Support Our Troops

First, I would like to mention the fact that weekly on his show, Alan Colmes names the fallen soldier by name and rank, while being diametrically opposed to the war itself. Now that is the perfect example of what it is, to acknowledge this war as ridiculous politics, but to support the troops. Thank you Alan Colmes. I, personally, have had it with four years worth of political propaganda that infers any connection with 9/11 to Iraq. I have had it with four years of magnetic bumper stickers that say "Support Our Troops" and I have had it with four years of pressure on those of us who disagree with the Iraq War being accused of everything from "killing morale" to being unpatriotic. And frankly, I am just really embarrassed for the people that are buying into the message that, "we have to keep fighting these terrorists over there!" Well the latest piece of propaganda that I have heard enough of, is this message in reference to the troops that they are"over in Iraq fighting for our freedom." Let me tell those that don't know the difference between Iraq and Saudi that the passport that was supposedly "discovered" near the WTC was not from Iraq, there were none, that is zero from Iraq involved in 9/11. The majority of the passports were from Saudi. So just quit the banter because the ones that believe this outrage already do, and the rest of us are not convinced, and just for the record, it would seem that more of those that once believed it, have seen what the rest of us already knew. So, in reality, to continue to support the war that is getting our troops killed, doesn't really sound like supporting the troops at all, now does it . . . Now, back to the propaganda that must be addressed.

What's with the magnetic bumper stickers? Do you really think the troops know about this major war effort sold in the impulse section of every discount store in America? And if they do, how does that make a day under fire in Iraq a better experience? And where is that money going when people do buy those? Is there some sort of special charity that oversees the proceeds to the tune of about 85% administration expenses? I have stated and I have written exactly the way I want to support our troops. I want to bring them home or at least have them risking their lives on the real battle front. I saw Iraq for the quagmire it was before it began and I really did try to warn people, but then, I'm just a nobody taxpaying citizen of a world super power. Let's talk about fighting the terrorists "over there," shall we? The so called eradicated Taliban is gaining ground in Afghanistan and we are too entrenched in Iraq to do very much about it. Israel, our ally that should have been able to count on us, battled Hezbollah alone this summer, because we didn't have the manpower to help, but we apparently have enough military power behind our "mouth" to keep threatening Iran and North Korea! So, please tell me how this "over there" mantra is making sense, because I just can't follow the inconsistency. And nobody is in Iraq fighting for American's freedom. That was the Revolutionary War. That was the war in which the military was comprised of those that were making the decisions. My last concern about supporting the troops is this latest thing about Walter Reed Hospital. I thought there were always dignitaries visiting our troops there. I thought the President and the first Lady made some visits there. How is it, that everyone in administration has missed the condition of the place? I read right after the war began, that the injured and recovering soldiers were actually billed for their meals, because their combat pay included meals and so, to maintain proper military protocol and have no double dipping the soldiers were supposed to pay. Where was the "support our troops" slogan there? I wrote an e-mail and personally asked to pay for some of those meals. I was trying to support our troops. Now back to this current diversion at hand. Turns out, that the VA just isn't up to more wounded veterans right now, so this war is really bad timing. President Bush has organized a "committee" to investigate the poor care and conditions. I have a much simpler solution than submitting this problem to the scrutiny of former Senator Gridlock, himself, because that just makes me think nothing is supposed to happen. Our President is the Commander in Chief of the military, and that would make our VP the second in line of that same position and we know that wives receive benefits when their husbands are in active duty, so . . . In the last couple of months Laura Bush has had a procedure, President Bush has had some sort of test and Dick Cheney has a blood clot. Why didn't these three individuals just receive care at these facilities and determine what improvements should be made? Perhaps they just need a different perspective of this facility, than that of visiting dignitaries. While they are telling us to support our troops, would they want the same treatment their decisions are causing our troops to receive?

And one of you says to them, Go in peace, be warm and full of food; but you do not give them the things of which their bodies have need, what profit is there in this?