i'm a former US Marine and i was ashammed and sick when i saw those pictures of what our troops did in those prisons. and you people got the nerve to get mad when people don't support the war or the troops how can i support people who do the same or worse than our so called enemy who were supposed to have WMD's and didn't, now i'm really pissed off. people got the right to support or not support what they want and they also have a right to voice their opinion and all those who say that is unpatriotic then i'm unpatriotic cause if i think something is wrong i'm gonna voice my opinion
2006-06-20
19:42:41
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
I am a Marine, a Soldier so i know the lifestyle and alot of my friends are Marines and i love and support them but iam also sticking up for those people who get Bashed because they disagree with the policy or don't support the troops and no soldiers don't have to follow orders that are wrong or unjust, -- every person should have the right to agree or disagree with out being bashed. i fouight and bleed in the first Gulf war, this war is based on a lie, we are American we don't lie to go to war, i have fought and seen death seen blood, and i don't want any other American to go through that over a lie a stinking lie. but back to the subject people should be able to voice their opinion with out being called names like coward or unpatriotic- i wish one of you would call me unpatriotic or coward, i have been in war most of you haven't
2006-06-20
20:07:55 ·
update #1
I'm a former Marine too. Semper Fi.
To answer your question I don't think there's anyone who doesn't honestly support our troops. What they don't support is the Bu11sh!t war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even your average Joe knows that 15 of the 19 Sept 11th hijackers were from Saudi. So why aren't we "liberating" Saudi from all of that oil?
Joking aside. Not everyone is going to support the war, and it's a logical fallacy to suggest as the Conservatives have that one cannot support the troops and NOT support the president's war on Iraq at the same time. It's all or nothing with these folks. To support the troops one must support the war, that's the warmongering ideology. They allow no room for dissent.
Well, obviously anyone can put 100% support behind the troops and not support our illegal war in Iraq. In fact it's my opinion that not requesting Congress to end our involvement in Iraq and bring our boys home sooner than later is a disservice to our men and women in uniform. But that's just my opinion.
__________
After reading the neocon's answer at the bottom (the guy who stupidly and typically quoted Fox News - Please!), I felt that I needed to provide a few details he conveniently neglected to share.
Absolutely NO weapons of Mass destruction have been recovered from Iraq. What has been found, however, are the *remains* of weapons programs that existed pre-first gulf war.
I would also like to point out that Chemical and Bio weapons have a maximum shelf-life of (drum roll) TWO WEEKS. 15 years is a lot longer than TWO WEEKS.
2006-06-20 20:04:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by dylanwalker1 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
First of all, there's nothing wrong with having an opinion that opposes the decision your government made. You're entitled to that, just like any other American.
However, you're on shaky ground when you don't support the troops. I don't think it's unpatriotic, but you have to ask yourself why you don't. You see what a few troops have done over there all over the news. Do you assume then, that a majority of the military is the same way? Is that why you don't support them?
When you start counting people by the thousands, you are bound to find a few bad apples here and there. Take any sample of people from any nation, class, or city that's more than 10,000. Do you really think that it's possible for every one of them to be law abiding, righteous, and generally good people? Don't kid yourself.
It all comes back to "why" you feel that way - the reason why the ground is "shaky".
2006-06-20 19:48:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by SirCharles 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I could care less about the war because what i think doesn't matter. I can't start or stop it, I can't make people be reasonable and decent, make them show respect. However, i can support every troop that is over there, many joining to support their families, to get an education the had no other means of obtaining, family tradition, etc. I don't like war, but i like it less when people run down the troops. Its just like Vietnam, except these troops aren't being treated like trash when they return home for a war they had no choice in. Many there don't agree, but as a Vet., you should know that those few soldiers didn't act for everyone over there.
2006-06-20 19:50:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by x_lil_redangel_x 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ok, this came out today... the US Troops found 500 Ammo cassings with serin gas and mustard gas in Iraq. WMD = Found
Check foxnews.com
Granted the acts at GITMO might have been extreme but we aren't chopping off limbs, shocking, beheading, cutting, gutting the POWs. All I ever hear about is ohhh the americans are so nasty to those who are captured. The dog never bit anyone, and No one was dismembered or tortured. but where were you when the American Soldiers were dismembered and beheaded the other day. When have we ever done worse than them!?
I get pissed off with people who don't support the troops because the troops are the ones who are providing the blanket of security and freedom that allows you to protest and be unsupportive. Am I in the military no but my brother is and our father was and his father before him and so on. They wake up everymorning and serve this country with pride, honor and without prejudice. They know people don't like them but they still protect them. So do i get pissed when some guy says "I don't support the troops"? hell yes.
2006-06-21 13:20:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I hear ya. I think the problem you're looking at is that too many think "supporting troops" and "supporting the war" are the same thing. Supporting one, DOES NOT mean you support the other. It should be more clear that supporting our troops means that you wish well for the american in uniform. Not what the government has him doing. Not supporting the troops is or should be seen as, turning your back on an american in uniform, because you don't like what the government is doing. -THAT'S something to be pissed about.
2006-06-21 05:01:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Our troops represent us as a nation defending our way of life. They, our troops, join our military because they believe in our country enough to risk their lives to defend against other countries that pose as a threat, despite political reasons. They dont do it for personal gain, but rather they do it in thoughts of their fellow countrymen. Unfortunately for us and them, politicians rule our countries and what they say goes. If the President said a certain country is a threat than our troops are just going to have to trust our government and defend us. They (our Troops) do it for us, politicians do it for themselves. So its OK to support our troops even if you hate the war. I,however, do not support the President but I support our troops.
2006-06-20 19:57:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by ddiscostu 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why should many good people be overshadowed by a few bad seeds?
BTW.....The only reason people can spout off over here is becuz of our military, otherwise we would be speaking German, so no matter the politics, the troops should be supported, they didn't choose to go there themselves.
2006-06-20 19:49:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by CA 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am also a former Marine(vietnam) and I also was pretty disgusted about Abu Graib. I think what they did was totally uncalled for, and not at all representative of what we aresupposed to be about. Those responsible should and have been prosecuted. Having said that, I don't see how you go from there to not supporting the war or any of the troops. I've argued this point of the legality of the war til i'm blue in the face so I'm going to limit it here. First of all while there were meetings between saddam and some al qaida leaders that took place in Iraq there was no evidence that saddam had any part in the planning or execution of the 9-11 attacks on the WTC. However if you remember we had been in an ongoing dispute with saddam on his lack of cooperation with UN inspectors with regard to them being free to make spontaneous unscheduled inspections of various sites at any time. There were frequent violations of no fly zones. There were what were considered to be reliable intelligence reports that saddam was attempting to purchase weapons grade plutonium. When 9-11 happened it didn't take long to figure out who was responsible and our response was fairly quick. Remember Bush announced the war on terror was going to be against anyone, anywhere, for as long as it took. We invaded afghanistan. Made great strides. Meanwhile reports still coming on saddam. He is still defiant. The man is known to be a ruthless psycho...everyone realizes this. He has used WMD's already in the form of gas on the Kurds. Intelligence indicates he is attempting to develop long range delivery systems. He has long had an interest in biological weapons(one operation was shut down earlier). Then the infamous report of his attempt to acquire plutonium( since disputed) It was believed by many people from a number of countries. Bush decides to take action. It was a judgement call. Hindsight is 20/20, but clearly Iraq is better off without saddam. Nol one can argue that we are not confronting terrorists (al qaida) in Iraq and destroying them, while continuing to destroy them in Afghanistan. Personally I think the president made the right move. I am glad it was he who was president on 9-11. He did something. As for the troops. I don't see how any American can not be proud of them. They have performed remarkably. I do not even give a thought to the several stories in the media about incidents involving Marines because in my opinion these men deserve the benefit of the doubt and a fair trial. Anyone who comments on that situation prior to a trial such as jack murtha to me is a disgrace. There is a huge anti-America, Anti-Bush campaign going on which originates from left wing extremist organizations having considerable affect on a war weary public.
Certainly you have a right to voice your opinion but I ask you to consider the effect on the morale of these young men who are fighting this war right now. Those people putting out the lies don't care about them. They want to make them look bad too. They want to do every thing they can to destroy the entire war effort and demoralize the American people. first turn them against their leader, then turn them against the cause, then turn them against the troops...then you have won the war. It's pretty simple to see the strategy. I for one will not break faith with my country or those fighting for it. I hope you will rethink some things. I know you'd hate to end up regretting some of the things you've said when this is all over and you get a chance to hear what these guys have to say about their experience.
SEMPER Fi
P.S. An Afterthought....
You made a few statements I forgot to address. You said that "a soldier doesn't have to obey an order that is wrong or unjust"...the oath is "that I will obey all lawful orders...." That word lawful refers to very specifically defined rules of conduct under the ucmj. The way you state it makes situations open for individual interpretation...too many opportunities where someone may respond with ..."that isn't right I'm not doing it". Heres a graphic example. If there are a group of detainees rounded up and placed in a ditch and a company cmdr orders you to "waste them!" as happened in My Lai in Vietnam, that is an illegal order and should not be obeyed. On the other hand if you're in a firefight in a town where there have been civilians and your plt. cmdr. orders you to fire a rocket into a particular building and you refuse because "you think" there could be civilians in the building you would be in violation of the ucmj. You should know that. If you didn't you should never have been in the Marine Corps...or any branch of servicefor that matter. As I think about your comments I have mixed thoughts. I honor your service in the Gulf war where apparently you were wounded and that certainly entitles you to an opinion about war in general, but then you go on and more or less dare anyone to call you unpatriotic, which I wouldn't do. However you aren't willing to show the same support for these guys who are fighting now as you got while you while you were in the gulf war. You seem to hint at patriotism but you can't have it both ways. Who are you to say they are fighting for a lie?...because some left wing nut says so? You know the same things were being said then about the gulf as they are now about Iraq. Had it not been a 90 day war you would have seen that. You realize "your" war was all about oil of course don't you. It was all because George Bush Sr was good friends with rich Kuwaitis. You were just a puppet. It must be true...CNN said so. Get my point? I realize all this is a bit out of order as a composition and if I had more time I'd go back and rewrite it. I just hope you'll reconsider your position.
2006-06-20 21:23:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by RunningOnMT 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Soldiers just follow the orders of those higher in rank. Don't be mad at an enlisted man, if an officer told him to do something. If you were not there, then you really don't know what happened there! Propaganda is alive and well!
Have you forgotton 9-11-01?
2006-06-20 19:49:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Are all "troopers" wrong NO! So let's talk about the ones i nthe right then. They're out there in a voluntary military protecting the freedoms as Americans, that we take for granted. And they get little to no thanks for it. At anytime, they can be shipped anywhere to fight, with no say in it at all. And if you can't support and admire that, then why the hell did you even go in yourself!!!!!!
2006-06-20 19:48:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋