Why should I support 'the troops'?

[Erik Mesoy]

I know the status quo. 'Liberals' are allowed to righteously oppose the war, on the condition that they support the troops. 'Conservatives' get to righteously say "oh noes unAmerican!" at anyone who doesn't support the troops.

But the status quo is breaking down. The 'conservatives' are saying unpatriotic and unamerican at the drop of a hat. The soldiers aren't supporting the troops. And when the 'liberals' tried to assign blame for the Abu Ghraib (warning: images) scandal at command level, the 'conservatives' insisted that it was just a few bad apples among the common soldiers.

"I was following orders" is establishedly not a valid defense. I can drop names: Medina standard, Nuremberg trials, the lot. What it comes down to is that 'the troops' are either knowingly (ir)responsible for their actions, or ignorant (in the technical, not pejorative, sense) of the above.

I will no longer support 'the troops'. (If you disagree with me, "NINELEVEN!" Because that's the sort of emotional invective 'supporting the troops' has been degraded to.) From now on, I will support individual soldiers with faces, names and decent records.
Not the soldiers who 'got a little of their own back on the filthy terrorists'. The USA claims to be of better moral fiber; how about we cleave to that instead of harming people for their ethnicity?
Not the soldiers who shot first in a crowded situation because they didn't want to die. The soldiers aren't in Iraq to fight for their lives; they're (supposedly) upholding American ideals, and as the 'conservatives' have chanted so often, an ideal that you won't uphold under pressure is merely cowardice with big words.
Not even the soldiers with insufficient body armor, supplies and weapons. Injustice done to one does not justify one's perpetration of injustice on another, and being in a miserable situation earns my pity/sympathy, not support.

And since you're bound to ask... Yes, I would uphold my ideals and my view of what is right up to a quick death. I made my peace with Death long ago. I planned my funeral when I was sixteen. If I should be the last person willing to die for an ideal, good riddance, world.

(DISCLAIMER: It's 0100 hours and I've been up all night recovering from a sugar high. I'm abstractly aware that I tend to make up rants when posting like this, but I can't see what's wrong with my post right now, and I want responses and criticism. 'Tomorrow' I'll probably be willing to retract half of what I said above.)

PPS: Sorry, sorry, sorry, Taliesin. I hope you don't get associated with this view simply because of April Fools' Week.

 

[jamiethearcher]

we support the troops becuase they bleed and die, in a crappy job, so that we have the right to talk about stupid crap on webforums like this.

Iraq might not be about these rights, but the troops don't get to pick where they are sent.

We support the troops becuase we didn't in vietnam, and getting spit on when you returned from a horrible war didn't really help the transition process.

 

[MattJek]

Cause they got suckered into a raw deal. They were expected to be serving and protecting their country. No one told them they'd be dying for oil and greed.

 

[Inqvisitor]

Everyone else can sit here and whine about the injustice of the war but these are the men who are actually being killed and maimed thanks to Bush and his web of deceit. I support the troops. Bring them all home now.

 

[Kozmos]

You are supposed to support Emperor Bush.Or he will send his apprentice Darth Rice after you.

 

[Cuivienen]

Everyone else can sit here and whine about the injustice of the war but these are the men who are actually being killed and maimed thanks to Bush and his web of deceit. I support the troops. Bring them all home now.

What he said.

 

[Silent Spectre]

Everyone else can sit here and whine about the injustice of the war but these are the men who are actually being killed and maimed thanks to Bush and his web of deceit. I support the troops. Bring them all home now.

I support the troops and hope they live through this nightmare. I do not however, support their mission, and I would hope they are brought back to prevent a tragic loss of life, more than we already have.

 

[Riesstiu IV]

I support them not dieing for a worthless cause.

 

[Red Stranger]

Don't blame it on the sugar high. If you don't like America, say you don't like America. The sugar high doesn't alter your true feelings. I get sugar highs all the time, but you don't see me saying these kind of things.

 

[pboily]

The only unconditionnal support/love I have is for my daughter. For everybody else, it's on a case-by-case basis (should they even care to have my unconditionnal support/love).

 

[blackheart]

Don't blame it on the sugar high. If you don't like America, say you don't like America. The sugar high doesn't alter your true feelings. I get sugar highs all the time, but you don't see me saying these kind of things.

Look past the sugar high. He is talking about more than politics.

I will no longer support 'the troops'. (If you disagree with me, "NINELEVEN!" Because that's the sort of emotional invective 'supporting the troops' has been degraded to.) From now on, I will support individual soldiers with faces, names and decent records.
Not the soldiers who 'got a little of their own back on the filthy terrorists'.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

The only unconditionnal support/love I have is for my daughter. For everybody else, it's on a case-by-case basis (should they even care to have my unconditionnal support/love).

Even your wife?

But yes, I'm not big on unconditional allegiance to groups of people. Ideas maybe, but there's no such thing as unconditional allegiance to an idea anyway, not unless one is being a blind ideologue.

 

[Red Stranger]

Remember, those soldiers are protecting you unconditionally.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

They are offering to protect unconditionally. However, that does not make, say, the Iraqi mission one of protecting the American people.

The troops are being misused for the mission, and you are encouraging their misuse and abuse by political powers.

 

[Red Stranger]

In that case you should still support the troop, and not support the Congress that approved the Iraqi mission.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

@jamie, Matt:

we support the troops becuase they bleed and die, in a crappy job, so that we have the right to talk about stupid crap on webforums like this.

Cause they got suckered into a raw deal. They were expected to be serving and protecting their country. No one told them they'd be dying for oil and greed.

Like I said in the first link, soldiers are leaving. According the the Medina standard and whatnot else, they are considered responsible for what they're doing. They are either choosing to die for oil and greed, or ignorant.


@Inqvisitor, Cuivenen:

I support the troops. Bring them all home now.

The troops are voluntarily or unknowingly staying. I don't want to be forced support that.


Riesstiu IV:

I support them not dieing for a worthless cause.

Me too. And the SAS soldier chose to do just that. He wouldn't put up with the cause, so he left.


Red Stranger:

Don't blame it on the sugar high. If you don't like America, say you don't like America. The sugar high doesn't alter your true feelings. I get sugar highs all the time, but you don't see me saying these kind of things.

I won't say that, because it isn't true. I don't like the flip-flopping and attempted retroactive justification for the war, and I don't like the corruption slowly being revealed, but that's not what this is about. This is about the fact that the troops are responsible for their own conduct. They may not say "I was following orders" or "I was ordered to Iraq". And like I said in my opening post, the status quo is breaking down, so I want to make it clear that I no longer support 'the troops'. That's been a taboo that I want to bring down.


blackheart:

Look past the sugar high. He is talking about more than politics.

Actually, I wasn't talking about politics at all, except as far as they decree the soldiers to be responsible for their own actions¹. I'm trying to break the stigma associated with 'not supporting the troops', because I think it's nothing but a cheap way to score political points. I demand that it be acceptable not to support the troops.

¹ Changing this while retaining a volunteer army would be a bad idea. You'd have a group of society's more desperate and jingoistic men who wouldn't be punished for following warcrime orders.

Will work on more replies later...

 

[pboily]

Even your wife?

But yes, I'm not big on unconditional allegiance to groups of people. Ideas maybe, but there's no such thing as unconditional allegiance to an idea anyway, not unless one is being a blind ideologue.

Yes, which could go a long way towards explaining why she is now my ex-wife...

 

[pboily]

Remember, those soldiers are protecting you unconditionally.

Not true. If it came down between either saving his life or mine, which do you think he will pick? It's not unconditionnal. He might chose to save some people's life over his (President, wife, etc...), but mine isn't on that list.

In any situation, if it came down to either saving my life or my daughter's, I would save my daughter and not think about it twice. That's unconditionnal. There is not a person alive who's life I would save before my daughter.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

Remember, those soldiers are protecting you unconditionally.

They do the job for free do they? And given a choice between stationing an outpost in Iraq or a base in America, they choose Iraq?

 

[Rik Meleet]

Don't blame it on the sugar high. If you don't like America, say you don't like America. The sugar high doesn't alter your true feelings. I get sugar highs all the time, but you don't see me saying these kind of things.

He clearly has not said "I don't like America"; so he probably doesn't dislike America.

As far as I understand his point; he is wondering why he should unconditionally support the troops and that is a valid question. In the USA there is no conscription, so if one really doesn't want to be in the army, that person doesn't have to be there. So the ones that are in Iraq are there voluntarily (directly or indirectly) and thus personally responsible for their actions. Both good and bad. But that still doesn't make it compulsory to blindly support an occupying army.