http://smilies.jeeptalk.org/otn/angry/newburn.gif

Sorry, it got out of hand....:(

[B] Then you should be aware that all protestors don't just protest for attention or to be arrested.

[QUOTE][Civil rights protesting has nothing to do with this anti-war protest. I'm sorry, but it is different, don't clump them together just because they both involve protesting. The civil rights movement took place in America, all over, so that was the place to protest. Civil rights were being violated by certain states and their governments, those were the people to protest. NO state government has any power or control over the conflict in Iraq, so why complain and protest to them? The federal government is the group that should be protested, not the lives of people trying to get to and from work in a busy city during the week. Do it on your own time if you want to make a statement; your rights to assembly and free speech are great, but what about my rights? Do I deserve to suffer from the consequences of a futile demonstration? [QUOTE]

They are both very similar in that people are going against the mainstream ideas and fighting for very unpopular ideas. Many people had the same ideas about civil rights protestors "What are they whining about, Why don't they go back to where they came from if they want rights" that I hear being expoused by people who have problems with protests. So as you can see there are several similarities. It't not an exact analogy but there are definately similarities.

As I stated before don't assume the activities of a few represent the thoughts and actions of the hundreds of thousands of peaceful protestors who don't block anyone's way to work or stop anyone from doing what they wish to do.

I used the analogy in a previous post. Should I judge you on the actions of all fraternity men?

Quote:

So go ahead, keep doing it even though its meaningless and hurts the feelings of our troops in the Gulf. They don't care if you're still supporting them; if you're protesting the war they are disappointed with you. - RUgreek

-Meaningless to whom? Is it meaningless simply because you don't agree with it. Again I will go back to the Civil Rights movement. Many people believed that the bus boycott was meaningless and would accomplish nothing, and guess what. After months of protest and boycott change did occur. Maybe the protestors feel like if they continue to go on even in the face of adversity things will change because they true believe this war is not the right thing to do for this country.

- Our troops are fighting for democracy supposedly and free speech is a part of democracy.


Anyway, it's Friday night so I will catch this convo. again in the morning. Time to head out. Have a great weekend everyone!!!

It bares repeating
 

I just felt that this post was so great that it should be repeated. Thanks Greekgrrl!

again, i would like to just say that in that one post, i was discussing one group of protestors, and not meaning to group them all in as a whole. and also again, neg news is constant news.....so just as supporters get minimal air time, as do calm and reserved protestors. that is all.....i don't think all ppl who don't agree with this war and protest are "tree-huggers" or "hippies" or anything....there's just better ways to go about things, i think.

and, cloud9, it's not that i don't want to be disturbed or shocked....that's not the point....the point is i don't want our guys over-seas thinking all of america is against them.....the point is, i don't want people to not be able to get to their jobs b/c someone who is outrageous lies down in the middle of the road. the point is, i think ppl can get their points across better by being calm and rational....that is all. i didn't think the point was to disturb anyone......i thought this was about freedom of speech more so than anything.....hmmmm.....maybe not? maybe the point is to shock ppl? i doubt that. i think these people have voices and opinions they want heard, and for whatever reason think being extremely vocal is the way to do it. i just don't think that's the case....
what i think needs to happen is that we all need to show support for our troops.........in my opinion (my opinion, that is all), that's what needs to happen around this country. not die ins, not obnoxious president hating rallies.....b/c our soldiers see that. they see america as not supporting them as well as blaming them for what's going on when all they are doing is what they swore they would do. what i will soon swear to do. so....if you wanna protest the war, great....but also hold a sign saying something positive to the troops. is that so much to ask?

m

part 2.....
 

posted by Honeykiss1974 it's cool, it's cool....i appreciate you can at least see where i am coming from. :) gotta love the heated debate!

posted by VirtuousErudite and i agree with you...to an extent. i think it's having the opposite effect, though. the media is kinda cracked out sometimes....showing so much of one thing, people never get to see the other. so, until the news can show a correct ratio of hostile protestors, to non-hostile protestors, to supporters, it will all be a clusterf*ck in people's minds. ya know? and God knows i love some fox news....but they're bad about not showing all sides, i think.....so msnbc to the rescue!

m

Fox news is the absolutely worst!!!!! I have to stick with CNN.

In my opinion, right now they are. Apparently they don't have important jobs to keep if they are f**king with the rest of the working public that are trying to make a living in this wonderful economy.

No, it's meaningless because it's quite obvious that all the protesting in the world won't change a thing. You or anyone else that protests this war in major cities other than D.C. are not furthering a cause. Go to Washington, do it there where the voice and opinion makes sense. Sheesh, why is this so complicated to explain?

Yea, and why not make a noble use of that free speech and stand behind them for a change. It seems like no matter what kind of situation this is, just for the fact it's "war" people will protest it.

- RUgreek


P.S. I do support peace, so don't label me a war hungry freak, just label me a freak please.;)

The $900,000.00/day is greatly made up of overtime for officers, but don't have access to an actual assessment record.

In response to protesters being labeled. Yes, some people are genuine in their feelings but make no mistake, there are professional protesters and they treat it like a job as well as "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine."

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASUS_12/4220_12.asp
"The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) expressed concern that antiwar protest rallies scheduled to take place this weekend in Washington, D.C. and San Francisco may employ inflammatory anti-Israel and anti-Jewish statements and rhetoric.
...Organizers of the January 18 "National March in Washington to Demand: No War Against Iraq", the San Francisco rally, and other events scheduled for this weekend have previously embraced statements supporting Palestinian terrorism, equating Zionism with Nazism, and calling for the destruction of the Jewish State."

THESE are VERY Interesting exerts-http://216.239.57.100/search?q=cache:y5wIWValft4J:http://www.aim.org/publications/week...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times came close when he wrote that the March 15 protest was organized by a group which "has drawn criticism from some people inside and out of the anti-war movement because some of its chief organizers are active in radical socialist causes and because it has taken controversial positions on issues not directly related to Iraq."
I’ve got news for Berkowitz. Some of the protesters, including key organizers of the January 18 and March 15 demonstrations in Washington, D.C., are anti-American and communist and apologists for Hussein. I know because I saw and photographed them. I covered both rallies. Photos from the latest rally are on the Accuracy in Media web site. The communist Workers World Party (WWP) ran this event through the International ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) front group. But the WWP is clever. While ANSWER had its own literature tables at the rally, the WWP had a separate space with posters, books and pamphlets. One pamphlet described the 1992 Los Angeles riots as a legitimate "rebellion." Having two different spaces for ANSWER and the WWP makes it seem as though they are two different groups. It’s simple but effective deception.

Soldiers on the war front have told their families that the well-publicized protests staged by the anti-war movement have been demoralizing to them.

I wish they could find out how many are registered voters, which brings me to another point. EXERCISING YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE IS THE BEST WAY TO PROTEST! Contact your representatives if you are unhappy. They are very sensitive to their constituants/voters.

I posted about a guy who repented of his anti-war views after being a "Peace Shield" in Iraq...here's the article in his own words.

some more thoughts...
 

I'll preface this by saying I'm against this war. Yes, I know US servicemen in Iraq fighting & I support them 100% - especially their safe return. But I don't support the politics that put them there.

• Freeing/liberating the Iraqi people isn't the mission of this war. And if it was, I'd have major issues with that. Why? Because we haven't seen fit to liberate anyone else lately. We didn't aid Afghanastan until we were affected by the Taliban (yes, I realize we put them in power, and as soon as we saw what they were we should have put a stop to them. And we didn't. I must have signed 20 petitions asking the government to step in during the mid-late 1990s. So I know they knew about it). What about Tibet's occupation by the Chinese? We haven't done a thing to liberate them. If we are going to be the World Police, we need to treat everyone equally.
  
• The US doesn't have a history of preemptive war. The minute we decided to attack Iraq, we set the precedent that it's OK to attack unprovoked. Because while I believe (I didn't say KNOW, I said believe) Iraq probably has all kinds of weapons of mass destruction, I also don't believe (again, I didn't say KNOW) we had any reason to think they were heading towards us anytime soon. (I can't shake the feeling that maybe part of this, at least, is just George W. finishing what daddy started).
  
• I don't like the fact that all of our family & friends are giving their lives for this war. Everyone says they are protecting our freedoms. Did you feel your freedoms were threatened prior to the war? I didn't. And I still don't. I don't mean to belittle what our servicemen & women do... they are absolutely answering the call of duty. One of the reasons I don't join in the protests is respect for our soldiers.
  
• I think just about everyone in America (and many other parts of the world) agrees that Saddam=bad. I'd sure like to know what our plan is after we eliminate his entire regime. Because Bush promised (paraphrased) not to enter into conflicts where we had to set up completely new regimes of government (end paraphrase). Not that it's bad, but it's a definate drain on our resources. And how do we know the best form of government for a completely different culture. There will be many Iraqi civillians hurt and killed in this war. Many more will suffer (injuries, hunger, death, lack of housing, etc.) in the aftermath. I would feel better about the current situation if I thought that America could address any of these issues properly, but I don't. And what happens if we put another "taliban" type government in place as we did before? Or another dictator?

Those are my big issues with this war. That being said, I would like to agree with the pro-war side on the following:

• Many of the protestors really don't have a clue what they are talking about. Although some do- mainly the organizers and a few of the more "seasoned" adults. (The other reason I'm not joining any of them.)-I will say all of the protests I've seen have remained civil, thankfully. And I see many as I work downtown across from the state federal building.
• No, this war isn't about oil. That's an aside if anything.
• Saddam=bad. Something needs to be done. I would have liked UN approval at the least & don't understand the hesitation, other than the MONEY factor (who's selling & buying what from whom, etc.)
• Bush & his administration are privy to a lot more information than any of us. If I had all of the facts, I might be the #1 supporter, who knows. But I do believe that some information needs to remain at the highest level, at least until the war is resolved, for safety & security reasons.

So my anti-war beliefs are based solely on my knowledge & value system- just like anyone elses. Those are my reasons for choosing not to support the war. Debate with me all you like-I'm open to other viewpoints. :)

OH- and I wanted to adress this, even though it's small hijack:
Actually, ethanol fuel is very well developed. When I purchased my used car I was discussing with my step-dad (a huge car guy that works for Summit Racing dealing with cars and car parts) the pros/cons of hybrid cars. I had intended to buy one in about year, but due to other circumstances was forced to make my car purchase early. (Resulting in the purchase of a cheaper, non-hybrid card). While he's not a fan of hybrid cars, he did tell me I can convert my car to run on ethanol fuel for less than $200. The problem then would be finding the fuel. He also told me that in Iowa all of the state police cars currently run on ethanol.

I really believe that we as a country & global community need to seriously consider alternate sources of fuel. So I was really happy to hear about this. OK- that's the end of my thread hijack ;)

Silver Turtle, you know what is so interesting? It seems like most of us share the same internal questions and fears. I have the same thoughts as you and others rolling around my mind and it seems most of us are trying to deal with the same issues. I guess it's a matter of HOW we deal rather than IF we deal with this situation. Similar to so many issues in life, just higher stakes.

Side bar-I am from a family of farmers-corn to be exact. We have several hundred acres in Kansas. While ethanol as a fuel is viable, as you indicated, it is hard to come by. It also costs slightly more at the pump than regular gas...or at least it did prior to now. I will also admit that the oil companies are a detriment to the further development, usage and availability.

AlphaGam1019-I too have heard those interviews. I keep them in mind when I start to question if we're doing the right thing.
I wish there would have been an easier way...

I've said quite enough...for now. Time to sit back and let this discussion resume. I can hear my own youthful words and remember the feelings and ideology I felt in the aftermath of Viet Nam. Though we may differ in our views, I am so proud that this issue (as others) is important enough to ignite passion.

A letter from a soldier
 

I just thought this puts things in a different perspective. Please do not jump my case for putting it here.

For all the free people that still protest.

You're welcome. We protect you and you are protected by the best. Your voice is strong and loud but who will fight for you? No one standing in your crowd.
We are your fathers, brothers and sons wearing the boots and carrying guns. We are the ones that leave all we own
to make sure your future is carved in stone.We are the ones who fight and die.
We may not be able to save the world,
Well, at least we try.
We walked the paths to where we are at and we want no choice other than that. So when you rally your group to complain, take a look in the back of your brain.
In order for that flag you love to fly, wars must be fought and young men must die.We came here to fight for the ones we hold dear.
If that's not respected, we would rather stay here.
So please stop yelling, put down your signs, and pray for those behind enemy lines.When the conflict is over and all is well, be thankful that we chose to go through hell.

Corporal Joshua Miles and all the boys from
3rd Battalion 2nd Marines, Kuwait

I'm not going to jump on your case :) but I do want to point out some flaws. Once again, that makes things way too simplistic.

A couple days ago I saw a rally: Veterans Against War in Iraq. To assume that every soldier is for this war is ludicrous. There are plenty of veterans that aren't, and I'd be willing to bet that there are more than a handful of soldiers over there in Iraq right now that don't agree with the war. But they're doing it because that's their job.

By referring to the soldiers "as fathers, brothers and sons," he left out a very valuable faction of soldiers -- what about the women? A side issue, I know, but I thought it was disrespectful.

I agree that sometimes wars must be fought in order for America to retain its power -- IF our country is being threatened, then wars are justified. This one, in my opinion, was not, because we weren't being threatened.

And it completely ignores the fact that there are many out there who are both protesting AND praying for our troops. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Silver Turtle -- thank you for posting that. I agree with all your anti-war points, and to an extent with some of your pro-war ones. I think there are quite a few protesters out there who DON'T have a clue what they're talking about politically (although I don't think they're in any way the majority -- as usual, the stupider and more extreme you are, the more likely it is that you'll get publicity) . . . but I think that should be okay if they feel in their hearts that war in this case is wrong. Hey, there are plenty of people who are pro-war for the simple fact that they feel it's right, and nobody's questioning them.

I do think oil is AN issue, and anybody who claims it isn't would have to be blind, but it is definitely a side issue . . . I do think Bush has somewhat better intentions than that in leading us into this war, and I don't think he'd start a war solely for the sake of oil.

AlphaGam1019 -- we discussed those interviews (or similar ones, maybe) earlier in this thread. Basically, while they may be true, they are by no means universally true, and thus don't serve as very good evidence. Surely there are people in Iraq who want to be liberated. There are also clearly many who don't, or who don't care, or who would prefer not to risk their lives for the sake of freedom.

From this article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2895849.stm

a soldier says: "We always had the idea that everyone in this area hated Saddam. Clearly, there are a number who don't." I'm not sure what sparked this response, but it seems obvious that they had found some people who didn't want to be "liberated." I also heard a quote from another woman, who, after being significantly injured by one of the bombs, was being dragged off to get medical attention. Bloody and crying, she screamed to the reporter: "Bush, listen carefully! We don't want your liberation . . . we all love Saddam."

Not exactly what our government has been telling us.

I'm so happy that I can rest my fingers and let Sugar & Spice and SilverTurtle type for me!

Great posts, ladies! You are the type of anti-war people I like to associate myself with!

On a sidenote: the "dead in the street" protest here in NYC, annoying, yes, but come on, it's NYC, we do everything over the top here!!! ;)

Sheesh, because, with all respect, you're wrong.

Congressmen and Senators spend a lot of time in their home districts. Local politicians and other interest groups are there, too. As are other special interest groups and important voices.

And again, respectfully, protests do make a difference. I'm sorry you weren't around during the Vietnam era or you would understand better, I think.

People are quick to point out that many protesters are looking for media coverage. Of course they are. What better way to get their message out. Is there something wrong with that? Really? Well, what about the daily press briefings and presidential speechs? Don't you suspect that they're held for the very same reasons?

Both sides use the media. Skillfully.

Many people believe that the real beginning of the end of that war came when CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite (at that time voted the most trusted man in America), began to question the reasons for that war (some of which weren't terribly different from the ones for this one) after carefully ballancing the protests against the politicians claims.

Presidents Johnson and Nixon's papers, recordings and other historical documents show that they were clearly obsessed with the peace movement -- to the point of ordering the FBI to carry out leagally questionable investigations (wire taps, infiltrating organizations, checking IRS records, etc.) of protesters. Talk about a loss of individual rights!

The real difference I see is the deeply unfortunate dislike, disdain, disrespect and even hatred for the troops coming back from Vietnam is missing in this case. It seems to me that the peace protesters, for the most part, are holding the political administration responsible, while still expressing support for the serving troops. (And yes, when you search your intellect, you know that there is a difference between protesting the cause and the troops)

While I still see a serious lack of hard evidence for the alleged reasons we're fighting, I'm not in any position to take issue with protestors on either side of this debate. And again, it is their Constitutional right to protest -- it's as simple as that, really in the long run.



PS to JAM -- having nothing whatsoever to do with the topic, my wife also grew up on a corn farm.