What do war supporters think of "traitorous" Veterans?

[genie_weenie]

President Bush's veto of the military funding bill that would have brought troops home from Iraq provoked frustration among the members of a small-but-growing organization who possess uncommon expertise on the subject.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/20070503_An_Iraq_veterans_group__based_here__seeks_to_halt_the_war.html

I know the likes of Cheney and Duncan Hunter, who gets millions in donation for his war chest, keeping him in office in order to keep voting for billion dollar government military contracts, want to keep our troops in Iraq for as long as possible. Trillions of dollars at stake!

But what do the american people who support the war think of anti-war veterans?

Do they form coherent, logical arguments to disagree with people who have walked the streets of Sadr City or stormed houses in Fallujah? Do they think at all or do they allow their emotions and react in a more visceral way? Is it easier to just hate those who dissent and be swallowed up in the daily lies of the Regime? Is it comfort they seek? Have they just not been shown the ground truth by the silent media? Would they believe it if they were? Does any real percentage of them believe it would have been better for those who speak out against war to have died in Iraq?

These vets and the gold star mothers are the truly brave. To stand against government, which has, in the past imprisoned, tortured and killed those who oppose Imperialism and knowing the bush white house is fully capable and willing to do the same today, is true courage.

[YOY]

1. They've obviously got PTSD!

Otherwise they would understand the need for "Freedom Jesus 9-11 Terra" Iraq :sarcasm:

[Heidi]

2. This American thinks anti-war veterans have a helluvalot more credibility

than a president who never saw combat and is rumored to have slithered out of even National Guard service.

Recommended.

:kick:

[genie_weenie]

5. It's incredibly odd to me

that Support our Troops can be a slogan when the Regime has never done so.

Of course, the more sinister reason in saying I Support the Troops is it gives cover to those whose actions are quite the opposite. Inadequate personal body armor, no rush to up-armor HMMWVs or to even bring in M113s, extending troops rotations in country and reducing time back stateside and Walter Reed should be enough evidence to prove the admin does not “support the troops”.

I can understand those who in their grief lash out, I could not condemn or a father who might hate me who my anti-war stance:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=821519&mesg_id=821617

This strikes me as very similar to the people who were cheering when bush was going to receive a purple heart from a Vietnam vet. That people could hold in to the ideas one man who made sure he did not go into Vietnam should be lauded and praised for receiving a Purple Heart from that war, while another man who earned his three in action can be mocked and ridiculed.

Is it a mix of emotional thinking, lies by the media and regime, the stubbornness of humans to cling to obsolete or even false theories and the inherent human predilection to respect authority? Is this why the pro-war side claims Support the Troops while only supporting those who ascribe to their beliefs?

[tabasco]

3. The brownshirts think anyone not obedient to their party is a traitor.

Military service doesn't matter to the true believers who would foist a dictatorship upon us.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. If being against war makes me a traitor...so be it.

"The enemy aggressor is always pursuing a course of larceny, murder, rapine, and barbarism. We are always moving forward with high mission, a destiny imposed by the deity to regenerate our victims while incidentally capturing their markets, to civilize savage and senile and paranoid peoples while blundering accidentally into their oil wells or metal mines."

- John T. Flynn, As We Go Marching

[TahitiNut]

6. An "anti-war (combat) veteran" is (imho) the truest of patriots.

Someone who actually served. Someone who has been in "harm's way." Someone who KNOWS what "war" means. A 'traitor' is someone who violates the political contract of a democracy and someone who seeks profit and advantage from the death and suffering of others.

[genie_weenie]

7. Treason has historically, imho, been

used to quell opposition and for maintainence of power for the ruling class.

Your definiton, if I understand it correctly, alters the definiton of treason to be violations of the spirit and rule of law and would make many members of the current government traitors.