Support the War, Betray the Troops.

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
Interesting point of view by Thomas Eddlem, with whom I do not entirely agree, but he makes the case well.

******

I once assumed the best of those who back the war in Iraq, believing that they unknowingly sent them off to die unnecessarily. But recent conversations with warhawks have convinced me otherwise. And the conclusion I’ve come to is that there aren’t any thoughtful supporters of the troops who truly support the war.

Of course there are legions of boobiosie, a majority by some polls, who believe the fantasy that Iraq had something to do with 9-11. But many others who support the war are doing so with full knowledge that Iraq has never attacked the United States and had no credible plot to do so. They support our war of aggression because Saddam Hussein has killed and tortured "his own people." They always seem to stress the "his own people" part, as if that would distinguish Hussein from any of the more than three-score dictators across the globe who have done precisely the same thing.

The attitude these people have about America’s uniformed services really bothers me. "We are the world’s policeman," I have heard more than once in the past week, "and if we don’t stop Hussein, who will?" The implication always given for the "boobus Americanus" in the audience is that Hussein is a potential Hitler who will be rolling panzers across the Potomac within a few years without our unprovoked act of aggression. The fact that Hussein’s forces got their fannies handed to them in a sling by Iran in the 1980s has no impact upon the chickenhawks. Iraq lost to Iran even though the United States was supporting Iraq in the war (despite the fact that Hussein’s worst human rights violations occurred during this time period). The fact that Iraq’s army has been about as potent against American military might as a junior varsity pep squad also appears irrelevant to them.

The arrogance of chickenhawk sentiments is that the lives of American servicemen are a dispensable and even a tradable commodity. I even asked someone if she would be willing to trade the lives of 125 million Americans for 1 billion foreigners if military intervention could accomplish it. She replied unhesitating: "Yes. It’s the greater good. Right?" Wrong. Let alone that such a trade would result in the death of every American male, the whole calculus is a ghastly evil.

It’s the worst and most despicable of all evils. Yet this same calculus is precisely what has brought us into this war. Many are willing to trade the lives of hundreds – even thousands – of our friends and neighbors in exchange for a possibility that some unknown number of strangers might live. The willingness of our servicemen to make this sacrifice is nothing less than noble, but their fellow citizens requiring the lives of their friends and neighbors for reasons unrelated to national defense can’t be described as anything less than treacherous.

The simple truth is that our servicemen signed up to put their lives on the line in defense of their country. They did not sign up to become legionnaires or mercenaries whose lives would become mere pawns in the hands of the majoritarian mandarins. What can "Support the Troops" mean in such a context? Servicemen’s lives become nothing more than a business transaction, with an effort to make a "three-for-one bargain" in the blood trade.

Servicemen’s lives simply aren’t ours to trade away, even though the war*****rs seem to treat them like last year’s baseball cards. There is a coldness of the heart that brings a person to make such a calculation. I shiver for my country when I think that so many people are willing to make it.

Christ said that there is no greater love than to sacrifice your own life for a friend. What can be said in favor of a person willing to sacrifice the lives of his friends for strangers he’s never heard of? Is a greater breach of trust or betrayal even possible? The most sickening thing about the whole business is that the chickenhawks actually take a measure of pride in noting that they have traded away the lives of their friends. They count it as their own generosity to sacrifice the lives of others.

May God protect us from such "generous" monsters.
 

RX Senior
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
8,135
Tokens
SPERM COULD WRITE A BETTER ARTICLE...

I mean really, I had a hard time following it it was so non-sensical and poorly written. I am not even talking about not sharing the authors point of view yet, just the ability to write. bloody awful.

how could anyone read it all, much less think its composed by a living breathing thinking mammal and go farther by taking the time to enjoy it and post it here?

phadeous, are you grantts evil twin? I mean grannt is nuts but you are above and beyond....

like Dr. Evil with rabies.....
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
Strange; I consider Grantt to be far farther outer-fringe than myself.

The esential ideological point with which I agreed in this piece is the tendency, not for military men themselves but for Joe Sixpack in the street to think of American soldiers' lives in terms of chess pieces. I espcially liked the "three for one" comment.

I am positively mystified at the Censor-Matic (tm) p-o-s-t-a-l and w-a-r-m-o-n-g-e-r are bad words, but not cunt or bitch or other seemingly more vulgar terms.

Phaedrus
 
>Interesting to whom?
the audience.

Nothing breathtaking in this article -- just a reiteration of some of the facts that we know to be true (and others try to forget).
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,509
Tokens
It is true. People who support the war have their priorities in the wrong place. They value a cheap gallon of gas higher than the lives of our soldiers.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
1,724
Tokens
"I mean really, I had a hard time following it it was so non-sensical and poorly written. I am not even talking about not sharing the authors point of view yet, just the ability to write. bloody awful."

You may want to go back to high school.
"...I had a hard time following it it..."
It's clear cut, written at some where around a 6-8th grade reading level, that's why one can sort of just breeze through it as easy reading. You better stay away from Dostoevsky.

By the way, are you American?, if so why would you say something as limey as "bloody awful"?, kinda makes you sound a little fruity.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,299
Tokens
phaedrus, regarding the censor topic, i was thinking the same thing. apparently a war m ong er is a greater threat to the english language than a cunt...lol
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,299
Tokens
They always seem to stress the "his own people" part, as if that would distinguish Hussein from any of the more than three-score dictators across the globe who have done precisely the same thing.

Amen.

I'm not saying that Saddam isn't a despot because of this, simply that this shouldn't be the logic we use if we're only planning on invading Iraq.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
Come to think of it RFC, I would take a daily supply of cunt over a daily supply of w-a-r-m-o-n-g-e-r-i-n-g without a second thought. Perhaps the programmers of the Infopop Censor-Matic (tm) are cut from a more similar cloth to mine than I initially suspected.


Phaedrus
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,299
Tokens
true. cunt won't declare war if you disagree with it...and it sure is a better "mouthpiece" than ari fleischer...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,159
Messages
13,564,716
Members
100,753
Latest member
aw8vietnam
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com