'Support the Troops' or Condemn the War Criminals?

55 posts / 0 new
Last post

statica wrote:

The formula the military uses to dehumanize the enemy blows back on its own recruits, and the first people really dehumanized are the soldiers themselves. If they don't come home in a box, they often come home broken. How the anti-war movement treats these men and women is a direct reflection on our ability to show concern for the 'other' who - for whatever reason -- chose to go to war.


We need to help those soldiers far more than we did the vets in our other wars.  I have seen personally the effects of PTSD on my father's generation of WWII vets.  I wonder if our troops are getting to be like the American troops who now have more deaths from suicide than they do from enemy combatants.

Young men and women who join the forces often have their eyes opened when they go into a war theatre and face death and destruction close up. We need to withdraw the troops and provide mental health services for those returning vets.  If for no other reason than to protect them and their families from the potential violence associated with untreated PTSD.


statica wrote:

'Support the Troops' or Condemn the War Criminals?

Ok, I'm seriously about to lose my shit! Seriously!

WHY WHY WHY does this have to be an either/or question.

Why cannot we as Canadian citizens support "our" troops as they come back from whatever theatre of conflict with severe injuries or severe PTSD *AND* condemn war criminals.

"Canadians cannot have it both ways; a hero-honouring culture that does not honour its heroes. Neither can the anti-war movement rail against the treatment of civilians, foreign combatants and detainees -- the war overseas -- while ignoring the challenges facing soldiers and veterans who have brought the war home. All are casualties. This is where a new peace keeping effort must begin."

Soldiering on? The human cost of war
By Krystalline Kraus | October 29, 2009
Part II: Soldiering on? The invisible injuries of war
By Krystalline Kraus | November 6, 2009

The troops are one thing.
Q: Who is ultimately in control and command of the troops?
A: The civilian government - They are the ones who set the policy for PoW transfers; they are the war criminals.
Q: Who should have money available to finance the physical and emotional needs/rehabilitation of our injured troops?
A: The government. Physically and emotionally traumatized soldiers and their families shouldn't have to rely on private donations to pay for rehabilitative and counselling services. That should be looked after by the government, which they are not doing. When is the last time you heard that a politician visited an injured soldier?


statica wrote:

For the anti-war community, it's a hatred of the whole military complex that clouds the eye.

Who better to know the true nature of war and the true value of peace than those who have suffered war such as soldiers and civilians who had the misfortune to be in the line of fire of war.

There are veterans' groups dedicated to peace such as: Veterans For Peace (VFP), Iraq Veterans Against War (IVAW), American Vietnam War Veterans Against War, Afghan and Iraq Veterans Against War (AIVAW), and many others.


Psychiatric Disorders Spiral Among US Troops


"A new study indicates US troops who were withdrawn from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars for medical reasons, were increasingly evacuated for psychiatric reasons.."