Taking on the burden: supporting our troops
The issue of supporting the troops and not the war in America has become a big one; and over time, an important one, as the issue of support threatens the morale of our troops fighting overseas. Our active troops rely on those of us on the home-front to provide them with adequate support and thanks as they fight for our very lives, and so the argument of whether or not one can support the troops and not the war should not be taken lightly.
I realize that there are families who have lost loved ones in the fight for freedom and democracy. I cannot imagine how hard it is for those families to take the death of their soldier, and yet our motive for declaring war is clear; our safety in America was seriously threatened on 9/11 when 3,000 lives were lost to plane hijackers. America, having never been a country to sit around idly when threatened, made the clear and swift decision to hunt down the evil men who yet posed a threat not only to America, but had been taking the lives of their own people, the Iraqis and Afghanis.
When remembering 9/11, our motive for going to war should not be questioned. Only those who do not value freedom and justice (not to mention their own lives) would stand outside the military hospitals to protest the cause their very troops had been wounded for. While everyone in this country has the right to their own private opinions, many anti-war protesters have taken the OIF issue so far as to put down the men who fight for their lives; and that’s going too far.
All the while these protesters claim to “support” the troops, even though they oppose the war. In the first place, I’d have to point out again that if these people were unable to grasp the fact that America was in danger and needed to act, then we can’t easily hear their flowery messages of “support” and take their words for it. Anyone who holds little or no regard for the meaning of freedom and justice cannot be expected to hold our soldiers, who are such an image of justice, in such high respect.
The argument of supporting the soldiers and not what they fight for is a very difficult object to get around. Let’s look at it from a soldier’s perspective; we are over in Iraq, sweating, bleeding, and watching our buddies die as we put all our strength into hunting down terrorists and at the same time help stabilize a newly freed country. Every day we observe the poor conditions that the Iraqi people were forced to live in under the power of terrorists. Through the deaths we observe and the demolition we see through battles with the terrorists, we see firsthand just how evil and uncooperative our enemies really are.
And then, after a hard day of fighting, we get back to our camp to read the news, surf the web, or read letters from back home. And this is the message we receive; the Americans do not believe in what you are doing. No one back home believes that you should or are capable of finishing the job. Sorry guys; we just don’t value life and freedom, so you might as well give up and come home.
Imagine what a devastating effect that would have on you should you be in such a situation. This message provides no support, no comfort, and no encouragement whatsoever. Apparently the whole concept of support has been altered somehow; it seems to me that “support” meant to coach someone along and give them encouragement.
Webster describes support as
In general, the maintenance or sustaining of anything without suffering it to fail, decline or languish; as the support of the health, spirits, strength or courage… That which upholds or relieves; aid, help; succor; assistance.
And supported as
Borne; endured; upheld; maintained; subsisted; sustained; carried on.
The anti-war protesters are not bearing the soldiers burden alongside them as this definition suggests active support entails; instead they are arguing that the burden is irrelevant and they are casting it aside. A true friend helps bear his buddies burden, does he not?
I realize that a lot of liberal, anti-war Americans have closed their ears to many truths, and so it would be a miracle if somehow my writing changed one’s mind. However, for those of you who truly value the meaning of life, and the blessing of freedom, please join me in taking some of the burden off our soldiers backs, and thus truly and actively supporting the troops.
Galatians 6:2 Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.
Posts
17 comments:
ok.lets go by your veiw. I don't support the war. so I am forced to not support the troops.
the troops can't pick the war they fight in.
what have we done in Iraq. nothing. it's worse than it was before.
Afghanistan was involved with 9/11 not Iraq.
Now remember, we put Sadamm in office. and then we take him out.
show me in the constitution that America can enter another nation because they are making big bombs.
"Only those who do not value freedom and justice (not to mention their own lives) would stand outside the military hospitals to protest the cause their very troops had been wounded for."
I think they value freedom highly, otherwise they wouldn't be using it to such a great extent as to malign their leaders. I'm guessing they don't understand the extent of evil that is in this world or coming against us. Therefore they blame us for inititating rather than our enemies. We are not the aggressor in this war but are responding to those who declare on a regular basis that their goal is to destroy us. So we are going after them to stop them in their mission before they are successful. Because there is evil in this world we do not have a choice if we want to protect our civilians.
"ok.lets go by your veiw. I don't support the war. so I am forced to not support the troops.
the troops can't pick the war they fight in."
A person can support the troops and not the war. But most of the protesting going on is against the troops, or includes elements against the troops. When the troops hear constant criticizm of the war, it appears that the people are protesting against them. It would be far better for the protesters to say "We didn't support the war when it began, but we support our troops and will stand with them no matter what." And those who think that withdrawing the troops is "supporting" them are greatly mistaken. As indicated by the book Black Hawk Down, after Mogadishu, the Army Rangers were mad at then-President Bill Clinton, not because of the loss of life, but because they withdrew after that. They figured that, if this mission was that important, then they should stay and complete it.
"what have we done in Iraq. nothing. it's worse than it was before.
Afghanistan was involved with 9/11 not Iraq."
Nothing? We are doing things at lightning speed there. :) Compare Iraq after 3 years to the Unites States of America after 3 years of the end of the American Revolution. :) Worse? Hardly. ;)
"Now remember, we put Sadamm in office. and then we take him out."
And we raised taxes and then cut them. Different administrations, under different circumstances. :)
"show me in the constitution that America can enter another nation because they are making big bombs."
"provide for the common defense." :) If the government deems a nation a threat, then can - indeed, should - act as necessary to remove that threat. :)
I asked you to show me from the constitution.not from you opinion
I don't know what "support the troops" means exactly. it is a term that people equate with "support this war" which is a completely different thing.
Do I attend charity fundraisers for veterans organizations, yes. Do I send weekly packages to my friends and family members serving overseas, yes.
Do I volunteer for an legal resource organization to provide legal assistance to veterans of the wars in iraq and afghanistan, yes.
Do i write opinion letters to my congressmen on issues of funding body armor and funding the production of up-armored humvees, yes.
Have i actively sought to find employment for friends in the National Guard who came home to lose their jobs after being away, yes.
Do I support the troops, yes i do.
Do i believe in this war in Iraq? No. not for one single second did I believe this was the right thing to do. I continue to speak out against it at all possible opportunities.
And that is my right as an American citizen.
Jennifer,
Where to begin...I will first extend an invitation for you to visit my own blog, theashamedamerican.blogspot.com. Secondly, I would like to invite you to commune with me on these issues, both as an American and as a Christian. I won't pretend that I wouldn't love to hear you say "You were RIGHT, I was WRONG", and I think, without even reading my blog, you'd enjoy the same from me. However, barring that unlikely situation, I would hope that we might both learn something about 'the other' from a correspondence.
Picking up at the point of defining support, I think it's a nice phrase but in truth my job, and yours is quite a bit larger than mere support. Those men and women who are in the service, whether they are fighting in a war or not have signed a contract to protect us that may involve sacrificing their very lives. They have undoubtedly, upheld their end of the bargain. Our end, however, is to make sure, being the "Country that is run Of, By, and For the people", that we NEVER take that sacrifice lightly. If WE are going to send them, WE must be sure that their sacrifice will NOT be in vain, or anything resembling it. We did not do those things; we've allowed ourselves to be lied to, and we've covered up or tried to cover up every disastrous mistake we've made in this war. This can only lead to more loss of life, both military and civilian.
Let's be clear too, God made me, not America. I am a child of this world first, America second. With that in mind, let's not discuss the 3000 innocents' lives lost on 9-11 without mentioning the tens of thousands of innocents we've killed (oops!) by accident in Iraq. Is that the ratio, 1 American = 10 Savages? Or is it just 'We take care of 'our own' first...' I don't think I've read that biblical passage.
Anyways, my job, being 1/3,000,000th of the management problem of this war, is to apply all of that leverage I have to get us to re-call our troops, apologize to our allies for lying ceaselessly, and start begging the U.N. to clean up my mess. Perhaps then the National Guard can do what they're trained to do: Evacuate New Orleans Six Months Ago. Jennifer, I don't blame the government, I blame you, and me and everyone else who bought this bill of goods. I don't believe, either, that if we broke it we must buy it. We were sold false goods, the deal is off. That's the problem, as an American, when you (not YOU, you) lie to me to get me to do what you want, and I find out, I will cut you off like no Sicillian ever dreampt possible. In this case, I, and mine are taking back our troops. Our sons and daughters. Bush, Blair, Rove, Cheney...they don't get to use those noble men and women anymore, as far as I'm concerned and I'm not even close to alone. God Bless America, she's gonna need it!
And that is my right as an American citizen.
Absolutely. But we can still argue with you. ;)
Regarding support, I would agree that supporting our troops does involve carefully monitoring what they are used for, so that their sacrifices are not in vain. It is not simply saying "I support our troops, whatever they do." While that is a part of it (and I do support our troops whatever they do), a second MAJOR part is keeping our government accountable for their usage.
With that in mind, let's not discuss the 3000 innocents' lives lost on 9-11 without mentioning the tens of thousands of innocents we've killed (oops!) by accident in Iraq.
...apologize to our allies for lying ceaselessly...
Please don't generalize or assert. If you say things like that, please provide evidence of your assertion.
"Let's be clear too, God made me, not America. I am a child of this world first, America second."
Excuse me? God did not create america? He did. This nation was the first of it's kind in the world, and it was based off of God and his pricibles.
A child of the world? Have you no sense? What the heck is the world? The UN? Yeah, thats a fun group to belong to. America is the land of greatest freedom in this world, and has the most freedom for Christians like yourself to practice. I am a child of Texas and America, not of the world. Apparently, you sense of america's greatness is severly lacking.
"With that in mind, let's not discuss the 3000 innocents' lives lost on 9-11 without mentioning the tens of thousands of innocents we've killed (oops!) by accident in Iraq. Is that the ratio, 1 American = 10 Savages? Or is it just 'We take care of 'our own' first...' I don't think I've read that biblical passage."
Damn right we had 3000 people die with no reason. Zealots of a violent religion with airplanes as weapons, killing 3000 people without a provocation.
Now, in Iraq. When have we intentionally killed the locals? When they are armed, and trying to blow us up. The iraqi army, and then the outside terrorists that are leading a false insurgancy.
As for defending ones own, what did isreal do in the old testament?
ask any american soldier that has served in iraq. they will tell you innocent civilians are caught in the crossfire ALL THE TIME.
"ask any american soldier that has served in iraq. they will tell you innocent civilians are caught in the crossfire ALL THE TIME."
Meh. They should move. Couldn't have been worse then Sadam.
Depends on what you consider innocent annon. If Iraq was an innocent place to begin with, then anyone who we killed was innocent. If however, the innocents are only the civies on the sidelines, working everyday, (kinda like those folks in the trade centers) then we are not shooting at them.
well, at least they had electricity under Saddam. and you could ddrive down the street without an IED exploding. or go to a cafe, or go to a market.
and the fact is, sometimes, americans bomb the wrong house, and sometimes we drop bombs from airplanes that dont' always hit the right target, and sometimes indirect fire, like morters, don't land where they're supposed to. it just happens.
are you in the military Palm Boy?
"well, at least they had electricity under Saddam. and you could ddrive down the street without an IED exploding. or go to a cafe, or go to a market"
-Electricity:
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/accomplishments/electricity.html
"# Returned to pre-war daily generation levels of 3,958 MW by October 2003 and reached a peak of 4,584 MW during July 2004.
# USAID has added 1,086 MW of generation capacity through new generation, maintenance and rehabilitation work, and repaired the 400 KV Khor az Zubayr-Nasiriyah transmission line.
# USAID and partners are rehabilitating or constructing 25 distribution substations in Baghdad to improve the distribution and reliability of electricity for more than two million residents. Eight critical substations were energized early in anticipation of the summer peak. "
Whats this? Electricity in Iraq? Above the Saddam era levels? Inconceiveable.
-Civilian Deaths:
http://www.slate.com/id/2108887/
"According to quite comprehensive data collected by the United Nations, Iraq's mortality rate from 1980-85 was 8.1 per 1,000. From 1985-90, the years leading up to the 1991 Gulf War, the rate declined to 6.8 per 1,000. After '91, the numbers are murkier, but clearly they went up. Whatever they were in 2002, they were almost certainly higher than 5 per 1,000. In other words, the wartime mortality rate—if it is 7.9 per 1,000—probably does not exceed the peacetime rate by as much as the Johns Hopkins team assumes."
This is a debunking of the most commonly cited (by left wing nuts, anyhow) study that claims 100,000 Iraq civie deaths since the war.
And the best count available:
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/index.php
-IEDs:
Now, which group is it that is planting IEDs? The fragging terrorists, not the coalition forces.
"and the fact is, sometimes, americans bomb the wrong house, and sometimes we drop bombs from airplanes that dont' always hit the right target, and sometimes indirect fire, like morters, don't land where they're supposed to. it just happens."
Yup. But not in an obsenly large fashion, as you assume.
Am I in the military? No. Why?
Jennifer,
If you really support the troops, you might want to warn them that they will be bringing home cancer and fathering children with severe birth defects!!
Quote from the link below:
Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have medical problems.
The number of disabled vets reported up to 2000 has been increasing by 43,000 every year. Brad Flohr of the Department of Veterans Affairs told American Free Press that he believes there are more disabled vets now than even after World War II.
Not only were soldiers exposed to DU on and off the battlefields, but they brought it home. DU in the semen of soldiers internally contaminated their wives, partners and girlfriends. Tragically, some women in their 20s and 30s who were sexual partners of exposed soldiers developed endometriosis and were forced to have hysterectomies because of health problems.
In a group of 251 soldiers from a study group in Mississippi who had all had normal babies before the Gulf War, 67 percent of their post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. They were born with missing legs, arms, organs or eyes or had immune system and blood diseases. In some veterans’ families now, the only normal or healthy members of the family are the children born before the war.
The Department of Veterans Affairs has stated that they do not keep records of birth defects occurring in families of veterans.
http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml
BTW, most of the horrible effects described above were from the FIRST Gulf War, where the amount of depleted uranium used was but a small fraction of what is being used this time around.
Furthermore, most of the DU used the prior time was restricted to anti-tank rounds that were used out in the desert. This time, it's in virtaully all the bombs and munitions, most of which are being used in the cities. This is genocide by any definition!
Still think Saddam was the one who was evil, Jennifer? I know you are very young, but you are a bright girl. Open your eyes to the truth..."For you shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free".
P.S. There's plenty of other info out there. Just do a Google of --depleted uranium atrocities--. I would love for you to address this topic in a future post on your blog.
Haha. Its awsome how you'll just compleatly ignore the response to your earlier comments, and act like nothing happened. Ya know, the facts about electricity, Civilan deaths, IEDs, and misdirected fire.
Yeah, of course vets will have medical problems. Everyone has a freaking medical problem, of one sort or another. Why would the vets be different?
"BTW, most of the horrible effects described above were from the FIRST Gulf War, where the amount of depleted uranium used was but a small fraction of what is being used this time around."
Curious, isn't it. Most bullets are made of tugsten, not DU. They used to be lead, but the environuts got their way during the Clinton administration. Speciallized anti-armor rounds are made of DU, like the ones the A-10 Warthogs carry, that wiegh a hefty 6 pounds a shell. The avergage magazine is not DU.
So whats really causing all the problems? DU is a fun straw man, but anyone considering the possibility that Saddam released some chemicals or biological weps? He had the capability, and why wouldn't he?
"Still think Saddam was the one who was evil, Jennifer?"
She doesn't have to answer that. Saddam was evil. Did the coalition forces go around pulling out peoples fingernails? Maiming people with electric drills? Shocking genitals with hand powered electric generators? No. That happened under Saddams reigim, and thank God not in the last 3 years.
Do coalition forces support Jihading terrorists? No. Did Saddam? Yes.
Perhaps you'll answer the points this time, and the ones from before.
She doesn't have to answer that. Saddam was evil. Did the coalition forces go around pulling out peoples fingernails? Maiming people with electric drills? Shocking genitals with hand powered electric generators? No. That happened under Saddams reigim, and thank God not in the last 3 years.
Ummm...guess you've never heard of Abu Graib? Or the Shiite death squads running around? Iyad Allawi said the country is now much more violents than under Saddam. And the morgue operators say the death rate in Iraq today appears to be THREE TIMES HIGHER than in was under Saddam.
But you're still gonna tell me how much better off everyone is now? Save it - I know BS when I hear it. And thank God the American people do too, which is why a MAJORITY now say that the war was a mistake from the beginning and that Bush LIED us into the war.
BTW, the Repubs are gonna get shellacked in the Nov. election. What's more - they know it! They can see the handwriting on the wall, which is why mnay Repub congressmen running for reelection won't even have their picture taken standing next to Dubya!
One question; how did Bush lie? I find it hard to believe that he staged the murdor of 3,000 lives on 9/11, and I seriously doubt he prayed for it either. It's as ridiculous as saying that the hurricanes, which man has no power over, was his fault as well.
"Ummm...guess you've never heard of Abu Graib? Or the Shiite death squads running around?"
Lol. Abu Grahb? Ever seen a hazing at a college fraternity? I'm confused as how Abu Graib is considered torture, but you could care less about gassing people with chemicals.
"And the morgue operators say the death rate in Iraq today appears to be THREE TIMES HIGHER than in was under Saddam."
Source please, making claims with reckless abandon doesn't help anyone.
Besides, what makes you think Saddam would turn the executed over to the morges? He used mass burials.
"But you're still gonna tell me how much better off everyone is now? Save it - I know BS when I hear it. And thank God the American people do too, which is why a MAJORITY now say that the war was a mistake from the beginning and that Bush LIED us into the war."
Yes, I am going to tell you. I have shown you in the post #12, which you have completly ignored. I'd also like to see the evidence for the polls. And that Bush lied.
"BTW, the Repubs are gonna get shellacked in the Nov. election."
And of course, thats why Republican donations exceed democrats recently, and we took senate, house, and the white house last time.
We'll see.
Post a Comment