What Does It Mean To "Support The Troops"?

It is a phrase that I have never understood; "Support The Troops", just what does it mean? Although I served in the military myself there isn't anything that I do that provides any support to 'troops' other than that as a general rule I have always paid my taxes as required and on time. I have not hosted dinners for local brigades, I have not petitioned my Congressman or either of my Senators for higher pay, better benefits, or more time off for our 'troops'. Oh, and just to keep this on an even keel, how about we agree that troops and veterans are not the same people and that veteran's issues are not the subject of this posting.

So just what is it, this declaration of support for our troops that is plastered on half the SUVs on the highway? I particularly want to hear from anyone who has one of those magnetic ribbons on their vehicle.

... you support them as your countrymen, though you feel they've been unnecessarily put in a dangerous and stressful situation. To a Republican, it means you have to support any insane foray into the Mideast that a Neocon, who's never been in any danger himself, might dream up.

as a citizen ensuring that the policies used to direct the troops are proper and just.

I also believe it is a code phrase that implies that anything critical of the president's war "policy" will result in protesters spitting in returning troops' faces, hanoi janes and a general disregard to their sacrifices a la Vietnam.

But how do you explain to these wingnute that it is they who do not support the troops by supporting a president who uses them as fodder and neglects their needs not only on the field, but upon their return? Why is the obvious so difficult to explain?

Support Troops = Support War = Support occupation disguised as war = Support George W. Boosh

It is against the rules here to bash the troops. It's written right into the rules because the rules writers don't feel that we can blame the troops for what the administration does. However, this is a question you have put forth so I will try to answer it without bashing anyone.

To a Republican, supporting the troops means supporting anything and everything Bush sends them to do. Even if it means supporting them rounding up innocents and building pyramids out of them and raping them and beating them and killing their children and blowing up their schools and hospitals and cities and towns, etc. The Republicans question NOTHING. Most Republicans evidently, have the IQ of a peanut.

To me, supporting the troops just means hoping they make it home safely. ...but I do not exonerate them entirely from their actions. We do not have a draft ergo they are there voluntarily. In my opinion, they have to take some responsibility for what they are doing, killing Iraqis, torturing Iraqis, etc. So I guess I don't really support the troops as long as they are over there. Contrary to what a Republican would take from that statement, I do not wish them harm. I wish them home. I wish they had not bought the lie in the first place. Most of them are just kids. I do NOT hold them to be ultimately responsible, obviously. That is at Bush's nasty little feet.

Lee

I know "we" pay for them, but that just makes it worse. Actual tax payers have no say. They're not our troops. They are agents of the state. That state isn't ours either, it belongs to those who make it work. We don't make it work, we are told how it will work. We are unquestioning cogs in the machine. That's why we have to be told to support the troops.

"Support the Troops" = "Support whatever mission they're on right now".

Which of course, minimizes the role of the civilian masters that sent them on that mission.

The armed forces do NOT make their own decisions where to go. They are ORDERED by a civilian commander.

Shiva help us if "the troops" start making their OWN decisions where to attack.