Re: OT: Bring Troops Home vs Support Our Troops


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
> On 25 Sep 2005 12:09:09 -0700, chuckgould.chuck@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >You don't have to serve to know that people do not want to be wasted
> >and misled, or to understand that wasting and misleading people is not
> >supporting them.
>
> I had to think about this for a while and when Eisboch posted his
> reply, this finally came out from it's hiding place.
>
> Your statement assumes that soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are
> being misled or being wasted.
>
> On a personal level, nothing could be further from the truth. These
> men and women are being led by some of the smartest and savvy NCOs and
> Officers I've ever heard of. The ones that I've talked to don't
> believe their lives are being wasted as they perceive their efforts to
> be noble and rewarding. I get to talk to a lot of these troops
> because I'm involved in a support network and communicate with a lot
> of local troops via email
>
> Yes, there have been errors and incidents that, rightfully so, have
> marred and dulled the tarnish on a noble effort, but I would submit
> that having a dog snarling at your crotch or being heaped in a naked
> pig pile is one hell of a lot different that having your head cut off
> with a dull blade. And to tell the truth, the Iraqi incidents paled
> in comparison to some of the stunts The Company and Tiger Squads
> pulled during the Vietnam War.
>
> So, to conclude and with all due respect, having served myself in a
> time of combat, I'm afraid that you are wrong and Eisboch is right -
> you do have to have served to understand.


Nonsense.

I posted a list of things I feel we should do and should not do when
"supporting our troops".

With the exception of using taxpayer money to allow Cheney's company to
pay mercenaries 4-5 times the salary of enlisted GI's taking the same
risks, I never really mentioned Iraq. I never mentioned George Bush.

Why would there be some bunch of apologies, explanations, or
justifications centering around Iraq? Do some people believe that
examples of the abuses I cited may be taking place there? Why would
that be? Fer krissake, I said, "Yes, we *should* support out troops!"
Now I'm told I'm not qualified to feel we should support our troops
because I have never been in the armed forces? That's absurd. If you
want to apply that standard, you would need to take a close look at the
top two guys in the Administration- one never served and the other sort
of shirked and sort of served depending upon which version of the truth
once cares to subscribe to.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Bring Troops Home vs Support Our Troops
    ... >>> Some are asking for an end to a war and to bring our troops home. ... >>> bring troops home and out of harms way is not supporting our troops. ... >>> American's (never been part of a physical protest myself), ... >>> individual soldier alone. ...
    (rec.boats)
  • Do YOU really support the troop?
    ... For many Americans, "supporting the troops" is an abstract concept, a broad ... It is a way of life. ...
    (rec.autos.simulators)
  • Re: Why Obamas proposals are close to worthless
    ... right-wing cess pool than his old pal Dick Morris: ... The article states that military leaders in Afghanistan favored ... additional troops in his report. ... stopped supporting the identical policies that they previously supported. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: OT: Bring Troops Home vs Support Our Troops
    ... >>> Supporting our troops means using our military might as a final resort, ... >>> inch thick enlistment contract (and asking him or her to sign up over ... >>> risk life attempting to keep civil peace. ...
    (rec.boats)
  • Re: Now theres a different take.
    ... I kinda think there will be more truth to that than ... For some, ignorance is a virtue. ... Why do you not understand the position of the troops when they say they don't want to have to worry about the possibility of dealing with an injured comrade that might have a much higher chance of being AIDS infected? ... it isn't just for homosexuals anymore. ...
    (soc.retirement)