Posted on 12/28/2006 7:03:27 PM PST by exg
What ‘supporting the troops’ really means
By Jim Meek
E.E. CUMMINGS wrote the world’s wittiest war poem – and called it "my sweet old etcetera." The narrator’s mother hoped he "would die etcetera bravely of course."
His father would go "hoarse talking about how it was a privilege and if only he could …" And his "sweet old etcetera aunt lucy … could tell you just what everybody was fighting for."
Unfortunately, no one on the Christmas chattering circuit seems to know exactly what Canada is fighting for in Afghanistan.
Thus we hear the same sloppy sentiment again and again: "I support the troops, but I’m not too sure about the war."
This useful little evasion – this anemic equivocation – is also tirelessly repeated by the nation’s editorial writers.
It is, in fact, the safe default position among Canadian public opinion leaders.
This became clear this week, when Canadian Press and Broadcast News announced that the nation’s leading journalists had selected "the Canadian soldier" as Canada’s newsmaker of the year.
Why, exactly?
Here’s the unofficial reason: Because otherwise Stephen Harper would have won.
Here’s the official reason, as explained by Bill Scriven, managing editor of the Sentinel Review of Woodstock, Ont.: "Canadians have made it clear that while they do not support the war in Afghanistan, they proudly support the efforts of the Canadian troops."
What’s wrong with this wholesome, Canadian woolly headedness?
Well, to begin with, Canadians have not made it clear that they oppose the war. Polls show about a 50-50 split on this issue, so the jury’s still out.
But forget the surveys for a minute, and take a look at the sentiment instead.
To say that you support the troops – but not necessarily the war – is to hint at the folly of the adventure in Afghanistan while applauding the bravery of the combatants.
This is just too patronizing. If Afghanistan is a fool’s mission – as this two-headed monster of an argument suggests – then fools must be carrying it out.
And the desire to have it both ways is just too Canadian. We applaud the soldiers, but not the killing they’re sent to do.
Give me a real pacifist any day, please – a Bertrand Russell willing to go to prison for his cause.
Or a real warrior, for all that goes.
I’ve been on Ottawa’s side of this issue since I talked this fall with David Sproule, the Canadian Ambassador to Afghanistan.
It wasn’t the usual messages that I found compelling – the need to reconstruct a nation, to educate Afghan girls and boys in what had been a brutal misogynist state, to establish a working democracy in a nation that hosted and protected the world’s most dangerous terrorists.
It was Sproule’s passion – and specifically his defence of Western values – that took me by surprise.
Now, I’m Canadian enough to be embarrassed by this argument. But the truth is that we’ve built a pretty successful society by modelling tolerance and celebrating diversity. And I’ll state this flatly: The world would be a better place if we could export those values.
And it’s not like we’re opposed by the people of Afghanistan as we attempt to do so. Instead, we are aligned against their oppressors – warlords, opium exporters and zealots.
In addition, we are now at a point where we can only protect our values at home by promoting them abroad. This isn’t merely altruism, then, but altruism informed by the most profound sort of self-interest.
In Afghanistan, this now means building schools – and making war.
I know, I know. It’s not that simple. Our NATO allies aren’t helping enough and we can certainly lose the will to win this war – and lose the war along with it.
Take that position if you like. But don’t tell me that you’re supporting the troops while you do so.
For it is also clear that Canada’s troops and their families are generally supportive of the mission to Afghanistan.
And they believe that their goal is primarily humanitarian.
Unlike the hero of the e.e. cummings poem, then, they are not stranded in a war they do not understand.
They know the stakes are large, as the risks are great. And they would appreciate your full attention and support.
In its absence, informed opposition would be preferable to sitting on the rhetorical fence, with your tongue twisted around a mealy-mouthed but comfortable lie.
jmeek
Jim Meek is a freelance writer in Halifax. He also works for Bristol Communications as editor of The Inside Out Report, a quarterly journal based on public opinion research.
When I hear an anti-war idiot say, "I'm against the war but I support the troops," it reminds me of those morons who like to say, "Most of my best friends are black." They are usually liberals too.
Now that's what I'm talkin' about! Santa out there checkin' who has been naughty and who has been nice.
ping!
Saying "I am against the war but for the troops." makes about as much sense as saying "I am against football but for the patriots."
BTW: Although I live in Arizona, I am a Patriot fan.
That is a cool pic. All's I need is a tank...
how about women who say "all the really neat guys are gay?"
It's more like saying "I support the Green Bay Packers, I just don't want them to win."
This is a poem written by one of our soldiers--dedicated to our left-wing-nut politician Jack Layton---
A Soldier's Poem to Jack Layton
Ole Jack Layton ~ Thoughts From A Soldier
Dear Jack Layton,
You sit there in your quiet home
No fear is in your heart,
You sleep soundly certain that
It won't be blown apart.
Your children they can go to school
And play out in the park,
They've never seen a bomb explode
Heard air raids in the dark.
They've never seen dead bodies
Piled up on the street,
Your wife, she won't be beaten
Treated like a piece of meat
You are free to form opinions
Read any news print you can see,
You enjoy your rights and privileges
In this country wide and free.
The reason you can live like that
Is because I fight your wars
I fight and push the enemy back
I keep them off our shores.
I am here and you are there
Pretending you know best.
Well Ole Jack now listen close
While I get this off my chest.
You have the right to criticize
You have the right to complain
You don't have the right to drag me down
In a stupid political game
The thing about your rights Ole Jack
The part you can't comprehend
Is you work in the very system
The democracy I defend
I stand on fences around the world
Protecting those that need it
It is not for you too determine Jack
Whether or not it's worth it.
Ask the people in Afghanistan
If they want me to stay,
Women and children depend on me
You say just walk away.
I don't need your changing policy
Trying hard to not lose face
What I need is you behind me
Helping protect this place.
You know its hard to do this
When I Think I'm all alone.
I hear stories of young punks
Pissing on memorial stones.
I read the papers over hear
And they tell me what is said.
Canadians are losing faith
I can't get it through my head.
You say that it is hopeless
It really brings me down
Don't tell my mother we're losing
Spread that rumour around.
I'm doing good, were winning here
But no-one will believe
Because we are way over here
Where no one there can see.
Women here can work you see
Children starting school.
We built a working government
We've broken Taliban rule.
We are so close to winning this
It's not too far away
History will show that we
Were in the right to stay.
When that brilliant day arrives
Victory you'll claim is ours
You'll forget you said to run away
Forget you are a coward
On that day just thank me
For my courage and my trouble
Find another place that needs help
And send me on the double.
I have no idea why this pisses people off so much. "I'm against the war but support the troops" makes sense to me.
Here's why. I just got back from 12 months in Iraq. I'm not for the way the war has been executed. But I'm a Major, I follow my orders and I lead my men. I'm "for the troops" but I don't support the war. Not because we're killing innocent Iraqi's and all that liberal crap.
My family is all from Boston. Unfortunately, most of my Harvard and Columbia educated aunts and uncles are extreme liberal democrats.
They are against the war in every respect. But while I was deployed, they sent me countless care packages with plenty of extra stuff for my soldiers. They hugged me when I left, praised our work and efforts. They supported us at our welcome home ceremony. But they hate the war.
So should I be pissed at them? If my uncle or aunt or brother is a liberal, does that mean I can't support them?
It's simple: I love my brother, but I don't support his politics. What's the difference with your statement?
(all my family has served in the military, including my over-the-top liberal brother- CPT USMC.)
Can you quantify that?
I can understand that you are not happy with the execution of the war.
I don't read that to mean that you are against our going to war in the first place?
In my analogy, a person can support football and the Patriots and still be against how the coach did during a particular season.
Please send me a FReepmail to get on or off this Canada ping list.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.