| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Left's view on the military; "We support you" my eye..... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 24 2005, 07:58 PM (264 Views) | |
| Larry | Jul 24 2005, 07:58 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Since the lefties refuse to address this in another thread, I thought it deserved its own thread. It pretty well sums up the hypocrisy of the left regarding the military, the war, and the claim that they "support the military while not supporting Bush's policies." Dennis Prager July 12, 2005 Liberals, Democrats and others on the Left frequently state that they "support the troops." For most of them, whether they realize it or not, this is not true. They feel they must say this because the majority of Americans would find any other position unacceptable. Indeed, for most liberals, the thought that they really do not support the troops is unacceptable even to them. Lest this argument be dismissed as an attack on leftist Americans' patriotism, let it be clear that leftists' patriotism is not the issue here. Their honesty is. In order to understand this, we need to first have a working definition of the term "support the troops." Presumably it means that one supports what the troops are doing and rooting for them to succeed. What else could "support the troops" mean? If you say, for example, that you support the Yankees or the Dodgers, we assume it means you want them to win. But most of the Left does not want the troops to win in Iraq. The Left's message is this: "You troops may think you are winning; you may think you are doing good and moral things in Iraq; you may believe you are fighting the worst human beings of our age and protecting us against the scourge of Islamic terror. But we on the Left believe none of that. We believe this war is being fought for oil and for Halliburton and other corporations; we believe you are waging a war that is both illegal and immoral; we believe you have invaded a country for no good reason and have killed a hundred thousand Iraqis [the Left's generally mentioned number] for no good reason; but, hey, we sure do support you." Honest people on the Left need to understand that the two positions are not reconcilable. A German citizen during World War II could not have argued: "The Nazi regime's army is engaged in an evil war of aggression and is slaughtering millions of innocent people, and I therefore completely oppose this war, but I sure do support the Nazi troops." One example is the claim made by Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and almost all other Democrats and liberals that the war in Iraq is "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time." How does one support troops that are fighting a wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time? A few leftist writers have been honest enough to say, "Nothing personal, guys, but I sure don't support you." But the vast majority of the Left and all Democratic politicians have not been honest on this matter. A second example is the oft-repeated line, found on liberal bumper stickers, "War is not the answer." Aside from the idiocy of this claim -- war has solved slavery, ended the Holocaust, destroyed Japanese Fascism, preserved half the Korean peninsula from near-genocide, and saved Israel from extinction, among other noble achievements -- the claim offers no support to those who do engage in war. How could one believe that "war is not the answer" and also claim to "support the troops," the very people waging what is "not the answer"? The answer is, by being dishonest. A third example is the Left's opposition to military recruitment on most of the elite and many other college campuses. So deep is leftist disdain for troops that most on the Left regard the mere presence of military personnel on a university campus as a form of contamination. Yet, the Left claims to "support the troops." Many on the Left express far more contempt than support for the troops. A Democratic senator compares our interrogators to the Nazis and Communist torturers; the head of Amnesty International in America defends likening Guantanamo Bay to the Gulag; and liberals routinely speak of troops as coming from the lowest socio-economic rungs of society (maybe that's one reason they oppose recruiters on campuses, lest the best educated actually join the military). But, hey, the Left supports the troops. An honest leftist would say: "Because I view this war as immoral, I cannot support our troops." What is not honest is their saying, "Support the troops -- bring them home." Supporting people who wish to fight entails supporting their fight; and if that fight is opposed, those waging it are also opposed. Many on the Left angrily accuse the Right of disparaging their patriotism. That charge, too, is false. I have never heard a mainstream conservative impugn the patriotism of liberals. But as regards their attitude toward our troops, the patriotism of those on the Left is not the issue. The issue is their honesty. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Jul 24 2005, 09:52 PM Post #2 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
I consider myself on the left and I didn't respond to it because while Prager may say this is what I think, it's not. Nor do I agree with Prager's logic. It's a;ways nice to look at things ijn black and white, very easy for those who need easy analyses and, of course, it makes it very easy to write the proper length column when the writer does this. But in doing so, the writer generally produces erroneous conclusions. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 24 2005, 10:21 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I don't think he came to an erroneous conclusion at all. I think the fact that he hit the nail squarely on the head is so obvious that only a blind man would miss it. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Phlebas | Jul 25 2005, 02:22 AM Post #4 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
My grandfather - on my mother's side- voted democrat in every election he could, supported unions, in favor of gay rights, affirmative rights, the whole nine yards. He was way to the left of me. He flew in B17s during WWII. My dad - son of immigrants - voted for Humphrey, McGovern, and every other Democrat he could. He's way left of me. He fought in Korea. Those are two examples of lefties who put their money where their mouth is. There are many more. There are also lefties who are hypocrites. There are righties who are hypocrites - for example, I've known a few war monger types whose "flat feet kept them out of the Army." If generalizing makes you feel better, Larry, then go ahead. |
|
Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 25 2005, 04:43 AM Post #5 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
The problem with your comparison Phlebas, is that the Democrats of your father and your grandfather are not the Democrats of today. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Phlebas | Jul 25 2005, 04:47 AM Post #6 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Some of the ones he voted for in the past were worse, and he still votes the Dem ticket all the way. We argue a lot. |
|
Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |








4:13 PM Jul 10