An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

“Supporting the Troops,” Revisited

yellow ribbon

As is part of a great American tradition, a lot was said and written in honor of our veterans this past Veterans Day. And, as it has become customary during the past few years, a lot has also been said and written about our newest veterans, the troops who have served so honorably and bravely in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also, as in past years, much has been said and written about “supporting the troops.” Many voice their support, and concern, for the troops by bemoaning the shortcomings and problems they face when they finally return home and take off that uniform. The past couple of years, and especially around Veterans Day, we have been horrified by the incredibly high rates of suicides, alcoholism, mental illness, PTSD, unemployment and homelessness among our veterans. In unison, Americans are asking why and demanding that our veterans be better taken care of, medically, financially, mentally and in other ways.

Fortunately, this Veterans Day—while we continue to demand support for our troops and veterans—we have not heard as often or as loud the cries of those who in the past have attempted to use Veterans Day to equate not supporting the war in Iraq with not supporting the troops.

Last Veterans Day I wrote about this emotional issue.

One of my starting paragraphs read:

Let me just say it up front: I support the troops, but I do not support the war in Iraq. Although millions of honorable Americans regularly make similar assertions, it is still risky to do so knowing that a good number of Americans will at best reject outright what they see as a contradiction in terms and, at worst, accuse those who make such a contention of being disingenuous, unpatriotic, etc.

And I concluded, referring to my hawkish views during the Vietnam War and my gung-ho support of that war:

There are many ways in which opposition to this war can be construed to mean lack of support for the troops. I was at one time masterful at that. I just ask that “supporters” of the [Iraq] war consider the possibility that those Americans who disagreed with our government on the justification for this war and who continue to disapprove of the cavalier manner in which our troops have been placed in harm’s way, do indeed respect, admire and deeply care for those who are doing the actual fighting in Iraq and elsewhere and making all the sacrifices.

As I said, this Veterans Day there wasn’t a lot of such rhetoric. Perhaps it is because the war in Iraq is winding down; perhaps because many of the “accusers” have mellowed in their views; perhaps because we are now on the threshold of significantly increasing our involvement, our troop levels, and perhaps the casualties in another war.

Or it could be because some of the initially ardent supporters of the war in Afghanistan are now having second thoughts.

I was and continue to be such a supporter. While I can not promise that I will continue to blindly support this war, I can categorically promise that I will never question the patriotism of those who have been, are, or will be against the war in Afghanistan, and that I will never insinuate that those who do not support the Afghanistan War do not support the troops.

I hope others will share in such sentiments.

  • tidbits
    Agreed, Dorian. Supporting people and supporting policy are separate issues.
  • biotechoutreach
    Your comments are right on the mark, although many to the far extremes will disagree with you. our President is facing the hardest decisions of this century, but I have faith that he will ultimately find solutions, within the next 7 years (yes, I think he will be re-elected), that will further our history as the great country leading economic global growth. His retractors haven't realized how smart he really is...
  • Father_Time
    Very nice Dorian. It is easy to keep the two separate in my mind. It might be a little different for people serving in the war zones though. It would seem that being in favor of fighting the war might actually be an indispensable asset for actually doing it. What do you think?
  • Leonidas
    I agree, average citizens who oppose a war should not be condemned for that, so long as they don't pull a Jane Fonda and help an enemy's propaganda machine, or spit on our troops as they return home. I don't know of any widespread occurances of this sort of thing, but a buddy of mine had it happen to him when he returned from Vietnam, and a few fringe-nuts have burned US soldier in effigy on the left coast. Still those are just a few of the furthest radicals and not the norm for the anti-war crowd of today. Most of these are good people who I might disagree with, but I would still call them friend or neighbor.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    " It is easy to keep the two separate in my mind. It might be a little different for people serving in the war zones though. It would seem that being in favor of fighting the war might actually be an indispensable asset for actually doing it. What do you think?"

    That is a good point, FT, and one that is brought up frequently when debating this issue. Of course having all Americans united and in support of fighting a certain war would be of great moral support for our troops actually doing the fighting. And, I know that when our national security or national interests are truly at stake, Americans do exactly that. "Indispensable"? I hope that those doing the fighting in "unpopular wars," "unjustified wars," such as the Iraq war is considered by many, know that while Americans do not necessarily approve of the policy, they almost uniformly support them, respect them and honor them---perhaps even more because of the fact that their leaders have placed them in harm's way and in such untenable situations.

    I don't know how else to answer your question, except for saying that I personally know how much I respect and support our troops, and that I am glad that some of the clearly despicable reactions by some to our troops who fought in Vietnam ( a war I naively supported), thank God, are clearly an exception, and an aberration, today.

    Thanks for your comments,

    Dorian







  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Leonidas:

    I sadly agree with you on how our Vietnam War returnees and veterans were treated during that war. In fact, in the same piece I wrote on the occasion of Veterans Day 2007, I said:

    "And so it goes this Veterans Day. Another time, another war, but the same questions about the judgments and policies that produced this war; the same brave troops fighting our battles; and, yes, the same debate--at times accusations--about not supporting the troops and about loyalty and patriotism. But, there is one difference: During the Vietnam War, and for some time thereafter, some Americans, in fact, did not support the troops. I clearly remember the contempt and scorn with which some treated our Vietnam War active duty troops and veterans. I also remember the truly unpatriotic words and actions on the part of some of the hard-core "anti-war protesters."

    Thanks for your comments



  • Father_Time
    How do you tell someone to fight to the death for a cause nobody believes in anymore?
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    "How do you tell someone to fight to the death for a cause nobody believes in anymore?"

    1. I do believe many Americans believe(d) (either because they were misled, or in spite of being misled) in the "cause" for the Iraq war. Most Americans, including yours truly, certainly believed in the "cause" for the war in Afghanistan.

    2. "How do you tell someone to fight to the death...." That is exactly the wonder of, a testament to, the dedication, sense of duty, loyalty and courage of our troops

    Dorian





  • ProfElwood
    I have to side with Father_Time here. We lost the Vietnam war, in large part, because it wasn't a war that the people believed in. For that matter, it wasn't even an official war, but more of a "stick your toe in the water to see if it's cold" effort. It's become way too easy for a president to commit us to war, which means, I would think, sending people onto foreign soil, against that's country's will, in order to kill them. We don't have a defense in order to protect our industrial interests, but to protect the nation.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    "We lost the Vietnam war, in large part, because it wasn't a war that the people believed in."

    You may be right there, ProfElwood, and the people not "believing" in the war probably affected the morale of our troops, but in my opinion it did not affect the performance and the bravery of those troops. As I mentioned, the fact that our troops continue to fight bravely and competently in the face of lack of public support back home for the war, speaks volumes to their loyalty and sense of duty.

    We "lost" the war, because our goverment decided to stop the fighting, cut our losses, sign a treaty,whatever you may want to blame it on, but not because of anything our troops did or did not do, in my opinion.

    "It's become way too easy for a president to commit us to war..." you get no argument from me here.

    Thanks for your comment







  • Father_Time
    We risk breaking that trust by wasting lives for a lost cause Dorian. We lost it once because of Vietnam. It has never been fully regained and the world knows it. That’s why a protracted insurgency is the weapon of choice against the United States. It works so well and now with the damage it is doing to our economy, we are truly dancing delightfully on the precipice by over using rhetoric than may soon be seen as insincere.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Perhaps totally besides the point, perhaps not,but...

    You may want to read two interesting and contrasting views on the Vietnam War and how we should or should not "apply the lessons of Vietnam" to the Afghanistan war, in last week's Newsweek:

    "The surprising lessons of Vietnam" by those who believe we "could have won in Vietnam, only if...." and "Beware the Revisionists," by John Kerry who pretty much says that "insisting we might have won in Vietnam might just lose us Afghanistan."

    Fascinating!
  • Father_Time
    Thanks. I'll pick up a copy.

    I agree with Senator Kerry, and that is my point. We could have defeated North Vietnam any day of the week except that the second we large scale invaded the North, we would have been at war with China and Russia. Therefore we had to fight the insurgency rather than the source of the insurgency. We failed.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Good point.


    Another superb account of the Vietnam War:

    Stanley Karnow's "Vietnam -- A History"

blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC