Can you support the war and the troops...?

Question

I dont support the police but I hate crime..sounds odd dont it..maybe its an oxy moron..and who is oxy..some kind of dem senator..from Kali..maybe

Answer 1

I support the war, the troops and my country. I would rather fight the war now, on their soil , on our terms rather than here.
Some of you Peaceniks are fooling yourselves by thinking that it will never happen here. The way you wusses are running things , you will be praying to allah.

Answer 2

I don't support the war but I support the troops.

The reason this makes sense is because the war in Iraq is not being fought for our national security and it's STRATEGICALLY worsening, not improving our position in the "global war on terror".

Thus, whether our troops succeed TACTICALLY or not - our national defense and foreign policy objectives are actually deteriorating as a result of our presence in Iraq.

Iraq was not a significant player in terrorism before we invaded, and had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Those countries which actively sponsored 9/11 and which supported Al Qaeda and the Taliban are STILL sponsoring terrorism - this is documented well in the 9/11 commission report: Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Pakistan.

And that's where our focus should be.

The epicenter of support for the Iraqi insurgency and the civil war continues to be outside the country - Saudis supporting Sunni insurgents and Iranians supporting Shiite (government aligned) militia. This conflict is catalyzed by U.S. presence - if we leave, the Iraqi government can simply brutally crush resistance and by default it will become a majority Shiite regime (which should make us happy - those are the folks we initially recruited to take over from Saddam - never mind that our CIA contacts had strong connections with Iran).

Note that the Republican Congress in the mid 1990's used this precise argument to oppose U.S. involvement in Somalia and the Balkans - even after U.S. troops had become involved. They supported the troops, but opposed the war. Read the story in the link about Bosnia in 1995 and Republican attempts to pull funding.

Answer 3

The responsibility of the troops is to follow their mission and the orders of their superiors to the letter. They have no latitude in choosing or forfeiting the wars they are sent on.
If a soldier does not fulfill his/her obligations towards a war they can/will be either imprisoned or killed on charges of treason.
The people who have the responsibility to authorize/choose a war are the Congress and the President.
The person who is responsible for the direction of the war is the President.

Thus you can always oppose a war and support the troops just like Tom Delay and Newt Gingrich did. If fact you should be obligated to support your troops.

Now ponder this:

On the eve of 9/11 the people in charge were:
Republican President.
Republican Governor.
Republican Mayor.
if a Republican is elected president in 2008, America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001 or worse.

Answer 4

it just goes to show you that american people don't reflect talking points.

i very much support our brothers and sisters in the armed forces and at the same time think that the war in iraq should be a do-over in saudi arabia.

we invaded the wrong nation and i do not support the policies of our loser president.

Answer 5

I don't support the war. I never have. But, I will awlays support people who risk their lives.