Reply #13: He's just pointing out that these"generalization"

[haymaker]

posts regarding "the troops" are just that, generalizations. Don't try to lump the entire DU into some category that fits your, or someone else's right-wing agenda. If you don't think that calling all liberals "anti-troop" is part of the agenda, then maybe you do need to grow up.

As for the post yesterday about troops getting killed and whether it is a good thing or not, I believe the poster was making the point that if the US and the Boy King get relatively unscathed in their mission to change governments of a sovereign country, albeit while slaughtering thousands, civilians included, then they would probably be likely to do it again. And that you can take to the bank.

While I don't want ANY troops to be killed, I also don't want ANY civilians, children especially, to be slaughtered and maimed by our troops. And please don't lay that "collateral damage" dookey on me either. The beloved troops are probably a pretty good cross-section of the general population regarding morality. Don't try to tell me there aren't any cold-blooded killers over there causing more harm than good.

So, while I don't think the the "grow up" thing was completely necessary, the necessity of this thread also comes into question.