Lookn2it,
I thank you for your response...
I'm at a bit of a loss as to how one can discuss something as vast as "war", "military", "soldiers", etc., without engaging in generalization. Surely I can't be expected to examine the motives of each individual soldier?
Furthermore, most folks don't hesitate to generalize in such statements as "they are fighting hard for our country and are good people", do they?
Thus, it seems a little like there's a double standard at work here in which it's wrong to engage in generalization when criticizing, but A-OK to do so when praising, mourning, glorifying, etc.
"We Support Our Troops"= generalization that would seem to imply that we support, for example, the four brave young men who heroically held down and systematically raped-- vaginally and anally-- a 14-year-old and then murdered her and her entire family and set their house on fire. I'm sure nobody here applauds that act; in fact, I'm sure that my mention of it further enrages those I've already infuriated. But it happened.
Moreover, if you could point to ANY quote of mine in which I act like it's "no big deal", I would be grateful-- I'm mad as hell about this waste of life, and I think I care more about those kids than those of you who "support" their mission-- I wish every one of them had never been duped by recruiters/advertising/guidance counselors/testosterone/ignorance/ in the first place and sent over there. I don't want them dead. I was just saying that I'm losing the ability to "support" a decision to join in on this fraudlent military campaign-- and I probably should have clarified earlier on that I was referring more to those who joined, say, after 2003 and 2004.
Anyway, I'm sure that in real life, you and I probably see eye-to-eye more than you would imagine-- you are reasonable and obviously NOT in the world of denial that much of the country inhabits...I'm sorry if I've come across as condescending or arrogant, but it's pretty hard to express one's personality in print, and I think I tend to ratchet up the sarcasm a little because, frankly, I was trying to get a point across that I knew was going to be at odds with prevailing sentiment.
I'm kind of a 'prevailing sentiment be da*ned' sort of guy. "Everyone thinks so" has never sufficed as the basis for my own worldview, and never will-- in fact, if most people think something, it's probably bogus as hell and immediately suspect.
As I said above, I'm really just monitoring this post at this point to see it through to its conclusion-- I've had the revelation that this kind of anonymous message board is a flawed concept from the beginning, at least as regards political discourse.
I'll be glad to address any further points you have, and I thank you again for your participation in the discussion.