Iraq War: Love it, then live it! (Put your well being where your mouth is)

[tableturner]

A guest opinion piece from the Tampa Tribune by a Viet Nam vet:

http://www.tampatrib.com/News/MGAXAJWT4TD.html

"Now, in this great struggle for freedom in Iraq, I want to turn to those who were so supportive of this war and challenge them: Love it? Then live it!"
<snip>
"I am talking about those of you who, like President Bush, believed Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States by possessing and potentially using weapons of mass destruction, and by collaborating with terrorists who attacked us on Sept. 11. I call on you patriotic Americans to answer the call for more help for Iraq 'in defense of freedom and democracy'."
<snip>

"You can join the military to fight for freedom. I have met many young, brave and patriotic Americans serving here. Pro-war Americans should line up to serve in combat alongside them.

"You can be part of the civilian military/security forces. American corporations working in Iraq are desperate to replace those who have been killed or wounded, or who have quit as the fighting has become very ugly.

"You can quit your job and take a comparable one here. No matter what you do in the United States, you are needed. Iraq needs lawyers, bankers, electricians, politicians, oilmen and many other professionals to build democracy and freedom.

"If you expect our bright young men and women in uniform to risk their lives in Iraq, give them the support they deserve. What better way than to come to Iraq and assume some responsibility in the fight for democracy?"

Now from me: yes indeed, if you love this war, then live this war! I won't be holding my breath, because I want to keep on living.

[DANDI]

1. That's a specious argument

First of all, one can agree that an armed conflict is necessary without "loving" it. Secondly, by that standard, no country could ever go to war without every man, woman and child carrying a gun to the front line.

[tableturner]

2. Not meant to be taken literally....

It simply makes the point that people should consider how tough it would be in that environment, and if they did, they would be a little slower (at least!) to be so vociferous in their fervence for this war. I listen to all of these doctors and stockbrokers who are so strong in their support of the war, a group from whom almost none have children at risk in this conflagration.

Think about this: the group from which most of the soldiers in this war are drawn is the group that is least favored by this president, the architect of said war. He screws them economically, then favors the wealthy economically, and then ravishes the screwees (the working class who got next to nothing in tax cuts) via the misuse of their children, and those who do not give their children to the effort, those who got all of the tax cuts, strongly favor this war, knowing that they are asked to give nothing!! They are getting favored economically, their children are safe, and they are most vociferous in their support of the war effort. These people are being bought by tax cuts, and the working class is paying with blood!!

Yeah....I'd like to see some of these weasels risk THEIR children or THEIR money. THAT is the point of the guest opinion piece, I think.

[opihimoimoi]

3. I concur, the working class pays the blood price and the financial price

as well.

same went for those Templar Knights of the Crusade. Went to fulfill a mission protecting the wealthy to the Promised Land only to be striped of their accumulated wealth and murdered on their return.

Such is the system giving power and Influence to the upper class.

GOLF: Gentlemen Only Ladies Forbidden

[phantom power]

6. I think it *should* be taken literally

Seriously, I've had it with being called a moral coward for opposing this war (and I have been accused as such). And never by anybody who's actually served in combat, in any war. I've refrained from playing the "go fight yourself" card up until now, but what's so wrong about that position: put up or shut up.

[rfkrocks]

4. lets face it-if there was a draft the war would not have happened

the point being that we now go to war because it is a "choice"We have the volunteers but that is more problematic here because the volunteers were not numerous enough-now if your own family's collective ass is on the line to go Iraq the walmartized middle class would have then suddenly realized that it is not a good idea-the volunteer army allows us to get away with no collective risk to war decisions-which is in a real sense a coward's way

[AndyTiedye]

5. If There Was A Draft We Would Have Invaded Syria and Iran Already

The only thing stopping them is not enough troops.

[rfkrocks]

7. No I disagree

I think the cost would make the nation wake-up and there would be demonstrations in the street and in the colleges-Bush can avoid the political repercussions of his wars by using the volunteer army-if there was a draft we would no longer have "war of choices"