How can some say they support the troops but not the war ?

Question

When their actions show there is no support of troops. For those not guilty of the same, why NO outrage???And why the Anti-American rhetoric????

"The anti-war demonstration in Central Park yesterday, one of several across the country over the weekend, was riddled with anti-Israel and anti-American sentiment, and in some cases classical anti-Semitism."New York Sun
Antiwar protesters spit on soldiers ,
Syracuse, New York-Lauren Maggi, was charged with second-degree harassment after spitting in a soldiers face.
Anti-war rally near the Capitol building Cpl. Joshua Sparling of the 82nd Airborne -was called names, cussed at , physically threatened and spit on.
Portland Oregon anti-war protesters Burn Soldier Effigy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecp8ZCC3tB8

Answer 1

Very few wars have ever had total public support. As the ability for people to spread their thoughts and collaborate on issues increases so does the ability for people to join against a war. Consider how easy it was for people to talk about Korea compared to Viet Nam. The major shift in communication and country unity that has taken place since between those two wars has had a direct effect on how the "public" has viewed a war. Now anyone can speak their mind, which is their right, but instead of only being able to affect the local group they can now affect the world via mediums like this. That can be a good thing and it also can be abused, we have all seen both.
In my mind it is not the place of the people to condemn the military personnel. If they are unhappy with the government's decision to wage one war or another then they should say so and then act on it in the polling booths. Since Bush Jr. was elected to a second term it brings me to believe that the ones who are protesting the war, and taking it out on the service men and women who are doing their jobs are in the minority. Not to say that they don't have a right to their opinion or that they should not voice it, on the contrary do so. However they only serve to hurt their cause to those "on the fence" when they are against war and then turn around and act in the manner described in the news reports.
I say that it is time for those of us that are proud of our men and women serving their country to have our own rally where we hold high those that have done so with distinction. I say that every small town and large city needs to have a daily rally, even if that is a rally of one, where we speak out about how we feel that the men and women over there are being put in a bad position, they have to do things that they may not want to do, and for doing what they are ordered they should be commended not ridiculed.

Answer 2

Obviously the people mentioned in this article don't support the troops. But that doesn't stand to reason that anyone who deosn't support the war doesn't support the troops.

Personally I was appaled at the scandal involving the Walter Reed millitary hospital in Washington DC. Why should our veterans be subjected to inadequate medical care? If our nation can afford god-knows-how-many billions spent in bullets and bombs, why can't we afford a few billion for bandages and beds?

People do not support the Iraq war because they believe the president and his crony's lied to gain support for the war, used 9/11 as a unspoken excuse to conduct the war, and have so far bungled the entire operation since the beginning. Billions of dollars are still unaccounted for, and terrorism worldwide has not slowed, in fact it is more prevalent now then ever before.

Does this mean the troops are to blame? No. The soldiers follow orders, that is there job. Some believe the best way to support our troops is only using them as a last resort, it is obvious to all that prior to the Iraq war Saddam and his "weapons programs" (there were none) were contained, we did not need to complicate things by invading.

Answer 3

I do not support the war.I DO support the troops. My son was in Iraq when the war first started.Our troops,believe me,wish they were home.The ones who talk to the press are hand picked by commanders.The families are sent a sheet when their loved one is deployed telling you how to answer the press.Not only that but people forget,THIS IS THEIR JOB.THEY CAN'T QUIT.If they don't like where they are they know better than to complain.The consequences are great.My son signed up to go after Bin Laden.How many troops do we have there?HE IS THE ONE WHO ATTACKED US.Why do we have so many troops in Iraq and we have never had nearly that amount in Afghanistan?I'm proud of my son and every soldier who is and has been over there.But we can't fight a civil war for them.And that is what is happening NOW.Whose side would we take ? Think people.Where would we be today if another country fought our Civil War?Would we even be speaking English?So yes you CAN support the troops and not the war.

Answer 4

You can be supportive of troops and not the war. It happens everyday, you like someone but do not like what they are doing. The war is ridiculous, but the troops are doing their job. Look back at Vietnam.....the soldiers were treated so badly it is pathetic. The anger toward the war has now crossed over into anger toward the soldiers which is totally wrong. People are ticked off at Bush and yet think that it is ok to take it out on the soldiers. Think about it how are they going to spit in the president's face? They can't so they will spit on the soldiers. It is called stupidity. I love of soldiers, but despise the war. I appreciate the soldiers doing their job, but wish they did not have to this particular job.

Answer 5

it is not help or loss of help for the two the conflict or the troops, that kind of communicate is political rhetoric, all individuals help our vets, a minimum of with words. this is each and each individual protester's own rejection of the horror of seeing a 19 300 and sixty 5 days old quadruple amputee or a grieving team of pre college babies being consoled via a youthful widow. Any clever individual will instinctually sense the would desire to quit such tragedy. this is deeper that purely ethical outrage. They sense not putting our troops in harms way "is" helping the troops. they don't understand that their is not any risk-free place yet, and that the battlefield would desire to very nicely come to them, if we don't pass to the conflict container. Any clever individual needs to end some thing that makes them sense that way. they'd't end the conflict or the lack of self assurance it brings to them so they protest their own lack of ability to result the placement via protesting the conflict or those working it. psychological discomfort is as genuine as actual. no person needs to make certain squaddies coming domicile in physique bags. the sentiments generated from such events result protesters on a private point and rigidity them to do what they do regardless of if that action seems ineffective or illogical. Their motives are not completely because of the fact of ethical outrage at a social injustice, there's a psychological and workers reason of the habit as nicely. they don't purely like the sentiments the media photos generate in them, so they attempt and make themselves sense extra advantageous via protesting what's out of their conrol.

Answer 6

I was totally for the War in Iraq at first. And I argued the case for war with many liberals.

Over time, my view has changed.

I no longer support this war.

I believe US troops are being put at risk fighting someone else's war. Our sons, daughers, husbands and wives are being used to pry open the Middle East for multi-national corporations and international bankers and elites.

Fact of the matter is, the US should NOT be poking around in the Middle East in the first place. All immigration from the Middle East should be cut off. And the borders closed. That right there would solve our problems of worrying about terrorists attacking US cities. But we're too PC to close down immigration so the Feds sacrifice America's finest on the altar of Political Correctness.

On top of that, the US is being flooded with people from the thirdworld (illegal aliens and legal immigrants) who are starting gangs and committing dangerous crimes and identity theft. (See LE stats for proof.) With most American cities infested with dangerous gangs -- I really don't see the point in attacking some starving Muslim guy landlocked by mountains and desert when we have thugs in our major cities killing and mugging people.

Answer 7

I support our troops in the war. I hope they arrive back home to their families safe and well. I support the people in this war who are innocent. Including women, children and men who are by standards in the war across the ocean.
I do not support the war.
I support anti-terrorism defence.
I do not support the war. Are we helping out or are we the terrorist in another country? Are they happy that we "invaded" their homeland? If another country did to us what we are doing to them, what would we do?

Enough ranting on my half....

To answer your question....
We are angry. Upset. We want something else to be done.
Unfortunately for the soldiers (that we do support and pray for) they are a symbol of the war. The closest person that we can communicate to about our detest. Can we spit on the Presidents face? Prime Ministers face?
People are retaliating against the war and the soldiers are the pawns that are the front that the "average Joe" faces, sees, hears.
Sometimes (even if it is wrong) getting physical is the way to bring this uprising to light. (as apposed to writing letters and petitions to our government officials)

Answer 8

I support the Troops but not the war, about half of the retired military is that way. I donate at the post chapel every week to help the families of deployed troops. Aside from buying a yellow magnet, what have you done?

Just because a bunch of college students go wild doesn't change the fact that this war is wrong. If they weren't out there protesting Congress would be doing nothing.

As for Israel, what has that got to do with anything. You mean not wanting to pay our monthly stipend to every Israeli is somehow unpatriotic?

Answer 9

I for one am outraged.

Americans have become such complacent sheep, thinking if we leave Iraq our troubles will go away.....

We must win this war..... and it's going to be a long and costly struggle against a shadow enemy in a part of the world that has a culture that values hatred and death. This enemy has declared war on us and seeks to destroy our culture and civilisation.

Many sacrifices have been made by our brave men and women in service, and despite the mainstream media rhetoric day after day, much progress has been made and our enemy has been weakened severely.

The enemy is relying at this point on our weak will to fight a protracted war....and unfortunately, most of our so-called 'leaders' in Washington have jumped on the popular bandwagon and declared surrender.

I consider these people....John Murtha is a prime example...as cowards and traitors to America. They lie about "supporting the troops" while spitting in their faces.

"""“’A Triumph for Pelosi.’ That’s how the Associated Press described [Friday’s] vote by the House to demand a U.S. retreat from Iraq, and in the perverse calculus of Capitol Hill we suppose it was. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has demonstrated she can pile on enough pork to bribe enough Democrats to cobble together a bare, partisan majority to ”send a message“ that has no chance of becoming law. Congratulations. ‘Today is an historic day,’ Ms. Pelosi said on the House floor. ‘The new Congress will vote to end the war in Iraq.’ But of course the bill does nothing of the sort. If she truly wanted to end the war, the Speaker and her fellow Democrats could simply have used their power of the purse to refuse to fund it. But that would have meant taking some responsibility for what happens in Iraq, which is the last thing Democrats want to do. So they have passed a bill that funds the war while claiming it ends the war. The bill’s ‘benchmarks’ and deadlines certainly have nothing to do with achieving victory in Iraq, or assisting General David Petraeus’s campaign to secure Baghdad. They are all about the war inside the Democratic Caucus. On the one hand, they appease the antiwar left by pretending to declare the war illegal if certain goals aren’t met by Iraqis or U.S. forces. But on the other, they allow ‘moderates’ from swing districts to claim they are nonetheless ‘supporting the troops.’ Acts of Congress don’t get much more cynical than that.”"""" —The Wall Street Journal

Answer 10

All people need to show their support for the troops by showing their respect for the soldiers, first, by treating them like human beings who have same basic needs for food, shelter and clothing. They also have the same basic need for love and respect from their families and from everyone in the country- which means not spitting on them. Soldiers receive training in special skills, and taught to prepare for anything including war. Soldiers are taught to defend themselves against anyone threatening their own liberty and of others who may not be able to defend themselves. Soldiers are taught to follow orders of their superiors, even if it means doing something they may not necessarily believe in. It's the president and congress that makes the decisions to go to war. So if someone is against the war, he or she needs to take this up with their politicians, not spit in the face of the soldiers, because by doing this they are starting another war instead of trying to bring about peace.