Using that same logic, I could suggest that legislators pushing for additional
funding for military action should first spend a few seconds contemplating, on
their desktops, the remains of a broken, dismembered child killed by heavy artillery.
I agree. Actually, I'd go even further. Before someone can stand up and talk about "supporting the troops," they should a) have served in the military or b) have a child/parent/spouse in the military. I'm really over hearing Republicans and Tories talking about "supporting the troops" when that's a meaningless phrase with no consequences. "Stay the course" as long as it's someone else's son/daughter that's doing the dying.