*** Official Anti War Protestor Thread***SanFrancisco, No Business as Usual....

[snidy1]

Originally posted by: PipBoy

Originally posted by: CZroe
Any protestors who think Bush made the wrong decidion to attack Iraq need to understand this...


You have made your decision.

Bush has made his decision.

You disagree with Bush.

Yes or no?

The CIA reports to Bush.

The CIA does not report to you.

Yes or no?

It's no secret that Bush has information you don't.

Bush has therefore made a more informed decision.

Yes or no? (Never mind... You CANNOT dispute this.)

It's no secret that it is information you can't have.

He was elected to make this decision based on his information.

If your decision would be different, keep in mind that you are currently not as well informed as the president.

You must trust that he secretly knows more than you about the situation and can make a better decision with that information.

After all, those that gave him this information unanimously support and recommended the idea.

It was his decision, not his idea.



DO NOT fall into the increasingly common mindset that "Just because my decision is different that the president's I must be smarter than him and the majority of US supporters." This is the lie that the democratic media and free speech has enticed so many to accept. Logically, it feels good to be smarter than the president so you may convince yourself that you are but you are simply working with less information.

I hope you never disagree with a decision the president makes, because this argument can be applied to anything. "If you disagree, you don't have enough information." May as well roll over and let the government run your life. It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the American public to question the decisions of its leaders, and if they disagree, protest and vote those leaders out.

You can disagree with the president, but if you do you should write him or get a petition. Don't go out and make fools of yourselves and disrupt the normal person?s life.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: lupy
Do you feel dirty now that you are maintaining equipments I (the dirty protestor) might have been involved in building?

So, you don't mind making money off the evil war machine that you despise so much?

 

[snidy1]

I *think* the point they're trying to make isn't that civilians are purposefully targetted - but that from the point of view of the soon-to-be-dead civilian it would be better to live under the regime than be killed by a bomb (accidentally obviously) as part of a liberation effort. Especially when the liberation comes externally - rather than from their own people and by their choice.

I would give up my life to help future generations with no problem.

 

[SickBeast]

From the article: "Classified US Defence Dep-artment documents also seen by the Sunday Herald show that Britain sold Iraq the drug pralidoxine, an antidote to nerve gas, in March 1992, after the end of the Gulf war. Pralidoxine can be reverse engineered to create nerve gas."
Did they mean "Declassified documents from the Department of Defense"? How did the Sunday Herald get to view classified documents?? Are we just going to take their word for it? Sure, I saw classified info about Area51 too. Aliens really do exist...
I seriously question the legitimacy of this information...
Sarcasm aside, let's just say the US and UK DID sell these agents. That is beside the point: that Iraq was not allowed to possess these agents AFTER the Gulf War. It states these agents were sold to Iraq in 1988, so what? Reagan's administration wasn't squeaky clean, gee what a surprise. When you think about it, what administration is? We can go on and on... but you are diverting from the point by saying that we sold them these agents... They would have bought them from someone eventually, no? If a criminal wants a gun bad enough, he's going to go out and buy one, whether it be from a corrupt cop or a drug dealer.
And in response to your nuke statement... India and Pakistan detonated one just recently, you probably saw it on the news. As has Russia, and probably other countries like North Korea. That counts as "using" them, no? Your Q and A did not state they were "used to kill human beings". There are many countries that have the capability, it's only a matter of time before a madman like Saddam pushes a button to kill humans (see: Murphy's Law).

You make some good points, but I don't understand how you don't see the hypocrocy in the fact that the US sold Iraq the materials/technology for these weapons, and now they are banning them. Picture yourself buying a car, only to be told by GM three years later that you had to destroy it or else they would blow up your house.

And saying that they would have bought the materials from someone else is pretty lame. That's like saying "I don't mind the drug dealer down the street who sold my son cocaine. He would have bought it from someone else anyways".

 

[SickBeast]

Q. How many huge opulent palaces has Saddam built in those years.
A. 12

Q. How much has the US spent on its' military budget since then?
A. ???

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: snidy1

I *think* the point they're trying to make isn't that civilians are purposefully targetted - but that from the point of view of the soon-to-be-dead civilian it would be better to live under the regime than be killed by a bomb (accidentally obviously) as part of a liberation effort. Especially when the liberation comes externally - rather than from their own people and by their choice.

I would give up my life to help future generations with no problem.

With respect - you can't speak for the oppressed Iraqi people - however honourable your intentions. So this is really a moot point.

Andy

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

From the article: "Classified US Defence Dep-artment documents also seen by the Sunday Herald show that Britain sold Iraq the drug pralidoxine, an antidote to nerve gas, in March 1992, after the end of the Gulf war. Pralidoxine can be reverse engineered to create nerve gas."
Did they mean "Declassified documents from the Department of Defense"? How did the Sunday Herald get to view classified documents?? Are we just going to take their word for it? Sure, I saw classified info about Area51 too. Aliens really do exist...
I seriously question the legitimacy of this information...
Sarcasm aside, let's just say the US and UK DID sell these agents. That is beside the point: that Iraq was not allowed to possess these agents AFTER the Gulf War. It states these agents were sold to Iraq in 1988, so what? Reagan's administration wasn't squeaky clean, gee what a surprise. When you think about it, what administration is? We can go on and on... but you are diverting from the point by saying that we sold them these agents... They would have bought them from someone eventually, no? If a criminal wants a gun bad enough, he's going to go out and buy one, whether it be from a corrupt cop or a drug dealer.
And in response to your nuke statement... India and Pakistan detonated one just recently, you probably saw it on the news. As has Russia, and probably other countries like North Korea. That counts as "using" them, no? Your Q and A did not state they were "used to kill human beings". There are many countries that have the capability, it's only a matter of time before a madman like Saddam pushes a button to kill humans (see: Murphy's Law).

You make some good points, but I don't understand how you don't see the hypocrocy in the fact that the US sold Iraq the materials/technology for these weapons, and now they are banning them. Picture yourself buying a car, only to be told by GM three years later that you had to destroy it or else they would blow up your house.

And saying that they would have bought the materials from someone else is pretty lame. That's like saying "I don't mind the drug dealer down the street who sold my son cocaine. He would have bought it from someone else anyways".

Of course it is hypocritical, I don't dispute that... but specifically, you're talking about two totally different time periods here: Pre Gulf War, and Post Gulf War. The facts are the facts, we have overthrown regimes secretly and openly (Panama comes to mind). We have used atomic weapons in war before, we have had an administration where the President used cigars inappropriately. If you really want to point the finger, then write a letter to members of the Reagan administration and blame them, not George W's administration. He didn't sell Iraq an ounce of these weapons... it was almost 2 decades ago that this happened (1986). As an extreme example, that's like blaming Germany's present gov't for what Hitler did.

Yes, I picture myself buying a car, and using that car to run over innocent people so I can steal their wallets. Then GM would tell me to destroy it, or they would blow up my house. And they would be perfectly justified in asking me to do so, b/c then I would be in the wrong just as Saddam was for trying to take over Kuwait.

Yes, I personally think Iraq would have bought them from someone else IMO. Look at North Korea, India, and Pakistan? We didn't sell them these nukes, how did they magically attain them? How did China obtain their Isreali missles? If Israel didn't sell them, don't you think China would have found someone who would have? Yes, I agreed with you that recent US administrations were corrupt for the sale of these weapons. Corruption means there is a lack of morals. So in essence I'm not arguing what they did was wrong, I'm saying that Iraq, IMO, would have bought them elsewhere from a different corrupt country. If you're implying that I should take an antiwar stance b/c of a past United States' corrupted gov't, then that's pretty weak.

 

[SickBeast]

If you're implying that I should take an antiwar stance b/c of a past United States' corrupted gov't, then that's pretty weak.

Fair enough.

All of that aside tho, I still feel that the war is immoral, illegal, and is going to kill innocent people.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

If you're implying that I should take an antiwar stance b/c of a past United States' corrupted gov't, then that's pretty weak.

Fair enough.

All of that aside tho, I still feel that the war is immoral, illegal, and is going to kill innocent people.

It will definitely kill innocent people, as will any war.

The illegality of the war is true, if you feel that no action should be taken without the UN's approval (yet 9 of 15 countries approved of the war, the only hurdle was getting France NOT to veto which we all know is a lost cause). It (the illegality) is false, if you feel that the US has information that the UN does not, and the information is strong enough to act on. Both are pretty grey areas, because we don't have information to the motives of the French/Germans/Russians (grudges? pure enmity for us? revenge for petty verbal barbs traded with one another?), as well information that our intelligence has found. Why do you think it's illegal?

Immoral is subjective, it's a person's definition of morals. Some would say the war is in fact moral b/c it liberates the Iraqi's from a ruthless dictator. Others argue it's immoral b/c we are attacking a country that has not engaged us on their own. Why do you think it's immoral?

 

[smartt]

All of that aside tho, I still feel that the war is immoral, illegal, and is going to kill innocent people. Woah, for a second there I couldn't figure out if you were talking about the war or Sadaam Hussein. He's been doing that for over a decade. That's his business, right? Go back to your A/C, sit down, drink some lemonade, and let the people who really give a crap about morality, legality, and innocent people take care of him.

 

[smartt]

Q. What are France, Germany and Russia's plan for Iraq instead of removing Saddam by force. A. Continue the Sanctions. Not really, Russia plans on selling Iraq equipment. No wonder, the 'still' communist bastards were against the war.

 

[joohang]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: cakin
While on a plane today, I heard someone say that North Korea now has the ability to launch a missile that could hit the West Coast.

SO? Whats the harm in that - would we lose anything if the left coast was hit?

If they did that, North Korea would be a huge crater on the globe. We have 4 nuclear submarines near Korea.

No, there will be huge craters all over the world.

North Korea =/= Iraq. Let's not even imply that as a joke.

 

[joohang]

Another subject I'd like to bring up:
Please stop judging people in terms of 2 extremes - pro-war and anti-war.

These days, I have trouble saying any sh*t because people impose all sorts of stereotypes and/or start off by calling me names.

I can never fully support the war because I do not see a good enough reason to start such invasion, and I think that it will only escalate the hate against Americans and make it more likely for terrorists to attack the US.

At the same time, now that the war has started, I hope that the coalition forces do win with minimal casualties.

Also, I see where the pro-war people are coming from and start to see your points of view, although I don't agree with everything you say.

Is it so difficult to recognize that people could take a more or less neutral stance? These days, I can't even post anything where I sympathize the Iraqi civilians without getting bashed. And if I say anything where I express my sympathies for dead, injured and captured coalition soldiers, I get, "It's a war. What did you expect?"

Some, and perhaps many, do not take the stance in either extreme. If they make an argument you don't agree with, feel free to debate, but let's please stop creating a false persona just to bash the person and release your frustration for not understanding other points of view.

(BTW, this also goes to anti-war people.)

 

[SickBeast]

Woah, for a second there I couldn't figure out if you were talking about the war or Sadaam Hussein. He's been doing that for over a decade. That's his business, right? Go back to your A/C, sit down, drink some lemonade, and let the people who really give a crap about morality, legality, and innocent people take care of him.

Sorry, but we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. This conflict could have been resolved peacefully. Oh, and don't give me that whole 12-years-to-disarm speech. Iraq was showing signs that they were going to comply.

I know there's a chance that I'll have to eat my words if they find chemical weapons in Iraq. It still won't change my opinion of the war tho. Look at all of the people that died in Vietnam. Look at all of the US casualties thus far. It's sad, and it could have been avoided.

 

[smartt]

I'm with you. Nobody likes war. I am not pro-war, or anti-war, but I'm definitely anti-Sadaam. I don't think the world di enough to get rid of him. How were we to know that countries like France and Russia have been hlping economically all along?

 

[smartt]

Iraq was showing signs that they were going to comply. Clinton showed signs he didn't have sex with Monica Lewinski. That was the Sadaam way, tell them what they want to hear. Truth is, up until now, he did just as little as possible, or whatever he thought he could get away with, to avoid conflict. If he was truly sincere, he would have been a lot more willing and showed more evidence. The 'burden of proof', in this case, was definitely his burden to bear.

 

[olds]

This guy has such a strong belief in what he's saying that he covers his face.

 

[joohang]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
This guy has such a strong belief in what he's saying that he covers his face.

WTF??? That's just wrong.

 

[deepinya]

Originally posted by: deepinya
Is it true that people fell off the Golden Gate Bridge while protesting? A friend of mine told me that but Im not sure if he heard it right.

Well?!?!

 

[jahawkin]

Link

The only speaker [at a pro-war rally] who received a hostile reception was N. Ruby Zigrino, a Muslim from Minneapolis. She was initially cheered when she said she supports "ousting a tyrant regime."

But she then read passages from the Qur'an, suggested that a new Marshall Plan will be needed in Iraq, and said administration officials should study foreign-policy failures to avoid repeating them.

Her listeners responded with boos and shouts of "Screw Muslims!" "Screw the Qur'an!" and "Go home!"

A turnout of 25,000 was mentioned more than once from the podium, but it was closer to 16,000 to 17,000, according to a count by the Star Tribune that was verified by the Minnesota State Patrol.

I guess I could make generalization after generalization, but I won't.
Edit: Oh ya, I bet this was a corporate sponsered pro-war rally.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Link

The only speaker [at a pro-war rally] who received a hostile reception was N. Ruby Zigrino, a Muslim from Minneapolis. She was initially cheered when she said she supports "ousting a tyrant regime."

But she then read passages from the Qur'an, suggested that a new Marshall Plan will be needed in Iraq, and said administration officials should study foreign-policy failures to avoid repeating them.

Her listeners responded with boos and shouts of "Screw Muslims!" "Screw the Qur'an!" and "Go home!"

A turnout of 25,000 was mentioned more than once from the podium, but it was closer to 16,000 to 17,000, according to a count by the Star Tribune that was verified by the Minnesota State Patrol.

I guess I could make generalization after generalization, but I won't.
Edit: Oh ya, I bet this was a corporate sponsered pro-war rally.

I doubt it

There wasn't a "sponser" - atleast at the "Rally for America" rally I attended on the capitol steps here in Des Moines. pics

CkG

 

[joohang]

Just saw on CNN that some moronic protestors set off a propane gas tank. WTF?

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Link

The only speaker [at a pro-war rally] who received a hostile reception was N. Ruby Zigrino, a Muslim from Minneapolis. She was initially cheered when she said she supports "ousting a tyrant regime."

But she then read passages from the Qur'an, suggested that a new Marshall Plan will be needed in Iraq, and said administration officials should study foreign-policy failures to avoid repeating them.

Her listeners responded with boos and shouts of "Screw Muslims!" "Screw the Qur'an!" and "Go home!"

A turnout of 25,000 was mentioned more than once from the podium, but it was closer to 16,000 to 17,000, according to a count by the Star Tribune that was verified by the Minnesota State Patrol.

I guess I could make generalization after generalization, but I won't.
Edit: Oh ya, I bet this was a corporate sponsered pro-war rally.

I doubt it

There wasn't a "sponser" - atleast at the "Rally for America" rally I attended on the capitol steps here in Des Moines. pics

CkG

Was a radio station promoting the rally?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Link

The only speaker [at a pro-war rally] who received a hostile reception was N. Ruby Zigrino, a Muslim from Minneapolis. She was initially cheered when she said she supports "ousting a tyrant regime."

But she then read passages from the Qur'an, suggested that a new Marshall Plan will be needed in Iraq, and said administration officials should study foreign-policy failures to avoid repeating them.

Her listeners responded with boos and shouts of "Screw Muslims!" "Screw the Qur'an!" and "Go home!"

A turnout of 25,000 was mentioned more than once from the podium, but it was closer to 16,000 to 17,000, according to a count by the Star Tribune that was verified by the Minnesota State Patrol.

I guess I could make generalization after generalization, but I won't.
Edit: Oh ya, I bet this was a corporate sponsered pro-war rally.

I doubt it

There wasn't a "sponser" - atleast at the "Rally for America" rally I attended on the capitol steps here in Des Moines. pics

CkG

Was a radio station promoting the rally?

Nope - not to my knowledge - infact there wasn't very much coverage at all only a short blurb on the local network news.

CkG

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Take the War on Iraq IQ Test:
1. Q: What percentage of the world's population does the U.S. have?
A: 6%
2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does the U.S. have?
A: 50%
3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves?
A: Saudi Arabia
4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil reserves?
A: Iraq
5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year worldwide?
A: $900+ billion
6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?
A:50%
7. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the essentials of life to everyone in the world, according the the UN?
A: 10% (that's about $40 billion, the amount of funding initially requested to fund our retaliatory attack on Afghanistan).
8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World War II?
A: 86 million
9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological weapons?
A: Since the early 1980's.
10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical and biological weapons on their own?
A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by the US government, along with Britain and private corporations.
11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare against Iran?
A: No
12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas in the Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988?
A: 5,000
13. Q: How many western countries condemned this action at the time? A:0
14. Q: How many gallons of Agent Orange did America use in Vietnam? A: 17 million.
15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and September 11th terrorist attack?
A: No
16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf War?
A: 35,000
17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the western forces during the Gulf War ?
A: 0
18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by U.S. tanks with ploughs mounted on the front?
A: 6,000
19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait after the Gulf War?
A: 40 tons
20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in cancer rates in Iraq between 1991 and 1994?
A: 700%
21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did America claim it had destroyed in 1991?
A: 80%
22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use its weapons for anything other than deterrence and self defense?
A: No
23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world peace now than 10 years ago?
A: No
24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon predicted in the event of an attack on Iraq in 2002/3?
A: 10,000
25. Q: What percentage of these will be children?
A: Over 50%
26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air strikes on Iraq?
A: 11 years
27. Q: Was the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999?
A: No
28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999?
A: 20 million
29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661 introduced, imposing strict sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?
A: 12 years
30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in 1989 (per 1,000 births)? A: 38
31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000 births)?
A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)
32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died by October 1999 as a result of UN sanctions?
A: 1.5 million
33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to sanctions since 1997?
A: 750,000
34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq?
A:No
35. Q: How many inspections were there in November and December 1998?
A:300
36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems?
A:5
37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to the Ba'ath Party HQ?
A: Yes
38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, Iraq had in fact, been disarmed to a level unprecedented in modern history.
A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief.
39. Q: In 1998 how much of Iraq's post 1991 capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors claim to have discovered and dismantled?
A: 90%
40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons inspectors back in?
A:Yes
41. Q: How many UN resolutions did Israel violate by 1992?
A: Over 65
42. Q: How many UN resolutions on Israel did America veto between 1972 and 1990?
A: 30+
43. Q: How much does the U.S. fund Israel a year?
A: $5 billion
44. Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons?
A: 8
45. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Iraq have?
A: 0
46. Q: How many nuclear warheads does US have?
A: over 10,000
47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons?
A: the US
48. Q: How many nuclear warheads does Israel have?
A: over 400
49. Q: Has Israel ever allowed UN weapons inspections?
A: No
50. Q: What percentage of the Palestinian territories are controlled by Israeli settlements?
A: 42%
51. Q: Is Israel illegally occupying Palestinian land?
A: Yes
52. Q: Which country do you think poses the greatest threat to global peace: Iraq or the U.S.?
A: ?
53. Q: Who said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter"?
A: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr

Many of these are subjective propaganda and purely opinion, for example:

40. Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons inspectors back in?
A:Yes
--------------------------------
22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use its weapons for anything other than deterrence and self defense?
A: No
-------------------------------
23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world peace now than 10 years ago?
A: No
-------------------------------
51. Q: Is Israel illegally occupying Palestinian land?
A: Yes




Other notes:

38. Q: Who said that by December 1998, Iraq had in fact, been disarmed to a level unprecedented in modern history.
A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief.
Scott Ritter and Hans Blix are both fools IMO, SCUDS were launched at the US just days ago and they failed to find them. We now have Blix's blessing on the war, if you need proof, I'll send u a link to his latest interview.
------------------------------
10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical and biological weapons on their own?
A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by the US government, along with Britain and private corporations.
Prove it with a link please
------------------------------
47. Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons?
A: the US
You forgot the Soviet Union, Pakistan, and India

Now the real question: How many times did Iraq violate UN Resolution 1441? Who is going to enforce these violations?

Next time, don't waste 1/3 of a page with incorrect antiwar propaganda. Just the FACTS please.

SCUD FUD No SCUDs have been fired, no SCUDs have even been found. The missiles used have been Al Samoud and Al Samoud2, not SCUDs. You'll find many references to SCUDs, that is true, however, after investigation of the "SCUDs", they were found to not be SCUDs. Wonder why this isn't being parroted by the US/Coalition?