Do you still support the war?

[PyRo]

Umm, no, I can support the troops and protest the war.

What do you mean "support the troops"?
How is that? One think we went over there for all the wrong reasons and shouldn't have done so. But that doesn't mean the same person laughs every time an American is killed, or doesn't believe we should stay there to sort out the mess we made.
*Note those are not personal beliefs, just an example.

[Bad_Dog]

war isnt fun... war isnt pretty... war isnt fun to debate... nothing fun comes from war...



but, I still support the war, the fact that we're trying to aid another country and restrict the flow/spread of chemical or biological weapons... its a tough job, but no ones better qualified than those who are doing it now to do it..

[edweird]

I don't understand the first option of the poll "Yes and I always will" if you answer that, what if Bush comes out and says "I lied about the entire thing, we had no evidence". Basically that option is like saying "I like war no matter what is going on".

Then I still dont care. terrorists are evil bastards that sould fall under the almighty concrete, tritonal and steel that I give our pilots. Oh and since im at it so should of saddam, even if it was just on general principal. As a active miltary personell I would rather work a mission that is doing some good in the world than repetive training what only serves to drain the taxpayers instead of protecting them.

Oh and the "conciencious objectors" that joined up cause they wanted the college money can suck on a gauge also, they are fundamentally what is wrong with the us military. I have no quams about sending them packing and taking back the enlistment bonus they received.

[magking1971]

Wars are stupid but I will support ALL past, present and future US troops.
Every terrorst should be hunted and killed.
Just a "my 2 cents"post

[Army]

To support the troops, is to support the war, period. You cannot have it both ways.

If you do not approve of what we are doing here, then whatever I do cannot be supported by you in any way. If you support me, then you approve of my killing people and building a free nation.

If you think we are doing tremendous good here, as we are, then you support EVERY effort we must take to accomplish what GW has set out to do.

BTW, GW owns a MASTERS degree, his grades seemed to have been good enough for that. No daddy can't buy you a degree.

BTW, GW was trained to fly the F104 Starfighter, arguably the most difficult handling aircraft the USAF ever fielded. GW needed to be plenty smart to accomplish that too.

BTW, learn about your enemy BEFORE you attack him. You may find out you are outmatched and outwitted.

[nippinout]

We waited months talking at the UN, got unanimous UN approval, congress approved action, and of course it was a lie. A lie supported by the UN, CIA, British/French/German/Russian intelligence and their governments, 2 previous presidents and their cabinets, and of course our friend

Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf


More than a decade of Saddam shooting at our planes and defying the IAEA and a dozen UN resolutions and people wanted to let Saddam have more time?!?!

WMD wasn't the only reason to have gone in. The man was a douche. He hated America and Israel. There's no doubt that he supported terrorism. We have to be proactive, and not reactive.

Just because the fight got difficult, we made the wrong decision? People these days are too weak.

[taylor492]

To support the troops, is to support the war, period. You cannot have it both ways.

If you do not approve of what we are doing here, then whatever I do cannot be supported by you in any way. If you support me, then you approve of my killing people and building a free nation.

Very well put. Its what ive been tryin to say all along.

[AutomagRT1483]

I support the troops, therefore I support the war. Nuff said.

[Steelrat]

We waited months talking at the UN, got unanimous UN approval, congress approved action, and of course it was a lie. A lie supported by the UN, CIA, British/French/German/Russian intelligence and their governments, 2 previous presidents and their cabinets, and of course our friend

Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf

[B] Definately true. In fact, I have read theories that Saddam was trying to perpetuate the myth that he had active WMD programs, in order to secure a better bargaining position. I just wish we hadn't put so much faith in the intel supplied to us by the Iraqi dissedents. Its pretty obvious they have an agenda of their own.[B]

[QUOTE]More than a decade of Saddam shooting at our planes and defying the IAEA and a dozen UN resolutions and people wanted to let Saddam have more time?!?!{/QUOTE]

Well, I think the Iraqis got the worst of those incidents. I think all of them consisted of the Iraqis shooting a SAM or two, our guys evading or jamming it, then trashing the SAM site with a ARM or cluster bomb. As for violating the UN resolutions, isnt that something that the UN should have had a say in? Im all for unilateral action, but using the violation of a UN resolution for a war, then ignoring the UN, is kinda like having your cake and eating it too. If we go, lets be honest and detail what our intentions are.

WMD wasn't the only reason to have gone in. The man was a douche. He hated America and Israel. There's no doubt that he supported terrorism. We have to be proactive, and not reactive.

Again, true, he was a turkey, and the surrounding countries have tended to be a little more cooperative with us after we took out Saddam. BUT, there are a lot of douches in the world. Iran hates the US and Israel, and definately supports terrorism, but we cant just go in there guns blazing.

Just because the fight got difficult, we made the wrong decision? People these days are too weak.

Welcome to the modern US. I was reading about D-day recently, and was reminded that we lost over 6000 troops KIA on the day of the invasion alone. Now, the public cringes at the loss of 600 troops during an entire conflict. I hate US casualties as much as anyone, but the military is a victim of its own success, and now the public expects low casualty numbers. Not much is going to change that short of another world war. And frankly, the public should have been told it would be a tough fight up front, but that would have been difficult politically. Going with optimistic casualty projections is never a good idea

I think most US citizens want our troops to finish what they are doing and come home safe, be they anti-war or whatever. Remember, the right to disagree with the government's decisions is one of the rights our troops fight for.

[-Carnifex-]

Sure you can, but the second you voice those anti-war feelings, the support for the troops goes out the window.

Umm no **** sherlock, but protesting the war does nothing for the troops.

You're an idiot, please refrain from displaying your inanity in my threads. Thank you.

[-Carnifex-]

To support the troops, is to support the war, period. You cannot have it both ways.

If you do not approve of what we are doing here, then whatever I do cannot be supported by you in any way. If you support me, then you approve of my killing people and building a free nation.

If you think we are doing tremendous good here, as we are, then you support EVERY effort we must take to accomplish what GW has set out to do.

One couldn't say that they hope the troops survive and return home before /after accomplishing their mission? Just because one finds the reasons for war to be bogus doesn't mean they can't support the troops.

[1stdeadeye]

One couldn't say that they hope the troops survive and return home before /after accomplishing their mission? Just because one finds the reasons for war to be bogus doesn't mean they can't support the troops.

Yes, please explain that to the soldiers over there. I guess Army's post counts for nothing since he is over there and that is the perception that he is relaying to us. I guess you are better tuned in to the feelings of our soldiers then he is.

[RoadDawg]

Yes, please explain that to the soldiers over there. I guess Army's post counts for nothing since he is over there and that is the perception that he is relaying to us. I guess you are better tuned in to the feelings of our soldiers then he is.

I've told my brother over in Afghanistan that I support the troops but not whole heartedly the cause. He agreed with me. He's there doing his duty as an american soldier. He knew the risks when he signed up. Does he regret it. NO. Do I think any different of him, NO. He is my blood. He is giving his to protect mine and everyone elses. WE can support the troops but not the cause. In fact it's our American duty to stand up for what we think might be an injustice. This is not the first time he's been in this situation and it won't be the last. He reminded me though that as a civilian it is my duty to speak up for what we think is wrong. Then he knows that people are practicing the freedoms he has chosen to defend. So here it is in a nut shell. I support the Troops but not the cause. Our troops are dying for Iraqi and Afghanistan people's freedoms. It's honorable but we will see if it'll hold.

[-Carnifex-]

Did I say that I was?

I'm sorry, I didn't know I had to agree with everything the gov't does in order to support our troops. Apparently just hoping for their safe arival home and being thankful for the freedom they've granted me isn't enough.

[Vash02]

I agree with carnifex. I dont see any reason why you cant support the troops but disagree with the war. I dont think we shoudl still be there but that sure as hell doesnt mean that i dont want our boys and girls to kick some serious but and return home safe.