Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Despite what certain people (on either side of the fence) may believe, I feel it is still possible to support the troops without supporting the war. I don't like wars. I never have, and I'm sure many people don't like wars, either. In fact, I'd be willing to say that the only people who like wars are those who profit from them in some way. And honestly, I've stayed out of the whole Iraq thing since it started. I don't know the details, and I really don't wish to know. As many of you know, my primary political focus is domestic social issues--not foreign affairs. So all I know in that regard is that I don't like war.

But that doesn't mean I don't like the troops. I don't disrespect them or feel contempt for them. I don't wish harm to them. And it's because I respect their decision. I respect their courage and valor, their willingness to give up their own life's comforts in the belief (however true or false) that their actions will help ensure the comforts of others of their nation. I understand that America has a great many things working for it (despite all the parts that still need fixing), and those are worth defending.

I don't like the war--the intangible concept, the event itself--but I respect the human beings behind it, because their opinions, no matter how different from my own, are no more or less valid. We're all still humans. We all make choices. I choose not to fight. They do. That doesn't mean they deserve disrespect (unless an individual does something on duty worthy of disrespect, such as unnecessary torture and cruelty).

So thoughts? Do you believe I am in the wrong?

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

To me, "I support the troops but not the war" means "I dislike the war but saying I don't support the troops is not politically correct."

How do you support men and women but not what they are doing? What they are living and dying for? What they signed up for?

_________________

The troops are doing what they are called to do, and are doing it to the best of their ability. They put their lives in danger in order to protect us. It may be true that sometimes they are placed in needless danger, or are sent into situations where their presence may not be for the best, but that is not always their choice. As a former military man myself, I know what it is like to be given orders that I do not agree with, and yet must carry out. I understand the moral commitment it takes to serve, even when I do not understand all the reasoning behind my orders. The same is true with those men and women who are serving now. Their dedication to duty, their willingness to set aside their own rights and even their own lives in order to preserve our freedom, are to be commended.

Likewise, as a conservative myself, I did not agree with the reasoning behind the war in Iraq. I felt at the time that the powers that be were making hasty decisions based on incomplete and inaccurate information. And, as things have played out, it turns out my instincts were correct. Nevertheless, now that we have overthrown their government (tyrannical and wicked as it was), we now have an obligation to leave their country with some sense of safety and security. We cannot simply pull out overnight, as some have suggested we must.

So, in answer to Pianoman, I can understand your motives: wanting to support the troops, even while repudiating the war itself.

_________________

I'll just flat-out say I don't support them.

Wanting someone to be safe and respecting them isn't quite "support". Support would connote that you believe in what they're doing.

Of course I understand what you're saying, and I think I'm of a similar mindset; it's just a matter of word-choice.

edit: dude, only use "Hell" when referring to the place. It's in the rules, you know.

Thanks for the reminder, Zeno, but who used it? I can't find it in Pianoman's or Lahi's post, and I'm pretty sure I didn't.

Not important. Please continue.

_________________

He had it in his.. that edit was mine.
Carry on. Nothing to see here.


As for supporting the troops, I fall in line with Dids on this one, sort of. While I supported the war (opposite of Dids), I was still uneasy about it.
Now, like Dids, I don't think pulling the troops out is the best idea.

I've lost 2 friends in Iraq. They died for a good idea (liberating an oppressed people). If we leave and some tyrannical maniac takes over, what was the point of being there in the first place? How are you going to tell their friends, families, etc that they died for nothing? I'd rather they die for Bush's supposed lie and have some good come of it (a democratic, free Iraq) than hear they died for nothing at all.

I believe you can support the troops while being against the war, but I don't think it's possible to fully support them. With that said, ANY support for them is better than the support my stepdad got back in the late 60's-early 70's.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Very simple, there is a good chunk of them that don't support what they are doing. I know three ex-soldiers, all of whom have been to Iraq. All three of them hate the war and hated having to go over there. It was not what they signed up to do. They all signed up to get there hands on that G.I. Bill as most soldiers do.

_________________

Wasn't that a bit short-sighted, though? I mean, the "I signed up for money for college" argument is pretty weak. I'm not sure that we really want to pay for college for people who don't realize that joining the military means you have the possibility of being put in harms way in a situation you might not agree with.
That money's not free, you know. There's a commitment that goes along with it. If you don't like the risk, don't take the money. I didn't like the risk, I didn't take the money.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

I have a friend who was in the Marines and he despises people like your friends. They basically take advantage of the military without intending to honor the contract they entered into. They should be ashamed.

_________________

The thing you're assuming is that the soldiers themselves are objecting purely on selfish grounds. Some of them may very well object on political grounds, i.e., that they don't think we should be fighting that particular war. The same soldier might very well be willing to fight in, say, Rwanda, where there would have been what they considered a legitimate need, or even in Afghanistan, but object to going to Iraq because he concluded, as I did, that the faulty intelligence simply was not good basis for the decision to invade. The difficulty is, once you're in, you're not allowed to let your politics dictate your mission. You are sworn to serve. But once you're out again, you have the same rights as other citizens to express your thoughts.

_________________

I thought "They all signed up to get there hands on that G.I. Bill," was pretty clear.

And don't play the faulty intelligence card. Every intelligence organization on the planet reported Saddam had WMDs. We told Saddam we'd invade unless he let us check for them, and he refused. What would you have done in that situation?

_________________

Surgically bombed some of the suspected facilities. I.e., limit the force to that which was necessary to accomplish the needed result.

Actually, I posted that partially in response to BTG and Rad as well. I signed up for the G.I. Bill too. Didn't mean I didn't believe in what I was doing at the time. And at the time, I had my own political reasons for objecting to the original Gulf War (1990), but I have since realized we had distinct moral obligations to our allies. But if anyone had said to me, "The only reason you signed up was for the G.I. Bill!!1ONE!" I would have set them straight.

_________________

I only say what I said with regards to the Cindy Sheehan types that say soldiers didn't sign up to fight, only for money to college.

I've got nothing against soldiers who signed up for money AND to defend their country but legitimately oppose this war (and aren't just saying that as a cover for the real reason they signed up, ONLY for free college money).

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Not really, two of them signed up before the 9/11 attacks. Then they had no clue what was to come. Back then it was "Sign-up, do your four years and take the money." They didn't expect to be going to war, but when the War in Afghanistan came around, they supported. They felt that was the right course of action. They did there tour of duty in Afghanistan and went home for a while until they were called to go Iraq.

_________________

But my understanding is that those whom BTG was talking about did actually fulfill their duty. Just as I fulfilled mine. (even though I wasn't in theater at the time, ALL of us had additional duties and responsibilities - and actually, I did have to pull guard duty a few times during that period).

And BTG seems to have confirmed that. Thanks, BTG.

_________________

I won't argue that was the prevailing attitude pre 9/11, but even then, it was foolish to think that joining the military didn't involve a chance of being put in harm's way. That's part of the reason I didn't sign up right out of high school, I didn't want to have 4-8 years where I had no control over my own life.

Don't get me wrong, their motives (supposed or real) don't take away from the fact that they served their country. I appreciate that. I just don't like when people refuse to serve because they "just signed up for money for college".

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Oh they knew there was a chance, everyone knows that. Just at the time the chance of being put in harm's way was in the area of slim and none.

_________________

Part of the reason I signed up was because I felt that was part of my obligation. To myself, to my family, and to my country.

_________________

I want to sign-up, too. I've wanted to join Air Force since I was 12, for those reasons too.

_________________

Hey, they DID serve, regardless of whether or not that wanted/intended to. That's more than I've done.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Agreed. Any soldier, marine, airman, or seaman who does his duty, for whatever benefit or motive, deserves respect. Only if they fail to carry out their duty is there any shame.

_________________

I've always believed that it's possible to support the troops and not the war. In fact, "Support the troops, [beep] the war" is something of a slogan of mine. It's kind of like saying "Love the sinner; hate the sin", except these people aren't even doing the "sin" voluntarily. I don't have anything against the soldiers, not even those that do support the war, because they're not actually doing anything wrong. (Well, other than the Abu Ghraib types, but the actions of the few shouldn't reflect badly on the many.)

I'm sure there are a lot of people out there in Iraq who don't want to be there, and I don't mean in a "Hey, I signed up for the G.I. Bill, not to fight" sort of way. What they did sign up for was to defend their country. Was attacking Iraq in this way necessary to defend our country? I'd say no. Not even with the WMD claims. Who the heck are we to override the U.N.'s authority, anyway? Are we some kinda cowboy country? Now, I'm not usually the kinda guy who thinks everybody should always just sit down, play nice, and follow the rules -- sometimes you do have to stand up and fight the system -- but we're talking about war, here. I think we acted a little hastily. I know that WMDs are a serious matter, but why the big rush? Was Saddam so eager to use them as soon as he had them? Or was he just going to sit on them just like every other country that has developed nuclear weapons? Saddam may have been a madman, but I don't think he was that mad.

Yeah, this is becoming an increasingly incoherent and off-topic rant, so I'm going to stop here...

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

Because that's how I feel. Political correctness offends me, and I loathe the faulty concept upon which it's formed. I feel respect and admiration for the people who are willing to fight and die for something they believe in, even if it's not something I believe in. The attitude behind the politics is what I admire--not the politics themselves. It's like my mother--she supports me. Heck, she LOVES me; I'm her son, ya know. But that doesn't mean she agrees with everything I believe and do (namely, me being homosexual and my choice to leave the Christian faith).

And for the record: I knew people in college who were a bit dismayed that they had to front the money for college after signing up for whatever military branch (Army, Marines, National Guard), being told that they'd be reimbursed by the government later. Still, though, I have also heard that the government takes good care of its soldiers--free home, free car, free basic foods and utilities, plus an income that doesn't factor in all those necessities.



Totally. That irks me even more, because the draft was imposed for Vietnam, so many of the troops that got such a poor welcome home were potentially people who didn't even agree with the war or with fighting in the first place.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

I Never Got A Free Car!

I WANT MY FREE CAR!!

_________________

I've supported the war and always thought it a noble cause. I support the troops and if I was old enough I would be out there right now. They need our support now even if we don't support the war. It's a very good thing to support the troops even if you don't support the war. They're our men and women out there for our country and they deserve support all of their life for that.

_________________

One of the drum majors from my junior year in high school went into the Marines and they provided him with all those things I mentioned. The car was a Hummer.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!