Friday, March 9, 2007

Republicans love our soldiers. . . to get blown up.

What is the difference between neo-conservative right-wing Republicans and most of the Democrats?

The Republicans love to bloviate about how much they love and support the troops, while Democrats just want them out of harm's way: harm that was brought on by deception and vengeance.

If stories of ill-equipped soldiers out in the field of battle weren't enough to make you realize that jingoistic Republicans could care less about the soldiers and about how a war is run (all of this maximizes cannon fodder), maybe the series of Washington Post articles about Walter Reed Army Medical Center's piss-poor service to our soldiers will. Or, how about this article in today's New York Times detailing an uneven and dare-I-say discriminatory attitude toward Army National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers, making them wait much longer for medical help and allowing their disability claims.

War is Hell. Republicans knew this going in. Oh, wait: this was supposed to be a "cake-walk." Maybe that is why they only readied themselves for an "easy" adventure in the desert. Otherwise, they would have realized that war is a cycle: you put soldiers in, you get soliders out. And oftentimes, this "output" of soldiers are disabled, crippled both mentally and physcially. They need help.

Republicans: Loving Soldiers to Death Since 2003.

1 comment:

LBK said...

I couldn't agree more! Why don't we send the draft-dodging architects of the war Rove and Cheney to Iraq without adequate body armor to protect themselves like so many of the troops to see how well they'd do over there. They so willingly and enthusiastically sent tens of thousands of Americans to risk their lives to fight a war sold to the public on false pretenses... the least they could do is demonstrate their own willingness to lay down their lives (that is if Cheney doesn't die of a heart attack or blood clot before he gets to Iraq!).