Because the troops are just doing their jobs. It's the incompetent @$$holes who are running this pointless war that you should be mad at, not the troops.
We all support our troops...that's why we hate seeing them used as political tools by a corrupt government. We hate seeing them put in harm's way for no good reason.
2007-05-25 18:41:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by The Man In The Box 6
·
5⤊
3⤋
It basically means that we want the troops home. It means that we don't support a President that got a report in 2003, that said that if we go into Iraq everything that has happened would happen. It means that we will not support a President that got caught with his pants down and his fingers in his ears.
It means that we believe in the words of Tom DeLay when he said that we can support the troops without having to support the President (only valid when a Democrat has the Oval Office). It means that we believe in the words of then Texas Governor George Bush when he said that a President needs an exit strategy and you cannot have victory without an exit strategy, (once again only valid when he is not the President).
2007-05-26 01:57:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by White Star 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
I hope you're asking a sincere question and not just being silly or trying to start an argument. As a veteran myself, I don't take kindly to people using our troops to make political statements or as a wedge issue. And that includes those who send them to fight, struggle and die not to defend their country, which they will gladly do, but to get votes, oil and corporate profits.
Before I continue, consider how many of the people who are so supportive of the President and extending his war of choice, have never served in uniform or have never served in combat. This would include both the President and the Vice President, by the way. Maybe if they personally knew and understood the terror of combat and the horror of war they wouldn't be so quick to send brave men and women to their deaths, solely to secure personal and political gains.
You support the troops (I hope) because they are doing, and have done, everything that was asked of them. You support them regardless of why the politicians sent them to that war.
You do not have to support keeping them in a war that is costing their lives, a war in which the President himself declared "Mission Accomplished" over four years ago.
You have bought into the Bush administration's lie that questioning the President's motives, policies and judgement is unpatriotic and unsupportive of our troops. If the President supported our troops they wouldn't be in Iraq and, if they did have to be, they would have the proper armor and equipment five years into the war.
Challenging the President's policies, calling him on his lies and exaggerations, his war-mongering and continually finding new reasons to keep our troops in harms way, is not the same as failing to support our troops. It is the most supportive thing we can do for our troops to ensure they are only asked to sacrifice their lives to defend our nation from *imminent* threats, not to solve another nations political problems, and to make sure they are properly equipped when we do have to send them to war.
2007-05-26 02:03:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Don P 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
All of you are missing the main point! Remember that photo op when Bush was flown onto a carrier and was waving with a big sign behind him that said “mission accomplished!” Well believe it the mission was accomplished! We destroyed the country, took total control of their oil, set it up for 30 years of occupation by building bunches of very large basses. We destroyed the power structure so there would be endless internal fighting and civil war to keep them distracted from the rape we are doing.
In our march to empire we now have the forward bases we needed to project power in the whole region. The fact that this is destroying our country and making us universally hated was an added plus to the leaders of this mess. We will be relegated to the roll of a third world country supplying the cannon fodder for the new world order. It won’t be that much longer when we become the enforcement arm of the UN with total UN control of all the troops. We will have no troops of our own with our own leaders loyal only to this country. Not much more needs to happen for this scenario to become a reality!
We need to turn this shameful mess around by voting out the CFR scumbags in control of our country. This includes most all of the present people in office. The only real exception is Dr. Ron Paul! He needs and deserves our total support! Having him for president would be the best possible support we could give our troops! He would bring them home and out of this illegal, undeclared war.
Don’t tell me we would be giving into our enemies as the only enemies left are the Iraqi people that want us out of their country. Is it so hard to understand they want to run their own lives? Is it so hard to understand they will shoot our troops and bomb them to make this point? If the situation were reversed wouldn’t we be doing the same?
2007-05-26 02:16:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by sx881663 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
So can you be against your kids soccer team and still be considered as supportive to your kid?
I hate to boil it down that way but every war is us VS them. Who do you want to win?
All too often I hear people against the war going on to root for our defeat, slander our troops, and slander our president like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and John Kerry.
Once we go down the road of second guessing ourselves, we become weak and pathetic. If you cant stomach the war the country voted for and wanted, then I suggest you turn off your TV and let people WITH the stomach do what needs to be done.
2007-05-26 01:58:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
OUR TROOPS FOLLOW ORDERS THAT ARE HANDED DOWN FROM THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF! Right or wrong, they are respopnsible for following the orders laid down to them by thier superior officers. It is the responsibility of the men handing down the orders for what occurs. The troops, as long as they are in line with thier orders, & not running around doing thier own thing, should not be held responsible for things that might occur that are the ugliest parts of war! Therefore, I can be supportive of the men who are upholding the security of our proud nation, yet disagree with the current decisions being made by our president.
2007-05-26 01:55:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Supporting the troops is our patriotism, that's our boys out there; against the war is our conscience speaking.
Why some of us has a hard time understanding something as basic as this is beyond me, consider the amount of thumbs down i'm going to receive, i'm being anti-american, terrorist-lover,etc; it's all so moronic................
2007-05-26 01:48:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
It means the troops are doing their jobs and we respect that, but they should not have been sent into war to begin with.
2007-05-26 01:36:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by knowmeansknow 4
·
5⤊
3⤋
Some people who are against the war don't want to support the troops by giving money and stuff. I think they want to seperate themselves from the war and don't want to feel connected to or responsible for what happens. But there are also people who are against the war and want to make sure our troops are taken care of.
2007-05-26 01:41:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
6⤋
it means just what it says. the troops don't vote on going to war. they follow orders. you CAN support the troops and not the war.
2007-05-26 01:34:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by truth seeker 7
·
9⤊
3⤋