| September 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | ||
We've heard it so many times - the statement by someone who wants U.S. troops out of Iraq as soon as possible, that they "support the troops."
Many feel that there's some logical flaw there - something that renders it sickeningly absurd.
And there is.
There are those in Iraq who are trying - and, in some cases, succeeding in their efforts - to kill our troops in that country. We win when enough of those enemies (the ones still standing) give up.
Every time someone in the U.S. calls for our troops to leave before we win, it encourages those enemies not to give up. It encourages them to keep trying - and in some cases succeeding in their efforts - to kill our troops.
That is not supporting our troops. It encourages the enemy to keep fighting, and contributes directly to more of our troops getting attacked.
The "we support the troops" crowd used to claim that the war is unwinnable, so the sooner we get the troops out, the better. And what an encouragement to our enemies that was, to hear U.S. elected officials claiming that the war was unwinnable! How many more American troops were killed because of the encouragement provided to the enemy by such officials? But General Petraeus' testimony before Congress last week cut the legs out from under the proposition, that the war in Iraq is unwinnable.
So let's have an end to this lunacy, that you can help to keep the enemy attacking our troops, and still claim to "support our troops."
Anybody who clamors for our troops to get out of Iraq before we win, is contributing to getting more of our troops killed.
