Support The Troops

I’m tired of seeing and hearing the phrase “Support the troops.” It’s meaningless unless you explain what type of support you are talking about. You can want to support the troops but have two completely different outcomes in mind.

Do you mean support the troops in fighting the war? In this case you want to pump more money into weapons and send more troops to back up the ones already there.

Or do you mean support the troops in increasing the likelihood they will survive in the next year? In this case you want to remove them from the bullets and bombs in Iraq and send them back home to comfortable suburbia where they are more likely to die falling down in the shower than getting hit with an IED.

I’m not sure how “Support the troops” has come more to mean “Support the war” instead of “Support life.”

Related Posts For You

newest oldest most voted
Mimi
Guest
Mimi
Offline

You just got voted off of the new BEST DC Blog site. How do you feel about that? Any thoughts or opinion on the BEST DC Blog site?

KassyK
Guest
KassyK
Offline

One of my best friends from college was in Iraq for over a year in a front line position in the Marines…for me that phrase means literally “support the troops” because the things they are seeing and having to do are things we could never fathom. He came back a different man.

My supporting the troops was sending him updates on all of his friends back home and writing and receiving letters from him while he was there to remind him that we missed him and really were thinking of him.

That is what it should mean.

Ned
Guest
Ned
Offline

I remember seeing one of those ribbons, except it said “the Nazis supported their troops too.” I thought it was cute.

Matt
Guest
Matt
Offline

“Support the troops” is the perfect propaganda. When faced with the reality that friends and family are facing the unimaginable horrors of war, even the most feverish war opponent will back down. If one does not support the war, they are not supporting the troops, according to the propaganda machine. “Support the troops” is the “silver bullet” of war propaganda. It leads me to debate who is more pathetic, the scum that proliferate such garbage, or the morons who buy into it.
In reality, what you say above is the one true way to support the troops, that is to insist that they be brought home.

DrG
Guest
DrG
Offline

“Support the troops” is republican propaganda at its best.Our troops were not forced to go to war (as in the Vietnam draft) but chose to do it. Therefore all the people who say they feel sorry for our troops and want them back asap honestly do not understand the volunteer contract that our soldiers sign when they leave home.

Tampa
Guest
Tampa
Offline

“Mr. President, support the troops is a bumper sticker, not a foreign policy.”

or

“YEEHAW, is not a War Plan.”

some of my favorites.

Jewcano
Guest
Jewcano
Offline

I could yammer on or I could quote from The book I’m reading:

“Officers tend to get sardonic when civilians forget where the larger responsibility for the war lies. “I don’t choose the wars I fight in,” says Lt. Col. Summers… “When people ask me why I went to Vietnam I say, ‘I thought you knew. You sent me.'”
“…To a man, the officers I talked with are commited to civilian control of the Army. But they are puzzled by the civilian sector’s growin refusal to take responsibility for the army it needs.”

The only thing keeping this war in Iraq going is the fact that the Iraqi people think we’re going to flake out, pack up, and leave, leaving them high and dry at the mercy of Wahhabists, Baathists, fascists, Sadrists, Ahmadinejad and a long list of other bloodthirsty murderers. They think this because it’s exactly what we did in Vietnam in ’73 and it’s exactly what our elected officials state they want us to do ASAP in Iraq, relentlessly broadcast on every media chanell.. And that is why the war goes on, because people a world away are hedging their bets against American fickleness. You guys have every right (inalienable, arguably) to speak your mind on what you think, so by all means, go ahead. But if you care about ‘supporting troops’ you understand that demanding our own defeat is a munition of asymmetric warfare as deadly as a bullet in some G.I.’s forehead. If you support the troops, and want them home soon and safe, then why not say you hope they’ll win?

Matt, thank you for dragging out the straw man that any voiced support of the military must be jingoist propaganda. I’m proud to have served to protect the right for you to put your foot in your mouth, and may you kick your own ass with it.

More bachelor talk, less politics, man. Too heavy.

Cob
Guest
Cob
Offline

I wish more Americans thought this way.

Y’all are going to be extremely pissed when you realize just how much money Bush borrowed to fund this war, and it is not going to be paid back. Bye bye retirement pension, bye bye allies, bye bye a lot of things. Thanks to the political blundering and massive misspending I am concerned that Bush might be the inflection point where America loses its dominance.

Cob
Guest
Cob
Offline

By the way, what fucking country is Bush running these days? The last 3 years he talks more about Iraq, improving Iraq, helping Iraq, than talking about improving his own country.

Cob
Guest
Cob
Offline

By the way…

political blunderings = isolating the USA and severing practically all good relations with countries, as well as creating enough dislike to have countries side with anyone who is opposed to America.

Peter
Guest
Peter
Offline

it’s just typical state propaganda – in this case right-wing just because that’s who is running the joint at this particular time. old-time propaganda strategy – think of some slogan that nobody could disagree with. it’s fine if the phrase is ambiguous/meanlingless – in fact, better if it’s that way.

of course, supporting the troops right now means denying them body armor and cramming them inside a rat/mold-infested holding facility.

Gep
Guest
Gep
Offline

I’m not about to get into the war debate because I think very few people get it. I venture to say I most likely am included in that group.

I do want to counter the following statement made above:

“…when you realize just how much money Bush borrowed to fund this war, and it is not going to be paid back. Bye bye retirement pension, bye bye allies, bye bye a lot of things.”

Yes, running a continual deficit will lead to fewer quality government expenditures and (in theory) higher interest rates and a weaker dollar. I am not trying to say a deficit is good.

But pensions like those our parents and grandparents will draw are going to disappear regardless of the size of our deficit. We are an in an environment ofrising healthcare costs in a system with an incentive to promote chronic illiness instead of cures, longer life expectencies, and a ballooning amount of dependents. This is what needs modifying to truly fix that problem.

And I don’t see how allies are being lost over a deficit. If anything, China’s symbiotic relationship with the US has only been strengthened. Yeah, both sides posture but our futures are intertwined.

Gep
Guest
Gep
Offline

Err, its late. In the first sentence I meant to say I am one of the people who do not fully understand the war. Just wanted to clarify; I’m not that big of an intellectual snob.

F*%K Starbucks
Guest
F*%K Starbucks
Offline

First off, I must state that I am in the military and I don’t agree with this war one bit. To me, supporting the troops means that I send my friend who got lucky enough to be sent there, coffee, porn, and books. He hates it there and is counting down the time to when he can get back and get out.
I do not have a, “support the troops” sticker and in fact, I hate them because most of the people who have them, don’t even really support them in the way that I do. Those are the people who feel that supporting them is by supporting Bush’s surge ideas.
To me, it doesn’t make sense to be supporting the troops by keeping them in Iraq longer.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

“Support the Trooops” means “Support the War” because it’s a simplistic way of rephrasing “let them win it.” (Nobody has defined “win”) It’s garbage and meaningless. It’s rhetoric and meant to challenge your manhood. It’s the same “logic” as “since we’ve been over in Iraq, there have been no attacks on American soil.”

Phil
Guest
Phil
Offline

I support the war, but am against the troops.

Jen
Guest
Jen
Offline

Being a sane and rational person, I didn’t support the War in Iraq when this mess first began. I don’t support it now.
However, people who say “bring our troops home now are idiots!

America made this mess so it is up to America to clean it up. I wish the US had never gone there in the first place, but they did. They cannot rip a country to pieces and then walk away like cowards. Well, they “can” but they shouldn’t.

Irina
Guest
Irina
Offline

Yes, it’s propaganda. But, if I was to say, I support the troops, it would me more moral support. Kind of like what people didn’t do for the troops in Vietnam or who came back from Vietnam.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

Jen, maybe, just maybe, some who are saying “Bring the Troops home” are not quite idiots. Maybe they realize we’re losing the PR war, badly — basically 88% of population in six countries friendly to the US hate us (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the UAE). It’s not just a hate. It’s visceral, seething hate. The kind that makes average Moroccans leave their families to go die in Iraq. Maybe, just maybe, by saying, “we’re bringing home the troops, and we’ll talk to countries in the region” may diffuse some of this (then spin the timetable). We can win militarily, there’s no question on that, but we’re right back at the Tet Offensive, where America decimated the VC but was annihilated in Public Relations.

Greg
Guest
Greg
Offline

I think Irina hit on what this means to most Americans. It’s one way of keeping people’s heads on straight so we don’t pull another Vietnam. It’s also a nice slogan to remind people to lend moral and tangible support to make the troops’ stay in Iraq as comfortable as possible.

T from DC
Guest
T from DC
Offline

OK, I just have to say this. I’ve come to a conclusion that this blog is overrated; aside from one or two truly interesting posts, Roosh is repetitive, trivial, and he generally tries too hard. I also suspect that he is very insecure. I can kinda see that, since he is not the most attractive guy judging from the pictures, and it doesn’t seem that his personality makes up for it. The worst thing is that he is clearly a beta male claiming to be an alpha. What what? Take for example his two recent posts, one about how much he hates his job and another one where he criticizes people carrying their blackberries. The only difference between him and the blackberry people is that he doesn’t get to have one.
I’ve been reading this blog for a while. It became a part of my morning routine. It would be wrong to say that it didn’t have its moments. I like to think that I grew out if it, but it’s probably the quality of the posts that changed. Either way, singlejew.blogspot.com is my new temporary morning blog fix until I find something better. Now this guy is kind of brilliant.

P.S. I’m from Easter Europe and while I can’t vouch for all my “sisters”, I highly doubt that any cute and intelligent Eastern European girl would ever go for someone like you, Roosh. Sorry.

gunslingergregi
Guest
gunslingergregi
Offline

Over here supporting the troops. Of course had to chime in. Some things a man should do in his life. One of them is go to war. The only problem is it’s not like world war II. One of the first wars in all time that didn’t have mass quantities of prostitutes. Probably why the suicide rate is so high. Now imagine they want to put gays in the military when they won’t even let you have hetro sex legally. hahahahahahahaahahah

WDH
Guest
WDH
Offline

http://www.ryancmajor.com/

I felt, and to a degree feel the same way Roosh does on the subject. However when you bring it down to a personal level your perspective changes a bit.

I went to school with this guy. He’s at Walter Reed now. I’m sad that he’s in the current state that he’s in, but I’m equally saddened by the fact that so many others are in the same situation because of this war.

It sucks because leaving Iraq or staying in Iraq will solve nothing.

hedonistic
Guest
hedonistic
Offline

To me, “support the troops” means NOT leaving our Army high-and-dry without body armor or backup. If we’re gonna send the troops someplace to fight we should be sending enough people to do the job, and giving them the tools they need to win.

“Support the troops” should never be confused with “Support the President.” Still, we’re stuck with this mess and need to do right by it. Our president is a total knob, but we get the government we deserve so think about that next time y’all vote.

Roissy
Guest
Roissy
Offline

jewcano: well said.

hed, as usual you spout unthinking boilerplate. instead of carrying water for the chief Kandidate Kunt AKA hilary’s talking points why don’t you brush up on some basic military logistics? there’s a trade-off between mobility and weight, and the correct balance is found that minimizes casualties. and that wartime adjustment is being met in ways that never get airtime with the megamouths running on the pro-kos platform. official report:

“[In a few years] the Army has gone from a low of 400 up-armored Humvees to nearly 15,000 up-armored Humvees patrolling neighborhoods, protecting troops and mitigating risk from most types of enemy munitions. As of this date, the Army has produced enough Frag Kit No. 5 Retrofit kits to outfit every Humvee in Afghanistan and Iraq. Thousands of these kits are being flown into theater every month and they are being installed in theater, 24 hours a day, seven days a week to ensure Soldiers have the best protection available.”

for the record, the “support the troops” bromide has become a get-out-of-jail-free card for leftwingers too cowardly to say what the really feel to an audience larger than amanda marcotte’s vagina monologues book club.

Gep
Guest
Gep
Offline

Roissy:

Where did you find that official report – does it have other good information to learn more about the situation? I like to avoid the press to learn about this situation (outside of the venerable Economist).

Thanks.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Offline

Roissy and Jewcano, I like your enthusiasm, but it’s misplaced anger. What does “win” actually mean? Does “win” mean security from car bombs, democratic right to vote, a country that looks like Saudi Arabia, or maybe Lebanon? Additionally, if the President was serious about “winning”, he would’ve dumped 500,000 to 1 Mil troops into Iraq. Okay, logistically, we can’t do that because we don’t have the troop strength. Well, if you don’t have the troop strength, it’s time to put in a draft. It’s time to ask each and every American to have a personal stake in this war, because without buy-in from every American, words like “Support the Troops” is a sideshow to the Super Bowl. Another 20,000 boots on the ground is a band-aid. It’s not going to stop 20 million Iraqi’s who’ve hated each other since before time from going at each other.

hedonistic
Guest
hedonistic
Offline

Roissy: I work for DoD, in logistics/support no less, so BITE ME. It took plenty of howling (not to mention public embarrassment) for that to finally happen.

Rumsfeld: WORST.SECRETARY.OF.DEFENSE.EVER.

Roissy
Guest
Roissy
Offline

“It took plenty of howling (not to mention public embarrassment) for that to finally happen.”

oh yeah? then why are you, along with your komrades in arms, still howling about it instead of correcting the record on what the army is actually accomplishing in terms of body armor in iraq?
nevermind, i think we all know the answer to that.
you stupid fucking cunt.

anon:
“What does “win” actually mean?”

simple. it means maximizing the benefits and minimizing the fallout accrued to the united states of america in matters of national security.

i couldn’t give a rat’s ass about democracy in iraq. in fact, i don’t think democracy is possible in the region bounded by the old islamic empire without wholesale substitution of the population with another. i believe this admin blundered into iraq with half-concocted notions of how things work in that part of the world, but they didn’t blunder with bad intentions. they responded to a threat to which they may have overreached.

if you’re looking for answers why the middle east and it’s satellites are cesspools of amodernity and shitstorms of violence, look no further than this:
cousin marriage.
particularly the form practiced in that part of the world.

hedonistic
Guest
hedonistic
Offline

Roissy: Stupid fucking cunt? (snicker) Oh well, I suppose two out of three ain’t bad, and probably the best you can do in any case.

Roissy
Guest
Roissy
Offline

no matter which two you pick
you ain’t coming out looking good.

Jinxy
Guest
Jinxy
Offline

Ever stop to think that maybe the majority of the military personel over in Iraq (whether they agree with the war or not) WANT to be there because it’s their job and it’s what they’ve trained to do for their entire lives, and that they really don’t give two shits about whether a bunch of $5 Caffé Latte sipping DC hipsters “support” them or not?

Some of you just need to STFU and keep passing the ammo.

Get real
Guest
Get real
Offline

T from DC nailed it. Over-rated.

Roosh, stick to writing posts proclaiming yourself an “alpha male” while complaining about getting shut out of VIP rooms and not getting any trim. Complain about evil corporate America in one post, then regurgite ridiculous ideas sprewed second hand from enormous media corporations. The contradictions and laughable “thoughts” are what keep me coming back. Is there someway you can send out an alert to the rest of the world when you have an idea that hasn’t been covered by about 5000 other blogs? Oh, and your persona could use an overhaul — its level silliness is eclipsed only by your inability to recognize how tired, helpless, and pathetic you come off in your posts.

And your hair? Get it cut. It looks completely retarded.

Hedonistic — Even if all the humvees were completely up armored and all troops were walking around in bionic, bullet/blast proof mech suits, you people would somehow complain about “not being prepared”. Try as you might, you will never sanitize war. It will never devolve into a high-tech game of paintball because the stakes are much higher than that — stakes you will never understand because your experiences with tyranny are limited to some anonymous drunken rugby player “accidentally” throwing it in your ass. Yeah, it would be nice if there were no guns and weapons and no such thing as war, but no amount of fireside vigils and over-intellectualizing will ever bring that to fruition because that’s not how humans roll.

The US Military is ready to fight wherever and whenever because they don’t have a choice. They have to be ready, simple as that. I wouldn’t expect anyone here who hasn’t served in a combat arms unit to understand, but for the time being do those who have a favor and quit acting like you know what you’re talking about.

Get real
Guest
Get real
Offline

regurgite -> regurgitate :p

hedonistic
Guest
hedonistic
Offline

. . . because I couldn’t possibly know what I’m talking about. mmmmmmm . . . ookay . . . interesting presumption. I’ll be charitable and assume the air is a little thin on your planet. My condolences!

Did I or anyone upthread say our soldiers “weren’t ready?” Was anyone questioning their ability or willingness to do their jobs? My comment had to do with financing/providing logistics support.

THIS WAS ROOSH’S QUESTION: What does “support the troops really mean?” Given my almost 20 years of defense work this is what “support the troops” means to me. For once I’m firmly on topic, but I still get the pompous flailings, as if my opinion were some kind of offront. Interesting!

Matt
Guest
Matt
Offline

And the propaganda machine has completed its work…turning every one of you into garbage spewing idiots. Please, for your own good and mine, stop buying into this social manipulation…and by buying in I mean both sides, supporters and detractors. Both of you have worked together to confuse each other into an oblivious ignorance of the truth.

trackback

[…] So Naive Club Rain Review Minimize Your STD Risk Bon Ass Experiment Date Rape Druggings Are A Myth Blackberry Vasectomized Man Respecting Women The Golden Goose Is Dead Grocery Store Fraud How You Start The […]

Commodore
Guest
Commodore
Offline

You understand that some of the troops actually want to fight; in the old days, wanting to fight and/or die for glory and country wasn’t such an outrageous goal. We’ve become less tolerant of violence and death these days, especially when the government is involved.

goy
Guest
goy
Offline

support our troops…those who say that dont really…they dont go fight on the field and dont send donation for any types of assitance…health care for veterans is lousy
they are just hypocrites they want to see play survival in the war zone while they live comfortably