Although they pursue a policy in Iraq which is harmful to our national interests, and is now opposed by a majority, conservatives will tell any lie to attack those of us who have been right in opposing the war. We’ve heard their claims that liberals are unpatriotic, hate America, and support the terrorists. Jeff Jacoby comes up with yet another way to distort the views of those who oppose the war:
WHAT DOES IT mean to support the troops but oppose the cause they fight for? No loyal Colts fan rooted for Indianapolis to lose the Super Bowl. No investor buys 100 shares of Google in the hope that Google’s stock will tank. No one who applauds firefighters for their courage and education wants a four-alarm blaze to burn out of control.
Yet there is no end of Americans who insist they “support” US troops in Iraq but want the war those troops are fighting to end in defeat. The two positions are irreconcilable. You cannot logically or honorably curse the war as an immoral neocon disaster or a Halliburton oil grab or “a fraud . . . cooked up in Texas,” yet bless the troops who are waging it.
These are absurd analogies. The opponents of the war do not want the United States to lose in the sense that someone might want a football team to lose or for a fire to fight out of control. Being realistic to realize that a military victory is unlikely is not the same as wanting to lose. Soldiers sent into an unnecessary war, often with insufficient supplies, which cannot be won, are not like football players who expect to play each scheduled game, or firefighters who have no choice but to fight the fire. This was a war of choice in which the goal of fighting terrorism would have better served by keeping Saddam contained and avoiding a course which would destabilize the area and strengthen al Qaeda and Iran.
In considering which party supports the troops and which is taking advantage of them there is no comparison. Democrats wish to keep them out of a civil war where they don’t belong, while Republicans will stay the course in a losing situation to attempt to save face politically, not caring about how many more die unnecessarily. Democrats have fought to adequately supply the troops, while Republicans play politics and try to limit expenses. Democrats push for greater health benefits for soldiers and veterans while Republican oppose the spending.
People like Jacoby can come up with all the bogus analogies they want, but this doesn’t change the fact that they are the ones who are actively harming the troops, and undermining our national security. The chicken hawks of the GOP are not the ones who are fighting to preserve our liberties.
