PDA

View Full Version : Support The Troops


Lyn
10-06-2006, 08:49 AM
Your alarm goes off, you hit the snooze and sleep for another 10
minutes.
He stays up for days on end.
_________________________

You take a warm shower to help you wake up.
He goes days or weeks without running water.
__________________________

You complain of a "headache", and call in sick.
He gets shot at as others are hit, and keeps moving forward. __________________________

You put on your anti war/don't support the troops shirt, and go meet up
with your friends.
He still fights for your right to wear that shirt.
__________________________

You make sure you're cell phone is in your pocket. !
He clutches the cross hanging on his chain next to his dog tags. __________________________

You talk trash about your "buddies" that aren't with you.
He knows he may not see some of his buddies again.
__________ ________________

You walk down the beach, staring at all the pretty girls.
He walks the streets, searching for insurgents and terrorists. __________________________

You complain about how hot it is.
He wears his heavy gear, not daring to take off his helmet to wipe his
brow.
__________________________

You go out to lunch, and complain because the restaurant got your order
wrong.
He doesn't get to eat today.
__________________________

Your maid makes your bed and washes your clothes.
He wears the same things for weeks, but makes sure his weapons are
clean.
__________________________

You go to the mall and get your hair redone.
He doesn't have time to brush his teeth today.
__________________________

You're angry because your class ran 5 minutes over.
He's told he will be held over an extra 2 months.
__________________________

You call your girlfriend and set a date for tonight.
He waits for the mail to see if there is a letter from home.
_________________________

You hug and kiss your girlfriend, like you do everyday.
He holds his letter close and smells his love's perfume.
_________________________

You roll your eyes as a baby cries.
He gets a letter with pictures of his new child, and wonders if they'll
ever meet.
__________________________

You criticize your government, and say that war never solves anything.
He sees the innocent tortured and killed by their own people and
remembers why he is fighting.
__________________________

You hear the jokes about the war, and make fun of men like him.
He hears the gunfire, bombs and screams of the wounded.
__________________________

You see only what the media wants you to see.
He sees the broken bodies lying around him.
__________________________

You are asked to go to the store by your parents. You don't.
He does exactly what he is told.
__________________________

You stay at home and watch TV.
He takes whatever time he is given to call, write home, sleep, and eat.
__________________________

You crawl into your soft bed, with down pillows, and get comfortable.
He crawls under a tank for shade and a 5 minute nap, only to be woken by
gunfire.
__________________________

You sit there and judge him, saying the world is probably a worse place
because of men like him.
If only there were more men like him!
***********************************************

Livinginthe past
10-06-2006, 01:48 PM
I'll be honest and say these type of posts make me puke (nothing personal Lyn, I know you didn't compose it)

There is nearly always a hidden agenda..seriously who doesn't 'back the troops?'

What we get, stealthily added, is the implication that those against the wars Bush is fighting are also somehow anti-forces.


Nearly everyone knows someone who has sacrificed to serve his country and also knows we'd be lost without them.

Here is my own verse.

You read about the illegal wars he is duty bound to fight.
He is forced to fight them without sufficient body armor.

You expect him to kill to order
He becomes a scapegoat for lashing out at the enemy.

NM

Derek
10-06-2006, 09:00 PM
So true, Lyn...so true. :)

Derek
10-06-2006, 09:01 PM
@@ and this one, too.

Derek
10-06-2006, 09:03 PM
Could a mod delete this? my browser posted it twice ;_;

hardwork
10-06-2006, 09:25 PM
"Those who are gone would not wish themselves to be a millstone of gloom around our necks. But there are many of the living who have had burned into their brains forever the unnatural sight of cold dead men scattered over the hillsides and in the ditches along the high rows of hedge throughout the world. Dead men by mass production ? in one country after another ? month after month and year after year. Dead men in winter and dead men in summer. Dead men in such familiar promiscuity that they become monotonous. Dead men in such monstrous infinity that you come almost to hate them.

"These are the things that you at home need not even try to understand. To you at home they are columns of figures, or he is a near one who went away and just didn't come back. You didn't see him lying so grotesque and pasty beside the gravel road in France.

"We saw him, saw him by the multiple thousands. That's the difference ..."

Ernie Pyle

http://ezinearticles.com/?A-Promise-to-Ernie-Pyle&id=177642

The JoKeR
10-06-2006, 10:22 PM
I'll be honest and say these type of posts make me puke (nothing personal Lyn, I know you didn't compose it)

There is nearly always a hidden agenda..seriously who doesn't 'back the troops?'

What we get, stealthily added, is the implication that those against the wars Bush is fighting are also somehow anti-forces.


Nearly everyone knows someone who has sacrificed to serve his country and also knows we'd be lost without them.

Here is my own verse.

You read about the illegal wars he is duty bound to fight.
He is forced to fight them without sufficient body armor.

You expect him to kill to order
He becomes a scapegoat for lashing out at the enemy.

NM

Being in the military myself, you'd be surprised how many people out there actually hate the military. The vast majority of people support us, but there are always those that just hate us. Don't ask me why, but for some reason we're looked down upon in some places. I guess that whole "only people that can't make it in the real world join the military" image is still around in those places.

Livinginthe past
10-06-2006, 11:08 PM
Being in the military myself, you'd be surprised how many people out there actually hate the military. The vast majority of people support us, but there are always those that just hate us. Don't ask me why, but for some reason we're looked down upon in some places. I guess that whole "only people that can't make it in the real world join the military" image is still around in those places.

It has to be some type of envy thing, to go out and make that type of real contribution.

I would imagine that it doesn't get more 'real world' than serving in a country like Afghanistan or Iraq.

Luckily, I think these people are in a very small minority.

NM

SteelCzar76
10-07-2006, 02:28 AM
I'll be honest and say these type of posts make me puke (nothing personal Lyn, I know you didn't compose it)

There is nearly always a hidden agenda..seriously who doesn't 'back the troops?'

What we get, stealthily added, is the implication that those against the wars Bush is fighting are also somehow anti-forces.


Nearly everyone knows someone who has sacrificed to serve his country and also knows we'd be lost without them.

Here is my own verse.

You read about the illegal wars he is duty bound to fight.
He is forced to fight them without sufficient body armor.

You expect him to kill to order
He becomes a scapegoat for lashing out at the enemy.

NM


The IDEAL of what our nation is supposed to stand for,.... is what our brothers and sisters die and suffer for. The few feeble, arrogant, ruthless and selfish old men that dictacte where battle is to be waged,... are not.
Many enter service because they have not the financial means to do otherwise,...yet they have the ambition to do something meaningful with their lives. This is to be commended honored and respected.
Some join not fully understanding that since the dawn of mankind a warrior's job,..his very duty,.... is to KILL and or die. It is not a game,...it is not a vocational program. (This is sad because it is sometimes marketed as such).
War is not poetic or beautiful,......but it is without question neccessary,.......as sadly most HUMAN BEINGS are still animals, and governed far more so by vice than virtue.
But they're none born of woman that is a god and can change this on a grand scale. (It is not in your power to do so)
All you can do is be as honorable and just as YOU can be,....so give those their due that do their job's for whatever reason.......... F#ck the politics.



"Hail Caesar,......HAIL THE BLACK AND GOLD"

lamberts-lost-tooth
10-07-2006, 05:31 AM
Here is my own verse.

You read about the illegal wars he is duty bound to fight.
He is forced to fight them without sufficient body armor.

You expect him to kill to order
He becomes a scapegoat for lashing out at the enemy.

NM

1) There is no such thing as "sufficient body armor"...all armor is "bullet resistant"...not "bullet proof"...and for the record...air is bullet resistant...

2) IF they are, or are not scapegoats would be up to the soldiers themselves...if they believe in what they are doing and are doing it willingly..they are not scapegoats....they just have a different ideology than those that oppose the war...and people looking from the outside in cannot make them scapegoats. Opinions from the anti-war crowd no more change the definition of a soldier than a vegetarian can change the definition of a cow.

...and just out of curiosity..you said " the implication that those against the wars Bush is fighting are also somehow anti-forces"...why Bush...and not Blair?

lamberts-lost-tooth
10-07-2006, 05:47 AM
[B]
[B]All you can do is be as honorable and just as YOU can be,....so give those their due that do their job's for whatever reason[/B


"Hail Caesar,......HAIL THE BLACK AND GOLD"

Well said...what Lyn wrote is can only be labeled as having a hidden agenda when personal politics are added to the equation.

Lyn
10-07-2006, 09:30 AM
Being in the military myself, you'd be surprised how many people out there actually hate the military. The vast majority of people support us, but there are always those that just hate us. Don't ask me why, but for some reason we're looked down upon in some places. I guess that whole "only people that can't make it in the real world join the military" image is still around in those places.

Anyone who "hates the military" hate everything. I have never heard of such a thing.

A person in the military (or one that has been in the military) has more respect in his little finger for humankind, than your average Joe has in his entire body. With respect everyting else falls into place. Many of these ppl you are talking about I suspect, have never served.

Cape Cod Steel Head
10-07-2006, 01:26 PM
1) There is no such thing as "sufficient body armor"...all armor is "bullet resistant"...not "bullet proof"...and for the record...air is bullet resistant...

2) IF they are, or are not scapegoats would be up to the soldiers themselves...if they believe in what they are doing and are doing it willingly..they are not scapegoats....they just have a different ideology than those that oppose the war...and people looking from the outside in cannot make them scapegoats. Opinions from the anti-war crowd no more change the definition of a soldier than a vegetarian can change the definition of a cow.

...and just out of curiosity..you said " the implication that those against the wars Bush is fighting are also somehow anti-forces"...why Bush...and not Blair?
Because Bush wanted this war, and started this war?

lamberts-lost-tooth
10-07-2006, 01:38 PM
Because Bush wanted this war, and started this war?

Bush started this war?....I hope you teach and dont indoctrinate. Was it a one man vote that legally got us into the war...or was it bad information about WMD's that BOTH parties believed and supported...and voted for in Congress?

Cape Cod Steel Head
10-07-2006, 02:15 PM
Bush started this war?....I hope you teach and dont indoctrinate. Was it a one man vote that legally got us into the war...or was it bad information about WMD's that BOTH parties believed and supported...and voted for in Congress?I present both sides and let them make the decisions. Have you read The Downing Street Memo?

Livinginthe past
10-07-2006, 02:22 PM
1) There is no such thing as "sufficient body armor"...all armor is "bullet resistant"...not "bullet proof"...and for the record...air is bullet resistant...

I'll be honest and admit I dont know what you are getting at here.

Are you suggesting that because body armor isn't 100% effective that troops shouldnt rely on it?

I referred to it as armor - I didn't label it bullet-proof or bullet resistent.

By sufficient armor, I mean that every soldier entering a similar combat situation should have the same armoring - they shouldn't be forced to hand some of theirs over to another soldier.

There have been numerous stories of soldiers dying simply because this has occured

2) IF they are, or are not scapegoats would be up to the soldiers themselves...if they believe in what they are doing and are doing it willingly..they are not scapegoats....they just have a different ideology than those that oppose the war...and people looking from the outside in cannot make them scapegoats. Opinions from the anti-war crowd no more change the definition of a soldier than a vegetarian can change the definition of a cow.

Of course they are scapegoats - a scapegoat is generated by the masses, the general population - the person(s) being made the scapegoat do not have any control whatsoever over this phenomenon.

Im talking about the soldiers that have been singled out for abuses of prisoners of war - I find it incredibly hypocritical that the media, and members of the public, can turn their collective noses up at the debasing of 'enemy soldiers' - when day-in day-out these same soldeisrs are expected to kill people they have never had any personal conatct with.

The taking of life is far more seriousand inhuman than the humiliations suffered by foreign POW's.

...and just out of curiosity..you said " the implication that those against the wars Bush is fighting are also somehow anti-forces"...why Bush...and not Blair?

Make no mistake, this is Bush's war - it is tantamount to a holy crusade where the world is divided into the righteous (The Christians and Jews) and the Axis of Evil (mainly Islamic countries) - where a war is fought under the false pretences of 'democracy'.

Blair is merely his pathetic poodle, I wouldnt even go as far as to call him a side-kick - he doesnt warrant such high praise.

Im embarrassed to say the leader of my country is a puppet whose strings are being pulled thousands of miles away.

This does not make him any less accountable, he simply has little power or influence.

NM

Livinginthe past
10-07-2006, 02:24 PM
The IDEAL of what our nation is supposed to stand for,.... is what our brothers and sisters die and suffer for. The few feeble, arrogant, ruthless and selfish old men that dictacte where battle is to be waged,... are not.
Many enter service because they have not the financial means to do otherwise,...yet they have the ambition to do something meaningful with their lives. This is to be commended honored and respected.
Some join not fully understanding that since the dawn of mankind a warrior's job,..his very duty,.... is to KILL and or die. It is not a game,...it is not a vocational program. (This is sad because it is sometimes marketed as such).
War is not poetic or beautiful,......but it is without question neccessary,.......as sadly most HUMAN BEINGS are still animals, and governed far more so by vice than virtue.
But they're none born of woman that is a god and can change this on a grand scale. (It is not in your power to do so)
All you can do is be as honorable and just as YOU can be,....so give those their due that do their job's for whatever reason.......... F#ck the politics.



"Hail Caesar,......HAIL THE BLACK AND GOLD"

Wonderfully put.

NM

lamberts-lost-tooth
10-07-2006, 02:52 PM
I present both sides and let them make the decisions. Have you read The Downing Street Memo?

Sure I have...but I have also read the McVale and Carroll reports that expain much of the reasoning and context of the Downing Street memo deals more with Bush's belief that Iraq had already violated the cease-fire aggreement and U.N resolutions put into place at the conclusion of the Persian gulf War...With the Failure to comply with that ceasefire and the blatant disregard of the resolutions..Bush believed the U.S. already would have no choice but to eventually resume hostilities...It was the added belief of WMD's that everyone is hanging onto..stating that this information was fabricated to excuse the war..when in fact noone has given any proof that ANYONE believed that information to be false.

In fact the memo recieved little notice because after media groups looked at it they determined that "the memos provide no information that would alter the conclusions of multiple independent investigations on both sides of the Atlantic, which were that U.S. and British intelligence agencies genuinely believed Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and that they were not led to that judgment by the Bush administration."---Washington Post 06/15/05... ." The New York Times reported (6/14/05) that "the documents are not quite so shocking. Three years ago, the near-unanimous conventional wisdom in Washington held that Mr. Bush was determined to topple Saddam Hussein by any means necessary." NBC reporter Andrea Mitchell similarly remarked on June 14 (Media Matters, 6/15/05) that you had to be "brain dead not to know what the White House was doing, but these memos offer no information or damning facts other than what was common knowledge."

It was determined to simply be old news being presented as "clandestine" and when looked at by the press there wasnt any new information that warranted further review or comment. In fact... the left as been livid that this story never gained legs. I hope that you havnt been providing your students with this type of information as relevent when even our national media deemed it as not worth pursuing.

lamberts-lost-tooth
10-08-2006, 05:14 AM
I'll be honest and admit I dont know what you are getting at here.

Are you suggesting that because body armor isn't 100% effective that troops shouldnt rely on it?

I referred to it as armor - I didn't label it bullet-proof or bullet resistent.

By sufficient armor, I mean that every soldier entering a similar combat situation should have the same armoring - they shouldn't be forced to hand some of theirs over to another soldier.

There have been numerous stories of soldiers dying simply because this has occured



Of course they are scapegoats - a scapegoat is generated by the masses, the general population - the person(s) being made the scapegoat do not have any control whatsoever over this phenomenon.

Im talking about the soldiers that have been singled out for abuses of prisoners of war - I find it incredibly hypocritical that the media, and members of the public, can turn their collective noses up at the debasing of 'enemy soldiers' - when day-in day-out these same soldeisrs are expected to kill people they have never had any personal conatct with.

The taking of life is far more seriousand inhuman than the humiliations suffered by foreign POW's.



Make no mistake, this is Bush's war - it is tantamount to a holy crusade where the world is divided into the righteous (The Christians and Jews) and the Axis of Evil (mainly Islamic countries) - where a war is fought under the false pretences of 'democracy'.

Blair is merely his pathetic poodle, I wouldnt even go as far as to call him a side-kick - he doesnt warrant such high praise.

Im embarrassed to say the leader of my country is a puppet whose strings are being pulled thousands of miles away.

This does not make him any less accountable, he simply has little power or influence.

NM

I understand that you & I generally disagree on this point and have both given reasons why.
My point on the body armor is a peronal belief that most people think that our soldiers are being given low-grade protection and should have body armor that "deflects" bullets...as you know..there is no such armor in the world that does this. The problem is/was some Reserve and National Guard troops were not properly equiped...Since you live overseas you may not realize that National Guardsman fall under the direct control of the Governor of the state. If a unit was not properly equipped it was a state failure and not a federal failure...only after being activated for duty does that soldier fall under federal control and responsibility...(with the permission of the States Governor)..and that is when we end up scrambling to get the proper equipment to troops either before they get into the field or shortly thereafter
I appreciate your explaining your position on Blair...I may not agree..but just was curious as to if your anger towards this war was aimed at Bush only.