We Support the Troops, But...

June 1, 2006 | Joe Stener

[mikemach5]

Kerry was nothing but a spoiled brat that never held a real job in his life and he resented the hell out of having to serve.

The only reason he served (in VietNam, no less!) was because JFK served. As soon as the public opinion tide seemed to be turning (and I said seemed to because I don't for a second believe that VietNam was as unpopular a war as the establishment-Left makes it out to be), he became anti-war. The first (and ultimate) flip-flop which would define his political strategy for the rest of his life.

[Dove34wolfe]

The mission of the war is very important. If you don't support the mission, then you ultimately find yourself devaluing the troops sacrifice. You are saying to those that gave their lives that they threw them away instead of recognizing that they gave their live in the fight for freedom and safety in both our country and in the countries they are fighting in.

How can you support the troops when you are saying that they threw their lives away for no reason, for big oil, for Bush's personal war or any other unprincipled reason? By not supporting the mission you insult the troops by scoffing at the very principles they died for.

[screw boll]

"Yet another person who has been reading my blogs."

No, I did nod see your Blog. However, I will check it out if you post a URL. Thanks

[stuartcr]

I believe so..

[papertyger]

This must be an example of how people think differently about things.

Actually, I think it's an example of duplicity, and plausible deniability.

[stuartcr]

No, you do not ultimately find yourself devaluing the troops sacrifice. The sacrifice is made, regardless of the reason.

I am saying to the troops that gave their lives...thank you, and good job. Just as we have said in all our wars.

I am not saying that they threw their lives away...I am saying that they did what they were supposed to do, as we all have. I am not insulting the troops, just as I did not feel insulted after VN.

All those things you mention, are what you are saying other peoples words and actions mean.

[stuartcr]

We must think differently then.

[D1X1E]

They do support each other but they are the ones MSM always tries to get for comments in hopes they will say something negative about the war and/or the president.

[eleni121]

With Liberal lefties there is always a BUT because it's all relative...anything goes depending on time and place and people. No absolutes..and absolutely no morality.

[papertyger]

Criticising the mission, has nothing to do with the troops, they did not create the mission.

Yes it does. It is well understood that troops are not exempted by claiming "I was following orders." If they perform the mission, they are responsible for performing the mission.

There is no middle ground to hide on.

Giving assent to this kind of duplicity is "passive" treason, because you know what the active promoters are trying to achieve.

[papertyger]

It's a relative, right?

What's the difference between betraying your country over some Mata Hari you've fallen in love with, or betraying it over a relative that refuses to acknowledge their betrayal is betrayal?

[papertyger]

We must think differently then.

Gratuitous "denial" is not "thinking." I've already laid out my position on the question...on what basis do you deny it?

[stuartcr]

That sounds like it's the MSM's fault, not that a democrat cannot support our troops. Since you agree that the troops which happen to be democrats support each other, then, it would appear that someone can support the troops, but not the mission.

[rightinthemiddle]

LOL!

It was a typo...shoud have said "It's ALL realtive, right."

On-going communication I have going with stuartcr. He thinks everything is "relative." Shades of gray, that sort of thing.

I don't.

[operation clinton cleanup]

[Blzbba]

"Did you root for your fellow Americans to lose, because that's what motivates these "Troop Supporters"?"


I didn't "root" for failure when Clintax was CIC nor now. But that was NOT my question and thanks for NOT answering it.

[stuartcr]

Obviously, we disagree.

If they perform the mission, then they have done their job, regardless of what the mission is, and they deserve our support.

[SE Mom]

You CANNOT support the troops without supporting their mission. The moment you begin splitting those hairs, the criticosm of the mission is an implicit criticism of the troops.

---

BRAVO Sofa...This cannot be stated often enough.

[MEGoody]

(In my best John Kerry imitation) Liberals supported the troops before they didn't support the troops.

[stuartcr]

I have no idea what you are getting at, please explain.