Comments on: Oppose the War, Support the Troops?

By: Hating the sin and other popular idiotisms. « T’ings ‘n Times

Hating the sin and other popular idiotisms. « T’ings ‘n Times — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:19:48 +0000

[…] the troops even if you oppose the war. I’ve never quite understood this one either and I’m not the only one. As citizens, should we not have the right to weigh in on the major foreign policy decisions taken […]

By: Tom Serge

Tom Serge — Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:33:08 +0000

I agree that you cannot be against the invasion and support the actions of the troops. It is like supporting a mechanic who works in a garage that lies to customers and performs unecessary work on the automobiles. The mechanic is complicent in the crime if he stays.

By: Caitlin Criner

Caitlin Criner — Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:00:20 +0000

Ratboy proposes that a way to support the troops is by praising them for carrying out orders, even if they are not “moral” or “correct.” By that logic if a soldier kills a child that posed no threat because of command, should that soldier be congratulated for listening so well? If that were the case than why did we have the Nuremberg Trails? Were not some of those men just following orders? Admittedly that is an extreme case, but it demonstrates my point. The military should be held responsible for not the whole war, but their part in it.
It’s a given, that if each soldier had his or her own agenda, the military would be chaos. I don’t oppose structure, but I do oppose turning into a machine with no conscience or regard for what hurts the reputation of one’s country or all mankind. The military should not act as “unthinking drones,” and those that are should be criticized, not commended.
Everyone in the country has a choice. If one chooses to join the military, he or she is agreeing to go to war. Therefore, if you honestly oppose a war and how it is being conducted, should you not also oppose the people that are fighting in it?

By: RatBoy

RatBoy — Sat, 15 Jan 2005 04:34:57 +0000

At some point, every person uses a phrase without realizing its literal meaning. When they talk of support for the troops, they are only assuring that they don’t hate the troops. Feeling the need to make this point is understandable, since there are always pro-war who accuse peacemakers for endangering soldiers and hating their country (every oppressive regime uses this ploy to silence critics during a time of war).

However, there is, in fact, a logical way that a person can rightfully declare support for the troops but not for the war. A soldiers job is not to perform the correct, moral, or useful action; a soldiers job is to follow orders. In the line of duty, they must be unthinking drones of the state; giving themselves to the will of Authority to be the might. A soldier contemplating the morality of war is a distracted soldier. Good or evil, if they follow orders, they have done what they ought to have done. The decision to follow orders belongs to the troops, and they should be measured by this canon. The decision to invade belongs to Authority, and they should be judged on how they use the military.

Therefore, a person can support the troops’ decision to follow orders and, simultaneously, oppose the way leaders use them.

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 31 Dec 2003 03:41:05 +0000

I am aware that the troops are carrying out orders… I think you severely missed my point.

By: Brad

Brad — Wed, 31 Dec 2003 03:24:41 +0000

They are just fou ollowing orders. Do you honestly think that the troops on the front lines carrying weapons are making the decisions of war? They are doing their job! Would you prefer them to be unemployed drawing welfare, which you pay for, or working drawing a paycheck, which you pay for?

By: T

Fri, 21 Mar 2003 18:16:29 +0000

I couldn’t agree with you more…