Putz equates opposing the surge with treason.

An un-American, unhinged smear from America's favorite non-partisan blogger.

J.D. JOHANNES SAID IT BEST: "Support the troops. Let them win."
UPDATE: By contrast, Charles Schumer promises another Vietnam.

To some people, Vietnam wasn't a defeat, but a victory. To them, the right side won. And lost. Naturally, they're happy to repeat the experience.

You hear that, Chuck Schumer and 63% of America, who oppose the surge? You're traitors.

UPDATE

Greenwald has an excellent post on Gen. William Odom's op-ed in the Washington Post titled, "Victory is Not an Option" and his subsequent smackdown of Hew Hughitt. Gen. Odom was in the Reagan adminstration, and is the Military Hall of Fame, but I guess this makes him a defeatist traitor who hates the troops.

UPDATED AGAIN

Gen. Odom thinks Putz's "Support the troops - let them win" meme is absurd.

4) We must continue to fight in order to "support the troops." This argument effectively paralyzes almost all members of Congress. Lawmakers proclaim in grave tones a litany of problems in Iraq sufficient to justify a rapid pullout. Then they reject that logical conclusion, insisting we cannot do so because we must support the troops. Has anybody asked the troops?

During their first tours, most may well have favored "staying the course" -- whatever that meant to them -- but now in their second, third and fourth tours, many are changing their minds. We see evidence of that in the many news stories about unhappy troops being sent back to Iraq. Veterans groups are beginning to make public the case for bringing them home. Soldiers and officers in Iraq are speaking out critically to reporters on the ground.

But the strangest aspect of this rationale for continuing the war is the implication that the troops are somehow responsible for deciding to continue the president's course. That political and moral responsibility belongs to the president, not the troops.

The illogic of "support the troops by supporting the President's failed policy" is self-evident: it's just a shallow rhetorical device for attacking critics of the war. But worse, it's the height of cowardice to use troops on the battlefield (from the comfort and safety of your keyboard) as political pawns to prop up a failed policy and a failed President.