Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Saying you support the troops but not the war, or don't support the troops or the war makes no difference in your actions as far as I can tell. Both are attempting to undermine the US war effort. At this point, reguardless if you think the war was needed or not is a moot point, the US has a moral obligation to the people of Iraq. You may not have approved of the war but it happened, you can't take it back, and advocating anything but victory at this point will harm the US both directly and indirectly.
|
Ustwo, I agree completely. I think the confusion that the Times author made was between not supporting the invasion and not supporting victory. Elphaba, when you say that you have never supported the Iraq war, I interpreted it to mean that you thought and still think it was a mistake for us to go there in the first place. Is this correct?
There are, of course, some people who "support our troops" but think we should immediately withdraw from Iraq. That position makes significantly less sense because it seems to me that supporting the troops includes supporting their mission. Even so, however, I think it is possible to argue that one can support the troops by hoping they leave the dangers of the battlefield behind.
Alternatively, if you hope that the Iraqi insurgents ("minutemen" in obese traitor-speak) defeat our soldiers, I don't see how you could possibly say you support the troops.
Thus, it seems that the vast majority of people who do not support the war could conceivably support our troops. It all depends on precisely what you mean when you claim not to support the war.