More people who oppose the war seem willing to admit they do not support the troops. This Oakland writer begins his piece in the Berkeley Daily Planet:
In the recent political battle around the Marine recruiting station in Berkeley there has been much confusion around the concept or slogan of “supporting the troops,” but opposing the unjust wars of the Bush regime. Many who oppose the Bush regime wars also say they “support the troops.” Let me say it straight out—I do not support the troops and neither should you. It is objectively impossible to support the troops of the imperialist military forces of the U.S. and at the same time oppose the wars in which they fight.
First of all, anybody who uses the expression "imperialist military forces" should simply be laughed off the stage. I half expected to read the expressions "running dog" and "lackey" in the article. Sadly, it was not to be. But we live in a free country and so people like this are free to be idiots. But I digress.
More to the point, I figured that as our military refuses to lose and become the proper victims our anti-war side portrays them to be, that the anti-war side in frustration would drop the facade of "supporting the troops."
Losing in Iraq was always the mission of our Left and the pretense of supporting the troops was always just tactical to avoid alienating the broad majority of Americans--even some war opponents--who do support the troops and who respect our troops for what they do and what they sacrifice for us. Unlike the Left, these Americans actually have family and friends in the military.
On the other side, there are those who argue that you have to support the mission to really support the troops, and they are marching to Washington:
The reason is to show support for the Troops and the Mission of the Troops. The purpose is to demonstrate resolve to do a difficult task and to create a dialogue about our National “Will to Win”. We firmly believe that you can not support the Troops without supporting the Mission which the Troops are asked to give their lives for.
Yet the members of this group include those who think it was a mistake to invade Iraq. But once at war, they believe we must settle for nothing less than victory.
Since only 40% of Americans clearly support the war and want victory and only 20% want to retreat now, how do you determine whether we have the national will to win?
The answer is in looking more closely at the remaining 40% who do not fall neatly in either camp. Their views show that you do not have to support the mission to support the troops. This middle is willing to win but is worried about the cost and not sure if we can win. For these people, who probably would fall in the "support the troops" category, can at best be said not to oppose the mission.
And combined with those who want to win, this adds up to a clear majority of Americans who support the troops and will be happy when we win. And that will be good enough to carry us to victory.
The coalition for victory in Iraq is broader and more numerous than the anti-war side's retreat coalition.
