'Supporting the troops'?

[fintstone]

'Supporting the troops'?
Thomas Sowell

November 18, 2004

During the recent election campaign, it has been a liberal mantra that they "support the troops" while opposing the war in Iraq. Just what does supporting the troops mean -- other than just a throwaway line to escape the political consequences of a long history of being anti-military?

It certainly does not mean making the slightest effort to understand the pressures and dangers of combat, so as to avoid the obscenity of sitting in peace and comfort while second-guessing at leisure some life-and-death decisions that had to be made in a split second by men 10,000 miles away.

The latest example is the now widely-publicized incident in which an American Marine in Iraq shot and killed a wounded terrorist in Fallujah. Chris Matthews on Hardball spoke of "what may be the illegal killing of a wounded, unarmed insurgent" -- the politically correct media term for a terrorist -- and asked: "Is there ever a justification for shooting an unarmed enemy?"

The unreality of this question is breath-taking, both logically and historically. How do you know that someone is unarmed, when finding out can cost you your life? A hand grenade is easily concealed and can kill you just as dead as if you were shot by a machine gun or hit by a nuclear missile.

American troops in Iraq have already been killed by booby-trapped bodies. During World War II, wounded Japanese soldiers sometimes waited for an American medical corpsman to come over to help them and then exploded a hand grenade, killing them both.

Assuming that somehow you are certain that an enemy is unarmed, perhaps because you have already searched him or disarmed him, is it ever justified to kill him anyway? That question was answered more than half a century ago, when German troops wearing American uniforms and speaking English infiltrated American lines during the Battle of the Bulge.

Those German troops, when captured, were lined up against a wall and shot dead. And nobody wrung his hands about it.

The rules of war, the Geneva Convention, do not protect soldiers who are not wearing their own country's uniforms. To get the protection of rules, you have to play by the rules.

Terrorists are not enemy soldiers covered by the rules of war. Nor should they be. They observe no rules.

Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the United Nations can all talk about "the Geneva Convention." But that agreement on the rules of war has never applied to combatants not wearing the uniform of any country that is a party to the Geneva Convention.

Terrorists wear no uniform and show no mercy, as they have repeatedly demonstrated by beheading innocent civilians, including women.

Why any such terrorists should be captured alive in the first place is a real question. Maybe they have information that could be useful. But every terrorist our troops try to capture alive increases the risk of death for American combat troops.

Their information better be damned important for that.

It is more than enough to ask a man to put his life on the line for his country, without needlessly increasing those risks by trying to be nobler than thou or playing to the international gallery. The very fact that this Marine in Fallujah has been taken out of combat and is under investigation can only have an inhibiting effect on other troops.

The inhibitions under which American troops have already had to fight have needlessly jeopardized their safety while we tiptoe around the delicate sensibilities of the media, European critics and "the Arab street."

The Times of London refers to a Marine "killing an unarmed man in cold blood." If that was his purpose he could have opened fire when he entered the room, instead of waiting until he saw an Iraqi terrorist faking being dead -- for what purpose the Marine had no way of knowing.

We cannot fight wars to please The Times of London or the other nay-sayers and nit-pickers who have been against us from the beginning. There is no point trying to appease people who are not going to be appeased anyway. And to do so at an increased risk to American lives would be criminal.

[cool_chick]

Well I find it interesting that those on the right claim to "support the troops" but what does THAT mean?

"I think it's fantastic that Bush sent our troops to a war for oil...this is how I support the troops." Is that how those on the right support the troops?

[cool_chick]

Plus, what else does the right do? Other than revering Bush as some God or something....?????

Does anyone on the right who "supports" the troops ever donate money for supplies? Does anyone on the right have a penpal over there? Does anyone on the right send needed supplies for a soldier on their own?

If anyone REALLY wants to support the troops, contact your local VFW to get involved. It's a great feeling to REALLY support the troops...try it (instead of bashing "liberals" - liberals meaning anyone who doesn't support Bush's poor decision to send troops in harms way to IRAQ....just IRAQ...as your only form of "support").

[Superman]

No no no, you've got it wrong, Cool_Chick, and you will never understand these writings until you get it right. "Anyone who doesn't support Bush's poor decision to send troops in harms way to IRAQ" is not the definition of a liberal. That is the definition of "terrorist." See? That way, all insurgents can be labeled "terrorists." Any and all resistance or criticism is justification for anything from name-calling to murder.

[dhoward]

Rather than blathering rhetoric, supporting the troops can mean something as small as not criticizing every media reported 'misstep' by American soldiers working in an extremely harsh and stressful environment. Whether ot not we should be there is a point that will be debated for many years to come. Personally, I agree with the decision to go to Iraq. Not that any of you care, nor would I ask you to. I can see why many of you will scrutinize American soldiers actions with a political eye. The last two generations of Americans have become "me" thinkers. How does this affect "me". There's no "me" in teame. (sorry ) Not that it's always bad to think that way, but consider the freedoms we enjoy in this society, and the people who have fought to preserve them.
Interestingly enough (to me, at least), my 17 year-old daughter announced that she was going to enlist in the Army. I have mixed feelings about this, naturally, but her reasons were clear. "Dad, I want to make sure that my kids grow up with the same opportunities I had. If people aren't happy with the way politics are, then they need to get their a$$es out and vote." this coming from a kid, who until recently, had no interest whatsoever in world politics or economics.
Go figure.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally posted by cool_chick
Plus, what else does the right do? Other than revering Bush as some God or something....?????

Does anyone on the right who "supports" the troops ever donate money for supplies? Does anyone on the right have a penpal over there? Does anyone on the right send needed supplies for a soldier on their own?

If anyone REALLY wants to support the troops, contact your local VFW to get involved. It's a great feeling to REALLY support the troops...try it (instead of bashing "liberals" - liberals meaning anyone who doesn't support Bush's poor decision to send troops in harms way to IRAQ....just IRAQ...as your only form of "support").

I'll skip past your first two questions and go right to the next three. Yes, yes, and yes. I belong to a fairly active motorcycle club; outsiders would consider us somewhat "right wing" (we call it "patriotic"); many are vets. We have, in the last year, sent half a dozen "care packages" to one of our member's units. Food, music and movie cd's and dvd's, magazines, anything to remind them of home. We also send cash; not that they can use it over there; the cash goes to their families here. He has e-mail; many of us write him amost daily. By the way, our member who is over there re-joined the Army Rangers at the ripe old age of 52. Do a search on "Darcy Richardson"; it's quite a story. He was home on leave a couple of weeks ago and attended a club meeting. Words could not express his gratitude, and his unit's gratitude.

The same holds true for my church. Many younger members are over there. We provide the same support; things from home and some financial help for their families, if they have one. We write them a lot. We are a very conservative, small, Lutheran church. Most of us would be considered "right wing" by those who like to label everything, but we do have a significant membership that could be called "left wing". Nobody within the church really knows or cares how other members voted; there are more important things that unite us.

In both groups, we are pretty quiet about our support. We do not do it to make a statement or gain publicity. I suspect most that "support our troops" are the same way. We just don't feel the need to call attention to our support; we just do it.

[Joeaksa]

Jeff,

We do the same here. Its not a big deal, we just send stuff across and do not make waves about it. The thing is, most of us remember when we were in a different place in the world, wearing a uniform and receiving something from "home" made a big difference.

CC is correct about going to the VFW (we do it at the American Legion) and they will direct anyone interested in supporting our troops of the various options. Just received my latest "penpal" email who is the brother of a lady I am helping in the flying world. Am mentoring his sister who is just starting out in the industry. He flies a F-16 in Iraq and is looking for contact with home and a few words of advise from someone who has been there before.

Was on a flight yesterday and went back and chatted with the boss after we got up in cruise. Asked him how he was doing on money and he smiled and asked what I needed. I told him I needed nothing, that he takes very good care of us already.

Handed him a write-up on the "injured Marine Semper Fi" care organization. http://www.bavf.org/shaft/041025.htm He quickly read it and asked about it. The parents and wives of injured Marines often do not have the funds to be able to afford hotels, rental cars and food when going to see their son/husband after they return from Afgan/Iraq and are placed in a hospital to recover, and this organization helps them.

I told him that the holidays were coming up and that they could use some help. He gave me $1000 in rental car vouchers and is donating enough hotel points to keep them in rooms for the parents and wives for a month or so.

This will never make the press... its just not needed. We want to help, not pubilcity.

JoeA

[azasadny]

I have never understood the "support the troops" thing. Does it mean "support the troops" or "support the politicians who sent the troops"? When I was in Desert Storm, I received letters and packages from folks who really supported me and many of them did not agree with the politicians for sending us, but they understood that I was just doing my job. The best "support" I received were the prayers of my fellow countrymen and the support they gave my wife while I was gone.

[Joeaksa]

Art,

You bring up a very good point. One of the best ways we can support the guys over there in harms way is to support and help their wives and family who are here alone.

We have a program here in Phoenix where any lady married to a serviceman can call a POC and get help. This ranges from getting their car fixed, help on the house, babysitter and so on, it just does not matter. If she needs help and her husband is away, if it can be done we do our best.

The emails and letters from the guys saying "it really took a load off of my shoulders knowing that my wife and kids had support" really helped us as well.

JoeA

[Seahawk]

Joe and Art,

Well done...it is always about family. Your statements underscore what I know is true based on my years in foreign lands: home is not just where the heart is, it's where my family is.
Since I am still active duty, it is easy for me to contribute to the young men and women in harms way. The fact that you folks do means more...

[rcecale]

Well stated, Seahawk.

Being retired, I don't have the interaction with the Active Duty Marines I used to. Even after a few years, I still, occasionally, find myself missing the way things were while I was in.

I'm not sure if this is just a local thing here in Georgia or not, but something a lot of people started doing in the spring of 2003 was to leave a light on in a window at night. This was to signify to any family member of a service man or woman that this was a "safe" house.

"Safe", meaning, if they ever needed help with anything, from a flat tire, to family assistance, to even just a place to go to be with people who cared...they were always welcome...ALWAYS!

Just another way of taking care of our own.

Semper fi!

Randy