2006-10-21 22:55:47 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
An interesting phenomenon is the concept of "support the troops, not the war".
A major schism occured in the United States during the Vietnam conflict. On one side was the traditionalist supporters of US policy, and on the other side a new vocal set of American's willing to challenge their governments policies. This new group (what would become the left wing of a predominently right wing country) had a major victory and a major defeat.
The victory was the cessation of the war. The defeat was the label of being radical. The groups most vocal about ending the war spat on returning soldiers, called them "baby killers", and acted as if they were against the country more than the war (flag desecration, the Jane Fonda incident, etc). This caused a backlash against the new left, and the division remains today.
Then came a major US victory in the first Gulf War. Protestors were in a decided minority, and the war was popular. The new (and more cautious) chant was for supporting the troops and not the war. Many Americans still associate the left with their behaviour from Vietnam, and so the "support the troops" concept rings hollow with them even though the concept is sincere.
Thus there are two sides to this, and both are reasonable even if opposed. On the one side, yes, one may support troops who are doing their job regardless of whether their job is a mission you might support. On the other hand it is reasonable for a soldier to retort that if "you don't support my mission, you don't support me". The second is a plausible statement when you consider that an overwhelming number of troops who voted in the '04 election from Iraq voted for Bush and thus one may infer that the troops support their own mission.
As with most political issues there are two sides. The left needs to understand why their "support the troops" slogan rings hollow with the right, and the right needs to understand that not everyone on the left is a part of the radical left who wishes our troops harm.
On a personal level I have been sickened by the level of rhetoric on this site and across the internet. The name calling, baiting, and childish ranting isn't helping the country. If people can come together to discuss questions like yours without the name calling we would be a united country with diverse opinions.
Good luck to you.
2006-10-22 00:03:41 · answer #1 · answered by Poli Sci / Law Prof 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, and I think that it is a good choice. I am an Australian and I do not support the War. However, I have friends who are in the armed forces and serving in Iraq, I will always support them and hope that they will come home safely.
I will protest against the government for sending the troops, I will not protest against the troops.
BRING OUR AUSSIE TROOPS HOME!!
2006-10-22 06:10:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Of course there is... I am a former member of the armed services and therefore have a great deal of sympathy for, and give my moral support to those who are currently serving. However, I am also one of those millions who were, and still are against Bush's madcap war in Iraq. History will show it to be yet another example of how humiliating disasters often result from using a military option instead of diplomacy.
2006-10-22 06:45:56 · answer #3 · answered by avian 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. The troops are professional people who chose miilitary careers. They are carrying out the duties required of them by the Commander in Chief. It's no different than me doing the bidding of my boss at work.
I support the troops and often not the decisions of the President at the same time.
2006-10-22 06:01:18 · answer #4 · answered by Cub6265 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
yes and it's also possible to be a troop and not support the war. troops are people who choose a job for many different reasons and none of them got a say in going to war. they continue to do there job no matter if they agree or not. support them they support you.
2006-10-22 06:05:28 · answer #5 · answered by JoJo 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Our brave solders did not choose this war. We should always support our troops even when our leaders are a bunch of morons. I feel sorry for our troops having to fight another war that can't be won.
2006-10-22 06:25:30 · answer #6 · answered by industrialconfusion 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They are two different things one is a country who started the war and the other is the Poor souls who were conned into going to war in the pretext of doing a good deed..Only insane idoits continue with killing to prove a point.I know I served in Korea and that was a lie same as this one is
2006-10-22 06:19:37 · answer #7 · answered by beaudrycharles@sbcglobal.net 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, and you should say so, loud and often! My sister's son is there for the third time, & he says we don't get a hint of truth from the news media. But he says the troops really need to know we care about them in spite of what they are being forced to do over there.
2006-10-22 06:07:46 · answer #8 · answered by therealme 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Of course there is. I feel so sorry for our men and women being sent to places like Iraq and Afghanistan. It's not them but the politicians that i get angry with. The Armed forces r good people doing what the politicians have sent them into to do. All praise to our armed forces in a useless war. They r getting killed and maimed cos of stupid governments!
2006-10-22 06:07:11 · answer #9 · answered by english_rose10 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You know, being 'in country' doesn't mean you're doing something bad against that country.
I went to Vietnam thinking I was there to ensure free elections.
When I got there, I learned there was only one guy running for president.
I still did all I could to promote American ideals.
I worked hard and tried to befriend the Vietnamese I came in contact with.
I still hate Johnson.
2006-10-22 06:38:17 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋