A man stopped me as I was exiting the grocery store. He asked me if I “support the troops.” I was slightly confused and told him “not actively.” He went on to explain that he is against all of America’s wars abroad, but he wanted me to sign a petition to get the troops better equipment. I asked him what type of “equipment”? He mentions armor, supplies… and tanks! Like with giant guns for putting holes in mountains and evaporating neighborhoods? He laughed and said “sort of, but we’re just trying to keep our men safe.” But you’re against the wars, I asked again. “Oh yeah! But gotta support the troops,” he reiterated. I found this position confusing being it’s the soldiers that “do” the actual war. Without them, there is no war.
This whole situation is not dissimilar to how my ex-Earth-girlfriend (name withheld) feels about baseball. She supports the players on the field (mainly their butts) but doesn’t really care much for the game of baseball. This gentleman supports the soldiers, but not the war. Which is like supporting the chess pieces, but not the actual game of chess (war). But not even all the pieces -only the white ones (except for, perhaps, the white King & Queen). The white rooks, bishops, knights, pawns are all OK is this guy’s book. Forget the black pieces! They’re BLACK for crissake! That adds up to only 43.75% of the soliders in the chess war that have the full support of people who say “support the troops.” The slogan really should be “support less than half the troops.” And that’s not even accurate because most of the places being bombed don’t even have “troops.” (INSERT ARGUMENT OF OPPOSITION: “Damn right they don’t have troops. They have insurgent-terrorist-enemy-combatant-anti-American-savages. What’s brainwashing mean?”)
So what’s this game about? Is this what it means to be “anti-war” in 2010? Were there people in Nazi Germany who supported the troops but were against the Holocaust?