-Why do you always want to make love to me from behind? Is it because you’re pretending I’m a different person?
-Satan, your ass is enormous and red. Who am I gonna pretend you are - Liza Minelli?
And that just wouldn’t be cricket.
[McDonalds if the British had won]
Crew member: Please excuse my uncouthness good sir, wouldest thou like chips with that?
Customer: No thank you kind sir. I do, however, perceive that the young master may wish to partake in an amusement meal.
[/McDITBHW]
Kal: 
You know everyday I thank the Lord and the rebellious nature of the US that I don’t have to refer to my car’s trunk as a boot.
No, it’s because precious few people are “pro-war”.
Who the hell in their right minds sits around thinking, “Wow! I wanna see my guys kill other guys for the sport of it!”.
What’s difficult is that the troops are volunteers who mostly believe in the rightness of what they’re doing. More fundamentally, it’s a question of identity. What makes these men and women “the troops” is the actions they’re taking – actions that clayton_e disapproves of.
Furthermore, I don’t think clayton_e would favor steps supporting what the troops are doing. He would not be happy to see additional troops or more powerful weapons, so the troops could win the war more easily.
Being on the other side, I wouldn’t say, “I oppose the anti-war protests, but I support the protestors.” I don’t hate the protestors. I might support them as human beings. But, I don’t support them as protestors.
OTOH, I think the comment is a defence against an unfair attack. There’s nothing evil about opposing a war (though I disagree with opponents of this one.) It’s an unfair slur to accuse war opponents of “not supporting the troops.” ISTM that clayton_e’s formulation is designed to defend anti-war folk from an unfair attack. Since that attack is so unfair, maybe any defence is justified.
You’re starting to show glimmers here of the right idea, december… it’s not much farther from what you said above to agreeing that one can be against the war and still support the men who are called on to fight it.
I am one of these people. I live in a town which supports a U.S. Naval base. Two of our carriers (the U.S.S. Carl Vinson and the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln) are overseas right now, one in the Gulf and one stationed off of North Korea. I personally know people who are stationed on those boats. I personally know others who are serving in the armed forces right now, who are also over there. My wife has children in her classroom whose parents are currently serving in the Gulf.
I am against the war for exactly the reasons Coldfire mentioned. I am not against all war, but I am opposed to this war as unjustified. I feel that it has come about due to failed diplomacy and squandered international relations. I blame our current leadership for embroiling this country’s soldiers in an unnecessary war. I am against the politics of this war, and so I criticize the politicians who have engendered it.
My hope for the soldiers who are fighting, and for all the soldiers that are fighting right now, is that they fulfill the duty they’ve been given honorably and quickly, and that they come back safely. I hope they preserve their honor and their well-being. I hope that they succeed in their mission, so that they may return home.
So, please tell me, december, how I am not supporting the troops.
“Support the troops” does not mean “agree with the Bush Administration.” They are two separate things, and can exist independently of the other, or in concert.
And by the way, when you say that “most of the troops believe in the rightness of what they’re doing,” you might want to talk with them first. They made an agreement and are honoring the terms of that agreement, but I know a number of soldiers who are as doubtful about the reasons for this war as I am.
And even those who do support the reasons for this war, though we may disagree, know that they have my respect, my concern for their well-being… and my support. They know this because I’ve told them so.
So, remind me again how I’m not supporting the troops.
I do understand what people are trying to say when they say the support the troops but not the war, I believe many are sincere when they say it, and I commend them for wanting to separate the members of the military from the political process.
However. People who say this must understand, the vast majority of military members do not see it that way. They do not feel supported by people who are vehemently opposed to what they are doing, no matter how much those people protest that they also support the troops.
Glad to see that we don’t disagree that much, Avalonian. Here’s a question. You wrote
In a broad sense, the “duty they’ve been given” is:* win the war*. So, is it your position that even though the war was wrong, now that we’re in it, you do support the troops winning the war? Or, are you thinking of these soldiers duties in some more specific way?
It’s not just a job, it’s their moral calling. Is that it? You got a cite for that?
Some may have signed up for the very reason you mention.
Others joined for the training for their post-service careers. Still others (and mind you, I know a few of them) signed on because it was a job, probably the best they could do at the time.
And I’m certain a few of these fine men and women joined not believing there would actually be a war.
I am thinking in a more specific sense, since no soldier’s orders are as broad as “win the war.” They are told what to do on a daily basis, and their orders change often. They are fulfilling the duty they agreed to, and I honor them for that.
However, even if I accept your broader definition, I still support our troops winning the war. This is for two reasons: that it is a bit late to pull out of it now, and that I still want them to return home safely, for the reasons I outlined above.
My main concern is the Administration’s “win at all costs” stance, which could be costly in the form of casualties in our forces. But again, I cannot find reason to blame the soldiers for that, and it saddens me that many more may die or be injured before this is done.
So, do you still think that I, and others like me, are not supporting the troops?
Lucretia, I wonder if you’d care to back up your statement that “…the vast majority of military members do not see it that way. They do not feel supported by people who are vehemently opposed to what they are doing, no matter how much those people protest that they also support the troops.”?
In my experience (again, actually speaking to soldiers that I know), many people in the armed forces are intelligent and thoughtful. They are as capable of separating politics from their duty as I am. In short, they know that I respect and support them, even if I disagree with the reasons they are fighting.
So, do you have evidence to the contrary, that there’s this “vast majority” of troops who feel unsupported? Or, as I suspect, is that just what you’ve been told?
And if you think I’m just supporting my friends, you’re wrong. I encouraged my daughters to write letters to the parents of some of their friends who are currently serving overseas. Their letters were simple and sweet, and filled with hope. We sent them last Friday, as part of a classroom effort.
A local radio station was sponsoring an effort to send Girl Scout Cookies to the troops stationed in the Gulf a few weeks ago; we purchased 5 boxes and donated them to this effort. Do you think the soldiers who received those care that they were sent by someone who’s against the politics of war, or that they feel unsupported? Again, I challenge you to find evidence to the contrary.
I feel as Tamex does, that this “you must support the war to support our troops” mantra is little more than political strategy. It’s a hearts-and-minds campaign all over again, but right here in the U.S., trying to generate a contradiction for people against the war, when really there is no contradiction.
The soldiers I’ve talked to appreciate my support, and they respect my views, even if they disagree. I see no contradiction in this. I see no problem.
Anyone who believes “kicking ass” is a valid means of solving problems, for one. There are plenty of people who really seem to enjoy blowing “rag heads” to bits, seeming to think it’s all some kind of football game. Wasn’t it Toby Keith, red blooded American Country Star, who sang, “We’ll put a boot in your ass; it’s the American Way”??
Oh, wait, maybe their not in their right minds…
JOhn.
Fair enough. And being anti-this-war but pro-saving-our-troops-lives, I’m pondering what to do. Do I sit silently by and let what’s happening proceed, thus lending support to the thought that all of America is in support of the action? Do I continue to protest, knowing that our troops might be negatively impacted (and I understand that not being supported at home can be seriously distracting, and distracted soldiers are more apt to get hurt)? It’s something I’ve been trying to puzzle out for quite some time now (actually since Gulf War 1.0, when my brother was shipped out, thankfully to spend most of the war in Japan). I welcome your suggestions.
JOhn.
You know, I don’t have any sort of controlled scientific study to back me up. Nor, I suspect, do you. However, I have been a member of the military community for 18 years. I was active duty, my husband is active duty, all of my husband’s coworkers are active duty, a large portion of our friends are active duty or former military, we live on a military post and all of our neighbors have at least one active duty member in the household. We personally know at least 20 people who are deployed. I’m going to go ahead and guess that I’ve spoken to substantially more “soldiers I know” than you have. We regularly read many military publications such as the Army and Air Force times, as well as the post newletter.
So you are right, my opinion is based on “what I’ve been told”. What I’ve been told by the majority of people I work, live, and socialize, and correspond with every day, as well as what I read in publications aimed at the military audience.
I’m pretty confident my observations are valid.
Sometimes kicking ass is a valid means of solving a problem. Howeve, it is rarely the first option.
Sometimes the mere threat of kicking ass (or is it ass kicking?) is enough to get the desired result, as in:
“Little brother, clean your room or I’ll kick your ass!”
Sometimes it’s not:
“Hitler, leave those jews alone or we will kick your ass!”
So pardon me if I see where a little “kicking ass/ass kicking” can do the trick at times.
Fair enough. Would you agree that mine are as well? I still don’t feel that I’ve shown anything but support for our troops, despite my feelings about the war, and that’s pretty much affirmed by the people I know in the military, all of whom are aware of my stance on the war.
I note that you didn’t address the other things that I’ve done to show support for our soldiers. Would you also agree that I’ve shown support for soldiers beyond just words?
I’m interested, too, to see how you might respond to jkusters second post.
I don’t see that much difference between not supporting the war and not supporting the troops. However, I don’t consider either position to be dishonorable.
Tamex said:
[quote]
There was one asshat standing on a footbridge over the interstate this weekend who cut to the chase. His sign read “Give War A Chance”. I suppose I should respect him for his honesty.[\quote]
I saw a banner that said “We gave peace a chance, we got 9/11”
Another example of someone avoiding the “support our troops” euphemism… Not posting as a good argument, BTW, but debate if you like…
Damn, I thought I was getting somewhere…
OK, so which action that I described taking is unsupportive of troops? Is it talking to them and expressing my respect and support to their faces? Encouraging my girls to write letters to them? Oh wait… it was the Girl Scout cookies, wasn’t it? I bet soldiers loathe Girl Scout cookies! Yeah, I obviously hate the soldiers as much as I hate this war. Not much difference at all.
sigh
I give up.