Quote:
Originally Posted by Skerlnik
Well, yes, but even those who join out of a purely mercenary motive deserve honor and care, when that duty is done.
|
Why? They were hired to do a job, they did it and they were paid for doing it.
Quote:
|
On the one hand, I agree with you that troops know what they are signing up for, and have no standing to complain when they are used stupidly.
|
Well, "used" suggests they didn't get what they were contracted to receive.
Quote:
|
However, I would expect that this nation owes some reciprocity to these soldiers. It speaks volumes about how we view them as mere tools to be employes and then discarded. When you serve your country, it's only right that the country serve you.
|
That depends on how you view the military. They're doing a job and they're getting paid for doing it. As for this notion that they're serving their country, I don't see how one can say that they're serving their country when they're involved in unconstitutional military action based on a foreign policy that would have been utterly abhorrent to the founding fathers.
Quote:
|
I don't get this. The people who relentlessly shout "Support the Troops!" when someone criticize our military's actions in Iraq, and become patriotically indignant at the merest suggestion of impropriety or savagery of our troops, seem to be the very same people who defend our national policy of discarding them and ignoring them after their utility is done.
|
Well, you know, veterans benefits are Congress' responsibility. So, it seems they're the ones who are discarding the spent cannon fodder.
Quote:
|
Why are the people considered "liberals" the ones most upset about things like Walter Reed and stop-lossing?
|
Because they're using such things as a ruse to attack the Bush Administration. If liberals were really concerned then they would go after their cronies in Congress who let this happen.