Republicans Support The Troop, (*) Not The Troops.

[Nitrogenica]

I think it is obvious that when Republican pundits say to the masses that they should support the troops, what the actually mean is "support Bush". They support him blindly and enthusiastically, after all, in their eyes nothing is *'s fault. In their world loyalty trumps truth.

I think average Americans get it, that Bush is much much more important to the right wing noise machine than any wounded soldier, any homeless veteran, or any truth about the war. They enjoy their money, power, and deceit way way too much. That's why we can, and must, take our Country back.

We're all tired of it all.

How long will pundits continue to "Support The Troop?" To me they support failure, mismanagement, needless deaths and tragic injury. I can't support that anymore. America can do better.

[Monkeyman]

1. We now have the ammo to fight back LTTE 's out now

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. The "Troops" is a shield to continue the imperial occupation.

We can't change anything, because it will be a sign that we aren't supporting the troops.

[NanceGreggs]

3. "Support the Troop"

That's a brilliant observation, jhuth.

And in keeping with the Republican viewpoint on such things, the 'troop' they've chosen to support is a draft-dodging weasel who to this day can't prove he fulfilled his military duty, is dictating battlefield policy when has no experience or expertise in such matters, and -- contrary to everything a soldier holds dear -- has absolutely no sense of brotherhood with his comrades-in-arms, to the point where their safety, on or off the battlefield, is of no concern to him.