction before it gets that far. Pretending that the Nazis were some kind of unique demons in human history that no one else deserves comparison to does not help this. “Godwin’s Law” has become, in large part, what the comparisons to Nazis it mocks used to be; a means of shouting down the other side.
Godwin’s Law is also known as* “reductio ad Hitlerium”* or in this case “reductio ad Göringem”. (Why Göringem you ask? Dunno. . . Somehow that fat, murderous, greedy tub of Nazi shit strikes me as a thrid declension noun in Latin. Call it a whim. )
I note with interest that the Wiki article on Godwin’s Law says: However, Godwin’s law itself can be abused, as a distraction or diversion, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent’s argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate. A 2005 Reason magazine article argued that Godwin’s law is often misused to ridicule even valid comparisons.
Let’s see. I used the comparison in a discussion that asks why proponents of a war use the argument that we have to “support our troops” and an OP that asks whether support for “our troops” means anything since anyone but a sadist or a misanthrope wants kids in the service not to get killed.
I am saying that it is a smoke-screen for “support our war”.
Do you suppose a comparison with the Nazis using the same reasoning to get public support, and Göring even admitting it in so many words at Nuremberg, might be a WEE BIT APPROPRIATE and valid here?
And I’m saying that unless there are millions and millions of them and/or prominent politicians and/or highly rated TV pundits saying that, then the backlash on the right–millions and millions of people, prominent politicians, highly rated TV pundits, all angrily denouncing those who don’t support the troops–is vastly out of proportion with the actual scope of the problem.
And how does that compare with the situation this time around? Obviously the point is to liken todays war opponents with those you describe.
While I am looking for footage, check out this book of compiled columns of a Chicago Tribune reporter who asked Viet Nam vets their experiences upon returning. I’ll try to find some video to go with it.
Although I don’t have any films of it happening, I served with many soldiers who served in Viet Nam. Most of them recount stories of coming home to protesters at the airport, screaming, swearing at them, flipping them off, calling them rapists and baby-killers. And two of the men said that they got spit on while walking down the streets in their home towns. These were all men who had been drafted so it wasn’t like they wanted to be there. They had no choice: they could serve or break the law.
It seems like the non-support people today vilify the current troops because they volunteered to join the service during the time of an unpopular war. Some may have joined because they didn’t feel there were financial opportunities available for them to get ahead. Some because it provided them easier access to education. Some joined because of the dishonest propaganda about WMDs, 9/11 and al Queda. Some joined because it was a family tradition. Some joined because they support their country and want to do what they can to help.
Whatever reason they chose to join, I don’t care. As I said previously, before they were soldiers they were our family and friends and I will never turn my back on them.
)