Ok, the logic is if you don't support the war you don't support the troops, or so I've been told. But what about the generals who stated that we didn't go in with enough troops, that Al Anbar province is a lost cause, that the military is overstretched, etc.?
Are they unpatriotic? Are they undermining the troops? Should they be shot for treason?
If you're in the military, which leaders do you listen to? Commander in chief or the guy in charge of your division?
2007-03-26 05:05:01 · 9 answers · asked by guy o 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Phantom, good response. But the Repubs say any questioning of the Bush Ad is undermining the troops.Which would mean some of the generals. I know the generals have the troops safety and well being at heart, but I question Bush's consideration.
2007-03-26 05:23:49 · update #1
Everyone "supports the troops". Its a stupid catch-phrase that the right-wing has hijacked into meaning. "support our facist ideology or you hate america".
The Iraq war is a lost cause, we stand to gain nothing from our continued involvement. All analysis of the situation shows a short civil war will be the best outcome once we leave. The worst case senario is a long-term civil war leaving Iraq fractured into 3 seperate entities, which will be consumed by Iran.
Bush doesn't want us to leave because he wants to pass the blame for his failure on to the next president. As long as the war continues, we do not need to focus on how horrible of a president he truly is.
2007-03-26 05:13:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
Saying that we didn't go in with enough troops is a criticism of the people who decide how many troops are going to be sent, that's all. I don't see how that could be construed to be undermining the troops. If anything, it's looking out for their welfare. Every commander wants an optimal war situation for their troops. That means taking an honest look at the military situation and making those views known. All soldiers deserve to know what they're getting into, and what the situation on the battlefield is. They still follow orders, as they must, but at least they know what's coming at them. I think that most of these guys are speaking out partly out of concern for their troops, as well as the overall mission.
As far as what leaders you listen to goes, you listen to all of them, even if you don't always agree. You obey orders and follow the "chain of command". The guy in charge of your division is closer to where you are and is your more immediate superior, but he still gets his marching orders from someone higher up, like everyone.
2007-03-26 12:19:31 · answer #2 · answered by the phantom 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Guy, if your question is not just sarcasm, then you should remember that elections are upcoming, and the political rhetoric will be profuse. That's what about 90% of this nonsense is. The rank and file military doesn't give a hoot what the president says, in most cases. By the time anything filters down to the guys that do the work, it's been modified to be workable within the military.
2007-03-26 12:50:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That logic of not supporting the war, therefore not supporting the troops is RIDICULOUS and close-minded!!!
One can support the troops, yet not agree with the war.
I'm sure the Generals support the troops even though they don't support the war. However they understand the reality of the situation over there and are simply trying to save their troops lives.
2007-03-26 12:15:18 · answer #4 · answered by mrnaturl1 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No they are saying we arent going to win this if the liberals wont let us have more troops and more money, we are overstretched and need more troops.
"If you're in the military, which leaders do you listen to? Commander in chief or the guy in charge of your division?"
The commander in chief is who you listen to, he outranks even the highest general, hence the title "commander in chief"
2007-03-26 12:12:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The generals are part of 'the troops.'
And you need to look beyond the media's claims about what those generals said. Generally they were quoted out of context in order to make a better headline.
BTW - you notice how soldiers who support what we are doing never get quoted by the news media?
2007-03-26 12:11:48 · answer #6 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes, they are. They lead them, and guide them in what to do to win! If politically, some generals are against the war, it is best for them to keep their mouths snapped shut about it. Under law, if they are in service to the USA still, speaking out against any war USA is engaged in currently, is an act of treason.
2007-03-26 12:10:44 · answer #7 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ever wonder what can he do with his two hands without the troops following him wherever he goes in planet of apes?
2007-03-26 12:11:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't support troops,
They inter In Iraq land, Iraqi never ask them to make them free from Saddam.
Iraqi didn't do 9/11
after Saddam, now you Amarican are killing them.
You sned them to prison in their own land.
make dicision for them in their own land.
i give them right to kill amarican solders, because they want protect themslevs.
2007-03-26 15:45:25 · answer #9 · answered by Pretty Girl 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋