Since when is it up to the troops to determine whether a war is just or not? I sure as hell didn't have much to say about justice when I was slogging it through Viet Nam. Just war or not, the bullet that ruined a kidney and my right hip was part of the costs I paid, as was watching buddies die.
And yes, I resent the fact that we (the boys doing the fighting) were not allowed to do the job we were told were were sent to do. And I resent the way the boys over there now are not allowed to do the job they were told they are over there to do.
I also resent the manner in which the anti-war crowd pursued their agenda, then and now. You may think you're supporting the troops with your anti-war rhetoric. But stop and think how a platoon sergeant or squad leader is supposed to address his men and get them ready for the day's foray into battle when most of what they hear from home is how what they are doing is a crime, and it's a hopeless situation, and there is no way they can possibly win, etc., etc., etc.
Troop morale, believe it or not, is a BIG factor in combat. A troop with low morale will inevitably come back with more casualties that a troop with high morale. A soldier with low morale is worried, distracted, emotionally weary. The one with low morale is more likely to get injured or killed, and/or drop his end of the stick and allow his buddy and possibly the entire unit to get injured or killed.
A trooper with high morale is alert, oriented, ready. He knows the mission and knows his part in it. He is less likely to get injured because he is alert. He is less likely to screw up because he is oriented and emotionally ready to do the job.
I know what I am talking about. I had to fight the morale battle in Viet Nam. It was not too bad my second tour, and my first tour I was on the receiving end of the morale speeches. But that last tour in '71 was fucked royally. And the fucking was not all due to Charlie.
