Supporting the Troops End the War Options

[Kontroll]

It baffles me when I see these bumper stickers that say 'Support the Troops End the War.' Is that really supporting the troops? Also, we are not in a war right now. We are in a conflict. Congress never declared war on Iraq, Afganistan, or any other countries since 9.11.

The mentality of the men and women in the service is so extreme, especially in the army and marines, that anyone whose never experienced it, really has no say that has any value. It's like a gym teacher trying to teach philosophy. You have to understand that most of the soldiers in Iraq or any other neighboring countries wanted to be there. That's why they signed up. They are taught to be prepared at all times to go to war. It's a soldiers profession to kill. It's their mission.

Saying that, if we don't support their mission, how can we support the people that are carrying it out? It doesn't make any sense. If you've got people back home saying that the war is stupid and wrong, then that is affecting the soldiers because now they have their leaders telling them what they need to do, and others telling them it's wrong. If anything, we should support the conflict.

That's the great thing about a voluntary military. No one forces you to join. And if some body does force you, then it's your fault that you went forth and gave the oath. They ask you right then and there if anyone is forcing you to join, speak now.

In conclusion, those opposed to the current conflict are only creating more damage to society and other societies. If we have any chance of getting out of the Middle East any faster the best thing to do is support our President and his choices. That's how our country made it through WWII. People decided to participate by building weapons and giving food to the troops. They donated money. Until Pearl Harbor we shouldn't have had any involvement, but the American citizens decided that it would be in the best interest to do something instead of talking about it negatively.

Please give me your comments.

[lilsnoopy]

Any third world country who attacks America.
Im glad to see that America actually took a stand against a dictator who probably would have gone even further if we didnt do anything in the beginning.
That is what happened with Hitler after he began attacking surronding European countries....no one did anything, and he killed thousands of people and began a war. Nobody tried to take a stand in his earlier actions and the world payed a heavy price.

You're comparing Hitler to Saddam Hussein.
You're comparing the German Army to... what exactly?
You f**king idiot.

First off Im not an idiot. Really, Im not. If anyone is an idiot, its someone who cant even try to understand what Im saying, and then feels the need to bash me on the internet. Its not very nice. Be more understanding to other people's beleifs (sp?), you'll need that skill in the real world.
Anyways, moving on. I wasnt comparing those two people. I was referring to how people reacted to two differnet scernios.
Hitler's form of foriegn policy was taking over European countires, starting with poland. The Allies allowed him to do this, since if they didnt, they might start another war (which they didnt want to do).
Yet, since the Allies didnt stop Hitler in the begining, after he took over Poland, they allowed WW2 to start, which resulted in thousands of people dying.
After the two towers were destroyed, America actually fought back. Imagine if America didnt fight back? If we didnt, America might have gotten attacked again, in a more devasting way. Terrorist's dont follow modern way of fighting, so anything that resembles the word "crazy" is possible for them.
All Im saying is that America got rid of a tyrant who attempt'd to install fear in countries by terrorist methods by hitting the US first. If we didnt get rid of him, who would? We got rid of a potential threat, unlike the Allies in WW2

[NoSex]

After the two towers were destroyed, America actually fought back. Imagine if America didnt fight back? If we didnt, America might have gotten attacked again, in a more devasting way. Terrorist's dont follow modern way of fighting, so anything that resembles the word "crazy" is possible for them.
All Im saying is that America got rid of a tyrant who attempt'd to install fear in countries by terrorist methods by hitting the US first.

What would prevent terrorists from attacking us again?
It's like trying to eliminate school shootings. You can't do it.
Correlation doesn't mean causation. Just because we weren't attacked again doesn't mean that our offensive position is actually preventing terrorist attacks. Remember, this isn't the first time the US has been attacked by terrorists (Hell, it isn't even the first time the WTC was attacked) , and it won't be the last (Well, for those towers it will be). Anyone can instill fear, not everyone can actually launch a serious invasion. Figure it out.

Oh, and don't forget: there is no connection between Saddam Hussein and the September 11th terrorist attacks. Moron.