Support The Troops, Not The War

I support our troops in Iraq, but the war is wrong.
There is no right reason for our troops to be there.  
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
This is supposed to be a war on terror, yet Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism. 
Saddam did not even like or trust bin Laden.
Since George Bush started this war, Iraq has become a haven for terrorists, and no one is safe there.
Iraq is a hellhole and getting worse.
Bush has no clue how to fix the mess.
The money spent on this war now exceeds $359 billion dollars.
Why would anyone in their right mind support it?
It is wrong.
So I support our troops but not the war.
Bring them home and send Bush over there.

George Vreeland Hill

     

Trackback URL for this post:

http://yourconcord.com/tci/trackback/170

As I've said in the past...

As I've said in the past... the Bush administration is the problem, not the war. On a side note all of his critics should note that he is basically just a puppet for Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. anyways
Saddam Hussein was suspected of, and would've been on trial for war crimes including genocide of Kurds and other violations of the Geneva convention so don't try to portray him as innocent. Furthermore Bush failed by warning Saddam with his several month long epithet of threats towards his regime and accusations of having WMDs, so Mr. Hussein had ample time to dispose of such devices. You don't need a smoking gun to convict a murderer, Corpus Delecti type standards were abandoned a long time ago. Also how would you explain Gulf War Syndrome, doesn't that just seem a little too similar to the effects of a certain nerve agent?

If you need a reason to justify the Iraq invasion how about the U.S. taking responsibility for cleaning up its messes? Though most don't want to accept it, during the 1980s with the Iraq-Iran war Billions of Dollars were funneled to Saddam Hussein in addition to weapons which he misappropriated to control his people and enforce brutal dictatorship rife with random killings. If you were to give an infant a loaded gun and they killed someone you'd be liable for negligence, how is this any different? If The Red Cross started to use donations to involuntarily euthanize children in third world countries wouldn't someone want to control what was happening with their funds?

If the war is about Oil like everyone says then where is the Oil and the effect at the pumps?(even though our gas is still borderline-criminally discounted compared to Europe). Iraq accounted for a minuscule amount of our Oil to begin with... Bush could've just as easily invaded Saudi Arabia given that Osama Bin Laden had ties there including several large figured bank accounts and they have far more in the ways of oil reserves.

If we pull out now it reinforces that the US will pull out before a job is finished, which experts fighting extremists in Israel and also against the IRA in the UK have agreed is the worst strategy. Of course the U.S. has a precedent already of such action as we pulled out Vietnam, we pulled out of Lebanon, and notably we pulled out of Somalia which is now a confirmed Al Qaeda hideout.

And to all the claims that the U.S isn't the aggressor, ask Mexico if they miss California and Texas. How about the fact that we invaded Canada no less then 3 times? Consider our "influence" in South American dictatorships including the regimes of Pinochet and lets not forget Manuel Noriega. Or that we overthrew the Shah, and assisted Fidel Castro and then of course theres Manifest Destiny and the famous "Thirteen Thirty or Fight" presidential slogan and Gunboat diplomacy.

With Liberty and Justice for all indeed....

Matthew "Phrozenspite" Noelte

Support the Troops, not the Wat

Let's start with this, I have no love for Bush and I did not support the Congress's decision to authorize Bush to go into Iraq. On the other hand, once there we have to be aware that the world is watching. To leave with no resolution will have our friends call us wise, and our enemies call us weak.

People can rightly conclude we don't belong in Iraq, but let's do it honestly. Iraq was not a war against terror, that excuse came later. It was not because of bin Laden,and Bush is not solely responsible for the war (Congress is as well, Democrat and Republican).

The war in Iraq is due to the fact that every major intelligence agency in the world agreed there were WMD. Post-invasion intelligence has shown Saddam wanted us to believe that. They all agreed Saddam was in violation of the ceasefire from the First Iraq War. What good is an agreement if one side does not keep it? And let's also be honest, if Saddam had WMD and we did nothing the people complaining about Bush now would be the first in line to criticize him if Saddam had gone into Saudi Arabia and taken over the oil we need and challenged the US to send troops to get him out, promising to nuke them on the beach. Those same people would call Bush incompetent, saying he knew Iraq had WMD's and chose to do nothing. Those same people would be blaming Bush for the price we would be paying for gas for our cars and oil for our homes. Yes, it's about oil, but that really means it's about our standard of living.

Even now, Congress plays us like fools, and we fall in line lock, stock, and barrel. Our headlines scream, "Republicans block debate on Iraq", lying to us as to what the real issue is. If Congress, Republicans and Democrats, wanted to truthfully bring this war to a halt they would be debating bills to cut funding, not "non-binding" resolutions that may make people feel good, but accomplish nothing. Mr. Hill has heard the rhetoric for so long he has come to believe it, and has forgotten how it was Congress that gave Bush the authorization, based on what was believed to be solid information, to invade Iraq.

Many of us can certainly believe we were foolish to go into Iraq (I was one of them). If intelligence was right and Iraq had WMD we'd be the fool instead of Bush. Bush has made a fool of himself with his arrogance and stubborness. But we are there now and we need to make sure the world knows that they can count on the US if it says it is ready to fight and have its sons and daughters die to defend their country. Countries like Japan will watch our resolve closely.

If, on the other hand, people truly believe we should cut and run, then demand your congressman vote on meaningful resolutions and not on meaningless items that are meant only to placate us and make us feel good. I happen to belive the Congress, if forced to show its hand, will recognize we can not now just leave Iraq now and would not vote to cut the funds to end the war. But many don't want us, you, to know that so they vote for non-binding resolutions that make us feel they did something worthwhile when, in fact, they played us for fools.

There is room for honest debate on Iraq, but let us be honest and not simply utter the dis-honest "sound-bite" rhetoric of either side that has been said so often we have taken it to be truth.

Bill