can you support the troops but not support the war?

Question

as a soldier i find my self not understanding this question, the majority of the troop will say they suppot the war and understand why they are there. the politition's need to read the Constitution, its not there place to make military policey, they agreed to go to war, so they dont have the right to say when we get out, it is the policey of the military to let the commanders tell the commander and chief the situation and when the job is done, they have the right to speak there mind. we dont fight the fights that we can win, we fight the fights that need fighting. the soldiers are fighting for the american way "freedom" the right to stand up for thoughs who can not fight for themselves. right now the iraqi's can not fight for themselves, if we leave, anouther nation will comin and dominate the nation. if you support the troops, then you support the war, because the troops do. if you want to protest something, then start saying that you dont support the polititians decitions.

Answer 1

Absolutely. The troops are doing their job. Blaming them for the conflict in Iraq is like shooting the mailman for bring you bills.

Why do so many people seem unable to grasp the concept that you an object to an order that is given -- because you believe it is stupid (even if it is legal) -- but still have respect for the person carrying out that order and doing their job?

You said that we should support the war becuase the troops do. The troops must support it. That's their job. They swore to follow orders. So, challenging those orders would be a betrayal of their oath as soliders.

The rest of the population is not so limited. We're supposed to question our leaders. That's our Constitutional obligation.

Answer 2

Only when you're a conservative.

Quotes from when Clinton committed troops to Bosnia:

“You can support the troops but not the president”
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

“[The] President…is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation’s armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy.”
-Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

“American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy.”
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

“If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy.”
-Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W. Bush

“I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning…I didn’t think we had done enough in the diplomatic area.”
-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

“Well, I just think it’s a bad idea. What’s going to happen is they’re going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years”
-Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today”
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

“Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?”-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”
-Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

“This is President Clinton’s war, and when he falls flat on his face, that’s his problem.”
-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

“Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly.”
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

Answer 3

if you support the troops you're supporting the war since they support it.

It's like if you support a drug dealer than you support that someone is making their living of selling drugs.
that sounded better before I typed it..but you get what I'm saying


also I just wanted to say thank you. I thought the war was 6 years however you are right with 4 years. I thought the war started when the towers got bombed- I was wrong. Sorry but thanks for making me want to actually do some research!

Answer 4

No I don't support the troops for they
are fighting in a ILLEGAL war that
Bush only put them in because that
mean, bad man tried to kill his daddy.

Funny how stupid the American people
are thinking Bush's revenge on that bad
man Saddam is (snicker) the war on terror!

I have NO respect or support for any moron
who joins the military today.

PS. I'm not the only one who feels this way!

Answer 5

Of course one can support the troops but not support the "war". Essentially it means that people support the life of our troops but don't feel that this is the place to place our troops in harms way.

Answer 6

No, and anyone who says that is a liar. Supporting the troops means supporting their mission and wanting them to succeed. The same people (overwhelmingly liberal) who say nonsense like that are the ones who, when you're not looking, will start going off on how our soliders are stupid and the dregs of society. Just look at Jean Francois Kerry and Charles "Cracked Head" Rangel.

Oh, and to those who say they don't want to see our soldiers in harm's way ... what the hell do you think their job description is?! That's like saying you support our police officers but you don't want them going into bad neighborhoods, or you support firefighters but you don't want them going into burning buildings where they might get hurt.

It's typical liberal pap that they say only to make themselves feel good about themselves. They have no conception of how damaging it is to troop morale -- and more importantly -- to the success of our military's mission in the global war on terror.

Answer 7

Having served, i can say i understand completely how this can be.

It really isn't that difficult for anyone with just a GED to understand.

Lets say for example we were ordered into Panama because they legally did not renew our canal contract at dirt cheap rates. I could support saving the life of a soldier by not sending him to die, or i could send him food but not bullets, but not support the invasion and reasons behind it. He has the option to not go or to come home.

Anyone who says they "cant" understand this is really just being willfully ignorant.

Answer 8

that's exactly what it means,when people say i support the troops but not the war. they mean that they are supporting the troops that have to endure the hardships but they disagree with the people that sent them to war.