Do you "Support our Troops"?

[diggz]

Jim, when you see someone over 45 in the casualties list.. you can basically chalk that up to the individual working a regular dayjob and thinking he could get an extra paycheck by serving in the National Guard 1 weekend a month.

I fully support our troops. They have no choice but to follow orders at this point. I also at the same time cannot wait for the exit of tyranny from our command post.

Here is an interesting topic that I have discussed with some friends:

In relation to the recent events, whereupon marines murdered civilians in "cold blood". Basically the marines knew that an IUD had been triggered by someone in their vicinity, so they opened fire on everyone in that area (men, women, children, etc)... hoping to kill a terror suspect out of the group.

What makes this any more "cold blooded" than say, a pilot who is instructed to deliver a missile into an apartment building, whereupon many civilians and suspected terrorists are guaranteed to be casualties?

The pilot kills civilians in a cold blooded manner, just like the foot soldiers. The only difference is he does not see those he murders. Thus the pilots own blind ignorance to the result of his actions, leaves him free of prosecution?

The civilians killed by a pilot are casualties, just like the civilians killed by the foot soldiers.

The only difference is if you want to prosecute the pilot, there are many "higher-ups" that will fall with him... However, with foot soldiers, you can say they acted "against orders" and prosecute them individually.

So in singling out individual soldiers, it just takes the heat off of those who really are responsible for the Iraqi civilian casualties.

I mean out of an estimated 40,000 civilian deaths in Iraq, these marines are the first ones to take a fall? I smell bullshit.

I support the troops.. but I don't support the ones giving them orders.