Every single anti-war protester that I've heard to date - without exception - has made a point of saying that they supported the troops. The phrase "I support our troops, but I do not support the war" has almost become as buzzworthy as the "war for oil" slogans or the term "unilaterally" (both of which are obviously false).
My question is....what does this mean? What do anti-war protesters mean when they say the words "I support the troops?" It obviously isn't the same thing that I mean when I say it. Anti-war people do not support Bush. They do not approve of war. They did not want us to do anything without the UN. They do not want the United States to blow up cities in Iraq and endanger the lives of the Iraqi people. As I understand it, they are against this war in every way, shape, and form.
So how can they say that "I support the troops"? They do not support the war, and they do not support us murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent people (as they claim), but they *do* support the guys actually pulling the trigger? They do not support millitary action, but they do support the millitary? I just don't get it. How can they support people doing their job, when they don't support the job in and of itself? And if they *are* able to support the millitary even though the soldiers are having to do a job that the protesters don't agree with, then how can they *not* support the President by that same exact logic? It just does not make sense.