I'm getting sick and tired of this incessant nattering about the need to "support our troops" in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is especially noxious here in southern Utah where a disproportionate amount of National Guard troops have been placed into full-time front line combat for extended tours of duty. They have un-wittingly been drafted to fight in a war that has nothing whatsoever to with protecting Utah or even the United States for that matter. This bloody invasion makes us all much less safe in every respect imaginable, especially in the way that it corrupts the moral framework in each of our souls. It is a rotten cancer that threatens us with its insidious nihilism and blatant blood lust.If I don't support the mission, how can I possibly support the troops?
It all reminds me of the demoralized and frozen German soldiers on the Russian front in the brutal winter of 1941-42. Clothing drives were held throughout Germany because the Nazis had not allocated winter clothing for their troops. Hitler arrogantly believed that they'd already have conquered Russia by the late fall of '41 and thus would not need to provision the army for winter. The German people were then asked to support their troops with donations of blankets, boots, socks and coats, even though they knew in their hearts that they were in a futile fight against a country that had not attacked them and was about to bring utter ruin to their Reich in one of the biggest counter-offensives in world history. Most Germans, by then despised the war and were weary and weak, but by God they supported their troops!
I refuse to buy into this way of thinking and never will. You always reap what you sow.
After U.S. troops failed to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which had been the Bush administration's primary reason for invading Iraq, one of the president's alternative rationales for his war has been the so-called magnet rationale. It goes like this: Even though we failed to find WMDs in Iraq, we'll make Iraq the central front in the war on terrorism by making U.S. troops a magnet that will attract the terrorists to attack U.S. soldiers in Iraq rather than people in the United States.
But the magnet rationale raises an important question: Why is it moral to use an innocent country for such a purpose, especially when the targeted country is going to be thrown into chaos and destruction and tens of thousands of citizens of that country are going to be killed and maimed in the process?
This is obviously the latest ruse to cover the truth about the most hostile and violent invasion of an innocent civilian population since Vietnam. My support will always be in the form of a wish that all of the soldiers come home now and never be dispatched to a foreign country again.
7 comments:
So were Hitler's soldiers.
"We were just following orders."
noodleguy said: "if it was your son, your husband, your daughter, would you not direct energy to support them?"
This whole "support our troops" sloganeering thing is part of what has been purchased with the tens of millions of our tax dollars that the Shrub administration has paid to public relations firms in DC -- to color the war into an impossibly pretty picture, and to SELL the idea to the Merkin Sheeple, and to stifle resistance here at home.
And, as with all MARKETING STRATEGIES charged with the task of trying to make a turd look like a diamond, if you can use ambiguous terms and appeal to emotion so that reason and clear thinking are fogged, then you will have won part of the battle.
OF COURSE I would "direct energy to support" any loved one put into harm's way for NOTHING! That, however, is not inconsistent with wanting them to come home. In fact, it is perfectly consistent.
That noodleguy is one of many Merkins who conflate "support" for the troops and the notion that they should stay there, or even be there in the first place, is a sad testament to the Merkin Sheeple's gullibility in the face of slick marketing.
Audie,
"Support Our Troops" slogans was started many years ago, not by the president, but by the mothers, fathers, sons and daughters of soldiers in harms way.
Audie said: "OF COURSE I would "direct energy to support" any loved one put into harm's way for NOTHING! That, however, is not inconsistent with wanting them to come home. In fact, it is perfectly consistent."
That is exactly the sentiment of the families that started it. There is a reason you normally see that slogan in the form of a yellow ribbon. They want them home too and that is the traditional sign of wishing someone home safely and quickly...Tie a yellow ribbon round the old oak tree...its been three long years..(who sang that?)
Tony Orlando and Dawn
The "Support Our Troops" slogan may have been started by families, but it's been co-opted by politicians as a way to squelch dissent on American foreign policy. So, if you're against the war, the "Support Our Troops" slogan is thrown in your face to elicit some guilt response or to question your patriotism.
The only support I'll show our troops is by helping them with their bags at the airport when they're brought home.
McDonald's wasn't the first to say "You deserve a break today," either, but that doesn't mean that when they say it (or sing it in that Barry Manilow-penned jingle) they're really concerned about your well-being. They just want you to buy their junk food.
Same with the US government propagating "support for our troops." What THEY mean -- i.e., "Shut up your opposition to our greedy little ill-conceived, unadvised, and unpopular war" -- and what some of the mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters mean by support -- i.e., "We endorse our loved ones' wish to defend our country, and trust that their lives are put in danger only as a last resort" -- are two wildly different things in this case. And the government's (and other warmongerers') use of that slogan to conflate the two meanings is disgusting and despicable.
Post a Comment