Can you support the troops if you don't support the war?

[margotb822]

Poll question: Can you support the troops if you don't support the war?

Many people believe that they only way Congress can halt this administration's war in Iraq is to cut the funding. Others argue that cutting the funding would only hurt the troops, but it wouldn't slow down the Bush war machine. What do you believe? Are the troops separate from the war? Can you support one without support the other?

[LWolf]

1. Cutting the funding ends the war.

Ending the war and bringing the troops home is the best kind of support I can conceive of.

[ileus]

12. When we cut the funding do we just leave them and the equipment there?

I mean really why not just put a stop payment on the war today and just leave all personnel and equipment there. Why spend another dollar there...period. The troops are resourceful they could sell their junk and make it to an airport somewhere for a plane ticket.

[LWolf]

22. What an asinine suggestion.

I'm sorry, but it is. Not only that, but it makes no point.

It costs less to bring them home than to leave them there with no exit plan.

It costs more lives to leave them there, too.

I'll stand by what I said: Bringing them home is the best way to support them.

[backscatter712]

41. After Congress cuts funding, there's still enough to get home.

There's a big pipeline of appropriations, purchases, supply lines, etc. between Congress and the battlefield, meaning that if Congress cut off the funding tomorrow, there would be enough resources in terms of money, food, fuel, weapons, ammo, etc. that the military could set up a disciplined, well-defended redeployment back to the United States.

Of course, since that fact never seems to enter the discussions in Congress, an alternative would be for the House to use its power of the purse and allocate exactly enough money to pay for a redeployment of troops and equipment in Iraq back to the U.S., and require that this money be used by the Executive Branch for that purpose, on pain of impeachment.

But it looks like we have too many psychopathic subhumans and cowardly, self-serving wastes of skin occupying our Congress that they're not going to do that either.

[proud2BlibKansan]

51. what a stupid comment

Funding the war is killing the troops.

[acmavm]

2. That's a really hard call. I suppose I could ask who's physically in Iraq

shooting innocent civilians, raping women, and killing kids? I suppose I could ask why if "I was just following orders' wasn't supposed to work for Germans, why should it work now? I suppose I could wonder why economically strapped American who are scraping to get by, in some case aren't really getting by, should expect to pay for the continuation of an illegal occupation and buy food and armor for the people committing all of the above. I don't know.

I do know that you won't find a rich republican's sons over there (except for that fucking nutball John McCain).

I don't know.

[margotb822]

11. McCain's son is at the Naval Academy

He's going to graduate next year, and unless he becomes a Marine, he will never set foot on the ground. And, somehow, I don't see a McCain letting his son go into that situation...

[acmavm]

15. Try not to be so annoying please

McCain's Marine son returns from Iraq
Source: CNN
URL Source: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/mccains-marine-son-returns-from-iraq-2/
Published: Feb 14, 2008
Author: Dana Bash and Deirdre Walsh
Post Date: 2008-02-14 11:19:23 by B L Z Bubb
10 Comments


Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who almost always refuses to speak on the campaign trail about his son serving in the military, got a rousing reception Wednesday when he told a private gathering of House Republican congressman that his son Jimmy — whose Marine unit had been deployed to Iraq — had arrived home from safely.

According to three GOP sources present at the closed meeting of the House Republican Conference, the Arizona senator said that when his son first arrived in the country, he reported seeing IEDs everywhere — but when he recently left, some seven months later, Iraq had become so safe he was handing out soccer balls.

Click for Full Text!

[margotb822]

23. No need to be so rude

McCain has two sons. One is at the Naval Academy, one is a Marine. We each had half the story.

[acmavm]

24. No Margot, you didn't have shit but a condescending attitude based on

total ignorance of the facts. I had the facts.

Got here on the 31st did you? You sure have quite the attitude for someone just learning (but apparently not very well) how to play the game.

[smoogatz]

3. Option 5: It's a bullshit question.

Here's why: first, what do you mean by "supporting the troops?" If you're going to be intellectually honest, you can't just throw around catch-phrases without defining them. Support the troops how? I want them to be brought home safe and sound: does that count?

Second: the premise of the question implies that it might not be possible to both "support the troops" and want the war to end. One of your answers implies that it might be possible that "the troops" and the war are the same thing. Both implications are clearly false: it's eminently possible to "support the troops" while opposing the war (most Americans do just that), and it's not possible that the war and "the troops" are the same thing: they're obviously different—"troops" are people, war is an event or a condition. But just by posing the question, you conflate them.

[uppityperson]

7. Agree. Change my vote "yes" to "other"

What does "support the troops" mean?

[azurnoir]

4. Voted maybe

there is a grey area, when it comes to troops who were enlisted in 2003 and are still being deployed yes I can support them, however that "support" becomes strained when it comes to more recent enlistments that knew where they were going and what they were going for when they joined up, it is hard to support or feel much sympathy for troops who joined to go "kill them some "sand ni**ers" 'cause it's good for 'Murika or as a "in yer face Mommy and Daddy"

[Arctic Dave]

34. My thought too.

If they were in when this started I will give them slack. But the truth about this CF has been out for some time. I have no sympathy for anyone involved wether your a frontline or a REMF.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. Gotta Sport Da Troops!

I really hate this framing. I do not support sending our troops overseas to murder foreigners for no good reason. I support bringing all of our forces back home and completely restructuring our military position in the world.

Put yourself in Germany 1941. Ask yourself the same question. Oh I know 'Godwin's Law'. Screw that. We've caused the death of somewhere around 1,000,000 Iraqis so far with no end in sight. How much troop-sportin do we have to do before we are simply accomplices?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

9. Succinct, and spot-on.

:thumbsup:

[mike_c]

14. excellent response!

My feelings exactly. The war against Iraq is a war crime, so just who are the criminals responsible for the crime? All Americans are CRIMINALLY responsible IMO-- and that includes "the troops."

[Karenina]

25. That point was passed after Abu Ghraib.

The ONLY support American in Iraq need is that which gets them the FUCK outta there and treats their wounds, be they physical, mental, emotional or spiritual.

[treestar]

40. Absolutely. The warmongers "use" the troops as their excuse

And it is really low of them, since they are the one that have them in danger for no justifiable reason. They are the ones who are worse, just using the fact that someone has to fight a war as an alleged excuse for the war.

These evil people should not be allowed to continue to frame things this way. They put us on the defensive when they have no right to.

[greenvpi]

6. No! The troops are what give Bush his power!

If they had not volunteered (and he's been President for over seven years so at this point they are all knew what they were getting into when they signed-up or renewed) to serve him personally. While all Bush does is talk and order, these troops are the ones who are actually doing the atrocities.

[Horse with no Name]

8. Not entirely correct

My brother signed up under Clinton.
You do realize we have a considerable amount of enlisted military who have been active MORE than 7 years? :eyes:

[greenvpi]

13. But why does your brother support Bush?

Why? Aren't you ashamed of his actions? He could have not signed-up again.

[Horse with no Name]

17. Stop loss.

Educate yourself. You look stupid.

[Arctic Dave]

35. Tell the military, Up Yours

Stop Loss only works if you stay. Have some sense, leave. When its all said and done what will you say, I didn't agree with the war but I keep on supporting it. Just because the politicians have no spine to end it I think the guys on the front line would.

[margotb822]

39. It's not like you can get up and walk out of Iraq

If people are deployed when their commitment is up, they must complete the tour. Even if they get extended, there's no out. One unit was almost 30% past the end of active service date before they came home. And that is the only reason why they didn't get extended a third time.

[Arctic Dave]

42. Right, once you are there

you are there, but I'm talking about before you go. If more people were like Lt. Watada it would be very difficult to occupy a country.

I think this T.S.O.L. song sums it up "Suppose they gave a war and no one comes".

[margotb822]

45. I've thought about it

But I'm in the Navy, who am I to complain. I am an objector, but I'm not in harm's way. As far as walking away, I like being an American, so deserting is out of the question. I could commit crimes in America, but then I'd be worse off if I got kicked out. So, I just keep working and hoping that my next tour isn't in Bahrain or Qatar. It's definitely hard to get out before your time is up.

I think that a lot of military training is akin to brain washing, so people are fed what the government wants them to know. As stereotypical as this sounds, its hard to find liberals in the military (but, its getting easier). So, its not til people get over there that they realize how much bs they're being fed by the conservative war machine. That's just what I've observed.

Oh, and then there are the people that will never change their minds because they need to justify their jobs, regardless of what the reality is. I have nothing to say about those people. I won't claim to understand them (but, I'm sure they believe Saddam caused 9/11).

[Arctic Dave]

46. Bravo Zulu for your service

I was in the same place almost 20 years ago. Thats right, we've been in that place for a long time. If someone thinks this is about 9/11 tell to put down the crack pipe.
Next time you are leaving the Gulf and you are in the most narrow part of the straight look about 170 degrees aft. You will see a rock formation that resembles the aft end of ship sticking out the water as if the front end was submerged. We named it "sinking ship rock",(I never said we were creative)I think that rock formation pretty much sums up the entire operation there.

[margotb822]

48. Roger that

Well, I hope there won't be a next time, but if I am, I'll definitely remember that.

[Marr]

18. That's bullshit.

People join the military for lots of reasons, mostly economic.

[Marr]

10. Can you support both the troops AND this occupation?

I think THAT'S the unsupportable position. If you support this occupation (and it's an occupation, not a war), then you're either very ignorant about what's going on and how our military is being abused, or you just care more about a political party and it's shallow slogans.

In either case, you don't support the troops.

[margotb822]

19. Would you think I'm ignorant if I told you

I'm in the Navy (and I joined before 9/11). Granted, I am not fighting on the ground, but I have many friends that are. I am personally disgusted by the war in Iraq and I believe that we never had a right to be in Iraq. I believe that our military is for our protection and should only be used as a last resort. Especially with the growth of technology, it isn't always necessary to put 'boots on the ground.' However, I know the troops that are over there don't have the protection they need and are at a greater risk. My best friend is in the Army (also joined before 9/11) and is deploying soon for 15 months. Of course, I don't want her to be there and in harm's way, but since she is over there, I want her to have the best protection possible. So to me, supporting the troops means two things: ensuring they have the protective equipment they need while deployed and not blaming them for the administration's mistakes. Many people join the military for reasons other than killing (and many don't deploy to Iraq). Money for school, money in general, to get some discipline and focus are all reasons why people join. I am definitely conflicted, which is why I posed this question.

[Marr]

21. Why would I think you were ignorant?

Unless you're rooting for this occupation, which you said you aren't. I was in myself, as were a lot of other DUers. I have friends over there, and many of my friends have family there. I'd bet you cash you'll find alot more people with "skin in the game", as they say in this crowd than you ever will in a pro-Bush crowd.

My idea of supporting the troops is similar to yours. You don't lie to them, and you don't ask them to sacrifice their lives to test out stupid ass foreign policy theories dreamed up by lunatics, or to service your ego, or because being a "war president" will help your political party during election time, etc.

[margotb822]

26. Haha, I don't know

According to many of the people here, this was a stupid question. So of course, I must be ignorant about the situation in Iraq. I'm glad to find someone who is willing to discuss, and not just toss insults around.

[Marr]

27. Oh yeah? Well screw you!

;)

Haha, just kidding.

[margotb822]

37. Real Nice

You had me for a second though!

[stray cat]

16. Of course!

We just have to vote a dem into office in place of Bush et al

[TwilightGardener]

20. Is my husband a troop? Yes. Do I support him? Yes. Do I support the Iraq Occupation? No.

There's your answer.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

28. They are all there voluntarily since the war has been going on for 5 yrs they could have gotten out.

They have made the conscious choice to remain in the military and that entails supporting an illegal war. They asked for it, so I hope they enjoy the money and the benefits of being a mercenary who has sold their soul to Bushco. This ain't like Vietnam where people were conscripted against their will and paid a pittance.Most of these people have made a financial decision where they can make more money by having blood on their hands then they could earn in civilian life. Most everybody supports them through the huge taxpayer burden of keeping a military in combat operations apparently for the foreseeable future or even a hundred years if McCrazy is correct.

[w8liftinglady]

32. I don't think that's fair.

My son enlisted 2 weeks after 9/11,as did his best friend.when you are in,it's very difficult to get out,especially if others depend on you-your buddies.If you think guys are in it for the cash,you need to do some research on military pay.My son served 3 tours in the Middle East-once in Afghanistan and twice in Iraq.I am proud of him,and will support him and his buddies to my grave.I will condemn the civilians who have used him and profitted at his expense until I die,as well.

[margotb822]

38. Good point.

I went to the Naval Academy and was in months before 9/11 (and almost two years before Iraq). I still have two plus years until my commitment is up. Things were different when I started and I don't like where they are now. Many people enlist in the "join the Army or go to jail" situation of the economy (I had many in my division), so I applaud them for being responsible, getting a job and some discipline. I hate the wasteful government that exploits young people. And recruiters tell people that with certain jobs they won't have to deploy to Iraq, just to get them in the door. It's only after you're in that you find out how it really works.

[Hekate]

47. Your ignorance is astounding. nt

[proud patriot]

29. Yes ! See my yard

[tabasco]

30. You SUPPORT the troops by demanding they be sent to combat only to protect the Nation,

and not sent to wars for corporate profits!

Troops are in Iraq fighting and dying for Dick Cheney's portfolio!

I am not a pacifist. I was an Airborne Ranger and have a CIB. I supported military action in Afghanistan, i.e., go in, kick ass, get the hell out. Iraq is nothing but corporate profiteering and MURDER.

Hillary and all the other COWARDS who enabled this war have no business in government.

[w8liftinglady]

31. when I told a Neocon I was an anti-war activist,she accused me of not supporting the troops

In reality,Republicans are judged to be the most troop and Vet unfriendly group by many Veteran groups,such as IAVA and DAV.

[Ghost in the Machine]

33. The words in this graphic I made were spoken by an anonymous Iraq Vet

at an anti war rally. I wish I knew who it was so I could attribute it to him.

This one is signature size:



This one is bumper sticker size (if you want to print one out)



I don't even remember when or where the rally was, and I'm pretty sure I read about it here.

PEACE!

Ghost

[apocalypsehow]

36. I voted "yes, there is a difference" - because there is. I can support the young men and women who

serve, and still deplore the mission their superiors sent them on. The distinction is quite important.

[lonestarnot]

43. Yes.

[JosephSchmo]

44. I support the troops in the sense that I don't want them to die ...

I want them to come home healthy. That said, I don't support what they are doing.

[Hekate]

49. Veterans for Peace believes you can. It's the reason I became a supporter of VFP.

I can't post photos, but if you want to know more about my local chapter, google Arlington West Santa Barbara for an abundance of information.

It's imperative that in our minds and actions we separate the troops from the policy and the warmongers who have enslaved them. Because as it stands right now, our troops are virtually enslaved by being sent back to Iraq over and over and over.

Hekate
Associate member
VFP Chapter 54

[El Pinko]

50. I don't support or condemn the troops

I don't bleive in standing armies in peacetime, and the troops are not protecting my country, they are occupying a country they had no business invading in the first place, and action I opposed to the point of participating in several protests.

I'm FORCED to support them with my tax money, but I don't think I owe them any moral support - they are doing work which I am opposed to.

I don't condemn them either because they are indentured servants to a madman and have little say in the matter - they keep their boot on the neck of Iraq or they go to jail.

So the closest answer for me is "don't care". If the united states was attacked and our troops were defending us against that attack, I'd cheer them on louder than anyone.

But I did not sign on for an expansionist, imperialist military. Sorry.