![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 15 of 15. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by partlycloudy on June 1, 2005, at 5:45:58
If you don't put one on your car, does that mean that you don't support the troops? There are yellow ones, flag ones, eagle ones, pow-mia ones, and many vehicles that sport multiple ones.
Do the troops get the money raised from the sale of these stickers? Is that how they are supported?
Posted by AuntieMel on June 1, 2005, at 17:57:12
In reply to About those Support Our Troops stickers..., posted by partlycloudy on June 1, 2005, at 5:45:58
I don't know who gets the money, but I'd bet precious little, if any, goes to troops.
I don't have one on my car, and don't intend to get one. I don't put political stickers on either. I just don't think it's the public's business what I think.
But it does not mean you don't support them. I didn't have one when my son was in the Air Force either.
To me there is a *big* difference between supporting the troops and supporting the war. I was strongly anti-war when Vietnam was going on, but I never blamed the poor guys that had to go over there. I think this one is a big boondoggle, too.
Posted by so on June 1, 2005, at 23:37:39
In reply to About those Support Our Troops stickers..., posted by partlycloudy on June 1, 2005, at 5:45:58
> Do the troops get the money raised from the sale of these stickers?
Occassionally, a little bit, but that is not the purpose of the ribbon campaign. There are other campaigns more focused on gathering various forms of material support.
Is that how they are supported?
>
>The support troops get from seeing ribbons is the same kind of support people get by reading this Web site.
Troops returning from the current US war have shown particularly high rates of post-traumatic stress reactions and some have commented that the widespread casual support demonstrated by ribbons is particularly helpful to them. Of course many also are in need of more serious material and psychological assistance.
The yellow ribbon campaign grew from an outpouring of support for US diplomats and families held hostage in Iran during the 1980s. During their lengthy captivity, the wife of the captive charge d'affairs in Tehran promoted the idea based on a popular song about a convict returning home. Motivated by Tony Orlando and Dawn's rendition of "Tie a yellow ribbon round the old oak tree" (1972 by Irwin Levine and Larry Brown) US residents colored trees, fences and signposts nationwide with yellow ribbons. During Gulf War I a network of military families contributed to promoting the symbol as a sign of affection for troops. The ribbons also are used as a way of showing support for military families -- sort of like saying "Thanks for letting us borrow your husband/father/brother/wife/mother/sister".
Looped ribbons are now widely recognized as signs of support for numerous causes including breast cancer awareness and AIDs awareness.
Posted by partlycloudy on June 2, 2005, at 7:40:48
In reply to Re: About those Support Our Troops stickers..., posted by so on June 1, 2005, at 23:37:39
I already knew the history of the ribbons, thanks.
I would prefer it if you would not post to me in the future.
partlycloudy
Posted by so on June 2, 2005, at 22:12:10
In reply to Re: About those Support Our Troops stickers..., posted by so on June 1, 2005, at 23:37:39
Ribbons are widely believed to have originated as a sign of support for troops during the Civil War, but folklorists say the myth originated with a John Wayne movie from the mid-20th Century.
Some veterans groups that now advocate yellow ribbons in support of troops note the irony that the color yellow is used as a symbol of support when in much battlefield lore yellow is a used as symbol of cowardice.
Posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 22:58:31
In reply to Re: About those Support Our Troops stickers..., posted by so on June 2, 2005, at 22:12:10
Thats interesting... I didn't know that.
It makes sense that bumperstickers are a public show of support too.:-)
Posted by partlycloudy on June 7, 2005, at 17:47:49
In reply to Re: About those Support Our Troops stickers... » partlycloudy, posted by AuntieMel on June 1, 2005, at 17:57:12
The only time I put bumper stickers on my car it was to help keep the fenders on it. A Dodge Dart, slant 6 engine, in all its rusted out glory. It advertised a local restaurant (if you could read the bumper stickers sideways) for several months before all the struts rusted through.
Now THAT was a worthy cause.
Posted by JenStar on June 12, 2005, at 23:47:31
In reply to About those Support Our Troops stickers..., posted by partlycloudy on June 1, 2005, at 5:45:58
I was in a gas station buying a phone card the other day, and there was a huge sheaf of the "Support our Troops" stickers at the counter. I looked at them. The guy behind the counter said, "Guess where those were made?"
"The US?" I said.
"Check it," he told me. I did.
The stickers in that store, anyway, were made in Taiwan.
"You're not supporting the troops," he told me, "you're supporting slave labor in a 3rd world country."
"Interesting," I said.
Are any of the stickers made in the US? I think they're mostly made by companies trying to profit - like any other stickers. Have you seen any US-made ones?
JenStar
Posted by partlycloudy on June 13, 2005, at 16:29:11
In reply to Re: About those Support Our Troops stickers... » partlycloudy, posted by JenStar on June 12, 2005, at 23:47:31
Sadly I am not surprised at that. I haven't been brave (or stupid) enough to reverse-vandalize and take the stickers off of cars I see carrying them, so I haven't gotten close enough to look where they are made.
pc
Posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 16:45:44
In reply to Re: About those Support Our Troops stickers... » partlycloudy, posted by JenStar on June 12, 2005, at 23:47:31
I have seen Support Our Troops materials made in the USA. But part of the mission of US troops is to make the world safe for international trade, so foreign-made bumper stickers wouldn't be unsupportive.
While some employment practices overseas might be less fair than some employment practices in the United States, I know of no basis for an assumption that most products made in any particular Asian country are made by slaves. For that matter, I know of no basis to assume that children are any more involved in low-wage labor overseas than they are involved in agricultural activities in the United States.
If there is a difference, it might be that young low-wage workers in the United States tend to be of a different ethnic background than the majority of the national population, whereas child laborours in Asian countries tend to be of similar ethnicity as owners of the companies they serve.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 22:57:47
In reply to Made in the USA, posted by so on July 8, 2005, at 16:45:44
> But part of the mission of US troops is to make the world safe for international trade
?????
Posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 22:58:16
In reply to Re: Made in the USA » so, posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 22:57:47
Sorry, that was a bit cryptic.
Just thinking about trade sanctions....
Posted by so on July 9, 2005, at 10:05:30
In reply to Re: Made in the USA, posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 22:58:16
> Sorry, that was a bit cryptic.
>
> Just thinking about trade sanctions....Like the ones against Iraq from 1991 until 2003?
And the ones against Cuba, Libya, Iran, Sudan and North Korea?Trade sanctions remain an important component of US foreign policy, but they are only effective insofar as they isolate sanctioned nations outside an economy of unrestricted international trade, which US policy has protected with military force to some extent since at least the 19th century. More recent free-trade intitiatives have been so controversial as to become the primary focus of globally organized political groups, including self-described anarchists who oppose free exchange among merchants across national borders. Nonetheless, free trade and economic globalisation remain unfailing main planks of both leading political parties in the US, and of administrations elected from each party.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 9, 2005, at 18:25:04
In reply to Re: Made in the USA, posted by so on July 9, 2005, at 10:05:30
> > Sorry, that was a bit cryptic.
> >
> > Just thinking about trade sanctions....
>
> Like the ones against Iraq from 1991 until 2003?
> And the ones against Cuba, Libya, Iran, Sudan and North Korea?Ok, I'll admit I know noting about any of those. I'm just thinking of how the US won't have a lot to do with us tradewise because of our nuclear free policy. I thought it kind of went 'do this or we won't trade with you'.
Probably my ignorance...
Posted by so on July 10, 2005, at 11:56:44
In reply to Re: Made in the USA » so, posted by alexandra_k on July 9, 2005, at 18:25:04
> Ok, I'll admit I know noting about any of those. I'm just thinking of how the US won't have a lot to do with us tradewise because of our nuclear free policy. I thought it kind of went 'do this or we won't trade with you'.
>
> Probably my ignorance...
The US in 1999 imposed tariffs on lamb imported from NZ and Australia because increased imports were damaging the domestic lamb market. But imports from Canada, Mexico, Israel and the Carribean were not sanctioned with tarrifs -- apparently because they were not increasing imports as much.The US has done much to moderate the stateside impact of globalism, and US constituencies have fluxuated between protectionism and globalism, but the clear direction in the nation most able to project force in protection of trade... in the nation that plays host to the UN (but balks at payment of membership dues)... is toward open trade.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.