Like most college campuses, the University of Illinois in Champaign has a vocal anti-war movement. This members of this movement, while at least publicly saying they "support the troops", do everything they can to reinforce every negative image of them.
Luckily, the anti-war movement's volume is matched by its inability to get much accomplished. Because they value "feelings" over reality, they can rarely accomplish much as they insist on consensus. There was an attempt to begin a campaign of harassment against ROTC students, but they weren't able to agree on how to do it. Some advocated for outright harassment, spitting, throwing fake blood, and the like. Others advocated a more PR-friendly response because that would be "received better." In either case, there is the implicit notion that these "kids" are unable to make good decisions for themselves and must have been lied to. Yet they "support the troops."
There is something patently offensive about the idea that men and women who are between 18-24 and spend their time in serious endeavors like the military are wholly incapable of self-determination while the same people argue that 12-year-old girls have all the faculties they need to make the life or death decision of abortion. It seems the idea of anyone under 25 doing anything besides drinking and carousing is unacceptable.
This is really little more than a re-hash of the '60s anti-establishment fervor. The military is despised because it is the "Establishment." Any accusation, no matter how far from the truth, is acceptable. It's not the evidence but the seriousness of the charge, after all. Recently an Army Colonel gave a presentation to a class of 10-year-olds on good citizenship. No evidence was shown that this individual was recruiting kids for the armed service, and in fact, all evidence directly contradicts that. Yet the anti-war movement on campus cried foul. To them, a soldier is no different than a pedophile. Yet they "support the troops."
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Joan Hunt
I'm glad I'm not the only one disgusted by the hypocrisy of the anti-war left. Thank you for taking the time to spell it all out.
2 - Dave Nalle
John, Whittaker Chambers also ratted people out to HUAC. I'm not sure he's the best role model.
Dave
3 - Bliffle
The question is: do you "...Support Those Baby-Killin', Serial Rapin', Pillaging Troops! "?
Do you find excuses for their actions ? How about the people who lowered moral standards for acceptance into the Army in order to meet recruitment goals?
4 - JP
If you're trying to paint anyone who's against the war as a nutball--and yes, obviously that there are extremes to which people should not go in protest--you're as bad as Fox News.
5 - Scott
Great article. Concise and pointless.
6 - Snarkattack
I'm a bit shocked by this...now please bear in mind I don't live in the States so we get a different picture overseas.
Is this article claiming that the anti-war movement is hypocritical or that all people who oppose the war are hypocritical?
Don't shoot me down! I genuinely don't know and am seeking illumination!
7 - Nancy
Most people (according to recent polls) support the troops but do NOT support the war or Bush. Support for our troops does not automatically entail likewise frogmarching to whatever tune Junior calls. Junior is NOT synonymous with the US; I am a very patriotic person, but I loathe Dubya utterly. I love my country, but that does NOT mean I have to love, support, or even believe G. W. Bush - which is fortunate, because I'd have to lower myself to becoming a simpering, drooling, gullible brainless idiot to give that lying scum any sort of credibility whatsoever.
8 - John Bambenek
Chambers was a communist spy turned informant, the people he ratted were people he worked with.
At least in those days, we WERE talking about Soviet spies.
9 - Arch Conservative
While obviously not everyone who opposes the war is a far left radical there is a certain element on the extreme left that John has described quite aptly. They are socialist/communist, America hating, riff raff that claim to care for the troops while demonizing them as murderous brutes.
We're talking your code pink and answer types. they are the scum of the earth and should be treated as such!
10 - zingzing
wow. archie makes half a point that i agree with.
"there is a certain element on the extreme left that John has described quite aptly." i can agree with that. easily.
i just want to point out that john isn't trying to say this is the "extreme" left. he's trying to say it is the whole anti-war movement that wants to "reinforce every negative image of" the troops.
which is a total fucking lie and i believe that john knows it.
so why bother writing such a thing?
john, you are so partisan that even archie has to come in and calm you down, which should let you know something.
11 - Nancy
Arch, what is 'code pink & answer types'?
12 - Arch Conservative
Well zing.... the word "movement" does tend to refer to those who are somewhat radical and active in thier antiwar behavior.
The average American who opposes the war on reasonable and logical grounds would not consider themselves part of the antiwar "movement" they do not attend antiwar rallies where copies of the Communist manifesto and che t shirts are being peddled, where anti american rhetoric is being orated and applauded.
So in a sense John is right. not all antiwar people are anti american hypocrites but pretty much all who are part of the "movement" are.
13 - zingzing
actually, i just had a "movement" in the bathroom, so i guess not all "movements" are all that radical. it was actually quite "regular."
more seriously, i went to an anti-war rally or two back when it COULD have done some real good (say 2003), and there was no communist manifesto, nor any anti-american rhetoric, other than the obvious, "what right do we have" type stuff. and really, what right do we have? not much, really.
hrm. if someone was really anti-america, wouldn't they WANT us to start useless wars that do nothing to protect us and make us weaker and spread our military too thinly all the way around the world and nowhere near where they really should be?
wouldn't an anti-war protester really be on the side of americans? not wanting americans to do for something that they see as useless? and isn't their criticism of the policy that makes this war possible, not against america herself or americans themselves? hmm?
what? that doesn't make any sense? i, having actually spoken to many, many people who are very much against this war (and most of whom support military actions such as afghanistan...), think that most of the anti-war protesters are against more american deaths and little else. if that's anti-american, then i'm a goat fucking a donkey on an island in the sky.
so, no, john is not right. he's completely wrong. it's painfully obvious that he is just writing this shit to make the anti-war protesters look bad. show me a person who spits on the troops and i'll show you millions of people worldwide who just want this useless war to end.
14 - zingzing
and why do right wingers worry so much about communism? get your head out of the 80's, for gawd's sake. when is the last time communism was even a real threat? 1985? fuckin hell.
15 - zingzing
"not wanting americans to DIE for something that they see as useless?"
SORRY
16 - Baronius
I haven't seen much behaviour like John is talking about. I get the feeling that most every American respects most every soldier. The anti-ROTC movement has been going on for a while now, and I think it's unrelated. I hope that John's wrong about this, but then again, nearly every stupid idea starts on a college campus, so I guess we'll see.
Oh, one other point. Don't forget the guilt that the draft-dodger felt in the presence of his old high-school buddy, now missing an arm. That motivated a lot of the demonization of the military in the 1960's. I don't think the left will get as unhinged as long as there's an all-volunteer army.
I hadn't thought about it, but the kid with the student loan or rich parents might feel the same guilt around ROTC members. Maybe that's part of the anti-ROTC movement.
17 - John Bambenek
My observations are passed on actual antics of the anti-war movement on campus, their mailing lists, their letters to the editor, and their speeches.
I have no idea what the anti-war movement outside campus is like. That's why I began with the precise location I was talking about.
18 - Michael J. West
I have no idea what the anti-war movement outside campus is like.
Nothing like the anti-war movement on campus. College life is a microcosm that has no idea how far removed from the real world it is.
John, remember how I was saying in that other thread of yours that immature, irresponsible, reckless and stupid behavior was inevitable from college kids? Well, case in point.
19 - diana hartman
"How about the people who lowered moral standards for acceptance into the Army in order to meet recruitment goals?"
no one lowered moral standards so the army could meet recruitment goals...i'm not sure i would go so far as to say there are moral standards to be met...there are disqualifying criteria (felony conviction, drug use, too fat, no GED or better, etc) but there's no moral standard one has to meet or that has been lowered to fill seats on the couch at the recruiter's office...
where do things thoughts like this come from?
20 - zingzing
so, should the draft come along, all i would have to do is get hooked on coke? fuckin hell. bring on the draft. like i need an excuse.
21 - zingzing
john b.: "I have no idea what the anti-war movement outside campus is like."
oh. okay. so, why did you try to paint the entire anti-war movement the same color as the university of illinois fighting illini anti-war movement?
22 - RogerMDillon
"where do things thoughts like this come from?"
Maybe, because the disqualifying criteria has been altered.
23 - BriMan
I got news for the author - the troops-r-us. Are we then self-loathing - another favorite yet meaningless slogan of the RW prop machine.
And exactly how is the RW supporting the troops?
By sending them off to die for Iraqis who dont like us? (Maybe we should give all the Iraqis puppies too)
By cutting their pay?
By refusing to give them and their families bankruptcy protections while they are actively serving?
Do I REALLY need to go on?
Another meaningless article not worth the cyberspace it takes up.
24 - diana hartman
"Maybe, because the disqualifying criteria has been altered."
how so? other than the upper age limit being raised in one service, what has changed? no matter the age, the fitness regs are still in place as well as piss tests and background checks...anything that can be waived through now was waived through before...
is there something someone is willing to provide to back this stuff up?
25 - John Bambenek
Zingzing-
oh. okay. so, why did you try to paint the entire anti-war movement the same color as the university of illinois fighting illini anti-war movement?
Answer: I didn't. that's why I explicitly mentioned in the first paragraph exactly what geography I was talking about. Or didn't you actually read the article?
BriMan-
Soldiers are meant to die in wars, that's what we like to call "Their Fucking Job". And I say this as a former soldier. We fight and die so you can rant and rave on BlogCritics unimpeded by bad people who want to kill you.
Also, you're welcome.
(I'll skip your made up accusations about pay cuts and bankruptcy mostly because it's patently false)