Dogfight

During this latest invasion of Iraq (I'd better give the date - 2003. Who knows how many more there may be.) I responded to a letter in the Oregonian from a Conservative friend (named Jack) who expressed the opinion that regardless of one's position on the war, once the hostilities begin, all political discussion should cease and at least tacit approval should be given in order to "support" the troops involved in the conflict. I thought that was a pretty shallow view, not only because it quashes dissent in a, supposedly, free society, but also because it might condemn to death or serious injury (both physical and/or mental) for an unworthy cause, the very troops we are being asked to support. Therefore, I responded:

You wrote, "It's time to put aside our fractured feelings and beliefs. It's time to support our sons and daughters,"

Put that way it sounds reasonable and kind.

 Let me put it another way: 

 You ever seen a dog fight? Not the kind with airplanes. The literal kind.

Its awful. They put the dogs in the pit and right away they start tearing pieces out of one another. They train them up on pain to make them vicious.

 Soon the floor is covered with blood. No one seems to care. They're too busy placing bets. Some leave poorer. Some leave richer. But the dogs always lose.

 I've heard people say its awful. I've heard people say we oughta put an end to it. But I've never heard someone say, "Sure, no civilized person thinks its a good thing; but I think we should shut up because we have to support the dogs."

-RICO*