|
Citizen Smash Speaks...
To be clear, I am not arguing that it is somehow unpatriotic or disloyal to speak out against a war that one feels is unjust. Indeed, if you strongly believe that a particular war (or war in general) is morally repugnant, then expressing your opposition is not just your right, but also your duty.
But if you truly “support the troops,” the proper time to express your opposition to the conflict is before the onset of hostilities. Because once the missiles start flying, your pubicly expressed dissent can and will be manipulated as propaganda by the enemy, and worse, can cause serious damage to the troops’ morale.
During my recent deployment to the Middle East, I received numerous letters and emails expressing support for our efforts, but not everyone was quite so positive. Some people actually wrote to tell me that they “supported me,” but went on to rant that I was merely a “pawn” in a game that I "couldn’t understand,” and other such patronizing nonsense. That’s the kind of "support" that I can do without, thank you very much.
It’s one thing to oppose the policy decisions that lead to conflict, or the administration that made those decisions – but it’s quite another thing to continue to undermine the war effort once the military is engaged. At that point, the surest path to peace is a swift victory.
I understand that one can still be a good citizen while expressing opposition to an ongoing conflict. It is possible to attend peaceful protests, to lobby the government to change its policy, and still remain safely within the realm of “loyal opposition.”
But if that is the path you choose, please don’t kid yourself that you are “supporting the troops.” The troops are committed to winning the war. If you don’t share that goal, then you are not, by definition, supporting them. You can still send them nice letters and care packages if you so desire, but that’s not really what “supporting the troops” means, is it?
Citizen Smash - www.lt-smash.us
Posted by Ted at February 4, 2004 10:25 PM