I oft hear or read the line “Supporting the Troops means Supporting the Mission”, but I am left to wonder why, if that is true, don’t War supporters merely say Support the Mission?
Well, one reason may be no one knows what the mission is:
Is the Mission to find WMDs?
Is the Mission to remove Saddam Hussein from power?
Is the Mission to elect an Iraqi Representative Government?
Is the Mission to train Iraqi Security Forces?
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/17104704.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jspOf course, the more sinister reason in saying
I Support the Troops is it gives cover to those whose actions are quite the opposite. Inadequate personal body armor, no rush to up-armor HMMWVs or to even bring in M113s, extending troops rotations in country and reducing time back stateside and Walter Reed should be enough evidence to prove the admin does not “support the troops”.
So why is
Support the Mission not broadcast loudly by Brit Hume or Bill Kristol or Hannity or Limbaugh or Ingraham or the Administration? I think it is because those peddlers of death and Mayberry Machiavellis know the American populace is not in favor of the so-called mission. Hiding behind the Troops and casting dispersions on the Anti-war position gives them the advantage. And it is an advantage they will never relinquish.
So it goes.