Supporting the Troops = Supporting the war?

[Specter_]

Ever since the "war on terror" started I have wondered:

Why are people who say it's not a just war attacked for not supporting the troops?

I mean, you can support the poor bastards dieing in some fucked up country for doing their job and still be against the war in Afghanistan for whatever reasons.

My opinion on the german deployment is, that the lads are doing a fucking great job, yet I think that a) they shouldn't be there in the first place and b) our politicians put them in unneccessary risks by providing inadequate gear and totally fucked upped RoE.

Now, I'm watching a lot of stuff on the british forces in Helmand and again I think they are doing a great job, but they shouldn't be there neither.

(I'm leaving Iraq out of the discussion because it would lead to a lengthy rant by me that I have no wish to engage in right now)

Point of discussion:
Do you have to support the war to support the troops?

 

[RufusMcLaser]

Definitely not. In the U.S. the shameful treatment of the Vietnam vets seems to have led to a general resolve never to let that sort of thing happen again, which might be why

...people who say it's not a just war attacked for not supporting the troops

-by some.
Only I haven't seen it happen that way here in the U.S. There's a lot of arguing over the war, but no one is marching around calling the troops baby-killers- at least, no one that matters. It happens, but not on the scale it did thirty-five years ago. I'm glad for that.

 

[The_Prophet]

Not at all
Troops are people, a war is not

touche

 

[NovaStalker]

Someone care to explain to me what 'supporting the troops' even means? And if it's even possible to support the troops without also supporting the war to at least a small extent?

 

[ButtonedDownParadox]

Any time I criticize the war people are quick to add they support the troops.

It's really annoying. It's like they're implying I'm absolutely ecstatic with the casualty toll.

 

[Specter_]

stuff

From what I see, as soon as you start reasoning we shouldn't be in Afghanistan, some bloke comes up and blurts something about "go support the troops" or in bad cases goes to length about how you support the taliban. I know it's always the loud assholes you hear, but that's part of the reason I made this thread, to get a new angle on what reality is like in the US and UK.

Someone care to explain to me what 'supporting the troops' even means? And if it's even possible to support the troops without also supporting the war to at least a small extent?

Let's see (the "not supporting the war"-bit is quite hard):
Not giving them shit about being baby-killers. (I'll put a link to something some anti-war-groups brought up as soon as I can find it again. It was a poster of a dead german soldier in a coffin with a headline like "a good step towards demilitarization")
Having a common-sense-approach on the actual behaviour of the troops: there was one incident with german soldiers goofing off with a skull they found, which created quite an avalanche of complains here in germany. And while it is not tolerable to desecrate someone elses bones, it was quite clear that it was an isolated incident and that the involved troopers were punished. But that was almost completely ignored by the media.
Helping them on a political basis to make their life easier. For example pressing the government to obtain and issue GPS-devices that actually work in the theatre of operation.

 

[Labyrinth]

I can't stand "The War". I think it was illegal and immoral in the first place, and that what the Bush first administration did was a clusterfuck of the highest degree.

Part of my not supporting this is to criticise both the US government and my own for sending troops over there. This is in the attempt to get the people back home. It's not a "Ha ha you fucking idiot for joining the army. You clearly wanted this war to happen." That kind of attitude is just as destructive as anything else, and it's stupid.

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice. As an Activist I'm going to try to keep them out of unnecessary wars and get them home as soon as I can afterwards.

 

[YouGetWhatsGiven]

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice. As an Activist I'm going to try to keep them out of unnecessary wars and get them home as soon as I can afterwards.

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

 

[Labyrinth]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

 

[ElephantGuts]

This is a point I've thought plenty of and thank you for bringing it up so I can speak my mind. Republicans purposely equate supporting the troops with supporting the war, so that when people say they don't support the war, the Republicans can say that they therefore don't support the troops, and therefore hate America, and therefore denounce their opposition to the war. It's a horrible tactic that unfortunately hasn't been seen through, or atleast not enough. You can support your country's troops but not support them being in a war. In fact, if anything being opposed to a war shows you support the troops even more because you care about them and don't want them dying for a bad cause. That's how I feel.

 

[Mstrswrd]

Not at all
Troops are people, a war is not

QFT.

But, seriously, this is my exact explanation that I have use dmany times, that people still don't seem to get.

 

[Devil's Due]

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice.

Then who will protect the country... ?

 

[YouGetWhatsGiven]

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice. As an Activist I'm going to try to keep them out of unnecessary wars and get them home as soon as I can afterwards.

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

Or we could just not be having a pointless war.
I'm not opposed to death, and if there was a reason for their deaths, I would say "At least they died getting shit done, unlike 90% of the world."
But this is, as I said, a pointless war. They're not dying to defend anything, or conquer anything, they're just dying because someone wasn't happy with the number of hundred dollar bills they were sleeping on.

I know that, I hate pointless wars as much as anybody. What I am saying is that, he said that if he could, he would not let them join the army.

 

[Marv21]

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice.

Then who will protect the country... ?

People will join the army for serveral reasons
1. Poor education
2. Adventure
3. Benefits

All those many intermingle, but when push comes to shove they all serve our country and hold our support. When they come home we better damn well get off our asses and have a parade for those soldiers. This is not vietnam again, not never. Even if you hate the war, love the people who fight it, go to the parade. Hate the right-wings later, love the people who risked their lives now.

 

[Devil's Due]

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice.

Then who will protect the country... ?

People will join the army for serveral reasons
1. Poor education
2. Adventure
3. Benefits

All those many intermingle, but when push comes to shove they all serve our country and hold our support. When they come home we better damn well get off our asses and have a parade for those soldiers. This is not vietnam again, not never. Even if you hate the war, love the people who fight it, go to the parade. Hate the right-wings later, love the people who risked their lives now.

Yes, I know that. I support the military and the soldiers, since my family has been a proud military one, and I am wishing to join the USAF when I can. I am just wondering what Lab had in mind if the Army just left, who would protect the country when they have no Army? Not every country would give up their arms, and we'd then still be at risk for other things. Just throwing away the Army for a country wouldn't end up being the best idea.

 

[new_age_reject]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

 

[Amoreyna]

Ever since the "war on terror" started I have wondered:

Why are people who say it's not a just war attacked for not supporting the troops?

I mean, you can support the poor bastards dieing in some fucked up country for doing their job and still be against the war in Afghanistan for whatever reasons.

My opinion on the german deployment is, that the lads are doing a fucking great job, yet I think that a) they shouldn't be there in the first place and b) our politicians put them in unneccessary risks by providing inadequate gear and totally fucked upped RoE.

Now, I'm watching a lot of stuff on the british forces in Helmand and again I think they are doing a great job, but they shouldn't be there neither.

(I'm leaving Iraq out of the discussion because it would lead to a lengthy rant by me that I have no wish to engage in right now)

Point of discussion:
Do you have to support the war to support the troops?

I think it depends how you do it. You recognize that the troops have no choice to be there and merely doing their job and what our leaders think is right.

A lot of people miss this point. When I was in the military, the majority of anti-war protestors that I meet/experienced were hostile to the troops as well. You cannot support the troops while calling them murderers at the same time - doesn't work.

So no - you don't have to support the war to support the troops, it shows in your actions. Especially if you decide to send aid to your country's troops, morale boosters etc to help them out.

Out of curiosity, have you gotten a chance to talk to any troop returning home from these conflicts? Their take on what is actually happening because they are over there might just surprise you and conflict with what you are being shown on TV. I am going to use the Iraq war as an example of this (positive) because it's where my experience is. While the news media has deemed the war pointless, that we aren't doing anything over there etc. I have meet several troops who talk about citizens meeting them in the streets waving American flags and cheering. And they aren't doing it out of fear of US troops - they are genuinely happy that they are there and are welcomed. This doesn't happen in all areas but it has happened and it's not something we get to see on the nightly news. You also don't get to hear about what the actual goals of the conflict are and how close they are to being acompished. I urge you to talk to these troops and get their take on what is happening and if they think they are doing any good. It will help in your support of them, especially when talking to ther people and your understanding of what is actually going on and what they are experiencing.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

If there were no armies there could still be war.

It would just be disorganized and full of raping and pillaging and unnecessary brutality.

Armies were invented you know, invented to wage war better.

 

[Gladion]

I don't agree with people joining the army, but that's their choice.

Then who will protect the country... ?

People will join the army for serveral reasons
1. Poor education
2. Adventure
3. Benefits

All those many intermingle, but when push comes to shove they all serve our country and hold our support. When they come home we better damn well get off our asses and have a parade for those soldiers. This is not vietnam again, not never. Even if you hate the war, love the people who fight it, go to the parade. Hate the right-wings later, love the people who risked their lives now.

Yes, I know that. I support the military and the soldiers, since my family has been a proud military one, and I am wishing to join the USAF when I can. I am just wondering what Lab had in mind if the Army just left, who would protect the country when they have no Army? Not every country would give up their arms, and we'd then still be at risk for other things. Just throwing away the Army for a country wouldn't end up being the best idea.

Riddle: Which country am I talking about? Hints: It's a very rich one, it's located in eastern asia, it's been nuked in WWII and, most importantly, has no fucking army since then.
Last hint:
„Article 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.“
Yeah, I gave away the answer, but my point is that the military might not be as important as you convince yourself it is. Okay, some countries really need an army, but there are reasons for that and those countries are responsible for them themselves (mostly).


Edit: "unneccessary brutality" sounds very funny.

 

[new_age_reject]

Would you rather them get drafted, or just plain having no army?

In my Utopic world, there would be no need for an army.

This. If nobody had an army then there would be no wars.
Either that or just strait nuclear holocaust.

If there were no armies there could still be war.

It would just be disorganized and full of raping and pillaging and unnecessary brutality.

Armies were invented you know, invented to wage war better.

And have they gotten any better?
More efficient, probably.
Better? No.