What does 'support the troops mean?'
robert lindsay
what their position. Is this some fallout from Vietnam, where we blamed
the troops?
Jerry you were there the last time, what effect did the support
(or more exactly lack thereof) have on the troops in the field?
My 8th grade history teacher (Ancient History) was a vietnam vet. He
had the unfortunate experience of coming back the day after Kent State.
A cute girl walk right up to him a spit on him. He didn't hit her.
(This was Mr. Pepperman, for you Henry Rollins fans)
I do not blame the troops in the field (which I would describe as
anybody below Division level) for this war, and I have nothing bad to
say about them or whatever actions they take as long as they aren't war
crimes.
Having said that, I believe the current policy is bordering on the
criminally insane, at least how it's been implimented.
Melon
Just more blind patriotism bullshit, really.
Uncle Jerry
<rrli...@comcast.net> wrote:
>I'm curious, because it's in everybody's posts and speeches, no matter
>what their position. Is this some fallout from Vietnam, where we blamed
>the troops?
>
>Jerry you were there the last time, what effect did the support
>(or more exactly lack thereof) have on the troops in the field?
>
The 'unofficial motto' of many members of the US forces in Vietnam:
"The unwilling doing the unnecessary for the ungrateful".
As to how the support and lack thereof affected the troops in the
field, in my experience it didn't come into play *there*.
All most of us cared about was family and loved ones at home and
getting back alive to see them. Most of us paid no attention to the
anti-war protests while 'in country'. They didn't matter one way or
the other. Generally speaking life centered on 'here and now',
staying alive and making sure you buddy did likewise and dreaming of
'the world', *as we remembered it, not as it had become*.
Where the protests and outright abuse had it's effect is when we
actually made it back home. For example some guys would shed their
uniform as soon as they hit the states, giving up the opportunity to
fly the rest of the way home for half-fare on 'standby', preferring
civilian cloths and to 'blend in' and avoid the hassles.
>My 8th grade history teacher (Ancient History) was a vietnam vet. He
>had the unfortunate experience of coming back the day after Kent State.
>A cute girl walk right up to him a spit on him. He didn't hit her.
>(This was Mr. Pepperman, for you Henry Rollins fans)
>
There was a lot of spitting, screaming and cussing.
Some protesters even went as far as dousing GI's in pig's blood.
Most of the really 'bad stuff' happened in and around SF International
and between there and Oakland Army Terminal. It was kinda' like
running a gauntlet.
>I do not blame the troops in the field (which I would describe as
>anybody below Division level) for this war, and I have nothing bad to
>say about them or whatever actions they take as long as they aren't war
>crimes.
>
Understood.
>Having said that, I believe the current policy is bordering on the
>criminally insane, at least how it's been implimented.
As is usually the case, old men send young men and now young women
also off to fight and possibly die and with hardly a thought to the
'human costs' of combat. Unless/until a person has walked a mile in
the boots of a grunt they have no business sending grunts into harm's
way.
http://www.thewiseguy.rulestheweb.com
in Bagdad and less civillian busses in Syria the war would be
advancing the way the odds makers in DC want.
Then supporters would quit lashing out at the activists for the fuck
ups of the former Valdez captian who is shooting off the cruise
missles into the neigboring countries.
Lets not forget these trigger happy sheeple blew up everything in
Afghanistan EXCEPT bin Laden and Omar.
Operation: Iraq Liberation (OIL)
Joe Winett
> the boots of a grunt they have no business sending grunts into harm's
> way.
It's going to be hard finding a President who has actually done all the
things he (or she) has to order people to do. If direct experience is the
new litmus test for leaders then we're not going to see much leadership.
Uncle Jerry
mrob...@worldnet.att.net
>Most of us paid no attention to the anti-war protests while 'in country'.
>They didn't matter one way or the other.
Out of curiousity, while you were there, were there even many opportunities
to find out about what was going on in the US? I'm guessing that the
military media (Armed Forces Radio/TV, "Stars and Stripes") probably didn't
do a lot of coverage of the protests, but that there were probably other
news sources available -- calls/letters from home, shortwave radio, etc.
I also realize that most of the time, soldiers didn't have the time to kick
back and listen to the radio or read a paper, but when there was time to do
that, could you find out much about what was going on at home if you wanted
to?
Matt Roberds
Uncle Jerry
Actually we saw the same news reports there that the folks back home
saw, just later, sometimes lots later, as we had to get close to a
television set in order to 'enjoy' the news/sports/entertainment shows
that were shipped in from the west coast on tape and film. "AFRTS"
(also know as 'A Farts') TV was 'watchable' from many areas and the
radio service pretty much covered the country.
Also "Stars and Stripes" while written with a pro-military/re-up slant
did provide some accurate reporting, usually of what 'went on', rather
than what was 'going on'.
What was really a 'hoot', was on occasion we could pickup the West
Coast 'blow torch' AM radio stations. There was just something about
listening to Wolfman Jack that symbolized "the world", especially
after he received word that grunts in RVN were actually able to listen
in, when conditions were just right.
victoria
'what it was like.' I see the protesters getting more 'airtime' than
the ppl rallying for the troops and it saddens me but I did always
assume while their -'in country' as you say it did not matter and
that is good to hear.
Wolfman Jack was awesome:-)
It just thus far seems to me that when these troops arrive home
they might get a bit of a vietnam ves type greeting and that just is
not right.for or against the reasons of this war the troops are
already there and well dedicated and should be supported,iffor nothing
than what they are willing to give of themselves for the pay they are
getting.Far be it for most of us to even be able to endure alot of
what they are enduring.
CARE TAKE!!!
Victoria
Catlash Productions: http://catlashproductions.bravepages.com/index.html
http://www.redcross.org
http://www.GothsAgainstHate.com
http://www.WallofTolerance.com
"...I don't know any of you." posted by Ivan the Idiotic on Monday,24 March 2003 after many long,past diatribes of challenges presuming to know exactly who I and many others of ok.general are yet never having balls enough to prove it.
~~Want exclusive living yet close to city and schools?
http://www.stonewallestates.com
Mercutio Jones
"victoria" <catlashpr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5c528vk61r1ihsgrg...@4ax.com...
> Let me pop in here to say it is interesting getting stories of
> 'what it was like.' I see the protesters getting more 'airtime' than
> the ppl rallying for the troops
CNN, FOX News, and the major networks are covering the war 24 hours a day
with embedded reporters, and that has a lot more "pro-war" influence than a
bunch of people in the town square with red, white, and blue bodypaint
hollering slogans does any day.
--
**************************
Mercutio Jones
Wobbly # X354183
lawt...@hotmail.com
**************************
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
victoria
True indeed.
On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 21:26:02 -0600, "Mercutio Jones"
<lawt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"victoria" <catlashpr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:5c528vk61r1ihsgrg...@4ax.com...
>> Let me pop in here to say it is interesting getting stories of
>> 'what it was like.' I see the protesters getting more 'airtime' than
>> the ppl rallying for the troops
>
>CNN, FOX News, and the major networks are covering the war 24 hours a day
>with embedded reporters, and that has a lot more "pro-war" influence than a
>bunch of people in the town square with red, white, and blue bodypaint
>hollering slogans does any day.
CARE TAKE!!!
Uncle Jerry
<catlashpr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Let me pop in here to say it is interesting getting stories of
>'what it was like.' I see the protesters getting more 'airtime' than
>the ppl rallying for the troops and it saddens me but I did always
>assume while their -'in country' as you say it did not matter and
>that is good to hear.
I can not speak for what it's like now.
Back then and *for most GIs* it didn't matter while 'in country'.
Survival came first and family & loved ones were all that counted
'back home'.
> Wolfman Jack was awesome:-)
Quite a character.
I never did purchase any of the 'baby chicks' or 'autographed pictures
of Jesus Christ' though. ;-)
Of course all that happened when he was down in Del Rio, years
earlier.
> It just thus far seems to me that when these troops arrive home
>they might get a bit of a vietnam ves type greeting and that just is
>not right.for or against the reasons of this war the troops are
>already there and well dedicated and should be supported,iffor nothing
>than what they are willing to give of themselves for the pay they are
>getting.Far be it for most of us to even be able to endure alot of
>what they are enduring.
Agreed 100%.
And then some...
robert lindsay
<bubba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 23:30:29 -0500, robert lindsay
> <rrli...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >I'm curious, because it's in everybody's posts and speeches, no matter
> >what their position. Is this some fallout from Vietnam, where we blamed
> >the troops?
> >
> >Jerry you were there the last time, what effect did the support
> >(or more exactly lack thereof) have on the troops in the field?
> >
>
> The 'unofficial motto' of many members of the US forces in Vietnam:
>
> "The unwilling doing the unnecessary for the ungrateful".
The Bataan Survivors had a simi;ar motto.
> As to how the support and lack thereof affected the troops in the
> field, in my experience it didn't come into play *there*.
> All most of us cared about was family and loved ones at home and
> getting back alive to see them. Most of us paid no attention to the
> anti-war protests while 'in country'. They didn't matter one way or
> the other. Generally speaking life centered on 'here and now',
> staying alive and making sure you buddy did likewise and dreaming of
> 'the world', *as we remembered it, not as it had become*.
Which is what I pretty much expected, from what i've read.
I suspect over here 'support the troops' is a code word for
'I'm more patrotic than you'. As I've said, I believe Bush's krew,
withe the exception of Powell, are idiots who will never be able to wash
the blood off their hands their bungling has caused. I don't blame the
troops fighting it, and furthermore, I do look down at those who do.
Just becausetheir are right wing idiots running the country doesn't
mean their are a lack of lefties who need a clue by four.
> Where the protests and outright abuse had it's effect is when we
> actually made it back home. For example some guys would shed their
> uniform as soon as they hit the states, giving up the opportunity to
> fly the rest of the way home for half-fare on 'standby', preferring
> civilian cloths and to 'blend in' and avoid the hassles.
I think another factor was the rotation system the army used where guys
were stripped out of their units and just dropped home with no
decomperssion and no support from others. To be sure, asshole protsters
didn't help either. In pretty much all pevious wars (and currently, I
think) units were rotated home in groups, which I would think helps.
> >My 8th grade history teacher (Ancient History) was a vietnam vet. He
> >had the unfortunate experience of coming back the day after Kent State.
> >A cute girl walk right up to him a spit on him. He didn't hit her.
> >(This was Mr. Pepperman, for you Henry Rollins fans)
> >
>
> There was a lot of spitting, screaming and cussing.
> Some protesters even went as far as dousing GI's in pig's blood.
> Most of the really 'bad stuff' happened in and around SF International
> and between there and Oakland Army Terminal. It was kinda' like
> running a gauntlet.
But of course, little has changed, as Kipling said:
I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.
I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.
Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.
We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in
the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the
wind.
You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!
> >I do not blame the troops in the field (which I would describe as
> >anybody below Division level) for this war, and I have nothing bad to
> >say about them or whatever actions they take as long as they aren't war
> >crimes.
> >
>
> Understood.
>
> >Having said that, I believe the current policy is bordering on the
> >criminally insane, at least how it's been implimented.
>
> As is usually the case, old men send young men and now young women
> also off to fight and possibly die and with hardly a thought to the
> 'human costs' of combat. Unless/until a person has walked a mile in
> the boots of a grunt they have no business sending grunts into harm's
> way.
The only good thing I think that MAY come from this whole fiasco is that
people are going to be reminded that WAR, as Sherman once said, is
cruelty, and you cannot refine it. We had gotten used to the idea that
our technology was invincible, and wars were just pictures of bombs on
TV hitting the other guy.
Sad to say, I almost want a nuke war to break out between say, India
and Pakistan. People seem to have forgotten Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
and I think they need to be reminded of it in color.
mrob...@worldnet.att.net
>Actually we saw the same news reports there that the folks back home
>saw, just later, sometimes lots later, as we had to get close to a
>television set in order to 'enjoy' the news/sports/entertainment shows
>that were shipped in from the west coast on tape and film.
I didn't know about that. Did anybody ever try to bet on last months's
football games?
>There was just something about listening to Wolfman Jack that symbolized
>"the world", especially after he received word that grunts in RVN were
>actually able to listen in, when conditions were just right.
For a long time, I defined "almost summer" by two things: the weather
being warm enough to leave the windows open most nights, and being
able to listen to the baseball game on the radio. When those two
things were happening, the world was good.
Matt Roberds
Uncle Jerry
>Uncle Jerry <bubba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Actually we saw the same news reports there that the folks back home
>>saw, just later, sometimes lots later, as we had to get close to a
>>television set in order to 'enjoy' the news/sports/entertainment shows
>>that were shipped in from the west coast on tape and film.
>
>I didn't know about that. Did anybody ever try to bet on last months's
>football games?
>
Nah, but sometimes guys would bet on games that had ended *hours*
earlier in spite of the results and in some cases the games having
been broadcast on shortwave, in real-time.
>>There was just something about listening to Wolfman Jack that symbolized
>>"the world", especially after he received word that grunts in RVN were
>>actually able to listen in, when conditions were just right.
>
>For a long time, I defined "almost summer" by two things: the weather
>being warm enough to leave the windows open most nights, and being
>able to listen to the baseball game on the radio. When those two
>things were happening, the world was good.
>
>Matt Roberds
Speaking of which, "it's almost, almost summer".
The last weather forecast I saw indicated that it's supposed to drop
below freezing here in a couple of mornings...
Uncle Jerry
<rrli...@comcast.net> wrote:
>In article <b5or39$lp6$0...@pita.alt.net>, Uncle Jerry
><bubba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
<snip>
>> As to how the support and lack thereof affected the troops in the
>> field, in my experience it didn't come into play *there*.
>> All most of us cared about was family and loved ones at home and
>> getting back alive to see them. Most of us paid no attention to the
>> anti-war protests while 'in country'. They didn't matter one way or
>> the other. Generally speaking life centered on 'here and now',
>> staying alive and making sure you buddy did likewise and dreaming of
>> 'the world', *as we remembered it, not as it had become*.
>
>Which is what I pretty much expected, from what i've read.
>I suspect over here 'support the troops' is a code word for
>'I'm more patrotic than you'. As I've said, I believe Bush's krew,
>withe the exception of Powell, are idiots who will never be able to wash
>the blood off their hands their bungling has caused. I don't blame the
>troops fighting it, and furthermore, I do look down at those who do.
To me current 'support the troops movement' is one of those warm,
fuzzy, feel-good things that's intended to buy some time for the Bush
administration. Of course one of the purposes of the Iraq
Conflict(tm) is to buy some time for the Bush administration, while it
hopes the tanking economy improves enough to save his ass come 2004.
>Just becausetheir are right wing idiots running the country doesn't
>mean their are a lack of lefties who need a clue by four.
>
Beyond doubt.
>> Where the protests and outright abuse had it's effect is when we
>> actually made it back home. For example some guys would shed their
>> uniform as soon as they hit the states, giving up the opportunity to
>> fly the rest of the way home for half-fare on 'standby', preferring
>> civilian cloths and to 'blend in' and avoid the hassles.
>
>I think another factor was the rotation system the army used where guys
>were stripped out of their units and just dropped home with no
>decomperssion and no support from others. To be sure, asshole protsters
>didn't help either. In pretty much all pevious wars (and currently, I
>think) units were rotated home in groups, which I would think helps.
>
The rotation system in RVN, a standardized 13 month tour owed in a
large part to the nature of the draft and the training cycles in use
at the time.
Draftees were in for 2 years, the first 2 months were basic training,
followed by some form of AIT (Advanced Individual Training), which in
some cases lasted a few more weeks in others a few months.
By the time the soldier was ready for RVN he had only 15 or so months
remaining in service. If he were fortunate enough to make it back to
The World(tm) he had only a month or two left to serve so most were
relegated to 'shit jobs' to simply wait out their final days of
service.
Since the same system had been in place for years there was a constant
'churn' going on throughout the Army and since it was impossible to
pull an entire company out simply because 2, 3 or 5 of them hit their
DROS in any given week, it was a self-perpetuating problem as 2, 3 or
5 "greenies" had to be brought into fill the empty slots.
Add to this the 6 month 'command rotation' of junior officers (so that
everyone got to punch their command ticket) and we had the mess that,
well, that we had.
<snip>
>> As is usually the case, old men send young men and now young women
>> also off to fight and possibly die and with hardly a thought to the
>> 'human costs' of combat. Unless/until a person has walked a mile in
>> the boots of a grunt they have no business sending grunts into harm's
>> way.
>
>The only good thing I think that MAY come from this whole fiasco is that
>people are going to be reminded that WAR, as Sherman once said, is
>cruelty, and you cannot refine it. We had gotten used to the idea that
>our technology was invincible, and wars were just pictures of bombs on
>TV hitting the other guy.
>
Over the course of the past couple of days one can not help but hear
the collective 'giant sucking sound' as our nation finally realized
that combat is not just 'smart bombs', whiz-bang technology and
golly-gee video segments but involves a very real human factor.
What's so disheartening to me is that our military leaders appear to
have been suffering from the very same ignorance, failing to realize
that when you take on the 'bad dudes' they are *not* going to play by
the rules.
They are going to use every dirty trick at their disposal and although
they know they can never withstand a direct confrontation they also
know they don't have to. The tactics of the Iraqis the past couple of
days strongly suggest they've been reading the "VC Playbook"(tm) and
unfortunately it is just as effective today as it was way back then.
>Sad to say, I almost want a nuke war to break out between say, India
>and Pakistan. People seem to have forgotten Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
>and I think they need to be reminded of it in color.
With "dead updates" every 5 minutes and a hour long special report
during the dinner hour.
And of course since the US has now sanctioned "Pre-Emptive War" as a
good thing, how can we complain if either India or Pakistan decides it
needs to preempt the other?
Maybe we ought to preempt the both of them.
Just to be on the safe side...