Do They Give ANYONE a Column??

When you read an opinion piece in a major American newspaper, you at least expect the author to have a basic working knowledge of the subject of which they write. Automotive guys should have a basic understanding of cars, yet need not be well versed in chassis dynamics. Medical writers should have foundational knowledge of physiology, biochemistry and anatomy.
However, when we get to politics, all bets are off. Fifth grade social studies is not even a prerequisite.

Take, for example, Joel Stein's piece of excrement in the LA Times entitled "Warriors and Wusses".

And I've got no problem with other people — the ones who were for the Iraq war — supporting the troops. If you think invading Iraq was a good idea, then by all means, support away.
But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they're wussy by definition.
Blindly lending support to our soldiers, I fear, will keep them overseas longer by giving soft acquiescence to the hawks who sent them there — and who might one day want to send them somewhere else.

Uh, Joel...it wasn't the soldiers who decided to go to Iraq. They were sent there by the guys you and your ilk elected, Republican AND Democrat. And the soldiers have no say in how long they will be there. You're a little confused here about who makes the policy.

Besides, those little yellow ribbons aren't really for the troops. They need body armor, shorter stays and a USO show by the cast of "Laguna Beach."
The real purpose of those ribbons is to ease some of the guilt we feel for voting to send them to war and then making absolutely no sacrifices other than enduring two Wolf Blitzer shows a day. Though there should be a ribbon for that.

True, the ribbons are stupid and actually do nothing for the troops. You should take the money you were going to waste on ribbons and send it to the USO, or some other military charity.
On the other hand, I checked with a number of friends who vote regularly, and none of us can remember a ballot question, "Should we send troops to war?" Again, you're a little confused about who makes policy decisions.

I do sympathize with people who joined up to protect our country, especially after 9/11, and were tricked into fighting in Iraq.

Those Saudis, they sure fooled us!! Making us think they flew planes into the World Trade Center!!! Haha!

And just what do you think "supporting" the soldiers means? They are doing a job...a job that requires, at times, great sacrifice and is done many times under difficult circumstances. But you know what? They knew this going in and they accepted the challenge anyway. They realized that life is not all about them. Is it too much to ask to show them some kindness? You don't have to like what they are doing. I imagine that at times some of them don't like it either.
If you see a soldier on the street, just say "Thanks for your sacrifice." Doesn't mean you agree with the policy, but that you recognize that they are putting everything they have on the line. Here's an idea! If you meet one in a 7-11, go crazy and spend a buck and pay for that soda he's buying!

Global George has done a disservice to many by portraying this as a war against Iraq. It is much greater than that. It is a war against radical Islam, which THEY declared. This is probably the only war in the past 100 years in which the threat to the US is real. Be mad about Vietnam. Debate involvement in WWII or Korea. But don't give up on this one unless you want to be praying toward the east a few times a day.