Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
"Support the Troops, not the War"
Published on November 18, 2007 By Dr Guy In Politics

Since the anti-war movement got cranked up, one of the slams against them was that they were tarring the troops with their rhetoric and actions.  After the shame of their actions during the Vietnam War, this was a very sensitive subject as most (definitely not all) people understood that the soldiers were doing the job they were ordered to do, and not setting the policy of where and when to wage war.

To that end, there have been repeated denials by members of the anti-war movement that they did indeed support the troops, just not the war.  But those denials ring false.  Words, it is said, are cheap, and actions define your true intentions.  And to that end, we have seen Moveon.org blast the General in charge before a word was spoken (Betrayus), and the members on the left for the most part refusing to condemn them.  Ok, a general does have more say in how a war is waged, but they still do not have a say on the where or when.

Now comes the latest in the "facto non verbo" demonstrations of the anti-war crowd.  It seems that the illustrious (?) city of Cambridge Mass. has decided that collecting care packages for US Troops is a forbidden activity.  This activity, one carried out by the Boy Scouts - an organization already on the black list for the left - was not to affirm or decry the war itself, but to make the lives of the troops who have volunteered to defend this country a little less stressful.

And Cambridge said no way. 

This is America.  That is their right in a free society.  It is also their right to lie, and that appears to be what this is all about.  Not their freedom to speak the truth, but their freedom to lie.  For the facts clearly indicate they do NOT support the troops.


Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Nov 18, 2007
who is either over-officious, unpatriotic, or, worse, thick as a beaver's tail.


I think you nailed it pretty well. Except for the part about the pre-disposition.
on Nov 18, 2007
Violence has gone down in Iraq somewhat. This is not because of the extra 30,000 US soldiers were the magic bullet that calmed everything down. There are more Shiite militia members (many of whom are also part of the various government security services) than there are US soldiers in Iraq. Add on to it thousands of remaining Sunnis that until recently were shooting at U.S troops. Neither of these factions have any love for the US, but both groups have learned the lesson that if they lay low the Americans will get out of dodge sooner- but by no means have they layed down their arms yet. They are biding their time, and they won't just one day say "hey, these Americans are good guys, let's all live happily ever after!!". All it will take is one proclamation from the Ayatolla in Iran and the U.S forces in Iraq will be in more trouble than they can imagine. If you think TET was bad, just wait till you see the footage when the green zone gets overrun.


I got to admire your skills at the written word. You basically stated all the nay Sayers talking points in a concise and complete manner.

Only 2 problems with that. First, "Iraqi" shares a birthright, not a mind. Second, you have no more proof of this (other than anecdotal) than Leuiki has of his point. The truth is probably somewhere between the 2 extremes you both paint. Some (a majority or plurality or a minority) do believe as Leauki stated. And the others believe as you stated. The real question that no one can really answer, is how many of each?

And as far as the "coincidence" of the surge and the reduction of voilence, maybe they got scared. Maybe they thought if they laid low, it would go away. And maybe it just plain worked. That is another truth that no one here, and perhaps in this world, can authoratatively answer. The one reality we know is that the surge came, deaths and violence went down.
on Nov 18, 2007
Just keep in mind that success in Iraq is bad politically for the left side of the aisle anything good that comes from America, any support that comes from America and her people to Iraq is like a dagger driven into the heart of the liberal left movement, that is why after years of headlines screaming about all the bloodshed in Iraq, suddenly there is a void now or news from Iraq is now a 10th page story.


This is very true, and directly to the point. To the point that some would deny some modest relief from the trials of Iraq (as one of our own recently documented from experience) in order to make a point. They made the point, and the stink of the light of day now have them equivocating. That is actually good. For perhaps the next group that decides to shaft the soldiers with lame excuses of "Politics", will think twice about it. I am willing to bet a years salary that not all of the GIs that were denied by this action like Bush. We have an example here at JU of one that detests him, yet does his duty (and I am not talking about the Faux Col klink).
on Nov 18, 2007
Leauki


Go for it! I love tangents and you are doing well! Thanks.
on Nov 18, 2007

Second, you have no more proof of this (other than anecdotal) than Leauki has of his point.

Actually, he has no _anecdotal_ proof either. He just stated his view, he didn't refer to any reports saying so nor did he explain why Iraqis would think like he claims they do.

I base my opinion on the facts that I have heard and read about. The villages named in English and after America are real, and so are the pro-American graffitis and the election results in Iraq. The Iraqi president, who has again and again thanked the coalition for liberating his country (his words), is real.

But whether or not the liberals base their view on reality is a different matter.

The Iraqi president:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007289

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070531-18.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_btIGD-sTPg&feature=related

On the other hand, the Youtube commenters who decry the video have absolutely no idea what Iraq was like under Saddam and what it is like today.

Iraq under Saddam, for the majority of people:

http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

http://halapja.9neesan.com/

This is not stuff that conservatives or Republicans or Tony Blair have made up. It is the bitter reality of the stable, peaceful Iraq that liberals soi much prefer over the current "disaster". Even the terrorists attacking Iraq today cannot compete with Saddam's killer machine.

For Shiites, it was a Holocaust. For Kurds, it was being gased. And it was France or Germany that sold Saddam the gas. Can you imagine how proud I am of my birth country, that in the name of "peace" (i.e. the pictures above which apparently represent "peace") we stood up to George Bush and tried to keep Saddam in power? "Our friends in the security council" he called France and Germany.

Both countries denied to be his friends, of course. But when it comes to friendship (and French oil deals) deeds are more important than words.

Face it, America is hated by those who gas children. And if I were American, I would be proud.

 

on Nov 18, 2007

And as far as the "coincidence" of the surge and the reduction of voilence, maybe they got scared.

One of the articles I linked to explained exactly what happened.

Incidentally, the "resistance" in Iraq do not blow up mosques and assasinate sheikhs because Iraqis love them and hate Americans. They do it because the "insurgents" hate Americans, Iraqis, Shiites, Kurds, everyone. They are the enemy. The US can either defend Iraq against them or hand the Iraqis over to them.

 

on Nov 18, 2007

This is not stuff that conservatives or Republicans or Tony Blair have made up. It is the bitter reality of the stable, peaceful Iraq that liberals soi much prefer over the current "disaster". Even the terrorists attacking Iraq today cannot compete with Saddam's killer machine.

No, you do not understand spin (and I will qualify that by saying that Artysim is above it, regardless of how similar his opinions may be at times)).  To them, reality is irrelevant.  Only their warped perspective is real.  And so, yes, it is made up.  And no amount of proof (and forget God stating anything since they do not believe in one) will change that.  We are not talking about rational thinking people.  Just ones that have a single agenda.  Hate.  And there is no rational answer to hate.

on Nov 18, 2007

the "resistance"

Hmmm....hand Iraq over to the NV?  I wonder why that has never been tried.

I get your point.  I read the article.  But refer to response above. 

on Nov 18, 2007
Wow. Cool thread. Amazing what passes for political discourse these days. Everyone's got opinions, few have real knowledge...me included. I do know this, that there are a lot of folks who keep saying they support the troops but hate the war. Are the two things really so opposite that they cannot exist in the same brain? Get real. Nobody...and I mean NOBODY...hates war as much as the kids who have to fight it. What the lefties (and anyone else who quotes this mantra) really mean is they could not give a crap less about the troops, they just want to make some political capital with a stupid, meaningless slogan.
on Nov 19, 2007
Nobody...and I mean NOBODY...hates war as much as the kids who have to fight it. What the lefties (and anyone else who quotes this mantra) really mean is they could not give a crap less about the troops, they just want to make some political capital with a stupid, meaningless slogan.


Indeed.

However, note that war is not always the worst thing that can happen. It is unfortunate and the left will deny it, but it's true. The left seem to accept any number of deaths caused by violence as long as it doesn't happen in a war.
on Nov 19, 2007
And so, yes, it is made up. And no amount of proof (and forget God stating anything since they do not believe in one) will change that.


No wonder Holocaust denial is so in vogue.
on Nov 19, 2007
Leauki, I respectfully disagree. I think that the average Iraqi is about as thankful for the American occupation as the average Lebanese is grateful to Israel for benevolently bombing half of Lebanon back to the stone age last year.


Been there. Seen it. You don't have a clue. The vast majority of Iraqis know damn well that the day after America pulls out the bloodbaths will ensue.
on Nov 19, 2007
Anyone who would consider collecting for care packages to US troops is too braindead for words.

You are right, they (and many hear at JU) are showing their true contempt.
on Nov 19, 2007

Nobody...and I mean NOBODY...hates war as much as the kids who have to fight it.

I think that is where the disconnect comes in for them.  They see things in a simple frame.  If you do it, you love it.  Because that is how they live their life.

on Nov 19, 2007

No wonder Holocaust denial is so in vogue.

I use to beleive that the Holocaust could never happen again.  The horror was too real and too grand.  But yes, in my older age, I am convinced that it can for the very reason you state below.

The left seem to accept any number of deaths caused by violence as long as it doesn't happen in a war.

3 Pages1 2 3