Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Who's The Trupper?

SilentPatriot wants to know who really supports the trooper? Since this meme is so oft repeated, I feel compelled to commit the ultimate linguistic sin and coin a new word: Trupper-- someone who supports the troops.

Crooks and Liars » With Congress on Break, Bush Deploys Unrested Soldiers

"The flag-waving chickenhawks can dish out all the propaganda they want, but let's face it - George Bush is gutting our military, hurting our soldiers and putting our country at risk. This is some scary stuff, folks. Our military is stretched so thin they're forced to send wounded soldiers back into battle, extend their tours of duty and have no choice but to once again cut short their leave time.

Yahoo:

For just the second time since the war began, the Army is sending large units back to Iraq without giving them at least a year at home, defense officials said Monday. The move signaled how stretched the U.S. fighting force has become. Read more…

Our president is holding our soldiers hostage in Iraq which in my eyes is tantamount to torture. Do we need to invoke the Geneva Conventions in order to protect the troops from their own government? It's time to put to rest the pathetic notion that anyone who doesn't support shoving our brave men and women into King George's meat grinder doesn't support the troops. I want to hear one, just ONE, right wing pundit or politician explain how wanting to save our troops from getting blown up for a lost cause doesn't count as support. You don't throw an anvil to a drowning man and claim you're trying to save his life, yet that is exactly what's happening to our troops.

SilentPatriot: Jack Murtha and the Democrats wants to legislate a required one-year leave. George Bush wants to send distressed soldiers back into battle as soon as possible. Now, who really "supports the troops"? As Kagro X @ dKos says:

So let's take stock here: While Congress debated the escalation, Bush began it. Now, as Congress debates the readiness requirements, Bush begins violating them."

No comments: