« Downtime | Main | The Wheels of Justice Turn Slowly For Infidels »
February 2, 2007
But They Support the Troops
Liberals campaigning for our defeat in Iraq will almost invariably claim that they "support our troops" — even if they want them to lose to Muslim terrorists. But tending to be quite a bit more intelligent than prominent Dems Botched Joke Kerry and Charlie Rangel would have us believe, our troops in Iraq aren't buying it.
Even NBC Nightly News reported the following, via Richard Engel in Iraq:
[T]roops here say they are increasingly frustrated by American criticism of the war. Many take it personally, believing it is also criticism of what they've been fighting for.
Naturally. Not even Cindy Sheehan is dim enough not to be aware that the constant defeatist propaganda coming from liberals is likely to cause the USA to lose. That's the whole point of it.
Tyler Johnson, a 21-year-old junior enlisted man, cuts through the BS easily:
You may support or say we support the troops, but, so you're not supporting what they do, what they're here sweating for, what we bleed for, what we die for. It just don't make sense to me.
But WaPo's William Arkin sneers at the troops for their ingratitude:
Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform […]
So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?
Arkin goes on to refer to our military as "a mercenary — oops sorry, volunteer — force that thinks it is doing the dirty work."
But he won't even give it credit for doing dirty work:
The notion of dirty work is that, like laundry, it is something that has to be done but no one else wants to do it. But Iraq is not dirty work: it is not some necessary endeavor; the people just don't believe that anymore.
Yet I'm sure the verminous Voice of the People William Arkin and his paymasters at WaPo support the troops.
On a tip from Metalgarth.
Posted by Van Helsing at February 2, 2007 9:13 AM
Comments
Yes, they "support" the troops the same way that they "love" America, you know, that special love and support a wife abuser has when he "only hits her when she has it coming."
Posted by: V the K at February 2, 2007 10:12 AM
And just as a wife beater clobbers his wife "for her own good," so do the leftwingers abuse our troops and those who support them "for their own good." It's their responsibility to save us from ourselves, doncha know!
Posted by: Pam at February 2, 2007 12:31 PM
Arkin's real problem, in addition to the fact that he's a pompous, ignorant asshole, is that he can't write worth a damn. Study much English in college, or did you just take "Pass/Fail" courses?
Posted by: Steve at February 2, 2007 6:53 PM
Let's see:
Support the troops - not the war.
Support the "surgers" - not the surge.
Therefore:
Support the politicians - not their politics.
So if the politician is making a speech that politicizes the war - "I'll get the troops out NOW because I claim I know something I didn't know THEN" (e.g. -this war isn't a fun vote getter anymore) - is it OK to shoot them in the back in mid-speech or maybe just torment their families?
Just wondering.
Posted by: tfhr at February 2, 2007 11:47 PM
I've done two tours in Iraq. I'm still in the service, though I'm not in the sandbox right now. What people like Arkin say really doesn't bother me. His opinion has no bearing on my life whatsoever.
Like any other human being I prefer to hear good things about myself. But to hear it from someone like Arkin...well, his praise would be as meaningless as his criticism.
I don't know what he does, and he doesn't know what I do. I prefer it that way.
I don't hate the people in the anti-war movement. In fact, I don't think about them at all. There is no real anti-war movement in the U.S. What you have is people like Sean Penn, Medea Benjamin, Sheehan, etc. standing in front of a group of anarchists/socialists/communists, calling themselves the anti-war movement.
I always thought, if you're anti-war, than don't fight. Thats the way the Quakers did it.
I would be satisfied if people like Arkin would just shake my hand, say "Thank You," and then get out of my way and leave me (and my brothers and sisters in arms) alone. That would make me happy.
Posted by: GI at February 3, 2007 9:38 AM
To GI:
I'm not a person like Arkin. I read both his initial screed and his condescending rebuttal of those who would dare disagree with him. I am NOT a person like him. Just wanted that understood up front.
What I want to say is quite simple. Thank you, GI, for volunteering to do a dangerous and often thankless job, and for standing between me, a mid-40s tub of lard, and the war's desolation. Godspeed and protect you and see you safely home.
Posted by: Uchuck the Tuchuck at February 3, 2007 12:23 PM
