Patriotism includes shutting up at times

[AKC]

It's become perfectly clear that the best thing that could happen for the courageous Americans serving in the Iraq War is to have the best and brightest of our young people joining them to close this chapter in the most efficient manner possible. Unfortunately, and due directly to the lack of Patriotism excercised by many in the anti-war crowd, instead of the best of our youth considering the military as an honorable endeavor many instead view it as a jaded choice. Today, when the best among us are achieving their daily goals in Iraq, the gutless jellyfish who insisted on "excercising their right to rebel" have caused recruiting goals to go into the red.

 

Patriotism IS NOT the excercise of our rights, it instead is the ability to recognize WHEN the exercise of our rights is appropriate.

 

There has been much talk in politics the past few years about "admitting being wrong". Oddly it is those who most fervently demanded contrition of political figures who have gone silent on admitting that their actions hurt, and continue to hurt our country. Today needless strains on the manpower necessary to complete the task in Iraq are inarguably the result of the lack of good judgement by the vocal opponents of the war. There is no shame in being absolutely wrong and admitting it, there is eternal shame for handicapping our fighting forces and refusing to at the very least cease the unpatriotic attacks that continue to damage our country.

[RkFast]

Wonderful post!

 

What makes me truly sick to my stomach is NOT the typical anti-war protests in the streets, aimed at Government. Its the out-and-out attacks by protestors on the military itself. Things like protests and even attacks on soldiers returning from service and outside military bases and at recruiting stations, the forcing of ROTC programs and military recruitment activities off college campuses and out of high schools, things like that.

 

Its deplorable behavior and terrible hypocritical, considering how the anti-war and leftist crows loves to say how they "support the troops but are against the war".

[BuckeyeBill]

Stupid people are suckered into believing liberals. You can NOT be against the war and for the troops. IMPOSSIBLE!!

 

Either you are all in or all out.

 

I have more respect for a person who is anti-war and anti-troops, than a person who is trying to ride both sides. At least the anti-war jerk has a true conviction.

[Campy]

Its deplorable behavior and terrible hypocritical, considering how the anti-war and leftist crows loves to say how they "support the troops but are against the war".

299719[/snapback]

 

I'm confused.

 

Let's say a person opposed the invasion of Iraq, but sends, say, a care package to a soldier or a letter to a Marine. Or maybe that person prays for their speedy and safe return home.

 

Is that not supporting the troops?

 

Where exactly is the hypocracy in that?

[RkFast]

I'm confused.

 

Let's say a person opposed the invasion of Iraq, but sends, say, a care package to a soldier or a letter to a Marine.  Or maybe that person prays for their speedy and safe return home.

 

Is that not supporting the troops?

 

Where exactly is the hypocracy in that?

299733[/snapback]

 

Its the general hypocrisy, thats all. How the same group of folks can say they support the troops, but then go to a rally where they attack two Air Force recruiters at a college job fair.

[Alaska Darin]

Its the general hypocrisy, thats all. How the same group of folks can say they support the troops, but then go to a rally where they attack two Air Force recruiters at a college job fair.

299754[/snapback]

Somehow I doubt the people who attacked the recruiters ever said they supported the troops.

[AKC]

I'm confused.

 

Let's say a person opposed the invasion of Iraq, but sends, say, a care package to a soldier or a letter to a Marine.  Or maybe that person prays for their speedy and safe return home.

 

Is that not supporting the troops?

 

Where exactly is the hypocracy in that?

299733[/snapback]

 

Supporting the troops in one manner in no way excludes the possibility of hurting them in another.

 

One of the "Big Lies" of the antiwar movement has always been the claim to support the troops while popping off publicly about their opposition to the war and hatred of our command leaders, all during a time of conflict. It's simply an outright lie, something we can prove in any conflict including Vietnam. Ask almost any 'Nam Vet how much the Anti-war protests hurt their image and reception upon returning to the U.S. At least in 'Nam a good argument could be made that protest was responsible considering the circumstancs, but don't take the next step and falsely claim it "helped the troops" unless that claim is limited exclusively to the effect it had on our pulling out.

 

In Iraq we have a completly different example, one hwere protest has already visibly hurt the troops and yet the conflict has recently received more and more support as a necessity from even many objective leftists. It's the few left who refuse to admit their mistakes and continue to hurt the mission, the Deaniacs if you will, who should be ashamed and should immediately cease their unpatriotic actions based upon the clear evidence of those acitons causing needless deaths in Iraq.

[AKC]

You can NOT be against the war and for the troops.  IMPOSSIBLE!!

 

Either you are all in or all out.

 

299729[/snapback]

 

I'm of the opinion that you can be Patriotic and still oppose the action in Iraq, you simply must not interfere with the mission by publicly decrying the war and hurting those fighting. It's this ability to shut the &%$# up and control that opposition that divides the good and Patriotic American from the lesser American.

[KRC]

Stupid people are suckered into believing liberals.  You can NOT be against the war and for the troops.  IMPOSSIBLE!!

 

299729[/snapback]

 

It is NOT impossible. You can be against the war but still support the troops in may ways. If you are a pacifist, then you are correct, but just being against this war does not eliminate you from being able to support the troops.

[Campy]

It's the few left who refuse to admit their mistakes and continue to hurt the mission, the Deaniacs if you will, who should be ashamed and should immediately cease their unpatriotic actions based upon the clear evidence of those acitons causing needless deaths in Iraq.

299771[/snapback]

What clear evidence is there that a person in San Francisco carrying a banner that reads "No War in Iraq" is killing our troops? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that being sent to Iraq and being shot at is more responsible for their deaths?

 

I live in a military town. Name it and claim it, we've got 'em here- USAF, USN, CIA, FBI, NATO, USMC, USCG, and Army.

 

I didn't want the US to invade Iraq, but I have friends over there now, and one that came home in a body bag. I write letters, send emails, and through MWR send out care packages to them.

 

Truth be told, I rather resent being told that by opposing the war yet claiming to support the troops that I'm being either hypocritical or unpatriotic- especially by people who probably haven't "supported the troops" in any way other than slapping a magnetic ribbon on the back of their minivan.

 

Those people can keep doing their version of "supporting the troops" and I'll keep doing mine. In the meantime, they can claim to be patriotic until they're blue in the face, and I'll keep sending care packages, emails, and letters.

[KRC]

I'm of the opinion that you can be Patriotic and still oppose the action in Iraq, you simply must not interfere with the mission by publicly decrying the war and hurting those fighting. It's this ability to shut the &%$# up and control that opposition that divides the good and Patriotic American from the lesser American.

299781[/snapback]

 

You can still publically decry the war. The problem arises when it is aimed at the people serving.

[Gene Frenkle]

Stupid people are suckered into believing liberals.  You can NOT be against the war and for the troops.  IMPOSSIBLE!!

 

Either you are all in or all out.

 

I have more respect for a person who is anti-war and anti-troops, than a person who is trying to ride both sides.  At least the anti-war jerk has a true conviction.

299729[/snapback]

This is the rallying cry of hard-line Republicans everywhere. Thanks for putting it into so many words.

 

Did it ever occur to you guys that recruitment is "in the red" because there is a war going on and kids don't want to sign up to possibly die in Iraq? Nothing like putting it all on the line for a government who continually cuts your wages and benefits while leaving your family SOL and living off of food stamps while you're overseas. I have a feeling that recruitment will pick right back up after this whole Middle East thing blows over.

 

Personally, I was against the war before the invasion, and I'm against the war now. My opinion has not change. The very soldiers you claim to support are being sent to fight and maybe die in a war that we shouldn't have started in the first place. That is my opinion, and yours is obviously different.

 

However, while I don't have any yellow ribbons adorning my car, I have made no attempt to obstruct or subvert to the war effort or troops. Not only that, but I truly admire the brave men and women who go where they're told to fight who they're told. They are mere pawns in all of this, as their actions are dictated from senior command and ultimately the Prez.

 

In short, I support and pray for the troops, but I don't support the war. By your logic, I guess I don't exist - what a relief to many of you!

 

I'm glad that I live in a country where I can think for myself, and sometimes even express my opinion without being bullied by partisan crap like you're spewing.

[Campy]

You can still publically decry the war. The problem arises when it is aimed at the people serving.

299817[/snapback]

Bingo!

 

They're doing their job. Some of them may agree with the mission, some of them may not, but it's their duty and they all deserve respect for honoring their commitment.

[AKC]

What clear evidence is there that a person in San Francisco carrying a banner that reads "No War in Iraq" is killing our troops?  Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that being sent to Iraq and being shot at is more responsible for their deaths?

 

Truth be told, I rather resent being told that by opposing the war yet claiming to support the troops that I'm being either hypocritical or unpatriotic- especially by people who probably haven't "supported the troops" in any way other than slapping a magnetic ribbon on the back of their minivan.

 

Those people can keep doing their version of "supporting the troops" and I'll keep doing mine.  In the meantime, they can claim to be patriotic until they're blue in the face, and I'll keep sending care packages, emails, and letters.

299805[/snapback]

 

I'll explain it one more time for you- if you hurt recruiting, something we know the antiwar movement has targeted and affected, you reduce the quality pool of new soldiers going to the conflict. This causes multiple layers of mission degradation that results in unnecessary loss of life.

 

I don't have a magnetic ribbon on my truck or car and I don't own a minivan. The last time I donned my old military uniform and medals it was to attend the funeral of a local hero named Cody Prosser who was killed in the initial stages of the Afghan campaign. There are surely many levels of support one might offer, but there's many names for one who claims support on one level while corrupting the mission on the other. Historically you could choose from among:

 

Apostate, back-stabber, copperhead, double-crosser, hypocrite, quisling, treasonist, turncoat or traitor.

 

I'd think Anti-patriotic would be favored by the PC crowd.

[AKC]

You can still publically decry the war. The problem arises when it is aimed at the people serving.

299817[/snapback]

 

You're confusing intent with results. 'Nam Vets being spit on upon returning home had zero to do with anti-soldier protests, it clearly falls 100% on the public cries against the war.

 

Are there Antiwar protesters who feel their decrying the war are today doesn't hurt the soldiers? Sure there are, but naivete is no excuse for the result:

 

More kids will die because some of the best prospects have been influended by the Anti-war movement

 

The climate for the returning soldiers has already been irretrievably damaged by the Antti-war movement. These heroes wil NEVER receive their full honor from the whole of our society because of the Hate Spew of those who refuse to recognize the consequences of their Anti-patriotic actions.

[Campy]

I'll explain it one more time for you- if you hurt recruiting, something we know the antiwar movement has targeted and affected, you reduce the quality pool of new soldiers going to the conflict. This causes multiple layers of mission degradation that result in unnecessary loss of life.

299834[/snapback]

Ah-ha. I think the problem is in generalizing those who "oppose the war but support the troops" as all one group.

 

Like any formal or informal grouping of people, there some on the fringe who tend to be the most vocal, but are in no way indicative of the group as a whole, eg, not all of us who oppose the action in Iraq sabotage the recruiting efforts of the armed forces. Nor do we all hope "our side" loses, which seems to be the opinion of the talking heads at Faux News.

[AKC]

Ah-ha.  I think the problem is in generalizing those who "oppose the war but support the troops" as all one group. 

 

Like any formal or informal grouping of people, there some on the fringe who tend to be the most vocal, but are in no way indicative of the group as a whole, eg, not all of us who oppose the action in Iraq sabotage the recruiting efforts of the armed forces.  Nor do we all hope "our side" loses, which seems to be the opinion of the talking heads at Faux News.

299866[/snapback]

 

I'm not convinced. You're saying that the anti-government ranters who preceded the OK City bombing have absolutely zero culpability in the atmosphere developing that led to that? That the anti-abortion marchers can erase any guilt over the killing of clinic staff under an equally weak and cowardly argument that "they meant no harm to individuals"? Not for me- if I enter into something that goes wrong I must accept it and do something about ceasing to support that which has gone wrong and possibly making restitution. Apparently your moral code allows you to replace responsibility with denial. If I were to stand by and watch a crowd rape a woman without doing anything to stop it, I'd be haunted for the balance of my life. I guess others can "compartmentalize" so far as to justify actions that they participate in that cause harm to others.

 

As far as CBS, I haven't wasted time with their news for many years, you might want to check out some of the cable offerings today who at least offer some variation from the left-of-center network fare.

[Campy]

I'm not convinced. You're saying that the anti-government ranters who preceded the OK City bombing have absolutely zero culpability in the atmosphere developing that led to that? That the anti-abortion marchers can erase any guilt over the killing of clinic staff under an equally weak and cowardly argument that "they meant no harm to individuals"?

300015[/snapback]

Me thinks I wasn't clear in my post.

 

To use your anti-abortion scenario as an example, I believe that all people who are anti-abortion are not going around blowing up abortion clinics and murdering OB/GYNs who perform abortions. Some do, and they're the extremist whackos, but they in no way shape or form speak for all people who oppose abortion.

 

Similiarly, the people who attack recruiters are not representative of everyone who opposes the invasion of Iraq.

 

I'm not trying to convince you that one is right and the other wrong. I'm only saying that not all people who hold a view or belief deserve to be lumped in with some of the whackos who hold a similar belief. That's all.

[AKC]

Me thinks I wasn't clear in my post. 

 

To use your anti-abortion scenario as an example, I believe that all people who are anti-abortion are not going around blowing up abortion clinics and murdering OB/GYNs who perform abortions.  Some do, and they're the extremist whackos, but they in no way shape or form speak for all people who oppose abortion.

 

Similiarly, the people who attack recruiters are not representative of everyone who opposes the invasion of Iraq.

 

I'm not trying to convince you that one is right and the other wrong.  I'm only saying that not all people who hold a view or belief deserve to be lumped in with some of the whackos who hold a similar belief.  That's all.

300065[/snapback]

 

Of course everyone involved in a movement does not take the action of the fringe- but conversely it is those actions of the whole IMO that create the atmosphere necessary for the fringe to operate. As far as public protest of a military situation like Iraq, the damage both today and in the future to all who have and will serve is a shared responsiblity. I realize it's very common for those in a movement to attempt to distance themselves from any undesirable results of that movement, but as I've said before in my mind that's simply textbook denial.

[Gene Frenkle]

Of course everyone involved in a movement does not take the action of the fringe- but conversely it is that actions of the whole IMO that create the atmosphere necessary for the fringe to operate. As far as public protest of a military situation like Iraq, the damage both today and in the future to all who have and will serve is a shared responsiblity. I realize it's very common for those in a movement to attempt to distance themselves from any undesirable results of that movement, but as I've said before in my mind that's simply textbook denial.

300078[/snapback]

So basically, we should avoid any thoughts or actions contrary to the current administration's stance on today's most important international issue. Diversity of opinion should be squashed down at all costs. I'm sure there would be no radical fringe then!

 

Do you really think the average kid who's thinking about joining the military is looking at these crazy wackos on both sides and saying to himself "Gee, I was gonna join up, but these freaks have convinced me otherwise! I think I'll join them instead and screw America over!" I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fear of injury and death.