Support the troops? Why?

The Daily Camera ^ | 2/12/03 | Clay Evans

[drew]

Evans: Support the troops? Why? February 9, 2003

Imagine that you live in Nazi Germany, but you and your friends oppose the government, which possesses the mightiest military force in Europe, perhaps the world.

Now Adolf Hitler rumbles ominously about war. You know that the likely first targets of attack — places like Poland and Luxumbourg — pose no immediate threat to your security. You oppose further aggression. But on Sept. 1, 1939, tinny radio broadcasts announce a German invasion of hapless Poland, whose piteous soldiers try to fight Panzer divisions with mounted cavalry.

Oh, well. Time to "support the troops" and lay aside your religious, moral and practical convictions. War has begun!

Got a problem with that?

That's more or less what the U.S. government and a complicit media have badgered us into doing since the military adventures of the Ronald Reagan era. In the constant media barrage about a probable war with Iraq, how often have you heard something like, "Americans remain skeptical of a war. But once bombing starts, they will rally 'round the president and support the troops"?

(Disclaimer: The point of this simile is not to compare the United States with Nazi Germany, or George Bush to Hitler — a fool's pursuit — but merely to conjure a parallel military situation.)

I did not oppose the Persian Gulf war. I think the Bush administration was right to eject the terrorist-puppet Taliban regime. And I support a multifaceted campaign to disable terrorists before they can attack. But I do not support the coming war with Iraq. Therefore, I can't "support the troops."

Don't get me wrong. I wish no harm on any American, and I would never treat with disrespect the men and women who defend us. But I will not meekly surrender my opposition to the war simply because of government and media propaganda.

Since the frequent Reagan-era military adventures (remember the terrible threat of Grenada?) the American public has been bombarded by constant messages that we must "support the troops" — even if we oppose the war. In the '80s, the government figured out that it could play on our Vietnam guilt to squeeze public "consent" — more like emotional blackmail — for military action. If you don't support the troops or the president, why, you're giving aid and comfort to the enemy. What a load of crap.

No less than in our hypothetical 1939 case, it's disingenuous to lay aside reasonable moral objections and "support the troops." One need not "support" the deaths of innocents simply because the government has started an unnecessary war.

People aren't as stupid as Donald Rumsfeld wishes they were. Millions are skeptical of the Bush administration's flimsy, revolving-door justification for war. Bush has floated many trial balloons; all have plunged like lead zeppelins.

Some say we must present a "unified" front during war. What an appalling argument. Is unity so important that it should neuter and silence all concern for innocents slaughtered by "our troops," not to mention the danger to the troops themselves? Should Iraqi women and children die for having the misfortune of living under the thumb of a tinhorn dictator (and one-time U.S. ally)?

If you do not support this war, please don't say you "support the troops" when it begins. It's dishonest. It's undemocratic. It's un-American.

[drew]

This jackhole was on Michael Medved today. Notice how he leaves out the military escapades of Bubba (why didn't he raise similar concerns during the war in Yugo?).

[facedown]

jackhole

Jackhole?

Support the troops bump.

[VRWCmember]

Where's the barf alert? The author is clearly an idiot (I just love his "I'm not suggesting the US is like Nazi Germany or Bush is like Hitler" comment after he had just equated them.

[LS]

To liken ANYTHING in the United States, even the despicable Clinton regime, to Hitler, is grotesque and disgusting. I hope the first Iraqi vial of VX lands near his home.

[dep]

his column does indeed make me think of germany, but in a way he probably didn't intend: he is a grade-a scheisskopf.

dep

[glennaro]

If he cannot "support the troops," which side will Clay Evans support or does he hold that it doesn't matter who wins?

[HiJinx]

The scene in "The Rock", where Nicolas Cage thrusts the pearl of VX into the bad guy's mouth, comes to mind.

I could live with that for this moron.

[Prysson]

This guy is a moron.

The bottom line..someone should tell him. Is he cant have his cake and eat it too.

1. Spare me your (generic your meaning any leftist buffon such as this fellow) protestations about how you arent trying to compare America with Nazi germany. You in fact are trying to draw a metaphorical comparison between the two. Otherwise why make the compairosn only to attempt to forstall protest by claiming to not compair. Well you dont get off that easy. You chose nazi germany with purpose and intent and that very position completely renders the rest of your argument moot.

This follow is like all the rest of the HATE AMERICA crowd who protest daily that they "love their country too" They just cant seem to manage to find anything good to say about it. What deranged sort of rationalization goes on in these peoples heads that they believe they can spout there tripe...then deny two seconds later that they are in fact saying what you think they are saying.

Its like saying...America is an imperialistic, greedy, oppressive terrorist country bent on murder and destruction of innocent lives all over the globe. BUT I love America so dont take it wrong that I said that.

Worms like this need to get a life. There truths are exposed. The do in FACT despise america..it is what drive them to compare us to Nazi germany without citing a single example of HOW we are like Nazi germany and then protest that they did not in fact make the comparison. We are on to people like this and they will NOT get away with their pathetic.

The truly amazing thing to me is that people like this expect people to take them seriousl. These are the same people who a year ago were saying that we did not need a missle defense because noone with nukes would every launch them at us...oh and now they are saying we should be focused on North korea because they have nukes and they could launch them at us...without even having the moral integrity to admit who it was allowed them to build those nukes in the first place.

Men like this have lost there credibility. They are completely incapably of uttering a truth. So I certainly dont believe them when they say " I love my country too"

[glennaro]

I sent the following e-mail to Clay Evans. If I receive a reply I'll post it on this thread:

Dear Mr. Evans:

I read your column and have a question. When we go to war with Iraq, and you will not "support the troops," who will you support? Or, do you see an Iraqi defeat and an Iraqi victory as morally -- if not politically -- neutral?

[The Duke]

I believe one can support the troops without necessarily supporting the leadership's strategy. Looking at the extreme case, if you had knowlege that our troops were walking into a trap then you might support the strategy of retreat, even as the leadership commands that they advance. You are supporting the troops, not the strategy.

It's up to the leaders to identify the opinions to be used in making decisions, to listen to those opinions, and to make decisions for which those leaders will ultimately be accountable (well, of course, unless your name is Bill "Rent-a-Prez" Clinton).

This does not mean that there are other differing opinions out on the sidelines, or that there should not be.

Simple slogans, however, should remain the province of the football cheerleader.

[StarfireIV]

Therein lies the problem, anyone who would even contemplate the comparison of US troops to those of Nazi Germany is politically, historically, and morally challenged in the extreme. We are clearly dealing with someone here who, like most participants in the Trust-Saddam-while-he-targets-us fan club, possesses the reason and intellect of an ill-tempered child.

[Batrachian]

The left has compared conservatives and Republicans to Nazis for a long time. There's nothing really new here, except the egregious comparison of Poland to Iraq. The comparison is not only morally objectionable, but also historically false, to put it mildly. I wonder if this moron thinks we'll institute the same sort of regime in Iraq that Germany did in Poland. Probably. Some of these people really believe the BS they're spewing.

Oh, and BTW, let's support our troops.

[Billthedrill]

I would never treat with disrespect the men and women who defend us.

Sorry, son, I'm afraid you can't really split a hair that finely. You can try, but it always ends up just as it did post-Vietnam, with the troops being spit on as "symbols" rather than as human beings. I'm thinking this author may not be old enough to remember the antiwar types of that era solemnly asserting the very same thing. I remember them well. Despite best intentions, or what I took as best intentions, they always ended up spitters or sympathizers. Me, I was the recipient of some of their tender attentions. It isn't something you forget.

[Steve_Seattle]

Kosovo is the forgotten war. These boofers don't want anyone to remember that they supported Clinton in a war against a small country that posed no security threat to the U.S., but which had a brutal dictator whom we chose to overthrow. "Regime change" was ok when Clinton was president, but not now, apparently.

[glennaro]

The following is the response I just received from Clay Evans (within a few minutes of sending my e-mail to him, see Post 9, above):

nope, i don't. my preference from the word go is that we not engage in this war, which i consider unnecessary and potentially counter-productive -- at least at this point in time.

when i say i won't "support the troops," i'm thinking more along lines that if a pollster were to ask me, i'd say "no, i don't. i don't support the war, so how can i support the troops?" i believe, as the column states, that this mantra is a subtle way to cow people into silence once hostilities begin, and i consider that the antithesis of the american ideal of freedom.

once war starts -- i'm afraid it's all but inevitable now -- you won't find me cheering video of the bombing of Baghdad, but i will be hoping for a swift and clean a victory as possible for the united states. i will do no cheerleading, however. it's not a game, which i'm afraid too many americans don't realize.

thanks for writing.

[ConservativeNewsNetwork]

Simple slogans, however, should remain the province of the football cheerleader.

The average leftist is remarkably like a cheerleader: They have nothing to say but standard slogans, and don't even understand them enough to know when to use them without prompting. Personally, I like it that some people say stupid horseshit like "THE WAR IS ALL AN OIL CONSPIRACY!" or "WAR WILL KILL PEOPLE SO WE SHOULDN'T GO TO WAR" when discussing politics. It makes the decision on when to stop debating and start amusing myself at their expense so much easier.

[glennaro]

Just received a P.S. from Clay Evans:

p.s. must i "support" anybody in a war?

[HiJinx]

Hmmm...no, not in America you (Clay) don't.

That's because we're a free country where you have the liberty of doing and saying whatever you please. As long as you're willing to suffer the consequences. In America that might mean a bloody nose or a slander suit.

In Iraq, it probably means a bullet to the brain.

Take your choice, Clay.

[LS]

Or the scene in "Wanted, Dead or Alive" where Rutger Howard shoves the grenade into Gene Simmons' mouth and is about to turn him in for the bonus. "F**k the bonus," he says and pulls the pin, as Simmons grunts and thrashes about. BOOOOM.

[Burkeman1]

It was also the most cowardly war this nation ever waged. Clinton put a bombing cealing of 15,000 feet on our jets. Thus we hit trains of civilians, apartment blocks, caravans of refugees . . . Where were people like this buffoon during Clinton's many wag the dog uses of the military? He has to go back to Reagan and Grenada? At least Grenada could possibly be described as a military threat with the presence of Cuban troops and the attempt to build an airbase. What threat was Serbia to us?

The left doesn't oppose this war for any reason other than the fact that a GOP President is waging it. If Gore had been elected president and wanted a war with Iraq we would have been in Baghdad a year ago with not a peep from the Left or a protest bigger than a few hundred people.