Supporting The Troops

Coffrey: Can something tell me what this means? What constitutes supporting the troops and what constitutes not supporting the troops? Or, as my opinion is, it's just a political phrase like "I believe in family values" that doesn't mean anything at all, it's just something politicians say?

lavendar_star: "Support Our Troops" Its something politicians say to look good, I mean they are not exactly going to say they don't support the troops lol when they are in war because of politicians say so. They say that in the UK too even though many actions by our government makes you think otherwise and we are not as intense with the patriotism thing as you guy seem to be in the states. So if someone said you don't support our troops being in a war i.e. Iraq and Afghanistan your entitled to that opinion but it seem for some Americans if you have that opinion your a traitor to your country and working for the enemy. lol

Aura: I think this 'support the troops' thing started after the vietnam war. It wasn't much fun for the men who just went where they were told, to be called baby killers when they got home. It is good that the rest of the population started to understand that war really isn't like a party. (remember the 'what if they had a war and no one came'? what a load of cr*p that was) And when you really think about it, soldiers are the very first to support peace lol, it's their ass on the lines. I bet they would all be very happy to train and train and train without ever having to use that training.

OCD_OCD: troops volunteer to join the military and put their lives on the line with the knowledge that they are fighting for and preserving the US and our way of life.

Coffrey: ocd, do you really think that soldiers are that profession just because they are patriots?

OCD_OCD: The ones that I know are.

OCD_OCD: I am missing your correlation, Blnde. They join a volunteer military to merely commit suicide?

Coffrey: Well then you must know the small percentage that go out of just civic duty. Most go because of the benefits, in an America where education costs are rising and income is significantly dropping, we can't pay for adequate education now, so we join to get out of perpetual poverty. I am going to be one of those "troops" soon, so I'll be able to get a lot of firsthand accounts, if you want sources

I think with the suicide rate, like anything else, it's a combination of factors. Chief among them being how our media portrays the military, as this fucking choir of angels and heroes and all that. Then the kids who join up get over to the warzones and find out it's not all fun and games and get ptsd pretty quickly, then the medical services are cut.

OCD_OCD: Then if you go because you want the perks, you are agreeing to accept everything that goes with it. If you don't agree with what goes along with being in the military, then it would be a pretty unhappy place to be, I'd think.

The media has portrayed the military both ways because there are heroes in the military just as there are complete nut bags. That's going to happen anywhere whether it's in school, businesses, sports leagues, etc. It's human nature.

It's not me that's cutting the medical services. I think you can lay the majority of that at the feet of liberals in government.

If you are so against anything that the military does, Coffrey, why would you join?

Coffrey: Well it's not hard to see, if you join the army, you're basically being shot at and for what? Most of the people on the ground know that it's a tribal thing and they are caught in the middle of it. Of course there are good guys in the military who honestly wanted to serve their country, such as Pat Tillman, but really, they either join because they have to or because they are psychopaths who get a thrill out of killing people, such the guys peeing on the corpses.

In the normal political climate, liberals aren't against cutting anything except fraud and abuse. But since democrats cower to republicans so often, I can believe you on that.

I'm only opposed to unnecessary conflict and an abundance of bases in other countries, if you truly care about the budget and deficit, then you would be too. Simply put, the military is where the money is now and I know that they need as many recruits as possible. I don't have any money, I was never pushed in high school, so I never really strived to do well (something I regret, by the way) and I live in a poor region. This is the majority of people who volunteer because, not to make it too political, our educational system in America is totally fucked. In most other first world nations, they have some years of free uni or college, because that's a true investment in the future, higher skilled workers, etc. Not America though, we chose to, not only fuck over public grade and high schools, but make higher education as expensive as possible. I don't want to say who is mostly responsible for this, but.... the Ryan budget plan cuts the Pell grant in half. Just a small example among many others.

OCD_OCD: The cost of higher education is the fault of the schools themselves. When universities spend more on football than education itself, their priorities are misplaced.

I believe we need more trade schools and specialized education. Not everyone either wants or needs a Renaissance education. When you have to take a number of wasteful courses such as golf (and have to pay for the stupid credits), it is out of control. You spend 6 years learning what you could have learned in two.

dave3974: support the troops but not the politicians

Coffrey: Yeah, you're right there, ocd. But that's one of their big money-makers since the government is largely hands off of higher education. Remind me how we go socialism again

And you're probably right on this, but again, you can't blame all the students for a problem like this, that's pretty ridiculous. While it is a problem, I don't think that accounts for the lack of higher education just because some take extra courses, that's like saying foreign aid is the reason for the deficit.

OCD_OCD: state universities have no excuse for raising the price of a degree by 300% over the last 20 years. They have massive state and private endowments.

Aura: oh, massive endowment, this convo is getting interesting (sorrysorry i couldn't resist)

davesdatahut: The problem with major college sports is much broader than what it costs to run these programs and the absurdly outsized salaries of coaches. For sure, it is an abomination that the highest paid person on the campus is a sports coach. That is beyond ridiculous. But the bigger issue is the cancer that major college sports has become in our higher educational system. It takes on such importance, and so much money is involved, that academics often become secondary and an attitude sets in that the sports are the priority and not the education. Sports are to be promoted - and protected - no matter the cost, no matter the perversion of the educational purpose of a university. The tail begins to wag the dog and the dog is becoming very sick. The Sandusky case is but the latest of an endless stream of examples, from players who get abused, to players who have no business being in college at all, to abuses of power to outright crimes. I love sports. But I would like to see us get to a place where the typical person can name an award-winning professor as fast as they can name the football coach.

davesdatahut: And as for the main topic here, who wouldn't support our troops? Of course, we have to support our troops. Under no circumstances should we not. The problem is when the support of troops becomes the blind allegiance to policies that are not thought through, leading us to send these troops to wars that have no clear purpose, no clear plan and are started on flimsy grounds.

Coffrey: Agreed. But again, "support the troops", what does that mean to do? To be in favor of them? I mean, outside the Westboro people, who are nutty regardless of what religion you are, I don't know a single person who is outspoken against the troops.

derexan: Let's be realistic people. None of these wars are about our personal safety, unless you consider your standard of living to be akin to your freedoms and safety. These wars are about petrocarbons and geopolitics. Don't hate the troops but don't glorify them. Most of them couldn't make it in the real world regardless. /served 5 years active duty and OIF veteran.

Sarcastic Dots: I think, in my eyes, it means you should support the soldier, but not the wars they fight. Still, as the post above me said, I appreciate it's a job in difficult conditions, so I don't really find what soldiers do condemnable; but sometimes, as with every organisation, there are complete psychopaths that bring everyone involved into disrepute.

I mean, I don't think it's complicated. Soldiers are people. When people paint soldiers as heroes and villains, people forget that they are neither: they are shade of grey in-between, like all of us. That's not to say soldiers--and anyone else-- can't commit heroic and villainous acts, but there is a difference between being a hero and committing a heroic act.