It's become something of a cliche to start every anti-war argument with, "Of course I support our troops, but..." The assumption is that everyone supports the troops overseas, right?

Not quite. I stumbled across one article, which states:

Here's a similar article, which is addressed to the soldiers:

What do you guys think? I don't necessarily agree with this. But I can see their point that it's difficult to truly support the troops if you are wholeheartedly against the war.

What does it mean to "support the troops"? When you "support the troops", you would HAVE to be supporting the U.S. initiation of war and bullying of Iraq.

Either that or you:

*support the U.S. military (for whatever reason), and aggression in general, as opposed to world collaboration

*support the idea that, right or wrong, American has the right to interfere militarily in the problems, issues, and affairs of other "lesser" nations

*believe that this situation could not have been worked out by a coming to the table that involved all interested and logical parties (i.e., any and all Arab nations, Turkey, and anyone who felt qualified to contribute to the discussion) toward a long-term, yet peaceful outcome

*want to feel that, in 2003, America is STILL the "greatest nation on earth" even if that means obliterating other nations by forceful and bellicose means

...or some combination of the above...

- - - - -

I don't ask anyone to follow, as I do this for myself; but, difficult as it is, I turn off ALL television programs and pre-empts (Where's my Fear Factor? ) relating to Bush/Iraq, I leave conversations at work relating to Bush/Iraq, and I walk away (in public) from discussions about Bush/Iraq when doing my errands.

I realize that I may have to do this for awhile - but, I did it with O.J. Simpson, the Menendez brothers, the Unabomber, the D.C. sniper, the Oklahoma city bombing case, and a couple of cases with parents who killed/drowned their children. I have a bit of experience.

While I do not hope for American bloodshed, it is my stance that the people who are in the U.S. military chose to obey their orders, thereby leaving for Iraq.

They are going along, willingly or not, because theirs is a military life. I am CERTAIN that the majority are proud to occupy a position that other ex-military here wish they could fill, "fighting for their country".

They choose to work in the U.S. military or in the reserves. They knew, for months now, that GWB was planning to enter into some type of conflict: he may wrap up with Iraq, and start with North Korea (or, set this up for the next president, who, if Republican, will [without a doubt] carry on GWB's wishes to the letter).

I cannot "feel sorry" for our troops. There are even people in this community who are proud to be in the military, and I support the right to their opinion.

Nevertheless, MY opinion is that this "racist aggression" is useless, could EASILY have been circumvented by the right people, and...has no end in sight.

Pretty provocative, Blue.

Well, I support the troops by which I mean:

1) I support the men and women who are willing to give their lives on behalf of their country whether or not they or I agree with the war the country is engaged in;
2) I feel sorry for every one of them, even if they have signed up, because human lives are precious to me and I hate to see someone cut down in his or her prime, even if it death-making is in their line of work;
3) I feel sorry for the innocent people they may to kill as part of their job.

Naive, perhaps, but I do not believe that my feelings about the troops translates into direct feelings about the military or the war in general. I do not feel bad that our troops went to Afghanistan or Bosnia, which were to me situations that demanded an American response. I do feel that the War in Iraq is a mess and shouldn't have been launched.

I refuse to turn off the TV or flee discussions because as an engaged citizen it is my duty to be aware, to speak out and up, and not let the discourse be controlled by just one side. We have had more than enough instances in history where people flew inward away from the reality of the horrors occuring around them, simply because they didn't want to deal or couldn't and knew they weren't going to be hurt in the process.

I also take exception to the comparison implicit in the quotes between our military and that of the Nazis. While some of the planners of this war may demonstrate ostensible world-remaking and Lebensraum intentions (Perle, etc.), I do not believe that the president, as much as I abominate him, is another Hitler. We also, thankfully, have in our constitution the limitation of 8 years total, so if, as part of the endless warmaking we hear any proposals to once again allow unlimited terms (as happened during Reagan's tenure, and Clinton's), I will grow very, very worried (as Mussolini starts to turn over in his grave with joy).

Bluebird, I think you're absolutely right. The "support for the troops" preface to anti-war statements is utterly self-serving. How can you oppose the war, on moral grounds, and find no fault with those who fight the war? If the war is wrong, then so must be those who engage in it's miserable deeds. Few servicemen and women participate unwillingly. Almost without exception they believe in their mission - they have to.

Having said that, I do support our troops. I support the extension of American power and influence in the world and those who carry out the task, at great risk and discomfort to themselves and their families. I support the war and Bush policy of regime change toward Iraq.

I support the right of my fellow citizens to oppose the war, Bush policy and the actions of our service men and women. I would just as soon they didn't tie up traffic, otherwise it doesn't bother me a bit.

[ April 03, 2003, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: Torgauer ]

"racist aggression" - per Blue.

Here we go again with a Race Issue.

Back to the real topic now:

I support the troops because of the fact that I feel powerless where I am. It makes little difference weather I support the "war" or if I oppose it. We are all powerless on this ride that the government is taking us on. I feel torn at times because part of me says that we should just cut them off, and not deal with them at all, I mean it's only 14% of our oil supply. Don't buy anything from them, or sell anything to them, let them rot over there. Then I sit down with a friend of mine who was over in "Desert Storm" and he told me about how an Iraqi prisoner they were treating at the hospitol had told him that before he had left for combat, the military came to his house and told him to get ready to fight for his country. At that point the Iraqi civilian responded that he couldn't fight because he was a single father. At which point the Military guy shot his son dead, and said "Now you have no reason to not fight." It's injustices like this that turn my stomach and flip the switch in my head that says that there may be some kind of redeaming outcome to this "War".

So I sit here at work, not thinking about the war a whole lot because there is really nothing I can do about the situation, and if you think that a protest rally here or there, or rehashing our opinion and constantly complaining about the current government action will make a difference I believe you are wasting your time. Wait until the next election and THEN make your opinion heard about an issue that YOU can do something.

I hope and pray for the safe return of our troops, and hope that in the end, something good will come of this situation, but to open your mouth and state that you do not support the troops, is like saying that you could care less that an American citizen is in danger, and that you don't care about the welfare of another person.

To me, saying "I support the troops" does not mean "I hope they kill a lot of Iraqis and win the war."

I think an anti-war person can say "I support the troops" and mean, "I wish no harm upon the individuals in our military, and that they do not get injured or killed, and that they return home safely." This is all the support I think anti-war people need to offer, just hope for the safety of each man and woman. Even though you might think they should have defied orders to fight, surely you can offer that much support.

I would also add to maxallen's comments that by "supporting the troops" I do not believe that they should take an active role in undermining or refusing to participate in this war. Being against the war is not necessarily or primarily a moral argument for me. My contention has always been that Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the region, even as he is/was not a direct threat to the US, but that war was not the right way to get rid of him.

Now that the war is on, I do not hope for us to end it without victory, because quite frankly the US has been screwing the Iraqi people for the last 25 years, and a failure to finish the job now (as in 1991) would be just another time we would have screwed the Iraqis. Therefore I support our troops, hope they all get home safely, and do their jobs with a minimum of loss of Iraqi life and perhaps bring hope to an oppressed people.

good topic. i, too, have questioned how one could support the troops and protest the war. but i think it can be done. as has been said, support can mean to pray for the safe return of the troops, as i do. to support the troops can mean to go out and cheer your head off when they march by in the next memorial day parade. to support the troops can mean to send letters and mementos of the places they left behind. none of this implies any support of the war.

let me make a sports analogy as to how one can support the troops but not the war.

it is the bottom of the ninth. your team is up to bat with two out, man on second, and one run down. batter comes up, checks the signal, and lays down a sacrifice bunt so perfect it could make grown men tear up. immediately, some people are cheering and some are booing. those who are cheering are cheering the effort of the batter, despite ending the game. those who are booing are booing the boneheaded play called by the manager. the crowd is, at once, supporting the player who made the perfect bunt, and condemning the bonehead who told him to do it.

[ April 03, 2003, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: thersis ]

Im in the military and i strongly support the troops and im against the war, and this might be surprising to a few people but there are quite a few people in the military that think this war is wrong. I have a lot of friends that over there now and i pray for them all the time. hope you guys are doing the same, regardless of how you feel about the war

Some thoughts about prayer. I think if you believe in prayer you should pray always, pray unselfishly (for guidance not favors) and realize that the only prayer that is always answered is "May God's will be done."

I hope all of those troops come home safe, healthy and better human beings for their experience.

They may not be able to deal with the horror, as possibly they are individuals who are suffering from depression and because of that cannot face an increasingly ugly reality.

I enjoy listening to my police scanners. Usually I monitor the Alexandria VA police, but I sometimes listen to the Arlington County police as well. I noticed in the weeks leading up to the US invasion of Iraq that, even if one were to listen to the scanner only one hour per day, one could count on hearing about at least one suicide in Alexandria or Arlington per week. Naturally, suicides are not generally reported in the newspapers, as such reports would serve to encourage others. Nor are they reported on the TV news. I do know that I am not imagining a trend of increased suicide, as one TVstation did during the news list the phone numbers for the local mental health hot lines. My guess is that they were asked to do so by a locality's health depatment or a local medical society.

That is what the Flyers' PA announcer now says before every game at the First Union Center. I think it says it all.

Oh No!! Bluebird (gasp)

Don't Use the RACE CARD here. Please do not become the Johny Cochran of Outsports.


This war is not about race as you implied.

Very well said man. I am not suprised that you say there are quite a few in the military opposed to the war. I have heard several veterans speak out against the war.

If the chemical suit doesnt fit, you must acquit.

I don't think that I could (justifiably) be compared to Johnnie Cochran...a-ny-hoo...

What I wrote is MY opinion, I am sure that I articulated it succintly, and I am not going to back down because RACE IS A FACTOR in my text.

- - - - -

FYI: In this situation, I would be using a race LETTER OF CREDIT, not a race (credit OR debit) card. wink

Race \"cards\" are obsolete in today's world, don't you agree?

- - - - -

Would you explain this to me? Does this mean that you don't agree with what's going on, but you don't feel sufficiently to even write a letter to your Congressman, or some such act?

What is it about how you feel that is \"powerless\"? :confused:

- - - - -

Can you imagine (yes, I'm begging for 3 seconds of your time) how difficult is for me to post in these forums, given my "powers of inflammation"?!?!?!

I hold back.

I take 5-second breaks.

I sip water.

I breathe deeply and look at happy faces.

etc., etc., etc.

...but my opinion is just that: MY opinion. I stand for it, not necessarily because I think I'm correct (no one can be 100%), as much as it is my right to have one.

BTW, I am not "avoiding" the circumstances...I am glad that that was brought up, becuase I am NOT. I am choosing to deny my support, of ANY kind, to an effort that strikes me as unbelievable.

This is my choice, as is my choice to have a military-free life.

I think the worst thing in the world is to have to devote yourself (i.e., mind, body, and soul) to the death, fighting for a cause you don't understand, believe in, or resonate with.

Yes, that stands me apart from the millions of Americans who support military, and GWB's policies.

Nevertheless, I am FROM a military family (both my father and brother are ex-military), and I have worked with ex- military, and I have dated ex-military men...and I have studied gay military issues.

Blah, blah, blah.

My point is...I feel strongly about my position because I stand for a life wherein military struggle is not valued over dialogue.

- - - - -

I guess it needs to be said: If I believed in GWB and what he is doing, I would back a military (not a racist) aggression with fervor.

I just don't see this one.

[ April 04, 2003, 07:14 AM: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]

Ok, I'll try to elaborate on my "powerless" feeling.

The reason I feel powerless at this time is because of the fact that this "Thing" has started, and it will continue until it ends. The end will not come from My Congress man, or your congress man, or even if then entire legislative branch were to come together and make some kind of statement, which will never happen. Writing to Sen. Max Baucus would get me a form letter at the least, and maybe an actual letter from him, if he has time. I've had dinner with my Senator, and he's a nice guy, but I don't think that telling him about my opinion on this war would make one hill of beans of difference, to the President. Yes it's our Inalienable right to protest and speak freely, I just don't want to waste my energy on a topic that has already been decided, I call that bitching and moaning about a lost cause. If I'm going protest, I'll work on changing something that CAN be changed.

Next you ask me if I'm in favor of "war". I think that's a moot point. The fact is, we, as a country are already at war. Debating about weather or not we should get into war is an exercise in futility. Weather I supported GOING to war is of no importance. The important thing now, is how are we going to finish this thing? I do not believe that we should, or even could, just pull out and leave the area. It's too late now. Hence, we're along for the ride. Where's the war going, and what will the outcome be? These are answers I don't have. Hence, I come to work and do my job, and leave the "war" and such to the President and his cabinet. In 2 years if I don't like the direction we're going, it's time to vote. Until then, I'll direct my energy to topics that I have a real ability to change.

It's still early for me, so this may have just been ramblings, but as I read it over, it seems to make sense to me. wink

Oh ya, by the way, Good Morning!

I agree with Kevin Weaver, an Out Against the War organizer (sorry, no link):

"... When the mainstream media and the right-wing pundits say "support our troops" they mean something different.  What they mean is don't question or oppose the Bush administration's motives for war....

"I have some harsh news for our troops.  They are not defending our rights.  It may be a hard pill to swallow for them and their loved ones, but the fact of the matter is that in this war of aggression, they are merely pawns in a rich, oilman's game.... [Our] war is a war to
preserve our democracy, not from a foreign aggressor, but from members of our own society."

I hate to disabuse you of your belief, but OUTSIDE THE US, especially in the Arab world, and in places like India, this war IS SEEN AS A RACIST WAR. Yes, it is. Not here, obviously, because we have people of all races, ethnicities and religions--including Arabs--fighting in our military, but outside the US the country (along with European Britain) are seen as white colonialist powers attacking an Arab nation. If you don't believe me, here's an account from the award-winning East Indian writer Arundhati Roy:

Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates

A lot of interesting points, guys. MSUBobcat, I certainly understand your frustration about not having any power over this decision. Maxallen, I loved what you said - it's similar to the point of the first article, "I don't want them to win, and I don't want them to lose." Certainly I don't want ANYONE hurt, our soldiers or the civilians of Iraq.

One question. A common statement still seems to be, Now that our troops are over there, we have to support them. That's all well and good, I agree for the most part. But let me make an analogy.

Say you are a German citizen in 1942. The German army is running roughshod over most of Europe, slaughtering civilians and military personnel alike. Do you "support the troops" just because the war has already begun? Or, if you believe what the government is doing is immoral, do you say that the soldiers are in the wrong as well?

I know it's a stretch. But my point is, if you do still "support the troops", maybe you don't think this war is so wrong, after all.

And I'm sorry, I'm even confusing myself. Have a good weekend guys.

Some great posts here, many of which address the great complexity of what's going on. I resist the urge and the pressure to summarize quickly or easily our present situation.

It's not a stretch to consider Saddam a threat to world peace; but it's also a little sketchy to conclusively say that he was ready to imploy weapons of mass destruction. Bush clearly has an agenda other than stopping Saddam's WOMD threat; yet our fellow Americans, the troops, are doing an immensely dangerous and horrific (in my eyes) job and they deserve our national support.

There doesn't seem to be so much an arguement of whether to "support" the troops here as one of "support" for the reasons they were sent there in the first place.

Perhaps some of us should explain what we mean by support for the troops.

I stated how I feel about the troops in my previous posts. I do not support what they are being ordered to do.

Ultimately these troops are individuals with the freedom to make their own decisions. No power on earth can take away their right to do that. Nor can anyone prevent them, or us, from facing the consequences of our decisions.

I believe this war is unnecessary and that it will eventually be unbeneficial to us and the world.

I disagree with those who consider themselves powerless. Each of us has complete power over what we choose to believe and do. If we choose not to act on those beliefs for fear of the consequences that is another matter.

Well, by the 1942 period, some (non-Jewish) Germans still were openly protesting the war, and most were promptly placed either in concentration camps like Dachau for political prisoners, or work camps, or were forcibly drafted, or were killed by the Gestapo. In a few cases, such as the Archbishop of Mainz, they had some cover because the Nazis, though increasingly hostile to the Roman Catholic Church, were loathe to attack senior clergy members for fear of alienating the large number of German Catholics (especially in Bavaria, one of the key Nazi regions).

Some (non-Jewish) Germans supported the troops but reviled Hitler. The attempt by members of the military-based upper aristocracy (Count von Stauffenberg, Count von der Schulenberg, Olbricht, etc.) to assassinate him in 1944 was in part an attempt to save the nation by destroying his government, as well as to preserve the military. Of course Hitler survived the assassination attempt and then promptly had most of the members of this group hanged, and imprisoned their extant family members (he didn't kill them, as they held property and titles and could be useful to him later on).

The vast majority of Germans, however, stuck by the Führer and his state apparatus (the Gauleiters, the SS, etc.), and were quite nationalistic even to the end of the war, despite (or perhaps because of) the increasing privation and omens of failure, especially after 1942. There are countless books on this topic, but most that you will read, particularly by Germans who lived through the war, show that even when they had doubts about Hitler and the endless wars into which he pushed the country, the lack of political freedoms and the steadily ramped up security state and compelled patriotism, and even when there were obvious setbacks, as against the Russians, they general supported the armed forces, the government, and the nation.

This was the case even though the Germans had been dragged into a deadly and pointless war just 20 years before in large part by the nation's leaders and the military, the ending of which resulted in the abolition of the imperial system (the Kaiser) and Germany's first true democracy.

Many of the tactics we see today in terms of propaganda, obfuscatory rhetoric and disinformation about war aims and threats, and harsh criticism and marginalization of political dissenters and protesters, have analogues in the period leading up to and after the Sudetenland Crisis (when he seized territory from Czechoslovakia and the Anschluss in Austria), but especially after Hitler's march into Poland in 1939.

[ April 04, 2003, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Fantomas thanks for the History lesson. wink

A case in point about what a soldier can do to show a sense of justice during battle:

I saw on the news today that some USA soldiers had rolled over a statue of Saddam Hussein at the request of some Iraqi citizens in a town the soldiers had just captured. It is not clear whether they were ordered to do this by a commanding officer.

Regardless, this is a useless and vindictive display that need not be done by soldiers even at the request of Iraqi individuals.

I would disagree just as strongly with the destruction of the former homes of slaves in the south. It only leaves less evidence of the perfidiousness of the institution, and more opportunity for the deniers of atrocities like the holocaust, slavery, apartheid, masacres in Rwanda, etc., etc., etc.

If the Iraqi people choose to destroy these symbols, then let them do it themselves. Choosing to do such things is the true beginning of a domestic democratic process. Democracies may be imperfect and make mistakes, but at least people get to choose to make their own mistakes.

We've certainly made our share, and will no doubt continue to do so.

I find the question of whether to support the troops repugnant. I only have empathy for the US troops as they are merely cogs in the machine. They are experiencing life-altering circumstances very often based on their personal decision to improve their life the only way they saw able to do so. Looking at the casualty lists, I am dismayed by the majority being African-American. Before the 1960s, joining the armed forces was an almost natural rite but since that time, it has become the only answer for poor men and women seeking a better life. Look at the casualty list -- you don't see too many WASPs who decided to take a break from the country club. These are mostly men and women who are trying to break the chain of poverty. I can only hope they come back soon (not very realistic) and that they and the Iraqi people all have this nightmare ended soon. As for this administration who sent them, I have nothing but contempt.

Oh my god, bite me. You wanna compare Bush to Hitler? The American people in 2003 to Hitler's gaggle in 1940-whatever? Yeah, okay, right. While Bush is hardly my own personal Republican, I find my own personal "kick their f*cking ass" nationalty emerging during this period. I know we could have done it differently, but I also know that this world is better off without Saddam and his sons. The boys, our nations' families, are there. Give them your prayers; give them all our prayers.

Have you noticed the lyrics to the "Star Spangled Banner" lately?

"The Bombs bursting in Air
Gave Proof through the land
That our flag was still there..."

Okay, so I can't remember the lyrics perfectly..you get my point...?! We live and die by the sword here, whether we like it, or not...

Bryan, there are plenty of leaders out there the world might be better off without but that isn't cause to start invading their countries. Bush has set a dangerous standard and, without a doubt, hypocritical when he looks past China (just a few human rights violations going on there) and the fragmented USSR because they ain't got no oil. While the UN initiative his pappy went after Saddam with was limited, it was a much more lawful endeavor and the US will pay the price for Bush's actions.

Whoa, whoa...first, is it true that the majority of the casualties are African-Americans? I am black and I have been reading the casualty lists, and what I see is that although a HIGH percentage of the killed or missing are black (above either their percentage of blacks in the military or country), I'm not sure they're the majority. All in all it's really saddening me. Also, most of the young whites who have died would be classified as Anglo-Saxon-descended protestants--WASP refers not to class but to ethnicity. So far the majority of the killed or missing appear to be young working-class white men and black men from the Midwest and South. A young Navajo woman, several Latinos (Mexican-American, Puerto Rican), etc., are among those killed. YOu are right that almost no people from wealthy backgrounds--as one analyst discussed it last week--are among those killed or abducted, but then very few wealthy young Americans go near the military these days. All these deaths are a tragedy. And now I read of another suicide bombing at the freaking ex-Saddam airport in Baghdad... :mad:

[ April 06, 2003, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Jesus, not everything is racism.. and last i checked... the military was all VOLUNTEERS... If you say that you do not see any RICH WHITE GUYS in the military... I dont see any rich hispanics in the military... i dont see any rich african americans in the military... But really if you think about it, they dont put the income of the parents next to the casualty list anyway...

True, but everything we do in this country is influenced by a legacy of racism that we have yet to confront.

If you inherit a house with a leaky basement, YOU still have to deal with the basement.

Racism has been confronted and continues to be on a daily basis. Inferring that it's like a leak in the basement is not only an unfortunate analogy (leaks usually occur in roofs) but a mentality that says that the problem will always be there, that "us victims" will always be victimized by the past. It's not true. Prejudice and discrimination is an unfortunate part of the flawed human condition - we deal with it always. But the legacy of racism is certainly out of the closet and into the light. Let the healing continue...and let the ignorant see the truth...

I responded to a simplistic genralization with a simplistic analogy. In that sense I was wrong.

But my point that we can't just use one problem to stifle complaints about another is still valid.

And we cannot except racism as an unavoidable part of human nature. I consider that fatalistic. People make choices. Sometimes they are bad ones.

Bluebird implied that racism plays a part in the cause of this war. That is a valid point whether we agree with it or not. I personally believe race often underpins a lot of decisions we make, although subtley and perhaps unconsciously.

This conflict differs in many ways from the action in Kosovo. The fact that the victims are non-europeans may make it easier for us in the US to tolerate a much higher death toll on the part of the Iraqis. It might have been less tolerable for us to forcefully occupy Yugoslavia in the same manner as we will now probably have to occupy Iraq.

I have seen racism among people of all colors, even in my own family. That doesn't make it any prettier or less painful. Instead of becoming sanctimonious and taking a suggestion of the existence of racism as a personal accusation, we should all try to see its effects around us and start to fight it there.

[ November 19, 2005, 05:30 AM: Message edited by: sportinlife ]

You keep talking about the military and volunteering for it as if they occur in a vacuum, but for the MOSTLY WORKING CLASS AND POOR soldiers who make up the lower levels, THIS IS ONE OF THE CHIEF DYNAMIC OCCUPATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES THEY HAVE! You certainly realize this, you're not that out of it, are you? You make it seem like they're volunteering for an archery contest or a Sunday ride on go-carts. This is one of the few careers that allows advancement to a WIDE ARRAY of people who only have a GED or equivalent. It is not a Ferris wheel ride at the carnival. Racism is offficially not tolerated in the military, nor is sexism, at least not to the degree they are in regular U.S. business. (Only discrimination against homosexuals is officially allowed, and courageous gay soldiers of all colors and both sexes are over there trying to defeat Saddam too, no matter what the military says.)

Also, given that people who SENT these mostly working class and poor soldiers--the majority of whom are WHITE--to fight in this war are RICH and WHITE, it would be interesting to note why SO FEW of them not only DID NOT SERVE to defend their country, but also why their children, patriots all I assume, also are not doing so. Why is only one member of the Senate, a Democrat (and veteran) from a midwestern state, the only one whose children are over there? Why isn't Jeb's son, or fighting-age children of some of these other folks--who are all RICHER in terms of income AND overall capital wealth than the vast majority of Americans--over there as well? That's the point I think that TC and others may have been trying to make, no matter what the color of the soldier. Also, if you didn't realize it, the majority of the richest people in the U.S. are white. Not all, but most. Far more than any other group, though things did change especially during the last 10 years.

Are you going about a long winded way of saying... bring back the draft?

As far as non-military people sending kids into battle... well, wasnt our country set up so civilians were put in charge of the military? If ex military generals were all put in charge, you'd call them militaristic...

Listen... life isnt about being rich or poor. Life is about self determination and what you chose to do how hard you work. My mother raised 2 children on 25k a year... if we wanted to drive, we had to get a job... if we wanted to be able to buy nice cloths for school, we had to work. If i wanted a car of my own, yeah... get a job. My mother raised us with the value of you get what you work for... not you are poor, you are doomed. Guess what? she has 2 kids who worked hard, paid for their own education and are now quite successful. Perhaps if more parents instilled these values in their children we wouldnt have the problem of people thinking they have no other choice but to accept nothing less than the best for themselves. That is why i say, this is a volunteer army... when you join, fighting is part of your job. You cant get out of it.

If they chose to bring back the draft... fine, i'll go if i'm drafted... however, i doubt i'll be on the front lines cause i worked hard to have a higher education which would be more useful to the armed forces in other areas.

"Bite me"? Good one. Jesus.

I wasn't comparing Bush to Hitler; I'll leave that to others. Here's my point: many people who support the war seem to be saying that we must support the troops no matter what. I'm simply asking if there is a limit to that sentiment. Say we found out some of our troops were committing atrocities and war crimes, as some did in Vietnam? Would we still have to support them?

I know this is all hypothetical, but I think it raises some interesting points.

(As for the Star-Spangled Banner, yes it is militaristic, but that particular passage - "gave proof through the night", etc. - simply means that the bombs gave off light so that you could see the flag still waving. See, I DO know the lyrics...)

Fantomas and PhillyFan need to get together and have a summit meeting.LOL. They are at each others' throats over this issue.

However, I must agree with PhillyFan. Just like the old lawyer Johny Cochran, Fantomas is trying to use the "race card". None of those men are forced to join the military. They do at will. The race card does not apply here. :mad:

If you average her salary with Bill Gates, which is how the current administration would calculate your tax reduction, you get a nice hefty little sum...or somebody does.

No need to exchange sob stories. We could go on forever. Setting one impoverished group against another is a classic balm for the guy who wants to exploit both.

Good for you, conor. Obviously the point was that our flag was still there as a result of our potent use of force: bombs. The most powerful nations on earth have always used war and violence as a way of staying powerful and controlling resources.

Again, obviously, if there are soldiers committing war crimes, we should support the military's proper investigation of those individuals. But overall don't we have a responsibility to support our nation's troops? It's likely that we all know someone over there fighting however many degrees of seperation from us that they may be...We can be against the war, highly suspicious and distressed by the Bush administration's tactics and propaganda, but don't we still support the soldiers? Hate the sin, love the sinner, or something like that?

This war isn't about racism, here or there; it's about oil and power. A rich white man from Texas' brand of power. I just hope that with all our bombing and action that we somehow take out Bin Laden and his gang while we're at it. Wishful thinking, I know.

You misread what I wrote, but I'm not surprised. I'm not using the race card, and to say so is idiocy as it to cite Johnny Cochran. In fact, far more whites use the "race card," as you say, every day...at any rate, back to my argument, the majority of those who have been killed are WHITE. THAT is what I said. More than anythign I'm using the CLASS card. The vast majority of the people in the armed services are from POOR and WORKING CLASS backgrounds, except those who come from career military families in which a parent or parents are officers, or the less common enlistees from the middle and upper middle classes. Working class people fighting a war for the interests of the rich. That's my argument. Race is part of it, but not the central issue.

And I said above, Arundhati Roy, the Indian writer, has called this a "racist war," not me. I don't think it is, but millions of people OUTSIDE THE US think of it as so. So maybe they're all playing the "race card"...sheesh, what a right-wing canard, just like PCism, etc.

How about this, rich or poor... black or white.. if you dont wish to fight for your country, dont join the military.

Does working class/high class have anything to do with volunteering to join the military? Most of the CLASS you are talking about... they could make more money sweeping floors than they get paid in the military. Could it be that most of the poeple... infantry, generals, sec of def, doctors, and nurses actually believe in what they are fighting for and dont see any of it as a class war??????? Otherwise, wouldnt we have mass people refusing to fight? Oh wait that is the Iraqi Army.

Who served in the military?

twin58- Thanks for that article!! I was actually in the process of looking for some information to post on this thread illustrating who served for their counntry and who didn't!!

My father served 27 years in the US Army retiring as a Command Sgt. Major in 2000. He wanted his three sons (I am the oldest of the three) to make their own career choice decisions, so he didn't pressure any of us to enlist. Coming out of high school as an honor grad, Student Body President, etc, I had scholarship offers from several schools (SMU, Texas, M.I.T., and others), but I decided that I needed more direction and guidance, so I VOLUNTARILY enlisted into the Army in 1993 being honorably discharged in 1999 as a Sgt. I was offered a $25,000 bonus(highest amount offered) to re-enlist for 4 more years, but decided that I wanted to continue my educational goals outside of the military(I had completed 3 years of college during my final 3 years in the military), so I refused the re-enlistment offer. I did finally graduate, after 5 1/2 total years of college, obtain my degree in Bus. Adm. from the Univ. of Texas. The point that I am trying to make here is that I came from a very middle class background, and worked hard in high school, to gain scholarship offers which I did, but I still chose to enlist into the military, and both of my brothers followed suit.

I didn't grow up rich by any means, but I had the chance to have an easier route to having doors open up quicker for me, had I gone to college right out of high school. I wanted to serve our country, not for the pay, which is totally ridiculous(avg. non-officer pay is: $20,000 per year), but for the structure, the comraderie, and moreso, the direction that I knew it could send a young man or woman into. I got all of that and more. It was by far, the best decision that I had ever made, and by the way, my former unit (4/133 Artillery), is over in Iraq at this very moment. I was a Computer/Radio Operator. I am extremely proud of my father for spending more than half of his life serving our country (he endured much more than I ever did, because he entered the military, when black soldiers still couldn't event share the same facilities as other soldiers, yet there were still told to fight for their country). Still, he never complained about the overt racism he faced every day, to me or my younger brothers. He didn't want us to think all non-blacks were like that, and we didn't even learn about what he encountered, until we all in our teens!! Even growing up, we had white military kids sleep over at our house, and vice versa, and we felt welcome in every neighborhood we moved to. Today's military has a better understanding of comraderie, public service, diversity (especially race relations), and unity, more than the general public ever will. If the general public had even half of the structure of the military, most of today's problems would be little to non-existent!! I really think that most, if not all U.S. companies should implement diversity classes!! Race relations, especially the understanding of another's culture, or the unwillingness to understand another's culture, therefore leading to ignorance, is a real big problem in this country. Still, I love this country, and having lived overseas before, we have it much better than we think, here in the U.S.

Speaking to the topic of this thread, being a military brat, and having served myself, I really do have a problem with people not supporting our troops. I think most of the anti-war protesters, don't fully understand, the sacrifice that our current and former troops have and will make for the future of our country. I haven't heard one good reason from those opposed to supporting our troops. I am not saying this to those opposed to the war, only to those not supporting those who volunteer to fight for our country. You don't have to say, "Rah, rah, hooray for our troops!" every day of the week, but before you say anything against our troops, you should at least research U.S. military history!! And after that, even if you don't support our president, and fully understand that all of the conflicts that we have fought, have greatly impacted our economy, our sense of well-being, and even more importantly, our freedom to speak, vote, etc., you still don't support our troops, then I just don't know what more anyone can say to convince you otherwise.

I disagree. Just as they signed on after thought and family discussions, they can get out. The LAST person who is powerless is a military soldier.

- - - - -

And, the IDLE rich, at that.

- - - - -

BTW: RARELY do I listen to this "race card stuff" on this Board. No one, in my experience here, has ever used this term correctly - and, for the most part, use it to derail a perfectly good piece of logic.


Principle is worth more than money and doing what you are told.

[ April 08, 2003, 06:44 AM: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]