"I Support the Occupation of Iraq, but I don't Support the Troops"

Satire from The Onion with link to entire article below:


Yes, occupying Iraq does require troops, but they are there for one reason and one reason only: to carry out the orders of the U.S. Defense Department. As far as their overall importance goes, they are no more worthy of our consideration than a box of nails. Ribbons and banners in ostensible "support" of the troops miss the whole point of the invasion, which is to gain a strategic hold over that volatile and lucrative geopolitical region.

Need I remind the reader that it is our flag, not the troops, that we salute? It is our nation-state, not a bunch of 20-year-olds in parachute pants, that deserves our allegiance. As a patriot and true American, my heart sings at the thought of the Pentagon, and the zealous, calculating measures undertaken by the proud military bureaucracy of this great superpower. I feel a surge of pride when I think about our high-tech GBU laser-guided bombs, capable of carrying a 2,000-pound warhead. I tied a ribbon around my tree for the safe return of our nation's F-16s, because our military aircraft are instrumental to finishing our work in Iraq. And on the back of my car, I have a sticker stating my support for the CIA's ongoing efforts in Iraq.
<snip>
It is ridiculous that my "heart" is somehow morally or ethically obliged to "go out" to the troops. In fact, had the troops not been put to productive labor by the sheer might and institutional authority of the U.S. military, a good number of them would be sitting around bars, drinking and gambling. In short, we shouldn't view the troops as objects of sympathy, because their very contribution to our society is their ability to carry out simple commands on a battlefield.

Allow me to pursue this from a more personal angle. I have a son in the military. If I may say so, we've never gotten along particularly well. Frankly, he's been a bit of a disappointment to his mother and me. Nevertheless, he is our flesh and blood and always will be, and we wish him no harm. So I speak from a position of personal experience when I say that, while I do not wish death for any of the troops, death tolls should not be our greatest concern. All that matters is the pursuit of the foreign-policy goals of this great land, the land I love. America.
http://www.theonion.com/opinion/index.php?issue=4108&o=2

real newspapers take note

Is this saying that our troops aren't worth much of anything in comparison to the ideology of the Bureaucrat's and their war games?

Is this saying that young people aren't really worth much BECAUSE they are young and all they are meant to do is to carry out orders instead of hanging out in bars?

Is this saying that young people aren't respected because of their inexperience and youth? AND that while us older and wiser folks that were allowed to get past our 20's, and develop some wisdom and some worth, really don't think that the present 20 year olds deserves the same chance to grow a little older, a little wiser and an opportunity to become a more productive member of society?

Am I understanding that ideology is more important than the shining example of people LIVING it? Theory is better as theory, not needing to be practiced? Who will there be to develop and/or practice our ideology and develop our wonderful (?) weaponry if WE devalue our future scientists, teacher, politicians, ministers...

WHO and what the HELL for?

It's parody news.

The Onion is a paper of primarily political satire/realism. It can make you cry.