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

[Murphyrulez]

Originally posted by: colonel
If they're breaking the law, they will be arrested.
If they're not breaking the law, they're excercising their liberties as defined by the Constitution.

Why do you keep saying this? Does that make it ok? Does the fact that if they do something wrong they will be arrested make you feel better about supporting these idiots? If I go and kill someone, and get arrested, is everything all better? No, because someone is dead.

These people that are doing something wrong, half of them may get arrested. NONE of them are giving thought to the consequences of their actions. The millions of dollars the cities are paying due to their protests. The people who can't get to the hospitals. The people who can't get home from work.

I was just watching CNN, protesters in NY were running from the police. Throwing trash cans at police cars. That's nice. Looked like most of the people there were kids just running around having "fun". Yeah, nice protest.

 

[ToBeMe]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Bush has burned American capital like Armageddon was right around the corner. He's got a huge portion of the world against us even in countries whose governments support us. And he's got protest at home. All you hear out of England is 'illegal imoral war'. If you go off and do something people are opposed to and you know they are, you have only yourself to blame for the trouble it causes. Bush is the cause of the war on war. He won't resign. He ignores the warnings to step away.

Can't comment on many other countries because no information is available as fact, but, FYI..................according to BBC TV 76% of US supports war and 56% of UK now supports blair and war in iraq.....................

 

[DanJ]

Originally posted by: ToBeMe
Can't comment on many other countries because no information is available as fact, but, FYI..................according to BBC TV 76% of US supports war and 56% of UK now supports blair and war in iraq.....................

Thats great, you can expet people of country's whose troops are on the line to support their country more, but how is world opinion?

Remember, the forces in this war are 85% U.S., the rest being UK and a little bit from Australia. World opinion in our favor leads to less terrorism. World opinion against us leads to more terrorism, more descent, more alienation from the globe and less allies in the future. Look at the coalition we had in Desert Storm as opposed to the coalition we have now. Its nowhere near as strong.

I believe a time article a few months ago said that 80% of the globe felt that the U.S. was the biggest threat to world peace.

How'd we lose our post 9-11 public support so damn fast?

 

[human2k]

Originally posted by: PG
haha

This just shows you that all peace protestors are idiots.

 

[DanJ]

Originally posted by: human2k

Originally posted by: PG
haha

This just shows you that all peace protestors are idiots.

Yes, one sign covers what, ~80% of the globe?

 

[ToBeMe]

Originally posted by: DanJ

Originally posted by: ToBeMe
Can't comment on many other countries because no information is available as fact, but, FYI..................according to BBC TV 76% of US supports war and 56% of UK now supports blair and war in iraq.....................

Thats great, you can expet people of country's whose troops are on the line to support their country more, but how is world opinion?

Remember, the forces in this war are 85% U.S., the rest being UK and a little bit from Australia. World opinion in our favor leads to less terrorism. World opinion against us leads to more terrorism, more descent, more alienation from the globe and less allies in the future. Look at the coalition we had in Desert Storm as opposed to the coalition we have now. Its nowhere near as strong.

I believe a time article a few months ago said that 80% of the globe felt that the U.S. was the biggest threat to world peace.

How'd we lose our post 9-11 public support so damn fast?

Well......not agreeing or disagreeing........to many variables. What I can say and is pretty much fact.............let's wait on the outcome and see whom rallies to our side to get a piece of the rebuilding and future iraqi contracts before we know whom our future allies are.

As for terrorism...................it well may happen..................but, it hasn't thus far and quite frankly, may happen no matter what we do short of giving in to their every whim which will never happen..............

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

The U.S. has support from more than 35 world nations. Maybe not military support, but financial and political. Just because we only have a few countries sending troops along with us doesn't mean the rest of the world is against us.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: ffmcobalt
The U.S. has support from more than 35 world nations. Maybe not military support, but financial and political. Just because we only have a few countries sending troops along with us doesn't mean the rest of the world is against us.

a point to make is that most countries troups wouldn't interface with ours very well and actually detract from the overall fighting capability.

 

[conjur]

-10 points for use of the word 'interface'

I heard on the radio on the way back home that the coalition forces are moving in from all directions (N, S, E, and W). Closing in....

 

[sandorski]

Just a thought to ponder for thos who are Anti-Protest(specifically those against those who are Protesting against the war):

Allowing Peace Protestors to protest, though inconvenient and sometimes violent/criminal, is better for everyone than banning their protest. By allowing them to protest they are able to vent their anger and pent up emotions, if this was denied to them and they were pushed underground, they'd turn violent in similar fashion as Tim McVeigh or Al Queda. So, despite the negatives of the current protests, and they are many, in the long run everybody will be better off.

 

[Spamela]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Just a thought to ponder for thos who are Anti-Protest(specifically those against those who are Protesting against the war):

Allowing Peace Protestors to protest, though inconvenient and sometimes violent/criminal, is better for everyone than banning their protest. By allowing them to protest they are able to vent their anger and pent up emotions, if this was denied to them and they were pushed underground, they'd turn violent in similar fashion as Tim McVeigh or Al Queda. So, despite the negatives of the current protests, and they are many, in the long run everybody will be better off.

i've always thought that this was one of the primary benefits of free speech.

OTOH, i doubt that Tim McVeigh or those prone to violence bite their tongues much.

 

[DanJ]

Originally posted by: ffmcobalt
The U.S. has support from more than 35 world nations. Maybe not military support, but financial and political. Just because we only have a few countries sending troops along with us doesn't mean the rest of the world is against us.

35 sounds like quality support until you look at the current Countries mentioned (remembering there is about 200 countries in the world):

Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Kuwait, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, Palau, Portugal, Rwanda, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Uganda.

We lost 21 of the 34 countries we had in Desert Storm, "many of which provided substantial military assistance, and many of whom were from the Arab world." Makes more since for countries in the Arab world to support us then it does, say, Iceland. Of course the Desert Storm coalition does not mention all the countries that gave us political support or symbolic support, as our current one does.

"Only five small central American and Caribbean nations, and Colombia - where the US is funding a huge anti-drugs war - were prepared to be identified with the US coalition. "
"Ethiopia and Eritrea, are bitter rivals who are both seeking US support in a boundary dispute"
"Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Iceland...are seeking US financial or military support through Nato."

Quote are from the BBC.

I'm sure Bush would like to add some larger, more powerful countries to the list (France, Russia, China, Germany, Japan (actual support, not just aftermath), etc.)

We've lost the great majority of the globe's support that we had in the aftermath of 9-11.

As to: "a point to make is that most countries troups wouldn't interface with ours very well and actually detract from the overall fighting capability. "

I disagree. I think their support would make this not seem like a war only by the U.S., rather a war on Saddam by the world.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: DanJ


As to: "a point to make is that most countries troups wouldn't interface with ours very well and actually detract from the overall fighting capability. "

I disagree. I think their support would make this not seem like a war only by the U.S., rather a war on Saddam by the world.

while their support would be nice i do seriously think that if we were getting combat troops from country X they're more likely to slow the US forces down simply because they don't have the capabilities that the US military has.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Spamela

Originally posted by: sandorski
Just a thought to ponder for thos who are Anti-Protest(specifically those against those who are Protesting against the war):

Allowing Peace Protestors to protest, though inconvenient and sometimes violent/criminal, is better for everyone than banning their protest. By allowing them to protest they are able to vent their anger and pent up emotions, if this was denied to them and they were pushed underground, they'd turn violent in similar fashion as Tim McVeigh or Al Queda. So, despite the negatives of the current protests, and they are many, in the long run everybody will be better off.

i've always thought that this was one of the primary benefits of free speech.

OTOH, i doubt that Tim McVeigh or those prone to violence bite their tongues much.

Agree on both points, especially McVeigh, he probably was openly opinionated(dunno though, he may have been one of those silent types everyone says was "nice" "good neighbour" etc). For the vast majority of people though, being able to vent will deflate them back to their everyday issues(bills, work, yadda ya).

 

[DanJ]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DanJ
As to: "a point to make is that most countries troups wouldn't interface with ours very well and actually detract from the overall fighting capability. "

I disagree. I think their support would make this not seem like a war only by the U.S., rather a war on Saddam by the world.

while their support would be nice i do seriously think that if we were getting combat troops from country X they're more likely to slow the US forces down simply because they don't have the capabilities that the US military has.

The coalition we had back in Desert Storm was a global opposition that didn't completely alienate the U.S. from the rest of the world. Just because we are the strongest and we might be inconvenienced slightly by combining with other militaries does not mean it would worsen our position; rather, as countries have a natural patriotism to their troops, it would bring us closer to said country which would improve global opinion. We can't be the world's military.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DanJ


As to: "a point to make is that most countries troups wouldn't interface with ours very well and actually detract from the overall fighting capability. "

I disagree. I think their support would make this not seem like a war only by the U.S., rather a war on Saddam by the world.

while their support would be nice i do seriously think that if we were getting combat troops from country X they're more likely to slow the US forces down simply because they don't have the capabilities that the US military has.

I think most NATO countries have the capability and compatibility to operate together(as well as training), but you are correct in that the fewer nations involved(unless they there were many paths to Bagdad, I suppose) the smoother things would likely go.

OTOH, as we know, the lack of "support" politically, diplomatically, and financially has a certain as yet undetermined cost.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: conjur
[

And I'll stand by my "Anti-Bush rallies by ticked off Liberals" until just ONE of these 'anti-war' protests actually becomes something of substance when a rally is held and a decent alternative to a forced disarmament is offered.

Ok, well you can stop right now then because there have been many alternative solutions presented. Many at the protests were passing out literature with alternative solutions....in a lot of cases printed by the individual.

So are you done now? Because war isn't a liberal/conservative issue in the first place. I have run into quite a few Republicans that don't like the way Bush handled this whole mess.

Such as??

And don't give me tougher inspections as one. 12 years later, they had not done what was hoped they would have achieved.

Go out to a protest and see for yourself. It's pretty easy for you try and dismiss their point of view when you don't even know what it is. But I don't think you really even want to know, you'd prefer to sit behind your keyboard and accuse them of not saying anything.

The people milling about in the streets have genrally put A LOT of thought into this. Many of them have printed up their own personal writings and thoughts on the matter. If you really are pretending to be so open minded that you'd like to hear what they have to say then go talk to them.

When I ran across the protest the other day after work I was all about getting some pictures. If they are out this week I will pick up as much reading material as I can manage and scan it. That way nobody but me will really have to make any effort to hear what they have to say.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: human2k

Originally posted by: PG
haha

This just shows you that all peace protestors are idiots.

This just shows that everyone with a lion avatar is a moron. About the same reasoning.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: flavio

Go out to a protest and see for yourself. It's pretty easy for you try and dismiss their point of view when you don't even know what it is. But I don't think you really even want to know, you'd prefer to sit behind your keyboard and accuse them of not saying anything.

The people milling about in the streets have genrally put A LOT of thought into this. Many of them have printed up their own personal writings and thoughts on the matter. If you really are pretending to be so open minded that you'd like to hear what they have to say then go talk to them.

When I ran across the protest the other day after work I was all about getting some pictures. If they are out this week I will pick up as much reading material as I can manage and scan it. That way nobody but me will really have to make any effort to hear what they have to say.

I'll pass on wasting my time. All I'm going off is what I've seen on the news as I posted a few quotes of interviews with protesters earlier.

And if there were so many people offering up ideas, why is the media not picking up on it??

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: flavio

Go out to a protest and see for yourself. It's pretty easy for you try and dismiss their point of view when you don't even know what it is. But I don't think you really even want to know, you'd prefer to sit behind your keyboard and accuse them of not saying anything.

The people milling about in the streets have genrally put A LOT of thought into this. Many of them have printed up their own personal writings and thoughts on the matter. If you really are pretending to be so open minded that you'd like to hear what they have to say then go talk to them.

When I ran across the protest the other day after work I was all about getting some pictures. If they are out this week I will pick up as much reading material as I can manage and scan it. That way nobody but me will really have to make any effort to hear what they have to say.

I'll pass on wasting my time. All I'm going off is what I've seen on the news as I posted a few quotes of interviews with protesters earlier.

And if there were so many people offering up ideas, why is the media not picking up on it??

I guess I had you pegged pretty accurately. You don't really have any interest in what they have to say. You just want to discount all of them without even knowing what they have to say.

You prefer if someone would just show you a single example of something you don't agree with so then can justify writing them ALL off. It really puts you on the same level as human2k a couple posts up.

So right there I have two examples of completely close minded pro-war AT'ers. Should I now assume that EVERY pro-war AT'er is close minded and entirely shut off from any viewpoint than the one spoon-fed from Bush?

 

[PG]

War never solved anything?

More rumors about the French:

French try to hack our network

Letters from the front

"...
And there's news about the French here. Or I shouldn't say news, as at the moment it's only barely more than rumor. But sometimes rumor carries such illicit pleasure that it cannot be suppressed, so I'll tell you what they're saying here. A crew member of mine caught a ride back to our compound with two British airmen who work in a center where some of the war planning and directing takes place. The Brits gleefully told him that the French had been escorted from the premises after being caught trying to hack our secret computer network. In what seems to be a corroborating story, someone else was told by one of the noncomms working in housing that people who'd been living in tents were finally getting moved into dorms - rooms that had previously been occupied by the French. Take it for what it's worth. Rumor? Yes, but some rumors end up being true. Even if this one doesn't, it's made a lot of people smile. Those French who are still here probably wonder what we're grinning at. (There do seem to be fewer around, but who can tell? Tonight is Steak Night at the chow hall, and that's the best time to take a French census. They come out of the woodwork on Steak Night.)"

 

[DanJ]

Originally posted by: conjur
And if there were so many people offering up ideas, why is the media not picking up on it??

Because the media sensationalizes. Bad sells; good doesn't.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: MacBaine

Originally posted by: AlienCraft
5,000 protestors are still blocking traffic downtown.
They claim they'll be protesting as long as there are troops engaging The Iraqi's.....

Once they get tired and/or their parents tell them to come home, it will clear up.

What would you do if you were morally and ethically against this war?

 

Just watched some news from NYC's protests. I have to wonder why anti-war protestors all seem to be angry. I thought they were for peace? Most of them just seem generally pissed off. I hear more negative comments about Bush than about the war. It seems to me a lot of the protestors are just people who are pissed that Bush got elected because they voted for Gore.

Pretty lame. It hurts the peace cause in general to have this angry liberals misrepresenting them and making them look bad to the rest of the world. Shame on them, using a war as a vent for their frustrations of the 2000 election.

For the people really for peace, more power to you. Unfortunately the angry liberals are drowning your voices out.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: dwell
Just watched some news from NYC's protests. I have to wonder why anti-war protestors all seem to be angry. I thought they were for peace? Most of them just seem generally pissed off. I hear more negative comments about Bush than about the war. It seems to me a lot of the protestors are just people who are pissed that Bush got elected because they voted for Gore.

They ARE angry because our government has ignored the wishes of half it's citizens. As far as Bush goes....one of the main complaints about this whole situation is the way Bush has handled it. He has proven to be an extremely inept diplomat. This has been a big point with the Republicans that do not support our course of action.