Of course it is the civy that has went to Afghanistan to get shot at,but in your context your right.

People have to question their government,that's part of the system,using half truths to defend their opinions is wrong especially when they accuse others of the same tactic.

When people attack certain actions rather ambiguously,not many point out they are against the premise of that action not those who are charged with carrying it out, i.e. following orders and that's disengenuous. The assertion that leaders are war mongers, bearing in mind the military commanders are soldiers also,it not hard to see why people see it as an attack on the vets.

No one is more anti war than veterans, because they have experienced the consequences of war. If we have to go to war the decision is not taken as lightly as others are putting across. So attacking the decision makers is also attacking the people who carry out their orders.

As an ex soldier I would go through hell and back to prevent my sons from going to war, but the fact is, I felt I contributed to my country and as much as it would hurt I could not deny my sons the same.

Sept.11 showed the world the threat of complacency, many in America thought that distance made them safe, how grateful were people to have the state troops and the USAF who represented some security. What do the leaders do stand and weight for the next strike?