Newshoggers Comments
New publisher cans Robert Scheer, now this. Something tells me we're supposed to get used to this whether we like it or not.
They're infecting every city in every state to make the entire left look like fringe lunatics.
It takes a LOT of effort, but we've seen recently that their bullshit can be called. Even by fringe lunatic blogs.
What about Vietnam? Why did our troops deserve to get spit on then and not now? If public opinion would tolerate it, wouldn’t the left be expectorating on today’s troops?
No AB, they wouldn't. That's a myth you wingnuts tell each other so that you don't have to feel guilty about cheerleading a bunch of incompetents who have shat on the poor bloody infantry (and marines) every chance they got.
-C
Good post, you make some excellent points. I readily agree with your understanding of the volunteer soldiers moral duty to decide if the war he is called to fight in is just. I think the reason those of us who would tell you that they do not "support the troops", choose not to do so, is found specifically in the idea that a war can in fact be just. Agreed, wars are fought for noble and just causes. The act of war itself though, is as far from noble as man can get. The glaring and uncomfortable truth is that if no one agreed to join the army, any army, ever. If the idea of joining an organization devoted to the destruction of human life and property, even in the name of saving them, were as anathema as cannibalism or incest. Then there would be no one to fight. The truth is that the reasons for an action, no matter how imperative, do not allow a person to disregard fundamental ethical principles in its implementation. Thus, the ends never justify the means.
This is an important discussion. I appreciate that it's proceeding (mostly) without rancor and insults. Whatever "noble cause" or "just cause" soldiers may have in their minds, the fact is that they are murdering to sustain criminality on the part of their governments (or religion). Our military is an imperialist racket waged against the have not's for the benefit of the haves. This is the veiw of the first Marine general Smedley Darlington Butler -- look it up. It is as true today as it was then. Our poor deluded soldier and those that "support" them are really only supporting the continuation of ignorance, ignominy, and cruel oppression. It's difficult for us who benefit from empire to see that our being a "special" nation in the eyes God, with the advantages we have are only the result of the exploitation and repression of those outside the empire.
I disagree. Mr. Stein has addressed a problem that has rankled me since the beginning of this damned War in Iraq; and I'm tired of so many so-called liberals treating this issue as a public relations problem, rather than a question of ethical consistency.
I don't support 'our troops', either. I support the men and women who are being exploited by this imperial war of aggression....but as soon as they are designated specifically as 'troops', any support I feel for them as individual human beings goes out the window.
As soon as they function as 'troops', they become something different from their individual selves. Would we even think of asserting support for 'The Gestapo' whose ranks, I presume, included numbers of individual persons who were 'kind to old ladies' and 'loved their pets and children' in their everyday lives? I doubt it...nor should we as long as they donned their uniforms and functioned as 'The Gestapo'.
Ever since liberals were accused, during the Vietnam War, of undermining our troops by protesting their mission, liberals have taken on the collective guilt foisted upon them by the PR of the warhawks. I'm with Mr. Stein...let's cut the crap and show a little bit more respect for human beings and a perfectly justifiable condemnation of the mission of 'troops'.
Let's be a little less concerned about what Karl Rove says about us, and consider that our first priority should be to end this war. I suggest we are prolonging it and abetting it when we fall all over ourselves trying to convince 'our troops' that we honor them and hold them guiltless for whatever they do while in uniform and following orders...in effect functioning as the tools of war policy (which is what it means to be 'a troop').
For what it's worth (and I can guarantee that some will say I must be lying), I served in the U.S. Army on the ground in Vietnam for a year in 1968/'69, and 'did a job' for which I was honored and praised by friends, family and neighbors who thereby allowed me to think of the mission in Vietnam as a 'noble undertaking'. It wasn't; and neither is this one; and we ought to have enough respect for the human beings in uniform to let them know we disapprove mightily with what they are doing AND we disapprove of their doing it!
what crap. I should demand payment for my time!
Knowing your pissed makes me so happy.
Cheers!
Hey C
Three cheers for the Black Watch and for Gen. Smedley Darlington Butler. For his thoughts on war look no further than
War is a Racket
ciao
L
C,
Man. How come I didn't get an e-mail about this one?
Beautiful post man, and you know where I'm coming from on this. You and I disagree on a lot of things, but I think how we address the troops, and support the troops is one of those things where we see eye to eye.
And you know what I'm talking about.
For everyone in the discussion that doesn't know what I'm talking about...
I was gonna do a whole long discussion, but I think I may just turn this one into a post as well.
M,
Let me know when your post is up, I'll be sure to link it.
Regards, C
Commenting by HaloScan
