I had just gotten into my car to go home from work when I saw it. There it was beckoning to me, demanding I look — demanding I read, insisting I understand…But then, I didn’t. “Support Troops Not War,” it said. I silently mouthed the words. “Support Troops Not War…. (long pause)….Support Troops Not War?” O.K. so I’m essentially a big dumb animal. Can anyone explain to me how that statement makes sense in a coherent, logical fashion? Support Troops Not War. What exactly does that mean? Let’s break it down, shall we? I’ll make this simple. We’ll just take the first half of the sentence, “Support Troops…” Let’s see, um… “Support” means to promote the interests or cause of, while the word “Troops” is defined as a group of soldiers; a cavalry unit corresponding to an infantry company; armed forces. Now why in heavens name would they be armed?
Forget that question for the moment. How about we break that word, “troops” down a bit further? Part of the definition is “a group of soldiers.” So what is a soldier? Merriam Webster’s dictionary states that a soldier can be “one engaged in military service, especially in the army.” My dad was a career Marine, so he would probably change that last part to, “especially in the Marines.” Anyway, it could be one engaged in military service or as the same dictionary states, “it could be a caste of wingless individuals with large heads and jaws among termites and some ants.” Wait a minute…er..uh…Here’s an idea; how about “Support Ants and Termites Not War”? That makes a lot more sense to me. The only problem is ants and termites sometimes go to war. So we wouldn’t want to support them in that case, would we?
And….what was I saying? Oh yes, “Support Troops.” Troops are soldiers and soldiers go to war. O.K. I’ve got it. I am supposed to support troops. Now the second half of the sentence/slogan/thingy says “Not War” Huh??? I be all confused-N-stuff. So let me get this straight. I’m supposed to support troops and troops go to war, but I’m not supposed to support war? Yet just like the ants they (the troops that is) sometimes go to war. War is their business. War is what they do; that’s why we call them TROOOOOPS! It is by virtue of their function that we call them that. And, it is because of their function that we are supporting them at all. To support something is to promote the interest or cause of. And, the interest or cause of a soldier is to keep the peace. He does so by the use of force in the context of a “just” war. Right?
Unless you define troops as those cutesy little girls called brownies, or maybe those tough resourceful young boys called scouts. Then again, that’s really a stretch because the current political climate dictates the non-support of the Boy Scouts, since they’re so controversial and all. You know, it’s the whole mom and apple pie thing. It’s just a little too wholesome for some people. So I’m positive the “sticker people” are not using “troops” in that sense. No, “troops” as in “soldiers” seems the most likely context.
Before going a bit deeper into the job description of troops, I thought it appropriate to cover the preconditions of troopdom. In this case, what is it that a person must do before becoming a soldier? Do they sing? No, they sign a contract with Uncle Sam in which they promise to protect and defend Old Glory. They promise to give their lives, if necessary, in times of war. Although, I have noticed there’s this little disease going around, where not just a few of our young fighting men have had a vicious attack of selective amnesia. They don’t remember that singing (excuse me) signing on the dotted line of a legally binding contract may mean that you have to actually honor it.
One particularly virtuous young lad actually came home on leave, remembered the fine print of his contract and decided to go AWOL. He was hailed as the hometown hero…by the local media and the brainless nutroots on campus. That took guts…so they said. “Intestinal fortitude” is what my old football coach called it. Yep, it sure takes a lot of guts…to run away from a fight. The way in which he accomplished this feat was rather innovative as well. He decided to be a conscientious objector after the fact. My understanding of this concept is that it is reserved for persons who are conscientious enough not to sign in the first place. “Unconscientious objector” would be a more accurate descriptor I think, for this young man.
Wait, I just realized another alternative. Would it be possible for me to support troops in peace time but not support them in war time? That might be doable. But why on earth would I want to? What are they? Extended family? Long lost relatives? A third world country? No. They’re troops. They aren’t like kids who have left home and are still on the “economic outpatient plan.” They’re a group of individuals who are being paid by you and me to keep the peace, through the use of force, in a time of war. So the whole “not war” part of the slogan is really throwing me.
I know, I’ll ask my father-in-law. He’s the epitome of common sense and moderation. What does it mean Dad? “I think what they mean is to support the individuals, not the war the government mandates them to be in.” Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah, now I understand. It was just a vocabulary error. It said, “troops” but what was meant was the “individual” independent of their chosen occupation.
But why are we supporting them if they are just individuals? As if the armed forces are nothing more than a gigantic entitlement program run amok. I can picture the conversation now. I go down to the neighborhood military base and start conducting interviews with the “troops.”
“So soldier, what is it that you do, exactly?”
“Well I, sit around and…sit around, look straight ahead, listen to my colon drain.”
“I thought you were a soldier.”
“Oh, I am.”
“Well, what is it that soldiers do?”
“I shine my shoes, clean the barracks, pick out nifty outfits, and I spend a lot of time cleaning my firearm.”
“Now we’re getting somewhere. You ever fire that thing?”
“Oh no! We never fire it; that might hurt someone. Somebody could get killed.”
“Precisely. That somebody, or someone might be trying to kill you. Ever think of that?”
“No. Not really. Why would I? This place is like an all inclusive resort or something. Life’s too good. That’ll never happen here. And as long as everybody back home supports us, there’s no reason it shouldn’t continue.”
“Well, you’re right there. We support you son, but we don’t support war. And I’ll sleep much better tonight just knowing that when the crap hits the fan you’ll be there to politely ask the enemy to go home because you don’t support it either. Rest assured, they will honor your request.”
Editor's Note: This commentary had its humble beginning here, of all places, some three years ago. It was later reprinted in the editorial section of the now defunct Capitol News, and then picked up by numerous publications such as Frag, Blood-N-Guts, Never Say Die, and that manliest of manly publications, Cry All You Want To Liberal Scum…You're Not Getting Your Mommy!
Chad, your “rantings” made me think of my best friend Michael, a Semper Fi Marine Sgt. who joined the Army 3 years ago, because he was “too” old to get back in the Marines JUST so that he could actively serve ANYWHERE the country needed his skills, loyalty and courage.
His top choice: Iraq. Here’s a cool guy, business savvy, with as much zest for life as any breathing, hot-blooded American, with everything to look forward to. Still, this Marine couldn’t stand the thought of America being under attack. They say once a Marine, always a Marine. I guess it’s in your blood.
So far, he has not gone over there, but he knows that ‘chance’ is very much possible.
I can almost hear him [at the sight of that bumper sticker] exclaim, “That’s stupid!”
Well, he’d have much more to say, but that would be his first reaction.
I guess I should add that despite my obvious angst over the self refuting, no-think idea such messages impart, I do understand the sentiment of those who embrace them. I can even share the sentiment that war is a terrible thing. But unlike my libtard antimatter, I realize that war is sometimes necessary. I think even Obama realizes that as he continues his build-up of troops in Afghanistan and drags his heals on the promise to pull everyone out of Iraq. The latter item being drawn out into a rather lengthy affair. You have to wonder where the press is right now. I would say. But to give the press’s location would be inconsistent with our PG-13 rating. It is enough to say that one would need a proctologist to find them.
On a side note, do you find it interesting that Iraq has essentially become a non-issue since Bush Jr was dethroned? When was the last time you heard negative press on Iraq? It’s been quite a while hasn’t it. I think we both know the answer why.
Undoubtedly, the “Iraq War” was a red herring the demoRats exploited to their own advantage. During the 8 years since we went into Iraq,the MSM seldom if ever reported the positive stories and contributions created by our presence in that region…The legacy continues. Albeit, mainstream media keeps an excellent tally of the casualties.
Obama: the WORST CIC since Carter.
For you BOTH!!!!!!!!! (a little bit of fact I keep feeding to Chad) Life IS NOT !!! what it seems.
Play the game, figure the game out, or be a pawn in the chess-game of life.
Do your own “math” to figure out what I am saying, if you don’t already know.
Dave “paid his dues” to find some things out…….he’s not paying yours.
Chad, you are way too dramatic………good salesman. Sorry I don’t “buy” your spiel. Support the troops ALWAYS !!!!!!!!! no matter the war is “worthy” (and sometimes it is). Many become our warriors by choice and desire…….many by the campaign the Gov’t sells them. That’s kinda’ like the sale the politician gives you…vote for me, I’ll = blah, blah, blah, .
They never do, never have. Good sales pitch though. You still believe politics is so important. OOps, I forgot, it’s a source of a dollar for you.
I’m way too dramatic? That’s the pot calling the kettle black. All I can say is, it takes one to know one, pal:) Yes. I’m dramatic. I make no apologies for that. I’m an extremist by nature. But I don’t always write that way. This one was intended to be dramatic. Makes for a more entertaining and engaging read. Sure, there’s a huge kernel of truth under it all, but it was written with a vaudeville flavor intentionally, for effect, and to drive home the point that supporting the troops while trying to separate out what it is they do, is kind of like saying, “support abortionists not abortions.” It’s complete and utter nonsense, which is pretty much exactly what I’ve come to expect from liberals, and they rarely disappoint me, buddy.
As for earning money with this blog. I’ve never made a dime off it. I blog for donuts over at Bloggersbase. Well…I used to anyway. Nowadays, I have no time for that. I’m doing good to keep up with my obligations here, let alone everything else. Anyway, just because I’m being extreme doesn’t negate my view, it also doesn’t mean I’m not being sincere. As I said, I was having fun with that piece. But you’d better believe that I meant every word.
Until next time, have a good one. Here’s hoping we can do lunch later this week. See you buddy.
You gotta be kidding, Dave! If life is NOT what it seems, what then? [having a life crisis]
Hey Dave, I forgot to ask if you read the editor’s note. That piece was written some three years ago. I may have been more extreme back then…remember??? LOL…I thought you might.
See you pal.