2007-01-20 13:50:47 · 8 answers · asked by Looking ahead 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
I understand what you're saying, but think of it like this: you love your kids, but you don't always like what they do. In the case of our troops, we want them to stay alive and safe and come home - but we may not agree with our government for puting them in harm's way.
2007-01-20 13:59:32 · answer #1 · answered by Palmyrita 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. Soldiers are people who have a mission they are ordered to perform and which by their oaths of service they are obligated to carry out. A person can be supportive of those people as people, wish them well, and hope they get home safely. That doesn't mean that at the same time those same people have to agree with the orders that are given to the soldiers by the civilian leadership. It's really quite easy to support the troops but not the mission. If the troops feel the need for all people to support the mission too, then they are just going to be disappointed.
2007-01-20 14:07:49 · answer #2 · answered by mattzcoz 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well actually no it's not hypocritical. People were opposed to the war for good reasons, Bush lied, the CIA made up stuff, Bush submarined poor Colin Powell at the UN. However when their children and grandchildren and friends serve in the military they want the troops to the best they can.
I believe it's Senator Murtha who made sure the troops had the armour they needed when they reached Iraq , even tho the army didn't properly supply it .
I think Senator Murtha as a Viet Nam vet UNDERSTANDS war having served and having seen how the Viet Nam vets weren't supported in the sixties and wanted to make sure that nothing like that ever happened again.
I wasn't thrilled when the Chretien government sent the military to Afghanistan and less thrilled when Harper pushed for an extended mission but I'll support our guys as much as I can. May not support the government's decision but the military people themselves you betcha. They do the dirty work for the old men and women who send them to war , but you sure don't see too many senators and president's relatives serving in the military.
Anyone remember the old CCR song , Fortuante Son, it applies here.
2007-01-20 15:09:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's not being hypocritical in the least.
The troops consist of our fellow countrymen and women, thus it's natural to support them.
However, about 68% of Americans DO NOT support the war in Iraq, (i.e. the mission), and question the real reason why we are there.
Got it?
2007-01-20 14:06:29 · answer #4 · answered by Mitch 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they are saying that they have respect and support for the troops doing a job that they know is one that they did not ask to do and not support the mission because we went into Iraq on a bunch of lies and no one likes to see lives lost because of lies
2007-01-20 14:00:15 · answer #5 · answered by billc4u 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I support the troops. They are over there giving their all, sometimes their lives. I support the mission to an extent. I am glad that Saddam is dead. I just hope that we went to war for the right reasons and not for oil or money.
What I don't support is the senseless death, but what is war without senseless death?
2007-01-20 14:01:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anya 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The mission sucks, but the brave men and women following the orders of the US Government are doing an amazing job in the most difficult and dangerous of circumstances.
Thus, you are proud of, and strongly support the men and women who are doing the job as best they can (and pray no-one gets hurt or killed), but you don't have to approve of the job they have been sent to do.
I hope that makes sense.
2007-01-20 13:59:57 · answer #7 · answered by darklydrawl 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
well I suppose they don't support the USA being over there but they don't want the troops to be scorned for doing what they have to do.
2007-01-20 14:04:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋