Meme--Simple Questions: If you support the war, why haven't you signed up

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

to fight it? Are you a coward? Or is it possible that deep down you know it's a con?

[bryant69]

1. They pop their excuse

And your done.

"I would but my cyst won't let me." That sort of thing. Most of them have learned from Cheney's lameass "other priorities" excuse and have come up with something better.

Plus they might take the opportunity to move the debate to civilian control of the military -a principle Democrats generally believe in.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

5. you're right...but only the "informed" will have such a defense at hand

and most war supporters are, we know, not informed at all.

[Jack from Charlotte]

9. Are you familiar with Operation Yellow Elephant? They ask young healthy ..

wingnuts, mostly in college Republican clubs, why they don't join up since they support the war so much. Their answers are hilarious.



http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/

[HornBuckler]

2. I don't - So I haven't

But those that do - yeah, good question.

you didn't expect a real good answer did you?
:)

[Skittles]

3. or, why did you never serve in the military

too many of these warmongering bastards are sooooo big on "protecting America" yet they had better things to do than military service

[BOSSHOG]

4. The favorite response I have received by posing such a question

"I haven't served in the military (yet)." And I got this answer more than once. Yes it warms the cockles of my heart to think of the likes of limbaugh and toby keith and daryl worley and on and on. Merkuns enjoying their freedoms and getting all huffy when asked why they want others to take up arms and yet choose not to themselves. I won't ever forget.

[chaumont58]

6. I saw a right wing blog bitching about Nagin winning

He said Nagin's win meant the end of all accountability, include Bush. The blogger is 24 years, a graduate of USC, about to enter Notre Dame law school. He stated his continued 'support for the war.' That's what pissed me off. He's 24, prime meat. In the comments section, I suggested he grab a rifle, and head for Iraq. The US Army would love to have him lead a combat patrol in Baghdad.

My addition to the comments section was deleted. I am shocked. Next, they'll be telling me there is gambling in Casablanca.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[abluelady]

8. Frankly, everytime I participate in a protest

I could be the victim of a nut with a grudge. I have bumberstickers on my car that scare my mother to death. She (and my husband) are waiting for me to be a target. So yes, I guess I do put my life on the line==not in a bogus war, but in other ways.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

18. Bush is a nut with a gun.

He's a giggling, simpering sociopath. I was a soldier. I did my time. I don't support this colonizing invasion, but I do know the soldiers have no choice, and do not take it out on them. Everybody's life is on the line since you people put his psychopathic ass in the dictator's seat.

And...NOBODY IS PRO-ABORTION! Got that?

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

25. If it walks, talks like a duck, etc.

You said "PRO-ABORTION". You are a Bush voter. You think you're that clever? We know the right wing's code words.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

39. Questioning sanity. Another wingnut ploy.

"Gore is off his meds"
"Dean needs anger management therapy"
"The loony left"
"You're quackers"

Keep it up.:hi:

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fudge stripe cookays]

80. Whaddya mean "Go?"

We were here first.

You go somewhere else if YOU don't like it. Things were almost civil before you arrived.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[abluelady]

24. Depends Where You Live and

What the bumper sticker says!

Seriously, nowhere is as dangerous as a war zone, but there is danger everywhere and when you speak up, you can be putting yourself in danger. There are women I know who walk girls into abortion clincs--tell me they are not in a war zone!

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fudge stripe cookays]

41. But see...

they're not extreme. They're mainstream (or used to be). This administration has corrupted our entire society and our media to make believe that they're not.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

44. here's the point you can't grasp: when you bang the drum, you are

morally obligated to put your life on the line, too, if you are able to do so. When you don't bang the drum, you are morally obligated to support and respect the brave and principled men and women who fight a cause with which you disagree, to protest whenever possible the injustice of the war you oppose and to try to reshape the debate, and to question why people mindlessly voice support war. Some supporters cover for their cowardice. Some, deep down, know something's wrong with the picture but haven't changed their minds yet. In a democracy, I'm obligated to suggest these people figure it out.
If I ever advocate a cause that means the destruction of life, I won't do it without facing the risk myself. That would make me a rank hypocrite. Why can't able-bodied warmongers meet this simple standard?

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fudge stripe cookays]

54. The expression...

in case you haven't grasped it....is "banging the drum to war." Liberals generally do not do that.

We want peace, helping our fellow man, assisting the homeless, the sick, the disaster-affected. We don't insist on blowing our fellow man to bits.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fudge stripe cookays]

94. There's no double standard.

Your beliefs require that you kill people, therefore putting yourself in danger too.

Ours do not.

Quit claiming double standard where one does not exist. Before you start throwing around terms, you might want to educate yourself what they mean.

Because you came here to stir up trouble with no other reason than to cause a flamewar, you ARE AN ASSHOLE.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

55. yes, I bang the drum for my positions...

and, consequently, I hope that in my better moments my behavior mirrors my positions without hypocrisy. I favor peace, so I don't fight in a war or ask others, too. I protest, argue, rant, post, and try in my meager ways to suggest ways to frame the issue. But I won't go to combat, because I do not believe in this war.
Many favor war, but would never dream of fighting for it. Can you see ANY hypocrisy here?

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

73. one last try

"Not every single person in a society...who believes in war in able to fight in it."

TRUE ENOUGH. LET'S, FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT, GIVE ALL OF THEM A PASS ON THEIR VIEWS, FOR OR AGAINST.

"Especially in our modern society, or in a small war, there may well be able-bodied men of sufficient age and health that COULD fight, who are not fighting."

OBVIOUSLY.

"This does not mean they do not support the war..."

NO, MY POINT IS THAT SOME DO SUPPORT THE WAR, BUT ARE COWARDS OR HAVEN'T THOUGHT THE ISSUE THROUGH, DESPITE HAVING DOUBTS ABOUT IT ON SOME LEVEL.

"or that they are hypocrites."

HERE:

hypocrisy n 1: an expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction

lip service n. Verbal expression of agreement or allegiance, unsupported by real conviction or action

hyp·o·crite n. A person given to hypocrisy.

AND HERE:
hypocrite: one who puts on a mask and feigns himself to be what he is not


www.dictionary.com

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[abluelady]

48. Absolutely Not

WE"RE tolerant.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[abluelady]

61. You're Not Understanding Me

Progressives/Liberals believe in free speech. If a neocon wants to sport a bumpersticker of any sort, he is not in danger, imho. We don't go out and kill people who disagree with us like pro-life activists who kill doctors.

I think when you try to compare neocons with progressives you are going down the wrong alley. My favorite bumper sticker says it all: ANNOY A CONSERVATIVE--THINK FOR YOUSELF.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[abluelady]

67. Whatever

I'm glad I see things the way I do as opposed to the way you do. :-)

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

83. Tree spikers are liberal?

Those violent demonstrators and sabotagers who spike trees and the like are zealots. Zealotry is bad in any form. Who's to say they are left? Who? You? Did they say they are on the political left? Do you know who each one of these people vote for? Limbaugh calls them "The radical Left", but limbaugh is a lying junkie.

What makes you think that the Mink freers are liberal? Weren't you the one who didn't wish to be labelled?

A few things we do know though...Liberals never mailed Anthrax, assasinated GOP presidents for a war industrial complex, assasinated his brother, assasinated a civil rights leader or his supporters because "Those darkies are getting too uppity". Conservatives don't conveniently die in airplane accidents without black boxes just weeks before elections. Liberals don't send death threats to a mother of a dead soldier because she chose to question the President why her son died. Liberals don't pistol whip small gay boys and leave them to die on a Wyoming fence post. Liberals never say "Just nuke 'em all and let God sort 'em out!"

There are no "both sides do it" you can make here that would convince me, unless you choose to label somebody "liberal" because Limbaugh and his ilk said they were.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

13. ummm, errrr...attention fellow Billy Goats, do not cross the bridge.

[fudge stripe cookays]

15. Well, see....

now that argument would work, if the other folks who are so "psychologically disabled" and have boils on their butts and other physical problems weren't so in-our-face about their chickenhawkness.

Any of us who have been out protesting put our lives on the line. Talk to anyone from Miami or Seattle protests from a few years ago? Clinic escorts? Nah...probably not.

Putting a ribbon on your car does not make you a patriot. Ill or not.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

16. exactly. Neither does obfuscating the issue by suggesting being

anti-war is any dig at our troops. They aren't cowards, unlike their "friends" who egg on war from the cubicles.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

20. You're right, protesters are not in the same risk.

...The soldiers that are at risk, are fighting a war that YOU'RE choices in Prez and psychopathic dominionist attitudes put them in. They are dying because of YOU and you're irresponsible choices in politics, and slavering worship of a sociopath who claims Jesus talks to him. None of them are dying because of protesters, or our anti-forced preganacy bumper stickers.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

29. Then why are you posting here?

This is a thread about Iraq war supporters who don't join up. If your not talking about that, then you are de-railing the conversation.

If you don't support the war, or at least not addressing it, and explaining why you can't join up just for that reason, then you are not keeping with the topic that was started here. Maybe it's you who should look for another thread.

And you did vote for Bush. You said "PRO-ABORTION"...Bushie code words.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

Comprehension problems, I see.

Let me say it in small words.

You are not on this topic if yuou are not addressing the Iraq Invasion.

Sorry about that big one "Addressing". It means "talking about".:eyes:

[fudge stripe cookays]

38. Well if it ain't a Democrat....

(as the name suggests, Einstein....)

Then you seem to have taken a wrong turn.

[brentspeak]

91. This particular disruptor is sort of a rarity

That is, an openly RW disruptor. The usual disruptors are the left-wing ones (both real left-wingers and RW's posing as left-wingers).

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

22. okay, my snarky comment above aside, I've no reason to believe...

you're not a patriot. And I certainly don't believe our troops are not patriots. I respect them for fighting for what they believe in. I don't, however, respect the able-bodied folks at home who bang the drum and egg on the fight at no risk to themselves.
You're right...taking an anti-war stance entails less risk than fighting in a war. However, it entails far more risk than supporting the war from the comfort of home if you're able-bodied but unwilling to fight. And that's what this thread is about.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

37. I should have written "If you support the war and are able-bodied

but unwilling to fight...." And I don't think you'll find many of them here. Try freeperzone, though, and it's full of them.
What you have here at DU, largely, are principled people who take a strong anti-war stand. And, yes, that requires no actual combat and far less risk than volunteering for Iraq. But, again, it requires far more risk than just egging on the fight and not signing up if you're able to do so.
If you support the war, then you must know that cause needs soldiers badly. If you support the war, you must believe it's winnable and noble. Why else would you suggest putting other human lives in harm's way? How else could you justify the casualties to thousands of US troops and tens of thousands of Iraqis?
I support the troops. I don't support the war. I don't support the loss of innocent life in the name of a cause. I don't support wasting a trillion dollars to support lies. I don't support misleading brave men and women into an impossible situation. And I certainly wouldn't suggest that other people ought to forfeit their lives, homes, health, children, fathers, and mothers for what I believe--unless I was willing to face the fight, too. Yes, this is a position that carries less risk than fighting in combat. But it still carries more risk than cheering from my couch and blindly backing the president when he sends others to injury, anguish, and death.
So where ARE than the warmongers who can fight but won't?
To them, this thread's original question is still on the table.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

40. turns out you quoted me out of context after all anyway

and gave my words a meaning much different from their actual meaning.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fudge stripe cookays]

71. I haven't been in your shoes,

but then I wouldn't want to be. I have problems of my own. MS, for example, which rules out a lot of what I used to do to stand up for my beliefs. Marching, leafletting, door-to-door speaking to voters.

If you believe that military families have much re-dress left, you're fooling yourself. They are little more than cannon fodder anymore. Their benfits are being stripped away, and their families are suffering here at home from losing those bennies.

I don't often stand for anything that would get anyone killed because of my stupidity. Supporting this president makes you the antithesis of a patriot by definition. No matter HOW you define YOURSELF. Saying something doesn't make it true.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fudge stripe cookays]

88. You didn't have to.

Your conservative buzzwords give you away.

[lectrobyte]

19. I support our troops. Why do you support killing them for a Bush lie?

Bring them home now.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lectrobyte]

58. 2,459 have died for George's lies. Do you support the war in Iraq?

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

85. Answer the q. DO YOU SUPPORT THE IRAQ INVASION?

????? That is what THIS TOPIC AN THREAD IS ABOUT! Not about "under any president". Who cares what you want to talk about. You're off topic.

[lectrobyte]

86. Then why confuse support of the war with support for the troops?

So tired of folks doing that. So many deaths. HAL is doing great, so I guess by Republican standards, things are going swimmingly.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=HAL&t=1d

[raccoon]

68. You sure you belong here? nt

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[raccoon]

82. No, but you come across like a disruptor.

Your use of the term "pro-abortion" makes me suspicious.

Granted, plenty of people can't serve in the military because they are physically/mentally unfit. But to me, for somebody to cheer on the war on Iraq (or anywhere else) when they themselves wouldn't serve in the military nor would they want their kids/grandkids too, they just want somebody else to do it all--that is hypocritical, to say the least.

[raccoon]

69. "pro-abortion" --Them's fighting words.

I think you are a disruptor.

[libnnc]

70. well it is lunch time you know...

Cheese or Pepperoni?

No green peppers though, makes me a little gassy...

[lectrobyte]

87. I'm not getting you. You support our troops, but if we don't put our

lives on the line, we can't tell someome who's rah-rah'ing the death & destruction & waste of Iraq to WALK THE WALK since they are TALKING THE TALK? Sorry, I am going to call them on their bullshit. I support our troops. I do not support the war in Iraq. Those are two different things. Enjoy your visit!

[brentspeak]

90. "If they are not able to lead men, or work together on a military goal"...

The first part of your statement deals with the issue of officer material, and I agree -- those who crow for war but don't even try to enlist -- the Sean Hannities, Dinesh D'Souzas, and the vast majority of College Republicans -- are the very last people in this country who should be considered for leadership positions, whether those be in the military, jobs, or public service.

As for the second part: there's no way a person will know if they can "work together on a military goal" with other people unless they're actually in the military to begin with. So, it's not clear what you're trying to say. I think what you're getting at is that the able-bodied "I'll fight the battle here at home" people are just incompetent individuals period.

[smtpgirl]

95. And everyone else has issues too!!

But the point is, the very people who claim they support the troops and the Iraq are RW's. They are the very shitheads that have made this country what it is today.

They are RWnuts who only give a SHIT ABOUT THEMSELVES and NO ONE ELSE???


I deal with these crybaby whining mother fuckers everyday at my helpdesk job.

Let them GO to IRAQ!!!

bloggiedoggie, you ARE A BUSH SUPPORTER, MKAY!!

[smtpgirl]

96. Are you a "lost" FReeper soul??

[Touchdown]

11. Well, I support the Yankees

...but I don't wear their uniform.:silly:

[itzamirakul]

28. TOUCHDOWN!

Yours is the answer I was waiting for! :)

This is Bush's crazy war and it should be fought by all those rw, gun-loving, kkk tatooed, big-busted huzzy wife-beater husbands (and wives)who support the idiot sitting in the Oval Office, twiddling his thumbs while Cheney and Rove run the country.

No decent Democrat should be expected to fight this war that kills innocent women and children to supposedly protect some folks that could well protect themselves. Why should our Democratic boys and girls go to war and get maimed or killed to help Cheney enrich himself and his friends through Haliburton and the Carlyle Group?

Did you ever notice how much like pigs these men look?
Just look at Cheney, Rove, and the rest of these fat, bald headed, greedy, arrogant snobs. They all look the same.

[Libby2]

14. That's right, and age or sex should not be criteria. (nt)

[Orsino]

26. You support OTHER people fighting the war...

...that you're too comfortable to support in any way but verbally.

[zbdent]

33. Young College Republicans

"do shit" . . . that was one eloquent excuse used . . .

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

36. Randi Rhodes said that to a 24 year old wrongwinger on The Larry King Show

He couldn't give her a real answer! It was sublime!

[ObaMania]

74. Sure he did ... NOT!

He said something to the effect of "Just because I support the Yankees doesn't mean I need to play baseball."

I fell out. Randi should've shredded him for that dumb ass response.

[Touchdown]

84. The little bastard's pic is on post 11.

With what he said about the Yankees.:rofl:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

89. roflmao!!!!!!!!

:rofl:

[smtpgirl]

97. Yep, she dressed down Ben Ferguson

[Doctor_J]

43. The chickenhawks have a few stock answers

one is "I'm fighting the war of ideas here at home", as if they might soon be filming "Liberty U ER". Another one, more recent and amazingly stupid, is "I support the Yankees but I don't wear their uniform". Only the dumbest of the Limbeciles would buy this one.

Mostly they are a really cowardly bunch, just like Smirk.

[Nederland]

45. Response

I see little difference between people that are in favor of a war they are not fighting and those here on DU who favor increasing taxes on the rich--taxes that they are not paying. In both cases, you are asking other people to bear the burden instead of bearing it yourself. In sum, I'd be careful with the precedent you are trying to set here. Do you really think that only the people impacted by a policy or decision get to have a say in that decision? Think about the ramifications of that idea on all aspects of government.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

51. a fair concern, however...most people here (I think) would be prepared

to pay higher taxes if we knew where the money was going and felt as if we had some say in the process. (I could be dead wrong about this.) Regardless, I think the parallel question on this issue would be: If you're in the top 2% and favor a fair tax code, why aren't you in favor of raisng taxes on your bracket's income first? Or, if you are in favor of it, why did you set up a tax dodge to avoid paying it? (These are meant to be hypotheticals and not directed at you, since, of course, I have no idea what bracket you fall under.)
At any rate, I think there's also a difference in what's at stake here. This war concerns us all, impacts us all, and impacts thousands who can't even participate in the narrative.
I hope I didn't miss your point.

[fudge stripe cookays]

59. If I knew that my money was going to fund...

a decent school system, good roads, safe bridges, and the like, I'll be all over my taxes.

When I think of my money going to educate children in poor neighborhoods with teachers making a decent living wage and getting benefits, and imparting a love of knowledge to children, I get all warm and fuzzy inside.

Instead, I'm paying for daisy cutters, Tom DeLay's hot tub, and a whole lot of crap that makes me ashamed.

[Nederland]

60. I agree

At any rate, I think there's also a difference in what's at stake here. This war concerns us all, impacts us all, and impacts thousands who can't even participate in the narrative.

I agree. The war effects us all and we all should have a say in it, regardless of our service.

[Scoody Boo]

46. I think the whole premise of the question is silly.

I am not in favor of the war, but I am not rushing out to sign up for human shield duty either.

This lis like asking a pregnant woman with a pro-choice sticker on her car why she did not abort her baby.

This like expecting everyone who is anit-gun grabbing every gun they see.

People can support a myriad of causes and not participate in promting that cause.

I believe the freedom of speech is absolute, but I have never stood with a sign anywhere.

The Military is a 100% volunteer service. People have their own reasons as to why they serve or not and it really is not any of my business to demand to know why they do or don't.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

56. The difference: if you advocated human shield duty but didn't volunteer

for it, then you'd be a hypocrite. You'd be asking others to put their lives on the line for what you belived in, but not yourself.
It's a fair point to make, though, that there are more dedicated positions to take and act on than mere dissent.

[Spaceman Spiff]

64. I used to post over at hannity.com

before one of their little pussy-assed mods banned me. Anyway, lots of people talked the talk over there but always had an excuse for not signing up. My favorite was "They already have enough people over there. They don't need me." Well, I'm here to tell you that if you go to a recruiter's office and say "Send me to Iqaq" you can bet your ass that they WILL find a spot for you.

BTW, just to let everybody know, I served in the Army from 89-93. Even did the Desert Storm thing. (Never fired a shot the whole time I was over there, though.)

[Scoody Boo]

72. I served from 87-91.

Made 77 parachute jumps (one into enemy fire in Panama), got chased by SCUDs falling out of the sky during Desert Storm. Not a scratch on me from any of that.

Two years ago I am climbing up the porch stairs with a bag of groceries and I trip over my damned dog. Broke my ankle, shattered it actually. Now it is held together with plates and screws. I limp a little when I walk, it becomes a pronounced limp when I run.

I would love to go back into the Rangers, but with this leg, I would not even be allowed to be a cook.

I do not want to serve because I support Bush, but I still see those young kids over there with a Sergeant's eye and as my troops. Too many of them are coming back in caskets or maimed. Maybe, when the chips are down, I could take the place of one of them.

[raccoon]

66. Or their candy-ass kids or grandkids? nt

[mortlefaucheur]

81. The mystery is

why so many liberal kids are signing up and serving for Bush* when it's plainly evident that Repuke kids are too busy exercising their "other priorities".
Instead of encouraging or browbeating anyone to serve, the better outcome would be that everyone is turned from contributing to the Iraqnam clusterfuck.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

93. I've Always Hated That Meme.

I know a lot of DU'ers agree with it and use it a lot, but I've never taken a liking to it. It just seems incredibly narrow minded to me. Though I agree that so many on the right are chickenhawk cowards, supporting the war still doesn't mean having to fight it. It's like just because someone supports gay rights doesn't mean they should be expected to partake in gay acts, and their lack of doing so doesn't diminish their level of support for those rights, for example.