The troops have zero responsibility for any decision about how they are used.
Once a person decides to join the US Armed Forces, that is said to be the last free decision they can make about their future for two years.
If you don't believe that armed forces are the only reason we can have this conversation, then I'm not sure what to say. Don't like the current conflict? Shit, then, just reduce the number and effectiveness of the troops, then just wait. I'm sure you'll find validation for them soon enough. Or maybe, if you don't have that long of a memory, ask why Bush had a 90% approval rating in November 2001 (and the Marines probably 95%). Ask what would happen to the BCC if we had another attack on this soil. Unthinkable, well it certainly was.
But even more unthinkable is giving today's troops the same treatment as the those that returned from Vietnam, to be treated with derision and disrespect after having done the hardest job ever required of them. One big reason there is "support the troops" thinking despite how things turn out, is because people looked back on their own behavior post-Vietnam and blanched. Don't be like that in a few decades, don't look back at your own behavior with shame.
Quote:
|
I've done my part to try to convince kids not to serve and die during this unpatriotic regime. I believe that makes me a patriot.
|
Well if Marines are needed for the next war, not this one, hope you will still feel as proud. Meanwhile you are a "free rider" as well. You got to live a free life without serving your country one iota. And if it turns out you were wrong in some way, no big whoop, right? So what if the country is a little less defended; you did your part, right? Nobody will die from your approach to the whole conflict, although when we last left it you had Kurdish oil that couldn't make it to a secure port without making a deal Turkey would never accept, IIRC.