Stop the madness!

majorpat · #1 02-11-2008, 07:39 AM

Sorry, for this post, but the truth is that I have few face to face outlets to throw down and I alway find the posts of the forumites to have a calming effect on me. By the way, I rode an exercise bike at a hotel yesterday....ho hum

But here's my beef, you may know I served in the invasion of Iraq, let's not get into all the aspects of this now. However, I am finally fed up with the "Bush and the general's are balloonheads but, doggone it, I support the troops" position adopted by just about everyone. Look, I have big problems with the whole misadventure, but it just chaps my a$$ when people adopt this position. To wit, a quote from Speaker Pelosi:
"This is a failure. This is a failure. The troops have succeeded, God bless them. We owe them the greatest debt of gratitude for their sacrifice, their patriotism, and for their courage and to their families as well."
She may be sincere but which troops does she want God to Bless? Just the privates and lance corporals? Are sergeants OK to support? What about me, I was a company commander with, one assumes, a larger understanding of the mission?
I guess my point is that after five years of this, the "I support the troops but think the mission is a failure" folks are basically saying, "we can't blame the troops (are the general's and colonel's troops?) they are just mindless automatons who really must follow orders all the time." It's condescending and is getting old. Hey I am just as supportive of folks who get deployed, many are my friends and former Marines, maybe it's just when the position is taken by public type folks to defend their position. Many may find it shocking, but much of the war is planned, adjusted, reevaluated and carried out without White House input on the best employment of a machine gun at at map grid 123456. My guess is that most troops on the ground would rather that politicians just said nothing rather than, "hey, I think you poor, misguided creatures are just peaches, too bad you just can't sit around baking cupcakes al day!"
It's warfare, folks.
For myself, I support the good folks in elected office, It's just the dam government that so screwed up.....

Sorry for the rant...I did buy a 1" Nitto stem this week!!!

dirtdigger88 · #2 02-11-2008, 07:43 AM

+1 and thank you

Jason

Blue Jays · #3 02-11-2008, 07:53 AM

Same as dirtdigger88, thank you for your generous and selfless service to our great country!

J.Greene · #4 02-11-2008, 08:05 AM

As the other two said...thanks

wrt to your point, you are an extension of the political machine. It's always been that way. Keep your head up and know that most of us are thankful we have people like you.

JG

Len J · #5 02-11-2008, 08:08 AM

I can't speak for Pelosi....but I can speak for me.

Give our fighting men and women a mission that they have been trained for, armed for, manned for & with proper rules of engagement & nothing can withstand the onslaught. I'll point to the Invasion of Iraq and quick defeat of the Iragi military as an example as is the initial several months in Afganistan.

OTOH, underman them, give them a nebulous mission that they have not been trained for, give them Rules of engagement that handcuff them & you are using them as both fodder and for purely political reasons. I'd point to the original counterinsurgence efforts and efforts to quell thousands of years of ethnic hate while undermanned & the attempt to stabilize Afganistan while removing more & more troops as examples of this.

In both cases they are the same fighting men & women......In both cases they deserve our respect and gratitude.........However in the latter example, criticizing the leadership that uses our precious troops so causally is not only appropriate, IMO, it's essential.....for anyone that actually cares about the Men & women actually being put at risk.

BTW...thanks much for your service.

Len

ti_boi · #6 02-11-2008, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by majorpat

Sorry, for this post, but the truth is that I have few face to face outlets to throw down and I alway find the posts of the forumites to have a calming effect on me. By the way, I rode an exercise bike at a hotel yesterday....ho hum

But here's my beef, you may know I served in the invasion of Iraq, let's not get into all the aspects of this now. However, I am finally fed up with the "Bush and the general's are balloonheads but, doggone it, I support the troops" position adopted by just about everyone. Look, I have big problems with the whole misadventure, but it just chaps my a$$ when people adopt this position. To wit, a quote from Speaker Pelosi:
"This is a failure. This is a failure. The troops have succeeded, God bless them. We owe them the greatest debt of gratitude for their sacrifice, their patriotism, and for their courage and to their families as well."
She may be sincere but which troops does she want God to Bless? Just the privates and lance corporals? Are sergeants OK to support? What about me, I was a company commander with, one assumes, a larger understanding of the mission?
I guess my point is that after five years of this, the "I support the troops but think the mission is a failure" folks are basically saying, "we can't blame the troops (are the general's and colonel's troops?) they are just mindless automatons who really must follow orders all the time." It's condescending and is getting old. Hey I am just as supportive of folks who get deployed, many are my friends and former Marines, maybe it's just when the position is taken by public type folks to defend their position. Many may find it shocking, but much of the war is planned, adjusted, reevaluated and carried out without White House input on the best employment of a machine gun at at map grid 123456. My guess is that most troops on the ground would rather that politicians just said nothing rather than, "hey, I think you poor, misguided creatures are just peaches, too bad you just can't sit around baking cupcakes al day!"
It's warfare, folks.
For myself, I support the good folks in elected office, It's just the dam government that so screwed up.....

Sorry for the rant...I did buy a 1" Nitto stem this week!!!

I think you make excellent points here. I don't know anyone who really thinks much of the politicians in Washington right now. The polls that measure 'approval' are at about 22% for Congress and 30% for GW...those numbers tell me that people think the whole group are simply out of touch with reality. They are self-serving opportunists some of whom might have good intentions but we know the old saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

You've done what few people could do and your service is key to the security of the country. Our lives are better because of what you do.

michael white · #7 02-11-2008, 08:17 AM

Nitto stems don't quite make up for the lack of spine in Washington, but they do help some. I have one still in the bag . . .

rnhood · #8 02-11-2008, 08:25 AM

Unfortunately Congress appears to be comprised of mostly former prosecutors, who love investigations but can't do much else. No wonder their approval rating is so low. They don't seem nearly as interested in our national security as they are in whether or not the NFL destroyed evidence that might indicate the Patriots coach spied on other NFL teams.

Chris · #9 02-11-2008, 08:31 AM

I agree with Len. I think the important thing, which America has learned from Vietnam, is that the military itself is not responsible for how it is used. If the big boss says go, it goes. That's why millions of us, can whole-heartedly support our troops by praying for them, wishing them well, and being proud of their attempts to accomplish the mission they have been tasked with, all the while being completely baffled as to why the administration would have tasked them with that mission in the first place.

97CSI · #10 02-11-2008, 08:33 AM

As someone who spent over eight years on active duty, including Vietnam, I too 'support the troops', but think the mission was more than flawed from the start. And our current leader is spineless (we are the same age - what did he do during Vietnam? Got his teeth fixed.). As bad as congress is, it was worse over the majority of the past sixteen years and seems to be slowly lifting itself out of the morass it has created for this country with dubya/Bill at the helm. But I won't hold my breathe. Depends on the super-delegates, who are mostly just old-line pols, themselves.

hansolo758 · #11 02-11-2008, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by majorpat

Sorry, for this post, but the truth is that I have few face to face outlets to throw down and I alway find the posts of the forumites to have a calming effect on me. By the way, I rode an exercise bike at a hotel yesterday....ho hum

But here's my beef, you may know I served in the invasion of Iraq, let's not get into all the aspects of this now. However, I am finally fed up with the "Bush and the general's are balloonheads but, doggone it, I support the troops" position adopted by just about everyone. Look, I have big problems with the whole misadventure, but it just chaps my a$$ when people adopt this position. To wit, a quote from Speaker Pelosi:
"This is a failure. This is a failure. The troops have succeeded, God bless them. We owe them the greatest debt of gratitude for their sacrifice, their patriotism, and for their courage and to their families as well."
She may be sincere but which troops does she want God to Bless? Just the privates and lance corporals? Are sergeants OK to support? What about me, I was a company commander with, one assumes, a larger understanding of the mission?
I guess my point is that after five years of this, the "I support the troops but think the mission is a failure" folks are basically saying, "we can't blame the troops (are the general's and colonel's troops?) they are just mindless automatons who really must follow orders all the time." It's condescending and is getting old. Hey I am just as supportive of folks who get deployed, many are my friends and former Marines, maybe it's just when the position is taken by public type folks to defend their position. Many may find it shocking, but much of the war is planned, adjusted, reevaluated and carried out without White House input on the best employment of a machine gun at at map grid 123456. My guess is that most troops on the ground would rather that politicians just said nothing rather than, "hey, I think you poor, misguided creatures are just peaches, too bad you just can't sit around baking cupcakes al day!"
It's warfare, folks.
For myself, I support the good folks in elected office, It's just the dam government that so screwed up.....

Sorry for the rant...I did buy a 1" Nitto stem this week!!!

Perhaps supporting the troops but not the leadership is a cop-out. However, what other course of action do the sizable number of people have who oppose the war, yet who admire the sense of duty in the soldiers who go to Iraq -- my nephew and the children of several people with whom I work being among them? We see first hand what service to one's country and sacrifice really mean. And this includes the officers and NCOs. When General Petraeus came to Capitol Hill a few months ago to explain the results of the "surge", he came across as a thoroughly decent man and a competent soldier. I was as appalled as anyone that Moveon.org would call him a traitor. He is a professional soldier doing what his civilian leadership instructed him to do as well as he can, without blaming his superiors or letting his personal opinions enter into the argument. That is true professionalism.

Yet even amongst those who serve, there is a sense that this war, while it may have had clearly defined objectives at one point, no longer does. And we didn't go in with overwhelming force (in opposition to the Powell doctrine). If those who serve feel that way, where does this leave the rest of us? Yes, we want our troops to have armored Humvees and whatever else they need to do the best they can and to survive. They are not "baby-killers", as those who came back from Vietnam were called. But we also want them to come home and not stay a moment longer than is necessary. The troops cannot say this because that would be mutiny. But those civilians who oppose the war certainly can do their best to influence the civilian leadership on how the war is conducted. That's democracy. That's what sustains my nephew.

And, thank you for your service. You are one of the troops we support.

Ray · #12 02-11-2008, 08:58 AM

MajorPat,

I can understand your feeling patronized and patted on the head by the language you cite. But, as others have said, some of the reason those opposing the policy behind the war use language like this is because those who support it so often accuse any dissenters of being unpatriotic and undermining the troops in the field by our objections to the policy.

I personally think the war in Iraq (as distinct from Afghanistan, which I do support and think we should be much more engaged in) was a horrible policy mistake. I don't think we should be in Iraq. I can't say it any more clearly and I'm not going to apologize for that. But we ARE there. I don't believe it is at all unpatriotic to question the mission. But since we are stuck in Iraq for some period of time, I do think the troops should be given the best equipment and best leadership we can find and should be encouraged to do their job as well as they can - and they DO a great job given the problems with the job they've been given to do. I also think Patreus is the best man for the job, even if I don't think we should have taken on that particular job.

The shorthand for this position is "I support the troops who are stuck fighting this misguided war, but I don't support the policy that put them there in the first place". I'm sorry you find that contradictory and condescending. I don't find it to be either and damn sure don't intend it to be either. I don't have a better way to say it. If you have any suggestions for less offensive language, I'm very open to hearing them and using different language in the future.

And, by the way, I FULLY appreciate the service of those of you who have fought and are still fighting over there. You may or may not believe me, but I'm very sincere about that. I also don't for a minute think that the troops are bobble-headed idiots (well, I'm sure a few probably are, just like with any other population). You follow orders because you HAVE TO follow orders - that's the only way a military unit can function. That's part of doing your job well and you DO do your job well. Again, there's no condescension in that at all.

-Ray

GregL · #13 02-11-2008, 09:04 AM

Majorpat, I agree with your assessment. I think the "support the troops" mentality is based on a kind of "national guilt" over the treatment of Vietnam-era military personnel. The pendulum has swung completely to the other side, where many feel they have to display this "false patriotism." I for one think it is hypocritical and don't partake in it. I was in O'Hare airport a few months back when some soldiers disembarked from a commercial flight. Nearly everyone in the gate area stood and cheered for them. I thought it was funny. No one knew if the soldiers had just returned from Iraq or Las Vegas, but they cheered nonetheless...

J.Greene · #14 02-11-2008, 09:14 AM

I don't think it is false patriotism. Infact, that is an offensive thing to say. Those of us who know people who are on their 3rd and 4th combat tours support the troops by default. We support the families they leave behind in so many ways beyond bumper sticker patriotism. But we don't have to support the overall poltics of the mission. Your quote is illogical and misinformed atmo.

JG

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregL

Majorpat, I agree with your assessment. I think the "support the troops" mentality is based on a kind of "national guilt" over the treatment of Vietnam-era military personnel. The pendulum has swung completely to the other side, where many feel they have to display this "false patriotism." I for one think it is hypocritical and don't partake in it. I was in O'Hare airport a few months back when some soldiers disembarked from a commercial flight. Nearly everyone in the gate area stood and cheered for them. I thought it was funny. No one knew if the soldiers had just returned from Iraq or Las Vegas, but they cheered nonetheless...

GregL · #15 02-11-2008, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.Greene

I don't think it is false patriotism. Infact, that is an offensive thing to say. Those of us who know people who are on their 3rd and 4th combat tours support the troops by default. We support the families they leave behind in so many ways beyond bumper sticker patriotism. But we don't have to support the overall poltics of the mission. Your quote is illogical and misinformed atmo.

It's called an opinion. Perhaps you have heard of them?

In my opinion, some people are almost afraid to NOT make overt shows of support for the troops. I have been told by several friends and family members in the military that they, like the original poster, do not like the "support the troops regardless" mentality. I support the people who are performing sometimes difficult jobs for their country. I do not feel that I have to make grand displays of this support, which can be construed as condescending. I do not support the government who made the mistake of sending them into Iraq.

BTW, two of my cousins have had multiple tours in Iraq.