29 September 2005

What a sad parade

I'm growing increasingly more confused by something.  For almost four years now, ever since the US military (rightly) went into Afghanistan, I've seen billboards, car ribbons, signs in front yards, etc. that say "Support Our Troops." 

People seem to have differing opinions on how one can go about supporting the troops:

1. Express strong, positive feelings for every single thing that the administration and Pentagon have done since the war on terror began, and attack anyone who does not support the war as someone who does not "support the troops."   

2. Assume that anyone who has been/currently is/will be deployed in the Middle East did so voluntarily, and supports their right to do so.

3. Doesn't agree with the idea to invade Iraq, feels disgusted about the way events there are proceeding, is saddened by the over 2000 American soldier deaths there, and wants the troops currently there to return safely.

4. Hates everything to do with the war, doesn't really believe there is a war, and doesn't appreciate or understand the risks soldiers face in this arena.

My personal beliefs fall under #3, and I really have no patience for #1 and #4 either.

Yet because I disagree with the way the situation in Iraq has been handled, I am labeled as a non-supporter of American troops frequently.  If I don't think they should be over there, I am giving "comfort" to our enemies, who will take the words of my dissent, get all hyped up on it like it was speed, and go out and kill more American soldiers, so I am told.


I don't want anymore Americans to die for a cause that is unattainable (and here I would add the three most important words when it comes to keep perspective: IN MY OPINION).  I want the troops to live, not die. 

How much more supportive can one be?

Perhaps I don't get it.  Again, I have been told that many times.

Here's something I definitely don't get.  When a woman who has seen one of her children die decides to speak up and ask the man who ultimately made the decision that sent her son off to die, she is crucified by some, fondly embraced by others.  Those that disagree with her anti-war cause say that she is (say it with me) "not supporting the troops."

We are told that the media in the war arena feeds off of the negativity that Mrs. Sheehan supposedly feeds.  Again, we will seejihadists go ballistic in their attempts to kill US service people because of this.

Meanwhile, it is revealed that some (which by definition means not all, not even close) of the American service people currently in Iraq are trading gruesome photos of killed insurgents for free access to pornographic web sites.

I'm not making this up.  All the details are here, along with the explanation from the Pentagon on how this is all being swept under the rug.

It would seem to me that it would place a lot more of our troops in a situation of "non-support" by making sure that pictures of dead enemies are floating around the Internet, especially when it is affiliated with pornography, than any group of people who do not agree with war in the first place.

And yet, it's so very quiet out there.  The outrage over the anti-war protests that went on in Washington this past weekend created quite a fuss for the first part of this week.  But those screamers are silent now.


If I can quote Bob Dole from his 1996 campaign "Where is the outrage?"  How come people on both sides of the support fence are not up in arms about this?  Tell me, which actions make the people of this country less safe-Cindy Sheehan and her traveling minstrels of end-the-war protest, or soldiers who take pictures of mutilated terrorists so that they can get a free look at a vixen or twenty?

Which do you think motivates someone to become a suicide bomber?

Of course, there are those that think this is another example of things that don't need to become public, because the world is different now, and the rules have changed.

People like the President that we somehow re-elected last fall, and the Secretary of Defense that was carried over, and the newly appointed Attorney General.

This is an issue where it should not matter whether you vote red or blue.  It makes every one of us a target, or more of one.  And it repulses me to no end that there aren't marches in the street all over the nation, demanding accountability from the top.

What about the folks who hate the way this country has declined recently, to an "anything goes" society?

When do we get out support?

No comments: