By now, in our fifth year of Iraq war fatigue, no single term has been bandied about and abused as "Support the Troops". Part of it has its origins in guilt about the way returning Vietnam Vets were treated by certain people. And naturally, no matter how much one may or may not support what the troops are actually doing, I hope it's still safe to say that we support them as human beings in a difficult situation. And many of us reading this blog know that the best way to 'support the troops' is to remove them from harm's way and bring them home as soon as humanly possible.
Unfortunately, the Bush Administration, as you all know, often views the troops as nothing more than props and political pawns. They talk about 'supporting the troops' every chance they get, yet their policies do anything but, whether it be the Bush-McCain-Lieberman escalation, the atrocities at Walter Reed Hospital, cuts in Veteran's services, insufficient body armor, you name it. I'm sure you're well aware of them. Yes, it's criminal.
So, today I was a bit stunned (but not surprised) to read in the Times Argus that the VT GOP is proposing a resolution that will declare "full support to our troops and their mission in conducting the War on Terror." The TA reports that "The bill seeks to designate May 6 as "Vermont Vets for Victory Day" and coincides with a six-day support-the-troops rally beginning on May 1 through several communities, including Rutland, Chester and Bennington." It's not as simple as it sounds...
As it stands, this resolution is not a good one. First, there is the ever-so-subtle insinuation that only good Republicans "support the troops". But the larger problem is it's basically putting one of the biggest lies about the war into a public legislative record : that the Iraq War is part of the "War on Terror" (or more appropriately as Borat would have called it, the "War of Terror"), and it's trying to get the Dems to sign off on that. Gotcha!
Many in the GOP are still obviously drinking the Bush Krazy Kool Aid:
David Ayer, a Republican activist from Barre who helped organize the upcoming support-the-troops tour, said Republicans may be open to some language changes, but insisted that the resolution is nonpolitical and has nothing to do with the Iraq War.
"I defer to the experienced veterans who have been on the ground and have been fighting the war," he said. "They tell me that the war in Iraq is the war on terror. We are fighting terrorists there."
He added that it is important for the troops to know that Vermonters support them.
"It's demoralizing for them to hear some of the comments made concerning the war," he said.
Yes, those comments demanding they be taken out of harm's way are just so 'demoralizing', aren't they? Maybe to those few who still love this war. Only thing missing was the 'so we don't have to fight them here' line.
But the absurdity doesn't stop there.One of the propagandists leading the complementary 'Vets for Victory' tour is none other than retired Lt. Col. Steve Russell...
an Oklahoma man who founded a pro-war organization of the same name. He travels the country now urging people to continue supporting the four-year-old conflict.
Russell, who traveled to Vermont earlier this year to speak opposite of peace mom Cindy Sheehan during the Senate Iraq War debate, was one of troop leaders who helped capture Saddam Hussein in December 2003.
In his speeches, Russell justifies the invasion of Iraq because he believes that Hussein was actively trying to make a nuclear bomb and ordered his military to smuggle other weapons into nearby Syria. (emphasis mine - JD)
That assessment puts Russell at odds with the Iraq Survey Group, the multinational fact-finding group that searched the country for weapons of mass destruction. The group's 2004 report stated that Hussein had abandoned his nuclear program in the early 1990s and a 2005 revision declared it unlikely that officials moved weapons into Syria.
Yet another war hawk completely unhinged from reality. VT Democrats have already raised concerns about some of the language in the bill, and I'm sure some of them also smell the 'gotcha!' in this resolution. Ultimately, there is nothing wrong with passing a resolution simply thanking the troops for their service and sacrifice. It is just imperative that it's wording doesn't include something proliferating well-discredited ideas, something the GOP has mastered until recently.
250-1
55-1
