Why do people waste time on anti-war protests?

[Pidgin]

What do you think are the main reasons and the main groups of anti-war protestors?

[Funbrunette]

Maybe they feel they can make a difference...I think some of them are a bit "wacky" and put themselves in a dangerous position, but I guess they feel the need to "do something"

[Danny_C]

... or maybe they care about the lives of others, and realize the political impact of large-scale organized protests.

[Darin]

Bunch of dummies.

Send them all off to France!

[Mister X]

Actually I don't know that it's a waste of time. Wars are won and lost in the media now I think.

[Pidgin]

Nope. If they cared about other people's lives - they would protest daily about all wrongs and suffering happening in the world or go and vulanteer in some organization.
They don't know anything about the war or the situation. They just walk the streets with signs say war-is-bad or bush-is-a-killer. Most of it is pure ignorance.
Many of them say that their objection is that it is not THEIR war - and that is why they should stay away. Thats dumb - but its their right.

[Visualad]

Originally posted by Danny_C
... or maybe they care about the lives of others, and realize the political impact of large-scale organized protests.

I agree.

[Pidgin]

Originally posted by Visualad
I agree.

With what?
Do you think that the protest will make US and UK change their mind and not go to war?
If that happens - do you believe that the lives of the Iraqis will be good and happy?
Also - if that happens - do you believe that the world will live in peace and Iraq will suddenly change its way and will grow to become peace loving democracy which is a beacon of light in the landscape of morality and human rights?
Or maybe you think its already like that?

[wsjb78]

I agree with Danny C. However one must add that there are daily injustices that we're very much adopted to. So that doesn't bother us. We don't even think of it. However this issue about war has been brought so much to our attention that people just think they must do something to prevent it...

[Panky]

Americans all grew up with the belief that what we say as citizens affects aspects of our government. We as citizens can influence our government by speaking out. "For the people, by the people...."

It's not surprising in the least that we have people protesting the war. It's part of our belief as Americans that we can do something. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. It's our right as Americans to protest.

Roe vs. Wade made abortions legal.
The civil rights and Martin Luther King, Jr.
Lobbyist put pressure on our government all the time for various issues.
Farm-Aid raised funds for the farmers in the MidWest.
Vietnam War was protested. The draft was a major issue.
There's issues with the homeless in America.
HealthCare issues.
People protest when the KKK makes an appearance.
Strippers protested against club owners for wage issues, benefit issues, working conditions...

Whether the protesters are misinformed, zealots, whatever...., it's still their right to protest. Will it make a difference? Who knows?

What happens if we do go to war? What happens if we don't go to war? I guarantee we aren't being told what is really going on. They tell us what they want us to hear to push the Governments own agenda.


Panky
ICQ:51140074

[pornodoggy]

Originally posted by XXXManager
Nope. If they cared about other people's lives - they would protest daily about all wrongs and suffering happening in the world or go and vulanteer in some organization.
They don't know anything about the war or the situation. They just walk the streets with signs say war-is-bad or bush-is-a-killer. Most of it is pure ignorance.
Many of them say that their objection is that it is not THEIR war - and that is why they should stay away. Thats dumb - but its their right.

Most of it is pure ignorance? Hmmm ... are they ignorant, or are you arrogant? Before I start, let me tell you that I think we ought to go in and clean up the mess known as Saddam.

Look ... for every war protester who is out because they think Bush is a killer there are three folks in the U.S. who couldn't tell you the difference between the Bathe party and alQaida, or between Iraq and Iran, and believe the fantasy that the U.S. is going to go in, win the war in two weeks (which hopefully they will), establish democracy in four, make the world safe from terrorism in six, and that the war will magically make Israel secure in eight. They don't realize that some of the kids starting middle school today will be going to Iraq someday, in the same sort of Senior Trip that Grandpa took to Germany in the 50s - let's just pray it's not like that same trip could have been in the 60s.

Bunch of dummies.

Send them all off to France!

Bad news, bro ... you can't do that. It's that whole silly freedom of speech thing. If they really bother you that much, maybe YOU should go someplace where it doesn't happen. Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba ... they don't have to put up with dummies like that.

[MegaGiga]

They are a combination of..

Hardcore protestors that will go on any demo just to a) make trouble or b) give themselves a reason to exist

Misguided or naive people that only know one side of the story

People with nothing better to do (jobless etc) - who would turn down a free trip to london?

Aging 60's hippy, flower power people trying to recapture the good old days..

Children of the above hippies..

Students - will protest against any government policy.. always end up in the student union bar afterwards drinking themselves into oblivion while congratulating each other for changing the world..

Sheep.. just following the crowd, they have no idea why..

[Danny_C]

And you forgot to add to your list:

people who care about the lives of others and know the political impact that large-scale protests can have.

And if you think protests are useless, consider Vietnam. Whether you agree with them or not, they do make an impact.

I do agree they won't prevent us from going to war, but it's going to be a much different war than it would be with everyone behind it. War is politics.

[pornodoggy]

Originally posted by MegaGiga
They are a combination of..

Hardcore protestors that will go on any demo just to a) make trouble or b) give themselves a reason to exist

Misguided or naive people that only know one side of the story

People with nothing better to do (jobless etc) - who would turn down a free trip to london?

Aging 60's hippy, flower power people trying to recapture the good old days..

Children of the above hippies..

Students - will protest against any government policy.. always end up in the student union bar afterwards drinking themselves into oblivion while congratulating each other for changing the world..

Sheep.. just following the crowd, they have no idea why..

It's funny ... I'm in favor of the war, and I just don't see it that way. Yeppers, there sure are some of all of the above out there opposing the war. Danny_C was right - you forgot the people who care about the lives of others, and they make up the majority of protesters.

But there are just as many "sheep" blindly following everything the government tells them. There are just as many "sheep" out there who are too simple-minded to understand that different people can come to different conclusions after thoughtfully analyzing the same information. There are just as many "sheep" out there who blindly buy into the idea that America has a right to impose its will on other countries, that diplomacy is for pussies, and war will solve everything (besides, war on CNN makes a good alternative to reruns of Cops).

[Pidgin]

Originally posted by pornodoggy
Danny_C was right - you forgot the people who care about the lives of others, and they make up the majority of protesters.

He didnt forget them. He listed them high in his list - the group he described as: Misguided or naive people that only know one side of the story

Originally posted by pornodoggy
But there are just as many "sheep" blindly following everything the government tells them. There are just as many "sheep" out there who are too simple-minded to understand that different people can come to different conclusions after thoughtfully analyzing the same information. There are just as many "sheep" out there who blindly buy into the idea that America has a right to impose its will on other countries, that diplomacy is for pussies, and war will solve everything (besides, war on CNN makes a good alternative to reruns of Cops).

True - but I didn't ask about them and no one isshowing on TV demonstrations PRO-war like its significant issue of importance.

I am not arrogant, I just know what I am talking about. And just to make sure we are on the same discussion - it wasnt be who suggested to send then to France.

BUT what I think about the protestors is that - TOTAL BULLSHIT.
They care about what? The Iraqis that might die in the bombing?
Is dying by a bomb is worse than dying of starvation? or by torture for acting againts the dictator? Or live life or fear as a Curd or dying of mustard gas?
Since you are also pro war - explain the logics in opposing an act of force against a mecriless dictator who kills his opponents, enslaves his people, builds up weapons and arsenals for war instead of feeding his people and promoting peace?

I heard about 30-40 people intreviewed about why they protested in UK today and their resoning is FUCKEN LAME! I am willing to hear someone knowledgable expresses his thoughts and ideas about it - but judging statistically - most of the million that protested today don't know shit and protest cause they have nothing better to do.

Clarification: I have nothing against their protest. I think it should be encouraged in a society to have multitude of opinions and free-speech should be protected. We had protests in Israel against the war as well. That is not something negative. But the question is still there - why do they bother??

[pornodoggy]

Sorry ... meant to attribute the quote about sending them to France, but forgot. Still, someone who claims he is not arrogant doesn't due much for his argument by making statements like

Misguided or naive people that only know one side of the story

You see, one could make the arguement that the niave ones are the people who believe that all will be wonderful once we remove Saddam. All the other Arab nations will fall like dominos to the wonders of democracy in action in Iraq. The Palestinians will a) aspire to the dreams of democracy or b) tremble in fear at the fate of the Iraqis and make instantaneous peace with Israel. Al Qaeda (remember al Qaeda? Them terrorist fellas?) will simply close up shop and go away, and of course, God/Jehovah/Allah will reign in heaven, and profits will had by all.

The Palestinians don't have much to do with Saddam. Yes, there are partisans with their own agendas on both sides of the issue that try to lump them in - but it's a red herring. As hard as this Administration has been trying to prove it, al Qaeda doesn't have much to do with Saddam. The United States is getting ready to go into a region that could teach Yugosolvia's former Serbs, Croats, and Bosnians a thing or two about uncivil relations, and the President who promised "No nation-building" will commit us to try to build a country out of it? Thinking that a painted sign will stop the war is not the only way to be misguided, mislead, or niave, methinks.

Yes, I am for the war. Saddam is, at least in part, an American-made mess - a legacy from the days when we armed and aided whoever proclaimed himself to be the enemy of our enemy dujour. He is a threat to the stability and peace of the region, and as such should be dealt with. I would prefer my government act a lot less unilaterally. I wish more people had a realistic understanding of what we are getting into; I wish more people on the pro-war side were a lot more grounded in reality about what we can accomplish, and what the backlash could be.

My girlfriend's son left Monday. He is a Captain in the U.S. Marine Corps. He served in Afghanistan; now he's off to the Middle East. Yes - I'm for the war. You'll forgive me if I'm not overwhelmingly enthusiastic about it.

[Pidgin]

Originally posted by pornodoggy
Sorry ... meant to attribute the quote about sending them to France, but forgot. Still, someone who claims he is not arrogant doesn't due much for his argument by making statements like

AGAIN you supposedly quote me on something I didn't say. Check what you quote man. Its not nice to say I said something which I didn't. Plase try to refrain from that.

What I did say is: "They don't know anything about the war or the situation". I believe (to the degree on "knowing") that 99.9% of the people protesting do not know enough to answer 9 out or 10 questions I will throw at them. AND I listened as I said, to their arguments. That is why I feel I can say that.

True - what you described as alternate logic is also naive - I would even call it stupid. But that has nothing to do with this war. This war does not "claim" to be a magic cure. It is maybe a necessity in a way. War that is immenent.

Originally posted by pornodoggy The Palestinians don't have much to do with Saddam.[/b]

That is not a correct statement.

Originally posted by pornodoggy
As hard as this Administration has been trying to prove it, al Qaeda doesn't have much to do with Saddam. [/b]

Where do you come with this knowladge? Because Tarek Aziz said so?

Originally posted by pornodoggy
The United States is getting ready to go into a region that could...
....
I would prefer my government act a lot less unilaterally.
[/b]

You portray this a little bit like they want to. Some things in life (including wars sometimes) are a necessity - as hard as it is to admit.
Yes - of couse it would be better this war was a concensus of all the world but its US is not alone there - very much not - and frankly, it DOES NOT MATTER. Israel unilaterally took out the nuclear reactor in Iraq in 81. You most probably owe your grandchildren lives to that act.
In that same aspect N.Korea is a problem.

Originally posted by pornodoggy
You'll forgive me if I'm not overwhelmingly enthusiastic about it. [/b]

You don't need my forgiveness. No one should be happy about wars. Its like tax - sad but true.

[Danny_C]

You know, I don't support this war, for a variety of reasons. But even in a war that I do support, I would hope that people would be in the streets protesting. Dissent is the greatest of American traditions, and it's the most powerful tool we have for balancing the government's zeal for going to war. The government needs to understand that the decision for war should be considered with extreme caution, and they should understand that taking action means accepting the consequences.

[Pidgin]

Originally posted by Danny_C
You know, I don't support this war, for a variety of reasons. But even in a war that I do support, I would hope that people would be in the streets protesting. Dissent is the greatest of American traditions, and it's the most powerful tool we have for balancing the government's zeal for going to war. The government needs to understand that the decision for war should be considered with extreme caution, and they should understand that taking action means accepting the consequences.

True. Thats democracy. Some countries don't have that luxary *hint* *Iraq*
But why are you against the war - what group would you categorize yourself with? You are not a hippie I think

[Danny_C]

No, I'm not a hippy.

I'd categorize myself with the group who thinks that Saddam needs to be dealt with, but that war is the wrong solution. I think war will cause more problems than it solves. I mean, there's no denying (on either side of the debate) that there would be benefits AND consequences to going to war and eliminating Saddam (the benefits depending, of course, on our success, which I think would be inevitable). Coming to a decision is a matter of weighing those benefits against those consequences. I don't think any advocate of war believes that there won't be consequences, and I don't believe any intelligent protester thinks Iraq is better off with Saddam Hussein in power.

My general philosophy is that people act barbaric because they're uneducated, impoverished, brainwashed, or desperate. If we want to eliminate terrorism, which I believe is at the root of the positive aspect of going to war, then I believe we need to deal with what causes that behavior. If people are starving, we should try to feed them. If people are brainwashed or uneducated, we should try to educate them. If people are desperate, and believe we are the cause of their anguish, then we need to launch a PR attack rather than a missile attack. Making people more impoverished through sanctions, or more uneducated because we've ruined an economy, or more desperate because American bombs are dropping all around them is going to spur them to even more drastic action. In fact, not only do I think peaceful solutions are possible (and would do more to make us safer from terrorism), but they would be cheaper than going to war.

Besides all that, going to war right now is going to paint a big target on the U.S. If anything goes wrong, the U.S. will be to blame. If everything goes right, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians are killed in the process, then the U.S. will be held responsible. Right now more than ever, it's common sense that we need allies more than we need enemies. And I only see our list of enemies growing (and our allies growing more wary of us).

[Pidgin]

Interesting..
How do you propose to implement this economy building, education, PR, .... in Iraq? Ask Saddam to do it for us? (after all he for sure want his people to be happy. right? thats why he uses the money from fuel to buy food rather than weapons and develop science and politics rather than stregthen his dictatorship). I don't think you realize the power of dictators and terrorism. Ask yourself how come all these dictators are in power for so long even though their people are suffering so much - in so many dictatorships around the world.

As to you believing that if US be all positive and do "everything right" it can't fail - I guess I am in a different opinion living in a coutry that already dealt with a dictator who failed to act by your logics and drew his people back into poverty and war instead of educating them and improving their lives terrorising his opposition and taking all the money intended for his people and put it in his swiss bank account in and buying weapons with it.

I know its hard and painful to wake up to that realization. I've been through this process. You will too (actually you should already have on 9/11 - but maybe you think you didn't try hard enough to be holy)

[dyonisus]

Originally posted by Panky
[b][color=pink] Americans all grew up with the belief that what we say as citizens affects aspects of our government. We as citizens can influence our government by speaking out. "For the people, by the people...."


What happens if we do go to war? What happens if we don't go to war? I guarantee we aren't being told what is really going on. They tell us what they want us to hear to push the Governments own agenda.

I completely agre with Panky on his last statement. I have watched avidly all the news on this proposed war and on the battle against the al qaeda.. I do not believe we are being given the entire story..

The protestors are out there protesting something they do not believe in. Regardless of their reasons, they are opposed to this war and are finding a means to have that heard!!

Saddam is a leader who has imprisoned "his people" but it is not up to one or two zealot governements to decide he must be dealt with ASAP and at a violent end, it is up to the UN and a majority vote amoungst the permanent members.

Let's face it, US foreigh policy has always been questionable, especially when the republicans are in power.. and this time they are only in power because of a botched voting system.. Why was the UN adopted if a couple of world leaders could over throw their power and do as they please, does that not leave room then for any country to do as it pleases and defy world law. Is that not what this is supposedly about, Saddam obeying world law,

hmmm, and dont be fooled into thinking that people are not starving and dying in the streets of the US or Britain.. Maybe before the US goes jumping into something so HUGE they should take care of bidness at home!!!

FYI - (in case you did not figure it out) I am against war unless it is a complete last resort and there is immennent danger. War will NOT stop terrorist attacks or change what happened 9/11.. I think it is great that people protest .. whatever their reasons, if they dont believe somethign is right, then let them have their say!!!

[Danny_C]

Whose post did you read?

What I said was that the only aspect of going to war that I would consider positive would be to fight terrorism. The administration is linking Saddam to terrorism, and believe that taking him out will help protect us. But you know what: we don't need to do anything within Iraq, because terrorism isn't coming from Iraq.

As for the weapons of mass destruction... none have been found, and I doubt any will be. I definitely don't believe in slaughtering civilians on the basis of a suspicion.

"As to you believing that if US be all positive and do "everything right" it can't fail..."

I said this? I said that much more good can be done with positive action than with bombings. Don't misquote me.

" I know its hard and painful to wake up to that realization. I've been through this process. You will too (actually you should already have on 9/11 - but maybe you think you didn't try hard enough to be holy)"

Wow, condescension from the right. Imagine that. Well, I'm an atheist, so I'm not exactly worried about being "holy". And I'm also a realist, so "waking up" probably won't happen. In fact, I could argue that 9/11 woke me up to the fact that there can be severe consequences to foreign policies that lack compassion for people. I understand based on historical precedent that there are consequences to war, and that innocent people (including children) die in the explosions.

My point isn't that we can defeat Iraq through inaction, but that if the ultimate goal is to make our people safer, then what we're about to do is counterproductive.

[Darin]

Actually, the news stations control the public.

.. they create bullshit, display it on your tv, then wait for the cattle so they can film it and make even more money.

There is obviously a lot of cattle on this board.

[Darin]

Mooooooooooooooooo

[Pidgin]

Originally posted by dyonisus
(1).. I do not believe we are being given the entire story.. The protestors are out there protesting something they do not believe in.
(2)..but it is not up to one or two zealot governements to decide he must be dealt with ASAP and at a violent end, it is up to the UN and a majority vote amoungst the permanent members.
(3)hmmm, and dont be fooled into thinking that people are not starving and dying in the streets of the US or Britain..
(4)FYI - (in case you did not figure it out) I am against war unless it is a complete last resort and there is immennent danger. War will NOT stop terrorist attacks or change what happened 9/11..
(5)I think it is great that people protest .. whatever their reasons, if they dont believe somethign is right, then let them have their say!!!

(1) We never are. BUT there is much more than you know lying infront of you to read - you seem to not be aware to a lot of it. You seem to base your theories on facts while missing alot of essentials.. like the next point and others..
(2) "one or two zealot governements": There are much more than one or two governments. If you bothered yourself with listening or reading you would know that. The UN is a joke. If anything I would say that: "Its not up to economical concerns of 3,4 governments to stop the UN from making the right descision" (Those being China[who sells alot of weapons and weapon technoloy to Iraq], France and Germany [which have exports and oil imports intrests with Iraq] and Russia [which invested greatly in the oil industry in Iraq]). The fact that these countries have veto rights is the only reason US is not pushing for a descision yet - otherwise it would have passed by a majority.
(3) You seem to be failing to see the magnitudes. (Also, there is a difference between being poor and being poor and tortured.)
(4) (I figured you are) Its already a last resort. It has been a last resort for 20 years. You are blinding yourself with rethorics. Saddam is a dictator. Never in the history a ruthless dictator (like Saddam) said "OK, I had enough, lets set up a democracy". Its a last resort because for 12 years there has been foolish attempts to do something that smart people would tell you its a futile attempt in the first place. But whatever - we tried, 12 years and been fooled around.
(5) If you would read my posts you would see that I embrace their right to protest and voice their opinion even if I think its wrong. I dont have to agree with them just because they have a right to protest - do I?

[Pidgin]

Originally posted by Danny_C
(1)Whose post did you read?
(2)...But you know what: we don't need to do anything within Iraq, because terrorism isn't coming from Iraq.
(3) As for the weapons of mass destruction... none have been found, and I doubt any will be.
(4)I definitely don't believe in slaughtering civilians on the basis of a suspicion.
(5)"As to you believing that if US be all positive and do "everything right" it can't fail..." I said this? I said that much more good can be done with positive action than with bombings. Don't misquote me.
(6) Well, I'm an atheist, not worried about being "holy". also realist, so "waking up" won't happen.
(7) In fact, I could argue that 9/11 woke me up to the fact that there can be severe consequences to foreign policies that lack compassion for people.

(1) Yours - the one with the flower kid
(2) MUHAHA - How did you become such an expert in the matter when all the intelligence agencies say otherwise? Cause you heard Saddam say that when some briton interviewed him? Fact man, facts - its a bitch I know - but they point to a different story.
(3) They have been found on the bodies of people he killed in the Iraq/Iran war. It has been found when Israel bombed is nueclear reactor in 81. It has been found when he imported materials needed for atomic weapons.
As to the inspectors ever finding any? I agree with you - none will ever be found by them (or maybe accidentaly will) - thats why they don't worth shit. Inspectors can not operate in Iraq in their current form. They are useless
(4) Who does? You seem to not see the bigger picture and the real reason this war is immenent
(5)And I said that even if they do EVERYTHING right you will probably be very disappointed about the outcome. Which relates to point (7)
(6) I hardly meant "holy" in the religious sense. As to waking up - thats my belief - you are still a long way from waking up. It will happen (imho) since reality didn't hit you hard enough yet.
(7) Thats what I mean "holy". Don't give me more of this "globalization" and "US bully" BS.
btw I'm not from the US but from Israel - so I'm not even protecting anything which I have interestes in.. BUT lets say tomorrow 2 planes would crash into EmpireState and Chrysler buildings, and you realized that an Israeli group called "El-kaka" did it because they are unhappy about fact that US didn't transfer enough funds to Israel or because US pushed Israel into negotiations with the palestinians which cause alot of hard to Israel.
Would you say - "poor Israelis what did we "evil US" did to them. lets give them more funds and throw PR and food at them cause they must hate us for a good reason"?
In fact - if "El-kaka" would take a plane and crash it into the middle of the people in Meca killing hundrads of Muslims - saying it was done because they hate Israel and call for its destruction - would you say "Poor Israelis - look what those Muslims pushed them to do. The muslims should say their sorry"?

[ARiA]

Originally posted by Danny_C
No, I'm not a hippy.

I'd categorize myself with the group who thinks that Saddam needs to be dealt with, but that war is the wrong solution. I think war will cause more problems than it solves. I mean, there's no denying (on either side of the debate) that there would be benefits AND consequences to going to war and eliminating Saddam (the benefits depending, of course, on our success, which I think would be inevitable). Coming to a decision is a matter of weighing those benefits against those consequences. I don't think any advocate of war believes that there won't be consequences, and I don't believe any intelligent protester thinks Iraq is better off with Saddam Hussein in power.

My general philosophy is that people act barbaric because they're uneducated, impoverished, brainwashed, or desperate. If we want to eliminate terrorism, which I believe is at the root of the positive aspect of going to war, then I believe we need to deal with what causes that behavior. If people are starving, we should try to feed them. If people are brainwashed or uneducated, we should try to educate them. If people are desperate, and believe we are the cause of their anguish, then we need to launch a PR attack rather than a missile attack. Making people more impoverished through sanctions, or more uneducated because we've ruined an economy, or more desperate because American bombs are dropping all around them is going to spur them to even more drastic action. In fact, not only do I think peaceful solutions are possible (and would do more to make us safer from terrorism), but they would be cheaper than going to war.

Besides all that, going to war right now is going to paint a big target on the U.S. If anything goes wrong, the U.S. will be to blame. If everything goes right, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians are killed in the process, then the U.S. will be held responsible. Right now more than ever, it's common sense that we need allies more than we need enemies. And I only see our list of enemies growing (and our allies growing more wary of us).

I agree!
I went to listen to what people had to say about it. I wasn't there to rally with a sign. I went, I listened, I left.
some people had intelligent things to say some didn't... but everyone had the chance to say what they felt, what they were thinking and they were heard. it makes a difference if the people you are representing/protecting dont agree with what you are doing.

[dyonisus]

XXX Manager..

dude, are you going to go to war??? Are you willing to take up arms yourself and go fight this battle along side the forces already mounting in the Middle East??

You seem to suggest you know alot about what I do or do not know. You forget, you are only expressing your opinions, dont chastise others for theirs and accuse them of being uninformed. I happen to be very informed when it comes to world politics, by choice.

If you believe that the US does not have economic interests in Iraq, then more power to you. But the fact is, the US helped arm Iraq in the first place. (At the very least this demonstrates the US is fickle in its allegences)

I dont disagree that Saddam is horrible, and I do not doubt that he possesses the ability to follow through on the fears US propoganda is spilling... but does that mean thousands of people must should other countries other then the US have a means to remove him from power.

I have come to this conclusion and absolve myself of this thread...
You have an opinion and defy anyone to challenge it. The UN is not a joke, every nation should have a say in how the world evolves. If war at this piont truly were "a last resort" then I believe there would already be war!!

Killing another human being is MURDER no matter which way you disguise it... and I do believe that it is torture for the less fortunate who are impoverished to have to live on the streets day in and day out never knowing where their next meal is comign from or if they are going to live to see another day!!!

[Pidgin]

Originally posted by dyonisus
dude, are you going to go to war??? Are you willing to take up arms yourself and go fight this battle along side the forces already mounting in the Middle East??

I live in the middle east. I am currently in a state of war. I am willing and have no choice but to participate in the coming war because the leader you suggest we should ignore will bomb israel even though she has nothing to do with him. So the answer to your question is yes.
I ask you - do you use thie objection to war just to excuse yourself for not doing anything to protect yourself but leave that to others.

Originally posted by dyonisus
You seem to suggest you know alot about what I do or do not know....

When someone says the starving people in US and UK is parallel to the suffering of people in Iraq and therefore compare Iraq and US or UK in the seriousness of the situation, you are mistaken.

Originally posted by dyonisus
If you believe that the US does not have economic interests in Iraq, then more power to you. But the fact is, the US helped arm Iraq in the first place.

I didnt say that - on the contrary. But you seem to not realize that there is other thngs beside money - like life, death and security and stability of thew world?

Originally posted by dyonisus
Killing another human being is MURDER no matter which way you disguise it... and I do believe that it is torture for the less fortunate who are impoverished to have to live on the streets day in and day out never knowing where their next meal is comign from or if they are going to live to see another day!!!

What is the point of this paragraph?

Some facts representing some of my thoughts:
US is going to disarm Saddam, which is essential and can not be avoided. The UN you value its opinion has said in 1441 that this is essential and urgent (last chance). Unlike you present the "war" this is not about bombing people. when you look at this war - see its purpose as well, not only the suffering caused. There is a grave danger that will happen if this "war" was not engaged.
Act of force has sometimes bad implications. So does not acting.
There is a phrase saying: "Attack is the best way of defense". You rather sit back and wait for an A-Bomb in your town before acting? Or you are so sure or "know" that is not something thats gonna happen cause the world is such a lovely place.
Iraq and Saddam is a dark and evil regime, you might fail to see that. It means that this regime is a danger for me and you and our way of life. So are many other dictatorships especially in the fundementalist regimes.
I love peace. I love life. I will not sit back and let someone take it from me just because I have no balls doing something. Sometimes you have to stop saying "Its my fault that everyone hates me" and think about it for a minute.

Read my posts and see I dont think war is good - death is good - poverty and suffering is good.
The suffer of the people of Iraq is a bad thing.

If anything, I wonder what you and other thing about that: is the "free" world have an obligation to liberate other people from "darkness"? or if its not in our "backyard" its not our concern?