"I Support The Troops But Not The War" - Doublespeak?

reply to post by justadood


At times a little division is just what the doctor ordered. Throws a few cautions to the wind. We don't all blthely follow. Resistence has to be widespread. Seeds have to be sown. Thoughts need to be kindled. Each has to do what they are able. We are in it together, but entirely alone.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


No, I don't think you do at all.

Being as angry as you are about it, I would imagine you are attempting to organize some sort of movement to help bring this machine to a screeching halt. I understand through my own experiences that if you've even tried you've been insulted and thrown out of every plausible place one would attend in hopes of beginning such a movement.

Then comes the problem where even if you are successful in creating that initial group, translating people into effective forms of direct action will only bring about war. Assuming you could maintain for any serious period of time you'd be losing sympathy quickly. This thread is a perfect example of how people have been brainwashed into allowing the State to have a monopoly on violence.

The "Support the Troops - Not the War" debate always interests me. Why distance yourself from the very people who have the ability and skills necessary to reshape your country? It would make more sense, to me, to reach out to them and attempt to organized some sort of Reformation movement or something.

Originally posted by 19872012
I ask you this - how are the current wars, or any war since 1945 at least, protecting my freedom of speech?

I'm sure a constitutionalist could answer that better than I so I'll just ask you a different question. If the SHTF who are you going to look to to protect you? Congress? The President? Martha Stewart? It's like the people that bash the cops. They're the first ones to dial 911 though if they need help. The bottom line is that the military personnel are serving the people. Just don't bash them for it.

reply to post by 19872012


Read my post again. I said "bashing the people". No war can "protect" you. It is the soldiers who do.

Then why do most soldiers support the war and defend the status quo?

I support the ones that do not, but the truth is, most do.

reply to post by 19872012


I have to disagree with you statement.

Maybe, most of them in your experience. In my experience most do no support the war.

Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
reply to post by 19872012

 

I have to disagree with you statement.

Maybe, most of them in your experience. In my experience most do no support the war.

Hmmmm, somebody find a poll...

really though, is the anti-war movement dead or something?

reply to post by 19872012


I'll believe it if Gallop says it, otherwise save yourself the key strokes.

I think the anti-war movement lost momentum because people started to realize what they would have to do to be heard and taken seriously by the State. No coffee shoppe revolutionary actually wants to see where that road leads.

reply to post by 19872012


Who cares what people think. I am of the opinion that people are weak and that's why they do not say what they want even if its right. To scared to be discriminated.

If you think the soldiers play a part in aiding wars that are illegal and unjust you have the right to voice that opinion.

There is NO case in life in this day and age where "following orders BLINDLY" is exceptable.

For example: If you are ordered to gun down a school of children for what can be no just reason, just because your commanding officer says so then the order must be challenged.

I believe that the most soldiers are acting in good belief that what they are doing is for the good of people back home.

I left the Armed Forces in 2000 and I am shocked that the UK army is being used in the manner it has been in the last 9 or so years. We at home have the luxury of seeing most of the picture where as serving troops are rather alienated from the real world to a degree. Live together, die together mentality also plays a part.

The blame, to me, lies at the feet of those in Downing Street and Washington. Period.

I can support the troops and the war somewhat as we are teaching other countries the definition of freedom and prosperity. declaring war on another nation or region is purely a defense mechanism if one feels threatened or disbelief in common sense or way of life. If one wants to remain in war and that is their choices they have pursued then why not support them as breathing people with higher expectations of life

reply to post by pink_guys64


Who are we to teach another country anything?

Truth is what's good for America isn't necessarily good for other countries.

I have the highest respect for anyone who aspires to protect and serve others. Even the noblest aspirations, however, can be destructive if expressed through poorly considered actions or inappropriate outlets.

I would love to believe that our troops are in some way protecting our freedoms. I really do. That is much more comforting to believe. But I honestly just don’t understand how invading other countries for their resources is protecting and serving us. I don’t see Iraqi civilians as an imminent threat to people in America. If someone could better explain to me how these well-intentioned soldiers are protecting my rights by occupying foreign lands, it would be appreciated.

reply to post by Epiphron


You have to separate the individual from the political situation.

Lets say I joined to kill terrorists on September 12th 2001. Now that they have me for 4 years they flip the script and tell me I have to be in Iraq. How is that my fault? No one can fault me for wanting to kill bad guys and defend us all. But I can't just say no to my orders.

Did you see the story about Rand Paul, OP?

thinkprogress.org...

Of course, he thinks that social programs also need to be cut, so that might be a deal breaker for you.

reply to post by 19872012


The troops and the war are two separate entities. Support for the troops can mean a wide variety of things. Personally for me, it means that I want the soldiers to be kept safe. I want them to be well-trained, armored, compensated, and above all I want them to return home to their families from these crappy wars.

People may willingly join the military, which in effect is them signing their life away for a contracted period of time... and attached to that contract is the reality that these soldiers will be sent overseas to fight wherever the military wants them to fight. However, that does not mean that I have to support the war machine or the entity that controls the destiny of these soldiers. A nation's soldiers are not the war, the governing factor that sends these soldiers to war... that is the war. And I do not support that particular element.

So in that sense, I support our troops, but I do not support the war.

Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
Lets say I joined to kill terrorists on September 12th 2001.

Yes, they manufactured your consent.

Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
Now that they have me for 4 years they flip the script and tell me I have to be in Iraq. How is that my fault? No one can fault me for wanting to kill bad guys and defend us all. But I can't just say no to my orders.

Can't you? Read the small print...check your human rights...do the jail time if necessary.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.yorkpress.co.uk...

www.youtube.com...

If you know it is wrong....

Don't believe the hype, yellow is the colour of the brave.

We don't support putting the troops in harm's way in the name of oil and profit. They died in Iraq not for freedom but for greed.

I support our troops, I disagree with the concept of what they died for.

yes to say you support the troops you are also inadvertently saying you support the war without troops there could be no war (yeah yeah tactical/drone strike my ass how many casualty's of civilians in bombing runs has there been in the past) and if there where no troops and only killing of individuals by flying a plane and killing people ironic it would be

Yes, doublespeak, mindless, empty propaganda, you name it. It's every bit as much blind faith as the most backward, twisted religion or cult on the planet. The whole nonsensical song and dance routine is based on the utterly false notion that ANY American military action SINCE WW2 has had ANYTHING to do with any AMERICAN'S freedom! It's PURE rhetoric and emotion, based on absolutely NO hard, real facts. (9/11 was most blatantly an inside job, or at least definitely not what the Orwellian government-media propaganda machine claims). The troops serve only the whims of their corrupt government, not their fellow citizens, after WW2, or definitely after the Korean War.

Originally posted by intrepid
In this case, "Just following order" DOES cut it. This isn't Nazi Germany. The troops serve their country and the people. They CHOOSE to do so. They aren't in control of where they are deployed though. The troops do their job. Defend the nation, whichever that may be. The ones that you should be concerned with are the tools in the gov't. They are the one USING these fine men and women for political and monetary gain.

See, I knew the first person to post a reply in this thread, as soon as I saw the name of the thread and read the OP, would say something like this.

Obviously you have figured out that our government is corrupt - now, you support the troops but not the war correct?

Well if you support the troops who are just doing what they're told by the corrupt government why can these troops you support not discern what is really going on? Are they puppets? No, not unless they allow themselves to be. Are they dishonorable? No, not unless they decide to be.

Are they fighting for a good cause? No, and they choose to fight and are still choosing to do so at this very moment. If all troops were to lay down their weapons and refuse to fight, would there be war?