I don't support the troops...

[Big Train]

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-stein24jan24,1,9515.column

Libs,

What should I call this...a reverse chicken hawk?


January 24, 2006

latimes.com : Print Edition : Editorials, Op-Ed

Joel Stein:

Warriors and wusses

I DON'T SUPPORT our troops. This is a particularly difficult opinion to have, especially if you are the kind of person who likes to put bumper stickers on his car. Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on.

I'm sure I'd like the troops. They seem gutsy, young and up for anything. If you're wandering into a recruiter's office and signing up for eight years of unknown danger, I want to hang with you in Vegas.

And I've got no problem with other people — the ones who were for the Iraq war — supporting the troops. If you think invading Iraq was a good idea, then by all means, support away. Load up on those patriotic magnets and bracelets and other trinkets the Chinese are making money off of.

But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they're wussy by definition. It's as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn't to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.

Blindly lending support to our soldiers, I fear, will keep them overseas longer by giving soft acquiescence to the hawks who sent them there — and who might one day want to send them somewhere else. Trust me, a guy who thought 50.7% was a mandate isn't going to pick up on the subtleties of a parade for just service in an unjust war. He's going to be looking for funnel cake.

Besides, those little yellow ribbons aren't really for the troops. They need body armor, shorter stays and a USO show by the cast of "Laguna Beach."

The real purpose of those ribbons is to ease some of the guilt we feel for voting to send them to war and then making absolutely no sacrifices other than enduring two Wolf Blitzer shows a day. Though there should be a ribbon for that.

I understand the guilt. We know we're sending recruits to do our dirty work, and we want to seem grateful.

After we've decided that we made a mistake, we don't want to blame the soldiers who were ordered to fight. Or even our representatives, who were deceived by false intelligence. And certainly not ourselves, who failed to object to a war we barely understood.

But blaming the president is a little too easy. The truth is that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying. An army of people ignoring their morality, by the way, is also Jack Abramoff's pet name for the House of Representatives.

I do sympathize with people who joined up to protect our country, especially after 9/11, and were tricked into fighting in Iraq. I get mad when I'm tricked into clicking on a pop-up ad, so I can only imagine how they feel.

But when you volunteer for the U.S. military, you pretty much know you're not going to be fending off invasions from Mexico and Canada. So you're willingly signing up to be a fighting tool of American imperialism, for better or worse. Sometimes you get lucky and get to fight ethnic genocide in Kosovo, but other times it's Vietnam.

And sometimes, for reasons I don't understand, you get to just hang out in Germany.

I know this is all easy to say for a guy who grew up with money, did well in school and hasn't so much as served on jury duty for his country. But it's really not that easy to say because anyone remotely affiliated with the military could easily beat me up, and I'm listed in the phone book.

I'm not advocating that we spit on returning veterans like they did after the Vietnam War, but we shouldn't be celebrating people for doing something we don't think was a good idea. All I'm asking is that we give our returning soldiers what they need: hospitals, pensions, mental health and a safe, immediate return. But, please, no parades.

Seriously, the traffic is insufferable.

[4moreyears]

What a fucking dick. Funny I am sure he loves his rights to express his opinion.

[thome]

The whole article i see a man with his head in the sand and on his knees \and he has pulled his own pants down.

I understand the guilt. We know we're sending recruits to do our dirty work, and we want to seem grateful.....

How can he say We /Our and still write the article he has,, obviously
self destructive in his view of himself.

But that's his OP and he has the rites to say it.I wonder how he got them...

[thome]

Or he is in the middle the Doldrums can't move Frozen in the face of the tough decision Am I for or Against... he seems neither.

Probably lot of people like that....

Even pacifists are angry mean bastards who will kill you to proove the point that -you- are wrong..

He is no pacifist he is a frozen meat bag no left no rite, a punchin bag..

[Big Train]

I think he is an arrogant tool who really doesnt care either way, but wants to get attention for himself as a "hard hitting writer"...

[thome]

Originally posted by Big Train
I think he is an arrogant tool who really doesnt care either way, but wants to get attention for himself as a "hard hitting writer"...

sometimes i feel that way about myself if that was ment for me i hear you .

I prefer -angry opinionated prick- i just hope my tombstone sais more than that....:cool:

[Nitro Express]

The article is written by a spoiled asshole who never had to put his life on the line for anything. Sadly we send some of the countrys greatest people to fight while the spoiled, worthless ones stay here and bitch about it. I had a friend return from Iraq in December. He was away from his wife and kids for almost two years . He stuffed as much ammo anywhere he could because the shit could break loose at anytime. His wife never complained once and he never complained.

All nations need a military because if they didn't someone moves in and takes over. Armed forces exist for one thing, to kill people and break things. That's what they are trained to do. The military is a machine that runs on people following orders whether they want to or not. Niether man grandfather in the WWI trenches nor my father in Korea wanted to be there nor did they enjoy killing but they did. My grandfathrer never owned a gun after WWI and he was a cowboy redneck type. He never talked about the war because it was too horrible.

War is doing your duty and killing other people on the other side doing their duty. As once said war is pure hell. Maybe we should be anti-war but dream on.

When Osama Bin Ladden attacked us on 9/11 he started a war. We might not always like the strategy and question the motives but what were we suppossed to do? Sit here at home and do nothing? Pandoras box has been opened and the world has changed, we will be involved in the middle east for a long time because we were attacked. War takes on it's course after it's started and everyone has an oppinion but nomatter who is in office at the time we were attacked and we are at war. We live in the age of dirty little wars and not big wars. Why? The big wars are unwinable because nukes are involved. So we have been fighting little wars since WWII and non of them have had a clear outcome.

Why do the politicians and citizens argue so much now? Nobody has an answer and nobody knows who the enemy really is.

Sure it's fucked and I think Bush has made big mistakes but to blame the guy who signed up to go into the military or reserves for variouse reasons is stupid. Most those guys signed up to get money for college. Now they are in a war. It's those same people who will be defending us here at home if our enemies bring the fight here.

[DR CHIP]

Horrible article

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Originally posted by Big Train
But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they're wussy by definition.

What a completely ridiculous statement....

OF COURSE you can be against the war but still support the troops....

THE TROOPS don't decide who/where they go to war against, it the idiots who set the policy who decide...

BTW, is was those same idiots who DIDN'T go to war when they should have....

Agreeing with the POLICY and supporting the TROOPS are two different things, completely....

[Nickdfresh]

OMG! This guy's so against the troops that this fucking commie-lib bastard wants to subvert George W. Bush's policies by:


..not advocating that we spit on returning veterans like they did after the Vietnam War...

....asking that we give our returning soldiers what they need: hospitals, pensions, mental health and a safe, immediate return. But, please, no parades.

Seriously, the traffic is insufferable.

--Joel Stein


That bastard!:mad:

[Warham]

The anti-war crowd in the 60's and 70's probably insisted that they didn't want the vets to get spat on, and look what happened.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
The anti-war crowd in the 60's and 70's probably insisted that they didn't want the vets to get spat on, and look what happened.

I also recall a lot of people in the 80's saying that politicians should never run wars politically, they should leave that to the military and make sure that we're out of win...

And we should never get caught up into other people's civil wars...

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
The anti-war crowd in the 60's and 70's probably insisted that they didn't want the vets to get spat on, and look what happened.

Yeah, it's a well circulated myth with the FAUX/NewsHax types, but I've never seen any evidence of it.

In fact the only people I've ever seen spitting on Vietnam vets are the Bush Criminal Empire and their associated political hit squads like "Swift Boat Shitheads Against Truth". They have spit on John McCain, Al Gore, John Kerry, Max Cleland, and by extention, all of those who served with them.

Which, coincidentally, does NOT include Junior, Uncle Dick, Rove, or any of the FAUX/NewsHax/Washingmoonie Times cheerleaders. Go figure.

And for the record, I think I know what the author of this article meant to say (see the last paragraph) but his presentation overall pretty much sucked ass.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Warham
The anti-war crowd in the 60's and 70's probably insisted that they didn't want the vets to get spat on, and look what happened.

Which anti-war crowd? The ones who were against the war itself, or the silver-spoon fed draft dodgers like Bush and Uncle Dick who were anti-war because they were scared to go?

[Big Train]

Originally posted by Big Train
[url]

After we've decided that we made a mistake, we don't want to blame the soldiers who were ordered to fight. Or even our representatives, who were deceived by false intelligence. And certainly not ourselves, who failed to object to a war we barely understood.

The truth is that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying.

But when you volunteer for the U.S. military, you pretty much know you're not going to be fending off invasions from Mexico and Canada. So you're willingly signing up to be a fighting tool of American imperialism, for better or worse. Sometimes you get lucky and get to fight ethnic genocide in Kosovo, but other times it's Vietnam.



So his major problem with the soliders is that they DON'T revolt when he thinks they should? Fantastic logic. Liberal lunacy I tell ya...redefining things as it fits the argument.

[Big Train]

And further to that point, he must have no problem with the Minutemen, who consider themselves "soldiers fighting off an invasion from Mexico", but something tells me his argument would shift if I were to ask him that..

[FORD]

Originally posted by Big Train
So his major problem with the soliders is that they DON'T revolt when he thinks they should? Fantastic logic. Liberal lunacy I tell ya...redefining things as it fits the argument.

Soldiers are allowed to refuse an illegal order. If a war itself is illegal, then how could any order given in such a war be considered "legal"?

Unfortunately, if someone challenged this, it would probably be tried in a military tribunal geared for a pro-BCE outcome, rather than in a regular court of law.

[Big Train]

So if soldiers selectively refused orders, like this guy advocates, it would be perfectly ok then to NOT protect certain areas or cities (I know it's getting O"Reilly ish) that perhaps advocated things they were morally against. Say SF or Los Angeles. Or not defending NY because of the "capitalist society there", or any number of "valid" reasons. If his support if so tied to things he believes, then perhaps so to should the soldiers who protect this country.

Thats not an ineffiecient army, thats a useless army.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Big Train
So if soldiers selectively refused orders, like this guy advocates, it would be perfectly ok then to NOT protect certain areas or cities (I know it's getting O"Reilly ish) that perhaps advocated things they were morally against. Say SF or Los Angeles. Or not defending NY because of the "capitalist society there", or any number of "valid" reasons. If his support if so tied to things he believes, then perhaps so to should the soldiers who protect this country.

Thats not an ineffiecient army, thats a useless army.

The purpose of the United States military is to defend the United States of America, and you are bound by an oath to defend this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. So if they refused an order to defend an American city, that would be an obvious violation of that oath.

And O'Reilly should be in prison for what he said about San Francisco, as should Jeb Bush. And so should Ann the Man Coulter, for his comment yesterday that Justice Stevens should be murdered (in order to give Chimp another Supreme Court appointment)

[Nickdfresh]

How will Anne Coultwhore get an abortion if the Supreme Court is stacked with rabid anti-abortionists?

[Cathedral]

People that try to put words in my mouth usually get my fist in their's.
He's smart to hide behind an article. dumb to point out he's listed in the phone book.

I grew up with money too, but along with that came a strong and lengthy heritage of military service in my family.
I know how we acquired freedom, and I know what is necessary to protect it, and also that it needs protecting every day.

It wasn't a one time, one war, thank you enjoy your peace and have a nice day kind of thing.
Freedom is achieved in installments, one war at a time, one evil dictator at a time....and payments will always be due.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
How will Anne Coultwhore get an abortion if the Supreme Court is stacked with rabid anti-abortionists?

She won't, and if i had my way not a single woman would ever have one again.

If you don't want children then don't have sex. killing a fetus should never have been an option for irresponsible people in the first place.
it's murder, and if you support it you are a supporter of murder.

It really is as simple as that.

[rustoffa]

The advent of mass media is here folks. Every fucking day that goes by, it gets worse. Bi-partisan politics is nothing new.

Lemme throw this out there:

Place the civil rights' movement, the Red Scare, Viet Schlam....any of it into the current media-driven current eventials'?

Fucking disaster.

The press, beit leftist, or Foxist, is responsible for the cuntroversy.

The revolution is being televised, bastardized, and climatised.

Fucking Maury Povich shit.

Break out the salt and take a grain.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
How will Anne Coultwhore get an abortion if the Supreme Court is stacked with rabid anti-abortionists?

Men don't have abortions, silly :rolleyes:

[LoungeMachine]

I don't support the Commander In Chief, or his inner circle

I don't support the Secretary of Defense, or his inner circle

I don't support the Secretary of State, or her inner circle

I did support the previous Secretary Of State, and am pissed they pushed him out.

I do support the commanders on the ground, who ask for more troops, and more equipment.

I do support the troops rights to hold the government to a contract, have adequate equipment, and not have their benefits fucked with.

I don't support the shitstain private contractors stealing our money, and making more than our troops.

I do support having an exit strategy more than "we'll stay 'til the job is done" bullshit.

Major combat operations ended 3 years ago for Christ's sake.

Let them determine their own destiny. We can look for WMD and spread Democracy elsewhere........it's a big world.



SUPPORT OUT TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME ALIVE NOW.

[Nitro Express]

The military and the troops that make it work are a tool. A tool that falls under the control of the elected politicians. If you don't like what's going on, blame the politicians in power. The poor soldier with the M-16 just has to do what he/she is ordered to do. Most would love to be home I'm sure.

[thome]

Originally posted by Nitro Express
The military and the troops that make it work are a tool. A tool that falls under the control of the elected politicians. If you don't like what's going on, blame the politicians in power. The poor soldier with the M-16 just has to do what he/she is ordered to do. Most would love to be home I'm sure.

I beg to Differ................
I,m a lil old so it's a stupid post but sometimes.........sometimes..............quietly.. ....I say to.. myself.......

to ...to .....to myself oooohooohho hhooo o hoo. hoo. ooooh. I guess
I,m lyin to myself .....WAR!..... cause there is you an no one else....

...WAR!..I miss you...

Well i've been haunted in my sleep ..WAR!
Youv' been starrin in my dreams.....WAR!

WAR!..... I miss you.

I've been waiting in the hall
Been waiting on your call
When the phone rings .........WAR!
It's just some friends of mine that say, ....WAR!
"Hey, what's the matter man?
We're gonna come around at twelve
With ...WAR!... that are just dyin' to meet you
We're gonna bring a case of wine
Hey, let's go mess and fool around
You know, like we used to" ....................WAR oohoo ohh hoooh hooh

Oh everybody waits so long .. WAR!
Oh baby why you wait so long ..WAR!
Won't you come on! Come on! .. WAR! ...WAR!....WAR!

I've been walking Central Park
Singing after dark
People think I'm crazy ....................war....sssshhhh....
I've been stumbling on my feet
Shuffling through the street ...........................................war..to to
People ask me, "What's the matter with you boy?"

Sometimes I want to say to myself............... WAR!!!!!
Sometimes I say................. WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I want to be with you
I want to be near you

I want to be inside you...WAR!


------------------------------------
Hit The ground Runnin as they say so to speak .
Be their in the thick of, Once more onto the -Breach- Dear.. Friends..
It's a sick thought feeling War is something to be Lusted for
Lil bit o the ultra violence is in all of us rite or wrong Yes/No.?
:p

[Big Train]

Originally posted by FORD
The purpose of the United States military is to defend the United States of America, and you are bound by an oath to defend this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. So if they refused an order to defend an American city, that would be an obvious violation of that oath.


That's my point Ford. Using his logic, any order you just feel is wrong, by your own morality, should not be followed. Being that people's morality, for better or worse, varies wildly, using that as a template for how things should function, things such as not protecting San Francisco would be perfectly valid. If this were the way the soldiers operated, you would have mutiny and a mercenary army.

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by FORD


And O'Reilly should be in prison for what he said about San Francisco

What a joke. A great American like O'Riely is not allowed to voice his opinion.

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by thome
I beg to Differ................
I,m a lil old so it's a stupid post but sometimes.........sometimes..............quietly.. ....I say to.. myself.......

to ...to .....to myself oooohooohho hhooo o hoo. hoo. ooooh. I guess
I,m lyin to myself .....WAR!..... cause there is you an no one else....

...WAR!..I miss you...

Well i've been haunted in my sleep ..WAR!
Youv' been starrin in my dreams.....WAR!

WAR!..... I miss you.

I've been waiting in the hall
Been waiting on your call
When the phone rings .........WAR!
It's just some friends of mine that say, ....WAR!
"Hey, what's the matter man?
We're gonna come around at twelve
With ...WAR!... that are just dyin' to meet you
We're gonna bring a case of wine
Hey, let's go mess and fool around
You know, like we used to" ....................WAR oohoo ohh hoooh hooh

Oh everybody waits so long .. WAR!
Oh baby why you wait so long ..WAR!
Won't you come on! Come on! .. WAR! ...WAR!....WAR!

I've been walking Central Park
Singing after dark
People think I'm crazy ....................war....sssshhhh....
I've been stumbling on my feet
Shuffling through the street ...........................................war..to to
People ask me, "What's the matter with you boy?"

Sometimes I want to say to myself............... WAR!!!!!
Sometimes I say................. WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I want to be with you
I want to be near you

I want to be inside you...WAR!


------------------------------------
Hit The ground Runnin as they say so to speak .
Be their in the thick of, Once more onto the -Breach- Dear.. Friends..
It's a sick thought feeling War is something to be Lusted for
Lil bit o the ultra violence is in all of us rite or wrong Yes/No.?
:p

What the fuck does this mean????

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
What a joke. A great American like O'Riely is not allowed to voice his opinion.

Well, he's an american, but great? that's debatable.

Some things i agree with him on, some i just can't.
Now he shouldn't be locked up for his comments, it is america and he has the right to speak his mind.
But being a tv personality he should use more discretion before blasting off at the mouth like a responsible mouthpiece.

Notice i didn't call him a journalist, because he isn't anymore.

[FORD]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
What a joke. A great American like O'Riely is not allowed to voice his opinion.

Inviting terrorists to attack an American city is not "voicing an opinion".

It is treason.

[FORD]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
What the fuck does this mean????

It means the idiot just opened himself up to a copyright infringement suit from Mick Jagger.

And Edwin Starr, probably.

[Unchainme]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
What a joke. A great American like O'Riely is not allowed to voice his opinion.

You spelled O'Reilly wrong, Dumbass BCE Busheep Troll. And yes O'Reilly is aloud to speak his opinion freely on Fox News nightly without censorship. Remember Criticism is not the same as Censorship.