Response: "How can we know what freedom is and appreciate such state when we don't have people fighting for us?" - Mariah

I believe that the kind of viciousness directed at soldiers that you are talking about is a misplaced anger by the aggressors. It's easy to look at the news and see that our men accidentally killed the wrong people when we're at war, and it's easy to find reasons to hate what the military is doing when you disagree with the president. Condemning the actions of our fighting force is not something to be unexpected by a country so opposed to any proper form of direct confrontation. However, attacking or protesting at an individual soldier, or a unit, I can never agree with. Your everyday soldier is not pulling the strings or ordering the strikes. He signs up, knowing his life is in danger, and is placed wherever the higher-ups want him to be placed. It is a long nd unlikely time before he is actually put into any position of total command (which I would consider to be a position where your bosses are limited and your say is actually taken under full advisement). So to ever attack the large majority, I think, is completely unjustified. They were doing whatever they had to do in order to keep peace, and if they did it wrong, it is not because they made any decision to, it's because the people above them made a mistake. It's easy to follow to chain of command in the military, and it goes up quite a ways before even a single person has the ability to act with impunity. The more aggressive critics of the military need to remember that the average private joins for one of two reasons: 1. "I need to make money for my family", 2. "I want to serve and protect my country at any cost to myself." These are not the kinds of reasons that drive a person to purposely kill a civilian, and these are not the kinds of reasons that fuel an unjust war. They are simply the motivating factors for an average person to do what none of us back home did: say, "My country and my people are more important to me than my individual life, and I'm willing make a wager on that and go out there and prove it." I would much rather hold responsible the President, who has the power to start and stop wars, and Congress, which has the power to declare a war legal or stop the President if he is making a huge mistake. It seems to me that these people, which an actual ability to decide and hold final say, are much easier to place responsibility on than a soldier who is returning from the front-lines.

Is there any true way to criticize any section of our government for acts of war in a time of national crisis?