Since my name is getting splashed all over this
debate, I would like to state a few facts.
I would appreciate it if you would publish them
for the record:
This war is more personal for me than it is for
a lot of people. I have several very close friends
who have their kids are over there. These
are kids I have known for a decade or more; a few
of whom I literally watched grow up. One
of the combat deaths was Army Command Sgt. Maj.
James D. Blankenbecler, who played on my third
grade soccer team and graduated from High
School with me. He left behind a wife and
three kids. The soldiers serving in Iraq are not an
abstraction to me; they are real people, many
of whom I know, or knew, personally.
I support the troops. I value their lives.
I honor their service to our country.
While I consider the war, and thus their service,
misguided and counterproductive, that is simply my opinion.
What is not an opinion is the fact that the sacrifices
they are making are monumental by any measure.
Anyone who won't concede that point, in my opinion,
is not serious about this debate.
Since I support the troops, but not the war, and
because I recognize that the troops are not mindless drones,
it produces something of a conundrum.
On the one hand, I believe the troops would best
serve our country by declaring themselves conscientious
objectors to what I believe is an illegal and
immoral war. However, I recognize that not everyone agrees with me,
and even if they did, the vast majority are still
simply not going to do so. Let's leave aside the reasons for that.
Suffice it to say, they are varied and complex.
The resolution to this conundrum thus rests in
my reasons for "supporting the troops."
It is my opinion that one's "support for the
troops" should not depend on one's support for the mission.
The troops didn't start this war; Bush did.
Many of them do not support the mission.
But either way, premising support for the troops only if they both
agree with, and act according to, one's own political
beliefs seems a pretty shallow form of support to me.
While I would like it if the troops were all to
say "Fuck you Bush, we are going home,"
I am not going to withdraw my support for them
if they don't.
This is because my support for the troops is instead
based on their sacrifice.
Whether they agree with me about the mission
or not, there is no question
they are putting their lives on the line.
For that, they deserve my support,
regardless of any other differences in opinion
we may have.
brew
You fanned the flames with your, "Too
easy, really.
It is the chainsaw's fault..."
which hung everything on the soldier.
That's not what I call supporting the troops...
You started with "It is the chainsaw's fault,"and
"All the chainsaw has to do is to simply say
"no."
You said, "(those who) refuse their orders
to kill people, are the real heroes."
But now that the flames are a little hotter, you retreat back to,
"they deserve my support."
What started as "too easy" has now become a "conundrum?"
Are you really a lawyer?