Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Against War @ Civic Center
A few shots of today's demonstration as I passed thru Civic Center, with the march just entering the Plaza even as protesters were still leaving Justin Herman Plaza at the foot of Market Street.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The library has the most rad public restrooms in Civic Center.
The Denver Peace demonstration today was full of spirit, with many meaningful posters, including
"Wellstone Lives".
Today. we must work even harder to restore democracy. We must give what we can to bring peace and to build healthy communities, whether it's 10 minutes a week, or 10 hours.
Mr. Bush and his cohorts' war plan has already begun
to devastate the services which enhance the lives
of millions in this country: health clinics; social and other community services.
Thank you, and Peace,
adrienne harber
"Wellstone Lives".
Today. we must work even harder to restore democracy. We must give what we can to bring peace and to build healthy communities, whether it's 10 minutes a week, or 10 hours.
Mr. Bush and his cohorts' war plan has already begun
to devastate the services which enhance the lives
of millions in this country: health clinics; social and other community services.
Thank you, and Peace,
adrienne harber
The Denver Peace demonstration today was full of spirit, with many meaningful posters, including
"Wellstone Lives".
Today. we must work even harder to restore democracy. We must give what we can to bring peace and to build healthy communities, whether it's 10 minutes a week, or 10 hours.
Mr. Bush and his cohorts' war plan has already begun
to devastate the services which enhance the lives
of millions in this country: health clinics; social and other community services.
Thank you, and Peace,
adrienne harber
"Wellstone Lives".
Today. we must work even harder to restore democracy. We must give what we can to bring peace and to build healthy communities, whether it's 10 minutes a week, or 10 hours.
Mr. Bush and his cohorts' war plan has already begun
to devastate the services which enhance the lives
of millions in this country: health clinics; social and other community services.
Thank you, and Peace,
adrienne harber
The Denver Peace demonstration today was full of spirit, with many meaningful posters, including
"Wellstone Lives".
Today. we must work even harder to restore democracy. We must give what we can to bring peace and to build healthy communities, whether it's 10 minutes a week, or 10 hours.
Mr. Bush and his cohorts' war plan has already begun
to devastate the services which enhance the lives
of millions in this country: health clinics; social and other community services.
Thank you, and Peace,
adrienne harber
"Wellstone Lives".
Today. we must work even harder to restore democracy. We must give what we can to bring peace and to build healthy communities, whether it's 10 minutes a week, or 10 hours.
Mr. Bush and his cohorts' war plan has already begun
to devastate the services which enhance the lives
of millions in this country: health clinics; social and other community services.
Thank you, and Peace,
adrienne harber
...as opposed to our escapades in May. good to see you posting more photos from the front lines
The library has the most rad public restrooms in Civic Center.
...as opposed to our escapades in May. good to see you posting more photos from the front lines
The library has the most rad public restrooms in Civic Center.
Many thanks for the photographs.
We love not only the wonderful restrooms at the library but all the books and oher reading material. On Gay Day, we have 1 million people at the Civic Center, so our peace demonstration of 100,000 today was just a beginning, an outstanding beginning. As our movement grows, we will have the money for a larger sound system, more stages, more toilets, more food booths and entertainment. We warmly embrace our precious library and its mission: Promoting reading.
Paul Wellstone, unfortunately, was assassinated and that is terrible and tragic but he was no liberal. Today, we marched in protest of the Fascist "Patriot" Act passed one year ago, 10/26/01. Paul Wellstone voted for the Fascist "Patriot" Act. He also voted to bomb Iraq in 1998, and many other reactionary votes. He was just another Democrat, providing a good vote once in a while, and the rest of the time, he voted the same as the representatives of the other capitalist party, the Republicans. Stop voting for all Democrats and all Republicans at all levels of government. We are not going down that reactionary donward spiral path of "lesser evil" garbage again. Humanity cannot afford it.
We should all be proud of ourselves. We managed to get 100,000 people to march for peace here in the belly of the beast before the war officially starts.
We love not only the wonderful restrooms at the library but all the books and oher reading material. On Gay Day, we have 1 million people at the Civic Center, so our peace demonstration of 100,000 today was just a beginning, an outstanding beginning. As our movement grows, we will have the money for a larger sound system, more stages, more toilets, more food booths and entertainment. We warmly embrace our precious library and its mission: Promoting reading.
Paul Wellstone, unfortunately, was assassinated and that is terrible and tragic but he was no liberal. Today, we marched in protest of the Fascist "Patriot" Act passed one year ago, 10/26/01. Paul Wellstone voted for the Fascist "Patriot" Act. He also voted to bomb Iraq in 1998, and many other reactionary votes. He was just another Democrat, providing a good vote once in a while, and the rest of the time, he voted the same as the representatives of the other capitalist party, the Republicans. Stop voting for all Democrats and all Republicans at all levels of government. We are not going down that reactionary donward spiral path of "lesser evil" garbage again. Humanity cannot afford it.
We should all be proud of ourselves. We managed to get 100,000 people to march for peace here in the belly of the beast before the war officially starts.
>>>We love not only the wonderful restrooms at the library but all the books and oher reading material.
You love the restrooms?
>>> On Gay Day, we have 1 million people at the Civic Center, so our peace demonstration of 100,000 today was just a beginning.
Did you say 'on Gay Day?' Ha ha ha ha ha
You really are in bad shape.
>>>As our movement grows, we will have the money more toilets.
Yes indeed, that's a noble goal
>>> Paul Wellstone, unfortunately, was assassinated and that is terrible and tragic but he was no liberal.
Did you really say that?? Assassinated? Are you really that deluded?
>>> Today, we marched in protest of the Fascist "Patriot" Act passed one year ago, 10/26/01.
Why would you protest against the "Patriot Act?" That's one of the better pieces of legislation to come out of congress in a long time.
>>>> We managed to get 100,000 people to march
Maybe 5,000 tops. Even so, that's a lot of weirdos taking to the streets. Whether 5,000 or 100, 000, that's a lot of anti-Americans for the rest of us to be ashamed of.
You love the restrooms?
>>> On Gay Day, we have 1 million people at the Civic Center, so our peace demonstration of 100,000 today was just a beginning.
Did you say 'on Gay Day?' Ha ha ha ha ha
You really are in bad shape.
>>>As our movement grows, we will have the money more toilets.
Yes indeed, that's a noble goal
>>> Paul Wellstone, unfortunately, was assassinated and that is terrible and tragic but he was no liberal.
Did you really say that?? Assassinated? Are you really that deluded?
>>> Today, we marched in protest of the Fascist "Patriot" Act passed one year ago, 10/26/01.
Why would you protest against the "Patriot Act?" That's one of the better pieces of legislation to come out of congress in a long time.
>>>> We managed to get 100,000 people to march
Maybe 5,000 tops. Even so, that's a lot of weirdos taking to the streets. Whether 5,000 or 100, 000, that's a lot of anti-Americans for the rest of us to be ashamed of.
Go back to spamming the other site.
Why would you go on an independant site anyway and post something like that.
You are the real freak.
Get lost.
Why would you go on an independant site anyway and post something like that.
You are the real freak.
Get lost.
He's just a whining, cringing example of how truly useless a human being can be if they choose.
As a target holder
As a wheel chock
As a assistant crossing guard
no wait- my bad- that's WAY
too much responsibility!
As a man hole cover.
Hey! Let's figure out a good
career move for him. Any
ideas?
As a wheel chock
As a assistant crossing guard
no wait- my bad- that's WAY
too much responsibility!
As a man hole cover.
Hey! Let's figure out a good
career move for him. Any
ideas?
court jester for IMC
court jester for IMC
wait that would require wit, he doesn't even qualify for that
I think he'd make a good toilet seat. Manhole cover is good too
wait that would require wit, he doesn't even qualify for that
I think he'd make a good toilet seat. Manhole cover is good too
Bushadmirer, i take it you were not there today, you said 5000 tops?
I was there today. Even though I was battling a flu, I am so glad I went! We are many and we are united against this disgusting war machine.
Hope you get over the flu.
Welcome to the house.
spaunk is also a moron vying
to replace Bush admirer and Sam B
in the ridicule stocks.
Let's laugh at them (in fear
of course) Ignore the monkeys even
if they are just human like enough
to make us feel sorry for them.
Welcome to the house.
spaunk is also a moron vying
to replace Bush admirer and Sam B
in the ridicule stocks.
Let's laugh at them (in fear
of course) Ignore the monkeys even
if they are just human like enough
to make us feel sorry for them.
Alot of people protested Bosnia
Why were the protests not as big? Because Clinton was slicker at PR than Bush
We care no matter who is being a greedy military fuckhead.
Why were the protests not as big? Because Clinton was slicker at PR than Bush
We care no matter who is being a greedy military fuckhead.
PS .. obviously you know extremely little of the subjects you mentioned, eg you seem to be unaware you do not live in a democracy but a republic, which was made quite clear with the passing of anti-democratic resolution in congress in December of 2000 H Con Res 443
"CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of the Congress in reaffirming the United States of America as a republic.
Whereas the form of government secured by the Declaration of Independence, the American Revolution, and the Constitution of the United States is a republic--not a democracy;
Whereas the Nation's founders understood that pure `democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths' (Federalist No. 10);
Whereas throughout the 224-year history of the United States as an independent and sovereign nation, the people of the United States have never exercised power as a democracy;......."
You can view the full text at http://forcesct.multiservers.com/sense.html
Now don't unfurl your flag again unless you are capable of defending it
"CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of the Congress in reaffirming the United States of America as a republic.
Whereas the form of government secured by the Declaration of Independence, the American Revolution, and the Constitution of the United States is a republic--not a democracy;
Whereas the Nation's founders understood that pure `democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths' (Federalist No. 10);
Whereas throughout the 224-year history of the United States as an independent and sovereign nation, the people of the United States have never exercised power as a democracy;......."
You can view the full text at http://forcesct.multiservers.com/sense.html
Now don't unfurl your flag again unless you are capable of defending it
The founding fathers understood that true democracy would threaten "the rights of property", in other words, their position of power based on ownership of large amounts of property. Our political system was set up to protect the rich and hold down the poor. That's why we'd like to tear it down.
I would like to consider myself pro-American. I would like freedom and prosperity for all who live in this country.
I do not want this country's military, directed by the President, to bring terrible calamity and destruction to another country for seemingly economic interests.
Also, I believe that we signed onto the UN charter shortly before the end of WWII - and that charter includes proscriptions against things like "regime change" and "pre-emptive, unilateral action". I believe that people, and governments should keep their word.
I appreciate that I am able to put forward a dissenting viewpoint.
I do not want this country's military, directed by the President, to bring terrible calamity and destruction to another country for seemingly economic interests.
Also, I believe that we signed onto the UN charter shortly before the end of WWII - and that charter includes proscriptions against things like "regime change" and "pre-emptive, unilateral action". I believe that people, and governments should keep their word.
I appreciate that I am able to put forward a dissenting viewpoint.
Our? government?
your prattle was wasted on me mate, eh?
your mice , rabbit management
and lonely days and lonely nights on the sheep farm have left ye daft I'm afraid.
It's ok, your lust for sheep leaves more humans for us,
your prattle was wasted on me mate, eh?
your mice , rabbit management
and lonely days and lonely nights on the sheep farm have left ye daft I'm afraid.
It's ok, your lust for sheep leaves more humans for us,
Frogs get lonely too.
Listen to them croak in the night
waiting for love.
Listen to them croak in the night
waiting for love.
Thanks for all those you-cliped-us trees.
He doesn't want to have to share time with
Sam B for village idiot. Maybe those two
intellectuals should hold a pow wow and
reasonably work out their work load.
Sam B for village idiot. Maybe those two
intellectuals should hold a pow wow and
reasonably work out their work load.
Where were you hippie fucks when Bill Clinton sent our armed forces to Haiti? Or how about when he said that we needed to go occupy Bosnia for "a few months", but we ended up being there for 4 years? Or how about when he sent our boys to Somalia and they got murdered and dragged up and down the streets of Mogadishu while the whole fucking world was watching on TV? Were you guys protesting? OF COURSE NOT. You are only protesting because there is a Republican in office.
And why do you give a shit if we enter Iraq and replace Saddam Houssein? Saddam is a known murderer, theif, tyrant, oppressor, dictator and terrorist. By resisting the Bush Administration's plans to replace the Houssein rigime, you are esencially defending a murderering terrorst. WHY? Houssein has had way too many fucking chances, and he is WAY PAST DUE for replacement. What the fuck is wrong with you people?
And who fucking cares if this *IS* about oil? Why should a tyrannical 'leader' like Saddam Houssein be allowed to control and influence any amount of the region's oil? I hope we fucking take Saddams oil away and pay the citizens of Iraq a fair price for it.
Which leads me to my next point - The citizens of Iraq also stand to gain from the replacement of Saddam Houssein. They stand to gain freedom from murder and oppression. They stand to gain a better way of life. They stand to gain participation in a free market where their skills and ideas are worth financial security and wealth for their families.
And what about terror? None of you fucking liberal idiots have the fainest clue what it is going to take to protect innocent people from terror. Terror is happening almost every day, and the only way to stop it is to weed it out at its source. Leaders like Yasser Arafat and Saddam Houssein LIE to the media when they say that they have no control over acts of terror on their soil. It is by definition a lie because they are dictators - nothing happens in their countries that is not under their control or beyond their knowledge. Not to mention the question of where the money comes from that supports terror. It's not cheap to run around the world and blow things up. "Leaders" like Arafat and Houssein most certainly support terror and need to be taken from power and replaced.
Why don't you just admit it: You are protesting because there is a Republican in the White House, not because you particularly know a fucking thing about freedom, democracy, history, terror, money, oil or logistics. Most of you are just liberal 'carbon copies' who only go out to protest our President because all of your fucking friends do. It's 'cool' to be an anti-American degenerate loser in the Bay Area.
And why do you give a shit if we enter Iraq and replace Saddam Houssein? Saddam is a known murderer, theif, tyrant, oppressor, dictator and terrorist. By resisting the Bush Administration's plans to replace the Houssein rigime, you are esencially defending a murderering terrorst. WHY? Houssein has had way too many fucking chances, and he is WAY PAST DUE for replacement. What the fuck is wrong with you people?
And who fucking cares if this *IS* about oil? Why should a tyrannical 'leader' like Saddam Houssein be allowed to control and influence any amount of the region's oil? I hope we fucking take Saddams oil away and pay the citizens of Iraq a fair price for it.
Which leads me to my next point - The citizens of Iraq also stand to gain from the replacement of Saddam Houssein. They stand to gain freedom from murder and oppression. They stand to gain a better way of life. They stand to gain participation in a free market where their skills and ideas are worth financial security and wealth for their families.
And what about terror? None of you fucking liberal idiots have the fainest clue what it is going to take to protect innocent people from terror. Terror is happening almost every day, and the only way to stop it is to weed it out at its source. Leaders like Yasser Arafat and Saddam Houssein LIE to the media when they say that they have no control over acts of terror on their soil. It is by definition a lie because they are dictators - nothing happens in their countries that is not under their control or beyond their knowledge. Not to mention the question of where the money comes from that supports terror. It's not cheap to run around the world and blow things up. "Leaders" like Arafat and Houssein most certainly support terror and need to be taken from power and replaced.
Why don't you just admit it: You are protesting because there is a Republican in the White House, not because you particularly know a fucking thing about freedom, democracy, history, terror, money, oil or logistics. Most of you are just liberal 'carbon copies' who only go out to protest our President because all of your fucking friends do. It's 'cool' to be an anti-American degenerate loser in the Bay Area.
said like a true simpleton
>> I do not want this country's military, directed by the President, to bring terrible calamity and destruction to another country for seemingly economic interests.
You must not be paying attention, or have a clue about the logistics of a modern U.S. military action. We will not "bring destruction" to Iraq. The people of Iraq will be liberated from their tyrannical oppressor. We're not going to level Baghdad. You've been watching too much footage of WWII B-17 carpet bombing raids. It's 2003. Our strikes are surgical. An F-16 could put an AGM-65 in the driver's side window of your car from miles away, and not kill anyone else. The people of Iraq stand to gain the most from the action. Second in line would be the rest of the world's community - they stand to gain security from this known terrorist.
In fact, I can't imagine what all this protesting is about. Do you idiots not realize that we ARE NOT going to carpet bomb Iraq? This is about REMOVING SADDAM. This action will not require the deaths of ANY innocent non-combat civilians. In fact, we don't even need to destroy his whole army if we do this right.
You watch the members of Saddam's guard and military lay down their arms and celebrate just as Saddam has been removed. The people of Iraq will be thankful.
again, said like a true simpleton.
The US army couldn't even manage to avoid bombing wedding parties and allied Canadian troops in Afghanistan. What's changed since then?
And how come your 'military analysis' is mostly a bunch of Soviet style propaganda statements like "We will not "bring destruction" to Iraq. The people of Iraq will be liberated from their tyrannical oppressor." HUNH??????
The US army couldn't even manage to avoid bombing wedding parties and allied Canadian troops in Afghanistan. What's changed since then?
And how come your 'military analysis' is mostly a bunch of Soviet style propaganda statements like "We will not "bring destruction" to Iraq. The people of Iraq will be liberated from their tyrannical oppressor." HUNH??????
Re: 'Degenerate America Haters'
I feel quite confident in saying that you are a brainwashed idiot. I would like to see you stand behind your inane ramblings, but as is often the case with fools like yourself, you are only capable of blindly supporting the power structures that you have been conditioned to allow to dominate your every thought. You are what you accuse others of being - a 'carbon copy' unable to think for yourself.
So, lets see how informed your opinions are...
* How much will it cost to invade Iraq? Please include the bribes we will need to give to other nations to get their support, and an estimate for the first 10 years that we need to remain there. Feel free to round it off to the nearest 10 billion.
* Explain why you feel it is ok for the US to shit on so many international agreements and treaties. Explain what impact you feel this will have on interantional relations over the next 10-20 years.
* Explain why you feel it is a good idea to disregard the advice and opinions of nations that have been our allies for over 50 years.
* Explain why this is so urgent, and be sure to include why you are ignoring CIA and UNSCOM evaluations in favor of Bush's undocumented 'facts'.
* Please explain why you are willing to risk inflamming the situation with regard to terrorism in order to take care of a threat that most experts feel is only likely to atack us if he is attacked himself.
* Please explain why you feel it is ok for US taxpayers to foot the bill for this war, while Oil companies will take the majority of the profits.
* Take a moment to justify the killing of potentially hundreds of thousands of people in order to bring one ruthless bastard to justice.
* Tell us what you know about how much the US and Britain contributed to Iraq's acqusition of Chemical and Biological weapons.
* Tell us how large the loans were that Bush sr. helped Saddam secure, which were defaulted and covered by US taxpayers.
* Tell us why you think Rumsfeld would go and negotiate arms sales with Iraq after he knew about the use of chemical weapons, yet now uses that to justify this invasion.
* Explain what factors you see coming into play that will prevent the damage to our economy that the shockwaves from this will cause. The ones that so many economists feel are very likely.
* Tell us what your opinion is on who would replace Saddam. Which of the 2 current proposals do you support: the 'American installed Dictator' or the 'US Military Government'.
"This action will not require the deaths of ANY innocent non-combat civilians."
This more than anything shows how deluded you are. Tell me, are you willing to bet YOUR life on this? Or just other people's lives?
Stand up and justify your beliefs, or admit that you have no idea what the fk you are talking about, because to be honest, I am very sick of hearing loud-mouthed punks like you claiming to be patriots, when your ignorance and naivety are the greatest threat this nation faces. Stand up and show us that you have a clue - because I say you are unable to do more than parrot what you see on TV or hear on right-wing radio.
Care to prove me wrong?
I feel quite confident in saying that you are a brainwashed idiot. I would like to see you stand behind your inane ramblings, but as is often the case with fools like yourself, you are only capable of blindly supporting the power structures that you have been conditioned to allow to dominate your every thought. You are what you accuse others of being - a 'carbon copy' unable to think for yourself.
So, lets see how informed your opinions are...
* How much will it cost to invade Iraq? Please include the bribes we will need to give to other nations to get their support, and an estimate for the first 10 years that we need to remain there. Feel free to round it off to the nearest 10 billion.
* Explain why you feel it is ok for the US to shit on so many international agreements and treaties. Explain what impact you feel this will have on interantional relations over the next 10-20 years.
* Explain why you feel it is a good idea to disregard the advice and opinions of nations that have been our allies for over 50 years.
* Explain why this is so urgent, and be sure to include why you are ignoring CIA and UNSCOM evaluations in favor of Bush's undocumented 'facts'.
* Please explain why you are willing to risk inflamming the situation with regard to terrorism in order to take care of a threat that most experts feel is only likely to atack us if he is attacked himself.
* Please explain why you feel it is ok for US taxpayers to foot the bill for this war, while Oil companies will take the majority of the profits.
* Take a moment to justify the killing of potentially hundreds of thousands of people in order to bring one ruthless bastard to justice.
* Tell us what you know about how much the US and Britain contributed to Iraq's acqusition of Chemical and Biological weapons.
* Tell us how large the loans were that Bush sr. helped Saddam secure, which were defaulted and covered by US taxpayers.
* Tell us why you think Rumsfeld would go and negotiate arms sales with Iraq after he knew about the use of chemical weapons, yet now uses that to justify this invasion.
* Explain what factors you see coming into play that will prevent the damage to our economy that the shockwaves from this will cause. The ones that so many economists feel are very likely.
* Tell us what your opinion is on who would replace Saddam. Which of the 2 current proposals do you support: the 'American installed Dictator' or the 'US Military Government'.
"This action will not require the deaths of ANY innocent non-combat civilians."
This more than anything shows how deluded you are. Tell me, are you willing to bet YOUR life on this? Or just other people's lives?
Stand up and justify your beliefs, or admit that you have no idea what the fk you are talking about, because to be honest, I am very sick of hearing loud-mouthed punks like you claiming to be patriots, when your ignorance and naivety are the greatest threat this nation faces. Stand up and show us that you have a clue - because I say you are unable to do more than parrot what you see on TV or hear on right-wing radio.
Care to prove me wrong?
Re: 'Degenerate America Haters'
I feel quite confident in saying that you are a brainwashed idiot. I would like to see you stand behind your inane ramblings, but as is often the case with fools like yourself, you are only capable of blindly supporting the power structures that you have been conditioned to allow to dominate your every thought. You are what you accuse others of being - a 'carbon copy' unable to think for yourself.
So, lets see how informed your opinions are...
* How much will it cost to invade Iraq? Please include the bribes we will need to give to other nations to get their support, and an estimate for the first 10 years that we need to remain there. Feel free to round it off to the nearest 10 billion.
* Explain why you feel it is ok for the US to shit on so many international agreements and treaties. Explain what impact you feel this will have on interantional relations over the next 10-20 years.
* Explain why you feel it is a good idea to disregard the advice and opinions of nations that have been our allies for over 50 years.
* Explain why this is so urgent, and be sure to include why you are ignoring CIA and UNSCOM evaluations in favor of Bush's undocumented 'facts'.
* Please explain why you are willing to risk inflamming the situation with regard to terrorism in order to take care of a threat that most experts feel is only likely to atack us if he is attacked himself.
* Please explain why you feel it is ok for US taxpayers to foot the bill for this war, while Oil companies will take the majority of the profits.
* Take a moment to justify the killing of potentially hundreds of thousands of people in order to bring one ruthless bastard to justice.
* Tell us what you know about how much the US and Britain contributed to Iraq's acqusition of Chemical and Biological weapons.
* Tell us how large the loans were that Bush sr. helped Saddam secure, which were defaulted and covered by US taxpayers.
* Tell us why you think Rumsfeld would go and negotiate arms sales with Iraq after he knew about the use of chemical weapons, yet now uses that to justify this invasion.
* Explain what factors you see coming into play that will prevent the damage to our economy that the shockwaves from this will cause. The ones that so many economists feel are very likely.
* Tell us what your opinion is on who would replace Saddam. Which of the 2 current proposals do you support: the 'American installed Dictator' or the 'US Military Government'.
"This action will not require the deaths of ANY innocent non-combat civilians."
This more than anything shows how deluded you are. Tell me, are you willing to bet YOUR life on this? Or just other people's lives?
Stand up and justify your beliefs, or admit that you have no idea what the fk you are talking about, because to be honest, I am very sick of hearing loud-mouthed punks like you claiming to be patriots, when your ignorance and naivety are the greatest threat this nation faces. Stand up and show us that you have a clue - because I say you are unable to do more than parrot what you see on TV or hear on right-wing radio.
Care to prove me wrong?
I feel quite confident in saying that you are a brainwashed idiot. I would like to see you stand behind your inane ramblings, but as is often the case with fools like yourself, you are only capable of blindly supporting the power structures that you have been conditioned to allow to dominate your every thought. You are what you accuse others of being - a 'carbon copy' unable to think for yourself.
So, lets see how informed your opinions are...
* How much will it cost to invade Iraq? Please include the bribes we will need to give to other nations to get their support, and an estimate for the first 10 years that we need to remain there. Feel free to round it off to the nearest 10 billion.
* Explain why you feel it is ok for the US to shit on so many international agreements and treaties. Explain what impact you feel this will have on interantional relations over the next 10-20 years.
* Explain why you feel it is a good idea to disregard the advice and opinions of nations that have been our allies for over 50 years.
* Explain why this is so urgent, and be sure to include why you are ignoring CIA and UNSCOM evaluations in favor of Bush's undocumented 'facts'.
* Please explain why you are willing to risk inflamming the situation with regard to terrorism in order to take care of a threat that most experts feel is only likely to atack us if he is attacked himself.
* Please explain why you feel it is ok for US taxpayers to foot the bill for this war, while Oil companies will take the majority of the profits.
* Take a moment to justify the killing of potentially hundreds of thousands of people in order to bring one ruthless bastard to justice.
* Tell us what you know about how much the US and Britain contributed to Iraq's acqusition of Chemical and Biological weapons.
* Tell us how large the loans were that Bush sr. helped Saddam secure, which were defaulted and covered by US taxpayers.
* Tell us why you think Rumsfeld would go and negotiate arms sales with Iraq after he knew about the use of chemical weapons, yet now uses that to justify this invasion.
* Explain what factors you see coming into play that will prevent the damage to our economy that the shockwaves from this will cause. The ones that so many economists feel are very likely.
* Tell us what your opinion is on who would replace Saddam. Which of the 2 current proposals do you support: the 'American installed Dictator' or the 'US Military Government'.
"This action will not require the deaths of ANY innocent non-combat civilians."
This more than anything shows how deluded you are. Tell me, are you willing to bet YOUR life on this? Or just other people's lives?
Stand up and justify your beliefs, or admit that you have no idea what the fk you are talking about, because to be honest, I am very sick of hearing loud-mouthed punks like you claiming to be patriots, when your ignorance and naivety are the greatest threat this nation faces. Stand up and show us that you have a clue - because I say you are unable to do more than parrot what you see on TV or hear on right-wing radio.
Care to prove me wrong?
>>I hope we fucking take Saddams oil away and pay the citizens of Iraq a fair price for it.
actually, bush has already stated that he plans to reinstate the "oil for food" program, where we pay iraq very little compared to market value, and they are only allowed to spend the money on food import.
doesn't seem to fair to do such a thing with a nation's primary export. food is not the only thing they need.
actually, bush has already stated that he plans to reinstate the "oil for food" program, where we pay iraq very little compared to market value, and they are only allowed to spend the money on food import.
doesn't seem to fair to do such a thing with a nation's primary export. food is not the only thing they need.
>>"Leaders" like Arafat and Houssein most certainly support terror and need to be taken from power and replaced.
ever heard of the scool of the americas?
the U.S. trains terrorists every day. if you want to stop terrorism start at home by fighting against bad foreign policy.
ever heard of the scool of the americas?
the U.S. trains terrorists every day. if you want to stop terrorism start at home by fighting against bad foreign policy.
Here's a link to some more pix taken in front of City Hall.
http://www.fearbush.com/gallery/?dir=Signs%20of%20the%20Times%2F2002-10-26%20San%20Francisco
http://www.fearbush.com/gallery/?dir=Signs%20of%20the%20Times%2F2002-10-26%20San%20Francisco
For more information:
http://www.fearbush.com
Here's a link to some more pix taken in front of City Hall.
http://www.fearbush.com/gallery/?dir=Signs%20of%20the%20Times%2F2002-10-26%20San%20Francisco
http://www.fearbush.com/gallery/?dir=Signs%20of%20the%20Times%2F2002-10-26%20San%20Francisco
For more information:
http://www.fearbush.com
"Degenerate America Haters" ???????
I could say your an idiot or an innocent fool, but the ignorence backed by violent tendencys, (war fool) is the what is scary to me. And there are millions of you out there.
To the more enlightned, it is our job to spread this knowlege and information to everyone we know.
And to you my friend, wake up.
Icant spell
I could say your an idiot or an innocent fool, but the ignorence backed by violent tendencys, (war fool) is the what is scary to me. And there are millions of you out there.
To the more enlightned, it is our job to spread this knowlege and information to everyone we know.
And to you my friend, wake up.
Icant spell
Here is the only valid arguement for the war that I could come up with: Saddam Hussein is a dictator who continually violates human rights codes. Saddam Hussein is alleged to be in possesion of certain weapons which could jepardize the lives of innocent people. To accept these means we have a responsibility to remove him from power before anything worse continues.
First, let me add that I do not support a war with Iraq, but I must admit that I have problems with countering these arguements. To remind everyone about the US supporting Marcos or Pinochet or whoever does not counter the arguement. All that says is that the US made not so righteous decisions in the past. Whoop dee do we all knew that already. To talk about how its about oil does not counter the arguements either it only skirts the issues without handling it; that is to say if the war is about oil than it can't be about these things. These premises are substantialized and at least the first is very well documented. To argue a sensible individual to a position that is against this war these questions need to be addressed. So let's start doing that.
First, let me add that I do not support a war with Iraq, but I must admit that I have problems with countering these arguements. To remind everyone about the US supporting Marcos or Pinochet or whoever does not counter the arguement. All that says is that the US made not so righteous decisions in the past. Whoop dee do we all knew that already. To talk about how its about oil does not counter the arguements either it only skirts the issues without handling it; that is to say if the war is about oil than it can't be about these things. These premises are substantialized and at least the first is very well documented. To argue a sensible individual to a position that is against this war these questions need to be addressed. So let's start doing that.
By the same logic we ought to dismantle the US government. They violate human rights codes; and five hundred thousand children have died in Iraq as a result of American sanctions. The US is doing more than jeopardizing the lives of innocent Iraqi civilians; it is ending them, wholesale.
Since when is america a democracy? We are a REPUBLIC! Our teachers are too stupid to teach the correct term, I guess I should expect stupid protesters.
Since when is america a democracy? We are a REPUBLIC! Our teachers are too stupid to teach the correct term, I guess I should expect stupid protesters.
"By the same logic we ought to dismantle the US government. They violate human rights codes; and five hundred thousand children have died in Iraq as a result of American sanctions. The US is doing more than jeopardizing the lives of innocent Iraqi civilians; it is ending them, wholesale. "
I basically said this arguement is nonetheless hollow. Let me show you the severe problems it has. First, there is the idea of a just war. If Hitler was trying to take his Eugenics across the world, people would have to fight right? German civilians would be killed right? Regardless of the civil rights abuses perpetrated by the US government it would be neccesary to take action against the greater evil.
I think that logic is pretty easy to understand.
Now for Sadam. As you could say it is US sancitions caused 500000 Iraqi civilians to die: first, UN sanctions not US, which is not the same thing regardless of how you view the UN. Cuba suffers from US sanctions. Get them right.
Second, one could just as well argue that Sadam could have let weapons inspectors into his country, not too huge of a demand conisdering he was lucky to have been able to saty in power in the first place. Since Sadam did not let them in, he effectively killed his people.
Third there is more than enough evidence to suggest that Sadam is an oppressive dictator who exploits his people. Wholesale.
The arguement still stands. I once again remind everyone I am not for this war, but am only trying to help formulate a solid arguement against one. Something that is coherent, logical, and leaps far beyond the ideological cheerleading that seems to have enveloped the site on this issue.
I basically said this arguement is nonetheless hollow. Let me show you the severe problems it has. First, there is the idea of a just war. If Hitler was trying to take his Eugenics across the world, people would have to fight right? German civilians would be killed right? Regardless of the civil rights abuses perpetrated by the US government it would be neccesary to take action against the greater evil.
I think that logic is pretty easy to understand.
Now for Sadam. As you could say it is US sancitions caused 500000 Iraqi civilians to die: first, UN sanctions not US, which is not the same thing regardless of how you view the UN. Cuba suffers from US sanctions. Get them right.
Second, one could just as well argue that Sadam could have let weapons inspectors into his country, not too huge of a demand conisdering he was lucky to have been able to saty in power in the first place. Since Sadam did not let them in, he effectively killed his people.
Third there is more than enough evidence to suggest that Sadam is an oppressive dictator who exploits his people. Wholesale.
The arguement still stands. I once again remind everyone I am not for this war, but am only trying to help formulate a solid arguement against one. Something that is coherent, logical, and leaps far beyond the ideological cheerleading that seems to have enveloped the site on this issue.
why are you opposed to the war if you're unable to formulate a solid argument to support that position?
is it because your opposition is based upon ideological commitments which don't withstand scrutiny? ( read: incoherent/selective [middle class] pacifism)
for someone so inclined to harangue others for their alleged deficiencies, you don't put up much of a show.
is it because your opposition is based upon ideological commitments which don't withstand scrutiny? ( read: incoherent/selective [middle class] pacifism)
for someone so inclined to harangue others for their alleged deficiencies, you don't put up much of a show.
Right on San Francisco! The youth are the future, and
they are speaking out for peace, social justice and truth. The U.S fascist war machine did nothing in Afghanistan except bomb innocent children into oblivion. Now, war lords are taking over, and the situation is worse than it was before! The same thing will happen in Iraq. The leaders go into hiding, while the children die. Terrorism will only be defeated through dipolmacy, respect, objective foreign policy, and the lifting of sanctions!
they are speaking out for peace, social justice and truth. The U.S fascist war machine did nothing in Afghanistan except bomb innocent children into oblivion. Now, war lords are taking over, and the situation is worse than it was before! The same thing will happen in Iraq. The leaders go into hiding, while the children die. Terrorism will only be defeated through dipolmacy, respect, objective foreign policy, and the lifting of sanctions!
Funny aaron when you tell me i have too many ideological commitments, this I think stems from my disdain for the black panthers am I right? I of course do have my reasons, but unlike you, I am actually always willing to debate, hear new sides to everything etc. hoping taking the opposite end of things will actually help facilitate discourse on this site which has reduced itself to ideological cheerleading. But don't worry aaron you cheer pretty well, all things considered.
as for the above poster, the situation in Afganistan is hardly what it was before. Learn a bit about the Taliban.
as for the above poster, the situation in Afganistan is hardly what it was before. Learn a bit about the Taliban.
"I once again remind everyone I am not for this war, but am only trying to help formulate a solid arguement against one. Something that is coherent, logical, and leaps far beyond the ideological cheerleading that seems to have enveloped the site on this issue." -- Mr. T
I never said you have "too many ideological commitments" -- whatever that could possibly mean. I suggested that you have ideological commitments that don't withstand scrutiny.
If you're opposed to the war, why don't you come out and tell us why this is so, Mr. T? Your above post gives the impression that you don't believe your real reasons for opposing war against Iraq will convince anyone.
Spare us your pedantic hectoring and cut to the quick.
As to the Black Panthers, what the fuck are you talking about? Just because I don't adhere to a selective pacifism -- as you do -- doesn't mean that I pledge allegiance to the Panthers. There are some good things that could be said about them, but much not so good.
As to my supposed unwillingness to engage in debate and hear differing opinions -- what a joke! For better or worse, I read the Wall Street Journal and the NYTimes (and other rightwing and mainstream sources) on a regular basis and am never shy about engaging people in debate -- whether rightists, or muddled liberals like yourself.
By the way, I responded to your asinine post in which you launched an addled defense of Thomas Jefferson and accused me (and others) of not having kept up on economic theory. Do a Mr. T search and check it out.
I never said you have "too many ideological commitments" -- whatever that could possibly mean. I suggested that you have ideological commitments that don't withstand scrutiny.
If you're opposed to the war, why don't you come out and tell us why this is so, Mr. T? Your above post gives the impression that you don't believe your real reasons for opposing war against Iraq will convince anyone.
Spare us your pedantic hectoring and cut to the quick.
As to the Black Panthers, what the fuck are you talking about? Just because I don't adhere to a selective pacifism -- as you do -- doesn't mean that I pledge allegiance to the Panthers. There are some good things that could be said about them, but much not so good.
As to my supposed unwillingness to engage in debate and hear differing opinions -- what a joke! For better or worse, I read the Wall Street Journal and the NYTimes (and other rightwing and mainstream sources) on a regular basis and am never shy about engaging people in debate -- whether rightists, or muddled liberals like yourself.
By the way, I responded to your asinine post in which you launched an addled defense of Thomas Jefferson and accused me (and others) of not having kept up on economic theory. Do a Mr. T search and check it out.
" First, there is the idea of a just war. If Hitler was trying to take his Eugenics across the world, people would have to fight right? German civilians would be killed right? Regardless of the civil rights abuses perpetrated by the US government it would be neccesary to take action against the greater evil."
If you accept this, then the war is just on the grounds of its conduct, and not on its reasons. WW2 was never fought over eugenics, and no one at Nuremburg was charged with promoting eugenics - only murder. The British and French declared war because they were legally bound by treaty with Poland to do so. America entered because Germany declared war on them; same with Russia.
In any case, Allied conduct was not necessarily 'just'. Unnecessary atrocities were committed against German civilians in the bombing raids. These raids, according to a study done by the USAF Strategic Bombing Survey in 1945, actually helped ease manpower shortages in military industries and were wholly ineffective:
"On three nights late in July and the beggining of August 1943, the heavy planes of the RAF Bomber Command droned in from the North Sea and subjected the city of Hamburg to an ordeal such as the Germans had not experienced since the Thirty Years War. A third of the city was reduced to wasteland. At least 60 000 and perhaps as many as 100 000 people were killed - about as many as at Hiroshima. A large number of these were lost one night when a ghastly 'fire storm', which literally burned the asphalt pavements, swept a part of the city and swept everything into itself. Adolf Hitler heard the details of the attack and for the only known time during the war said it might be necessary to consider peace. Hermann Goering visited the city with a retinue to survey the damage and was accorded so disconcerting a reception he deemed it discreet to retire.
Yet this terrible event taught a lesson about the economics of war which very few have learned and some, indeed, may have found it convenient to ignore. The industrial plants of Hamburg were around the edge of the city, or, as in the case of the submarine pens, on the harbour. They were not greatly damaged by the raids; these struck the centre of the city and the working class residential areas and suburbs. In the days immediately following the raids production faltered; in the first weeks it was down as much as 20 or 25 percent. But thereafter it returned to normal. By then the workers had scanned the ruins of their former homes, satisfied themselves that their possessions and sometimes their families were irretrievable, had found some rude clothes and shelter of a room or part of a room in a still habitable house, and had returned to work. On these three nights of terror their standard of living, measured by house-room, furnishings, clothing, food and drink, recreation, schools, and social and cultural opportunities, had been reduced to a fraction of what it had been before. But the efficiency of the worker as a worker was unimpaired by the loss. After a slight period of readjustment, he laboured as diligently and skillfully as before.
There is a further chapter to the story. Before the attacks, there had been a labour shortage in Hamburg. Afterwards, despite the number killed and the number now engaged in indispensable repairs, there was no shortage. For, as a result of the attacks, thousands who were waiters in restaurants and cafes, attendants in garages, clerks in banks, salesmen in stores, shopkeepers, janitors, ticket takers, and employees in handicraft industries (which, being small and traditional, were more likely to be in the centre of a [European] town) lost their places of employment. They had previously contributed nothing to war production. Their contribution to the standard of living proved indispensable. Now they turned to war industries as the most plausible places to find employment.
Even in the presumably austere and dedicated world of the Third Reich, in the third year of a disastrous war, the average citizen had access to a wide range of comforts and amenities which habit had made to seem essential. And because they were believed to be essential they were essential. On such matters governments, even dictatorships, must bow to the convictions of the people even if - the exceptional case - they do not share them. The German standard of living was far above what was physically necessary for survival and efficiency. The RAF broke through the psychological encrustation and brought living standards down somewhere nearer the physical minimum. In doing so it forced a wholesale conversion of Germany's scarcest resource, that of manpower, to war production.
In reducing, as nothing else could, the consumption of non-essentials and the employment of men in their supply, there is a distinct possibility that the attacks on Hamburg increased Germany's output of war materials and thus her military effectiveness.
These details are based on studies made in 1945 by the United States Strategic Bombing Survey (of which I was a director) which included a detailed investigation of the effect of the Hamburg raids. The Germans had an understandable pride in the speed of Hamburg's industrial recovery and kept detailed records which facilitated the investigation."
-J.K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society, pp. 138-9
In any case, two wrongs, even if one of them is greater than the other, don't add up to a right.
Furthermore - the US was never one to declare war on Germany and came to the war at a relatively late point. I think you must be talking about Britain and France, here. And as I've said before, they were legally, not morally, bound to their declarations of war.
"Second, one could just as well argue that Sadam could have let weapons inspectors into his country, not too huge of a demand conisdering he was lucky to have been able to saty in power in the first place. Since Sadam did not let them in, he effectively killed his people."
Well - that's stretching it quite a bit. The US has a much larger stockpile of WMD's and no inspectors, does that in itself imply that anyone who could, would be justified in attacking and the blame could be placed on the administration?
"Something that is coherent, logical, and leaps far beyond the ideological cheerleading that seems to have enveloped the site on this issue."
Indeed. I agree with you here. Arguments both for and against the war are guilty of these accusations.
If you accept this, then the war is just on the grounds of its conduct, and not on its reasons. WW2 was never fought over eugenics, and no one at Nuremburg was charged with promoting eugenics - only murder. The British and French declared war because they were legally bound by treaty with Poland to do so. America entered because Germany declared war on them; same with Russia.
In any case, Allied conduct was not necessarily 'just'. Unnecessary atrocities were committed against German civilians in the bombing raids. These raids, according to a study done by the USAF Strategic Bombing Survey in 1945, actually helped ease manpower shortages in military industries and were wholly ineffective:
"On three nights late in July and the beggining of August 1943, the heavy planes of the RAF Bomber Command droned in from the North Sea and subjected the city of Hamburg to an ordeal such as the Germans had not experienced since the Thirty Years War. A third of the city was reduced to wasteland. At least 60 000 and perhaps as many as 100 000 people were killed - about as many as at Hiroshima. A large number of these were lost one night when a ghastly 'fire storm', which literally burned the asphalt pavements, swept a part of the city and swept everything into itself. Adolf Hitler heard the details of the attack and for the only known time during the war said it might be necessary to consider peace. Hermann Goering visited the city with a retinue to survey the damage and was accorded so disconcerting a reception he deemed it discreet to retire.
Yet this terrible event taught a lesson about the economics of war which very few have learned and some, indeed, may have found it convenient to ignore. The industrial plants of Hamburg were around the edge of the city, or, as in the case of the submarine pens, on the harbour. They were not greatly damaged by the raids; these struck the centre of the city and the working class residential areas and suburbs. In the days immediately following the raids production faltered; in the first weeks it was down as much as 20 or 25 percent. But thereafter it returned to normal. By then the workers had scanned the ruins of their former homes, satisfied themselves that their possessions and sometimes their families were irretrievable, had found some rude clothes and shelter of a room or part of a room in a still habitable house, and had returned to work. On these three nights of terror their standard of living, measured by house-room, furnishings, clothing, food and drink, recreation, schools, and social and cultural opportunities, had been reduced to a fraction of what it had been before. But the efficiency of the worker as a worker was unimpaired by the loss. After a slight period of readjustment, he laboured as diligently and skillfully as before.
There is a further chapter to the story. Before the attacks, there had been a labour shortage in Hamburg. Afterwards, despite the number killed and the number now engaged in indispensable repairs, there was no shortage. For, as a result of the attacks, thousands who were waiters in restaurants and cafes, attendants in garages, clerks in banks, salesmen in stores, shopkeepers, janitors, ticket takers, and employees in handicraft industries (which, being small and traditional, were more likely to be in the centre of a [European] town) lost their places of employment. They had previously contributed nothing to war production. Their contribution to the standard of living proved indispensable. Now they turned to war industries as the most plausible places to find employment.
Even in the presumably austere and dedicated world of the Third Reich, in the third year of a disastrous war, the average citizen had access to a wide range of comforts and amenities which habit had made to seem essential. And because they were believed to be essential they were essential. On such matters governments, even dictatorships, must bow to the convictions of the people even if - the exceptional case - they do not share them. The German standard of living was far above what was physically necessary for survival and efficiency. The RAF broke through the psychological encrustation and brought living standards down somewhere nearer the physical minimum. In doing so it forced a wholesale conversion of Germany's scarcest resource, that of manpower, to war production.
In reducing, as nothing else could, the consumption of non-essentials and the employment of men in their supply, there is a distinct possibility that the attacks on Hamburg increased Germany's output of war materials and thus her military effectiveness.
These details are based on studies made in 1945 by the United States Strategic Bombing Survey (of which I was a director) which included a detailed investigation of the effect of the Hamburg raids. The Germans had an understandable pride in the speed of Hamburg's industrial recovery and kept detailed records which facilitated the investigation."
-J.K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society, pp. 138-9
In any case, two wrongs, even if one of them is greater than the other, don't add up to a right.
Furthermore - the US was never one to declare war on Germany and came to the war at a relatively late point. I think you must be talking about Britain and France, here. And as I've said before, they were legally, not morally, bound to their declarations of war.
"Second, one could just as well argue that Sadam could have let weapons inspectors into his country, not too huge of a demand conisdering he was lucky to have been able to saty in power in the first place. Since Sadam did not let them in, he effectively killed his people."
Well - that's stretching it quite a bit. The US has a much larger stockpile of WMD's and no inspectors, does that in itself imply that anyone who could, would be justified in attacking and the blame could be placed on the administration?
"Something that is coherent, logical, and leaps far beyond the ideological cheerleading that seems to have enveloped the site on this issue."
Indeed. I agree with you here. Arguments both for and against the war are guilty of these accusations.
Saddam launched scuds towards Israel to try to start an Israeli-Arab war, he used biological weapons twice, once against his own people, he has carried out mass executions for 3 decades, fired on coalition aircrafts hundres of times, Saddam's troops invaded Kuwait, robbed raped and pillaged, and then lit all the oil wells on fire on his way out, Saddam opened up the Oil pipes leading to a mass ecological nightmare for the Persian Gulf.
People are starving in Iraq, and Saddam pays 3.5 Billion for an exit strategy in case of a UN invasion, not to mention building 40+ palatial mansions for his personal use.
Saddam is actively pursuing nuclear weapons as evidenced by his attempted to purchase advanced enrichment equipment a few months back. An Iraqi military officer testified that Saddam was stockpiling biological and chemical weapons in underground stores under hospitals and schools.
Saddam has threatened any invading troops with chemical and biological weapons.
I am against war unless it is a last resort. Saddam has had ample opportunity to remain a dictator as long as he doesn't threaten the region. That didn't happen.
This isnt a new war for oil [unless you are talking about French, Russian, or Chinese contracts], it is enforcing the peace agreement that ended the Persian Gulf War. An agreement that has been violated 14 times.
How many more chances does he deserve? Do we have to wait for him to use a nuclear bomb? Time for him to go.
People are starving in Iraq, and Saddam pays 3.5 Billion for an exit strategy in case of a UN invasion, not to mention building 40+ palatial mansions for his personal use.
Saddam is actively pursuing nuclear weapons as evidenced by his attempted to purchase advanced enrichment equipment a few months back. An Iraqi military officer testified that Saddam was stockpiling biological and chemical weapons in underground stores under hospitals and schools.
Saddam has threatened any invading troops with chemical and biological weapons.
I am against war unless it is a last resort. Saddam has had ample opportunity to remain a dictator as long as he doesn't threaten the region. That didn't happen.
This isnt a new war for oil [unless you are talking about French, Russian, or Chinese contracts], it is enforcing the peace agreement that ended the Persian Gulf War. An agreement that has been violated 14 times.
How many more chances does he deserve? Do we have to wait for him to use a nuclear bomb? Time for him to go.
Pakistan
--run by a shaky unelected dictator, Musharraf
-- has nuclear weapons
-- harbors al qaeda (Osama bin Laden is probably there)
--is at war with nuclear power India presently
--is also presently a US ally!
Pakistan just gave North Korea information and materials for making nuclear weapons, so now our official enemy, named as part of the 'axis of evil' also has nuclear weapons.
Are we attacking North Korea or Pakistan?
no, of course we're not, *because* they have nuclear weapons. If you attack nations with dangerous weapons like that, they might use them. It is pretty clear that Iraq only has some old scud missiles that will go within a 400 mile range. So israel might be in some danger when we attack, but not the US
--run by a shaky unelected dictator, Musharraf
-- has nuclear weapons
-- harbors al qaeda (Osama bin Laden is probably there)
--is at war with nuclear power India presently
--is also presently a US ally!
Pakistan just gave North Korea information and materials for making nuclear weapons, so now our official enemy, named as part of the 'axis of evil' also has nuclear weapons.
Are we attacking North Korea or Pakistan?
no, of course we're not, *because* they have nuclear weapons. If you attack nations with dangerous weapons like that, they might use them. It is pretty clear that Iraq only has some old scud missiles that will go within a 400 mile range. So israel might be in some danger when we attack, but not the US
"Against War @ Civic Center"
Who wouldn't be opposed to war at the Civic Center. What a lousy place to hold a war.
Who wouldn't be opposed to war at the Civic Center. What a lousy place to hold a war.
It looks really good by fire light.
Yeah, fire light. Good idea. I'm visualizing a Sparticus thing. Crucify these protesters and light their bodies so we can watch the 49ers play at night.
Like a mugger or a rapist saying I dont want to hurt you but i will? Huh?
That makes no sense. Equating the UN actions against Iraq with a mugger or a rapist displays a complete detachment with reality.
I am sure you blame the UN no flight zone in the north for an emerging Kurdish economy. I am sure Saddam will welcome the Shiites in the South with hugs and kisses after the no-flight zone in the south is lifted.
Forget about that time Saddam lured his step-sons back and shot them, forget the time he gathered an auditorium full of people and had several picked out by hand, taken out back and shot.
The Iraqi regime is a peace loving one.
Pakistan is right, since there are other evils in the world, we should not single out Iraq for bending the security council resolution over the hood of a car and having its way with them.
I would like to thank sfindymedia.org, glad for their fine tinefoil hat products, at conspiracy theories for helping me to see that the US is bad.
That makes no sense. Equating the UN actions against Iraq with a mugger or a rapist displays a complete detachment with reality.
I am sure you blame the UN no flight zone in the north for an emerging Kurdish economy. I am sure Saddam will welcome the Shiites in the South with hugs and kisses after the no-flight zone in the south is lifted.
Forget about that time Saddam lured his step-sons back and shot them, forget the time he gathered an auditorium full of people and had several picked out by hand, taken out back and shot.
The Iraqi regime is a peace loving one.
Pakistan is right, since there are other evils in the world, we should not single out Iraq for bending the security council resolution over the hood of a car and having its way with them.
I would like to thank sfindymedia.org, glad for their fine tinefoil hat products, at conspiracy theories for helping me to see that the US is bad.
"The Iraqi regime is a peace loving one."
Nobody said that.
In your world, though, do 2 wrongs = 1 right?
Was it OK for the Soviets to massacre Nazi POWs?
Nobody said that.
In your world, though, do 2 wrongs = 1 right?
Was it OK for the Soviets to massacre Nazi POWs?
I don't think the Iraqi regime has just comitted 2 wrongs.
What we are debating here is what has happened since the end of the Persian Gulf war. A war that Iraq started by invading Kuwait, and we ended with the stipulation he stops production of WMD's.
Either he follows the security council resolutions fully [there is some debate that his firing on coalition aircraft may have already violated the agreement], or his regime is overthrown.
I for one would welcome a democratic Iraq. It would stop a major source of funding for suicide bombers, and democracy for the Shiites in the south may force Iran to push along reforms a little quicker.
What we are debating here is what has happened since the end of the Persian Gulf war. A war that Iraq started by invading Kuwait, and we ended with the stipulation he stops production of WMD's.
Either he follows the security council resolutions fully [there is some debate that his firing on coalition aircraft may have already violated the agreement], or his regime is overthrown.
I for one would welcome a democratic Iraq. It would stop a major source of funding for suicide bombers, and democracy for the Shiites in the south may force Iran to push along reforms a little quicker.
When did this whole ends justify the means crap come back into style?
Lets say a post war situation is great, how many deaths are acceptable in your mind. There has to be a number. If every Iraqi civilian were killed to create a US victory Im sure you would oppose a war. So its not as simple as what the result will be, you also have to discuss what the cost will be in human lives and if its worth it....
But the end result in Iraq is likely to be disasterous. A Kurdish North is not acceptable to Turkey, how many years could that war go on? (and a breakaway Shiite population in the South could cause another Iran Iraq war or at least a long term conflict...)
If Iraq has any WMD could a collapse cause these to fall into the hands of real terrorists (Iraq may have tried to kill Bush Sr but it really hasnt had any real ties to terrorism that Ive heard anyone suggest)
And what of the regional antiUS backlash. American actions in Afghanistan increased the power of fundamentalists more than anything since Reagan armed the Mujahaden to fight the Soviets. Fundamentalists gained in the elections from Pakistan to Morocco. Even the current conflict in Nigeria is partly a result of increased antiWestern feelings worldwide.
I havnt heard a peep from teh Bush administraion about what comes after the US victory... look at Afghanistan. According to Bush it was a great US victory but the real leaders of the Taliban and Al Qaeda still control regions of the country (as well as areas in a current nuclear power, Pakistan) Bin Laden can issue monthly tapes to the world press and as the short wave of money dissipates Afghanistan sinks back into civil war and extreme poverty (as well as production of most of the worlds opium)
Lets say a post war situation is great, how many deaths are acceptable in your mind. There has to be a number. If every Iraqi civilian were killed to create a US victory Im sure you would oppose a war. So its not as simple as what the result will be, you also have to discuss what the cost will be in human lives and if its worth it....
But the end result in Iraq is likely to be disasterous. A Kurdish North is not acceptable to Turkey, how many years could that war go on? (and a breakaway Shiite population in the South could cause another Iran Iraq war or at least a long term conflict...)
If Iraq has any WMD could a collapse cause these to fall into the hands of real terrorists (Iraq may have tried to kill Bush Sr but it really hasnt had any real ties to terrorism that Ive heard anyone suggest)
And what of the regional antiUS backlash. American actions in Afghanistan increased the power of fundamentalists more than anything since Reagan armed the Mujahaden to fight the Soviets. Fundamentalists gained in the elections from Pakistan to Morocco. Even the current conflict in Nigeria is partly a result of increased antiWestern feelings worldwide.
I havnt heard a peep from teh Bush administraion about what comes after the US victory... look at Afghanistan. According to Bush it was a great US victory but the real leaders of the Taliban and Al Qaeda still control regions of the country (as well as areas in a current nuclear power, Pakistan) Bin Laden can issue monthly tapes to the world press and as the short wave of money dissipates Afghanistan sinks back into civil war and extreme poverty (as well as production of most of the worlds opium)
I will assume for the sake of argument, PJ, that you are sincere in desiring a better situation for the people currently trapped under the rule of Hussein.
One of the biggest fallacies is to project ones' own hopes onto a military operation the conduct of which you will have no control, whether you've granted it support or not. It is doubly fallacious to project ones' hopes onto the actions of the US ruling class given its sordid history in the Mid East and elsewhere.
This shit ain't happening in a vacuum, PJ. Context matters, even if Americans think that's just for chumps.
You must be aware that the US supported Hussein throughout the 1980s, up until AND AFTER he gassed both the Iranians and the Kurds. The US supplied Hussein's regime advanced armaments in his war against Iran (while, it should be added, arming the Iranians as well). During the Persian Gulf "War" and on-going bombings, the US deliberately destroyed Iraqi water treatment facilities, in the process causing untold thousands, mostly children, to die of infectious disease. The US massacred huge numbers of Iraqi conscripts as they were retreating from Kuwait (remember the "Highway of Death"?) while giving a free pass to Hussein's elite forces to smash uprisings in the wake of his defeat in Kuwait. The US, through the UN (whose decisions it honors only when they accord with US interests), imposed sanctions for the past twelve years that have caused hundreds of thousands to die. The US has dropped plutonium tipped missles onto Iraq, causing huge outbreaks of cancer and other syndromes.
Yes, the US wants to save the Iraqi people!
For years now, the US has sent the clear message that NO MATTER WHAT Hussein does -- whether he abides by UN resolutions or not -- the US seeks his overthrow. It is known that the US filched UN arms inspectors' intelligence and used it to launch attacks against various Iraq facilities, totally against the wording of the resolution. The US has in effect declared permanent war against Hussein -- giving him no incentive to adhere to resolutions -- and then acted surprised that he objects to total disarmament.
One needn't have an ounce of sympathy for Hussein to see what a charade this all is.
We must ask why the US has been so fixated upon Hussein. Why is it so interested in building military bases throughout the Middle East and Central and South Asia. You talk of your desire for democracy in Iraq. Since when has the US cared about democracy in the Middle East? That's a laugh. US geo-strategic planners know that if the people have real power, US interests are threatened, hence the US' support for brutal regimes throughout the region (and around the world). Honest supporters of bombing Iraq, like Tom Lantos, have already revealed that the real concern is with imposing a pro-US vassal who'll do the US' bidding.
How many Iraqi's are you willing to see die so the US can set up a new, more pliant, Hussein?
One of the biggest fallacies is to project ones' own hopes onto a military operation the conduct of which you will have no control, whether you've granted it support or not. It is doubly fallacious to project ones' hopes onto the actions of the US ruling class given its sordid history in the Mid East and elsewhere.
This shit ain't happening in a vacuum, PJ. Context matters, even if Americans think that's just for chumps.
You must be aware that the US supported Hussein throughout the 1980s, up until AND AFTER he gassed both the Iranians and the Kurds. The US supplied Hussein's regime advanced armaments in his war against Iran (while, it should be added, arming the Iranians as well). During the Persian Gulf "War" and on-going bombings, the US deliberately destroyed Iraqi water treatment facilities, in the process causing untold thousands, mostly children, to die of infectious disease. The US massacred huge numbers of Iraqi conscripts as they were retreating from Kuwait (remember the "Highway of Death"?) while giving a free pass to Hussein's elite forces to smash uprisings in the wake of his defeat in Kuwait. The US, through the UN (whose decisions it honors only when they accord with US interests), imposed sanctions for the past twelve years that have caused hundreds of thousands to die. The US has dropped plutonium tipped missles onto Iraq, causing huge outbreaks of cancer and other syndromes.
Yes, the US wants to save the Iraqi people!
For years now, the US has sent the clear message that NO MATTER WHAT Hussein does -- whether he abides by UN resolutions or not -- the US seeks his overthrow. It is known that the US filched UN arms inspectors' intelligence and used it to launch attacks against various Iraq facilities, totally against the wording of the resolution. The US has in effect declared permanent war against Hussein -- giving him no incentive to adhere to resolutions -- and then acted surprised that he objects to total disarmament.
One needn't have an ounce of sympathy for Hussein to see what a charade this all is.
We must ask why the US has been so fixated upon Hussein. Why is it so interested in building military bases throughout the Middle East and Central and South Asia. You talk of your desire for democracy in Iraq. Since when has the US cared about democracy in the Middle East? That's a laugh. US geo-strategic planners know that if the people have real power, US interests are threatened, hence the US' support for brutal regimes throughout the region (and around the world). Honest supporters of bombing Iraq, like Tom Lantos, have already revealed that the real concern is with imposing a pro-US vassal who'll do the US' bidding.
How many Iraqi's are you willing to see die so the US can set up a new, more pliant, Hussein?
What is this helicopter? WHat did it do? Sorry if this sounds really stupid.
First things first...
America is hated because it is the most successful nation on earth (economically, politically, etc...). We (and our way of life) are a threat to any backward country's government, who suppress their people under the guise of nationalism or religious fundamentalism. They teach their people to hate America no matter what America does - as long as we prosper, we are a threat. What other country does more to help the world than America? What other country provides billions in foreign aid? How many countries sends their troops to every trouble spot to act as a peace keeping international meals-on-wheels? What country beat back fascism and communism in the last century? Which country will take the lead to beat back Islamic Fundamentalism in this century?
The looming war in Iraq has nothing to do with oil. If you believe that, you will believe anything that the idiots in Hollywood tell you (You probably watch the TV show JAG, and think that's a realistic portrayal of the life of a Naval Legal Officer). Granted, most of our fat, ignorant, Oprah watching population does not have access to all classified military intelligence - but I think there is plenty of evidence available to anyone that illustrates the threat that Iraq poses to the US.
Another thing.. All you hear today is how America should do more to appease everyone that hates us (for whatever reason). "Oh, we should build schools and bridges for this country because they are poor & they hate us & they have tribes that fight among themselves" ----- BS "Oh, we shouldn't build a tall replacement for the WTC because it would be an arrogant symbol of our evil power & make more people hate us" My god... Yes, skyscrapers are symbols... symbols of our prosperity, hard work and optimisim & we shouldn't apologize for them or anything else "American." Being American is nothing to be ashamed about -- we should have our spines re-attached and have some pride in what makes our country great. Millions of Americans have worked very hard to make this country prosper. If people around the world would put half as much energy into some "hard work" to build their own countries, as they do into the protesting and attacking our's, we wouldn't have so many problems. They blame us for all of their problems and then expect us to solve them, when only they are ulitmately responsible for fixing them.
Anyone who says Iraq is poor deserves to be slapped repeatedly. The Iraqi people are repressed under a extremely wealthy dictatorship. They have the means to be a prosperous nation & getting rid of Saddam will only benefit the Iraqi people in the long run (and most of them support our effort - believe it or not - you just don't hear about it since they would probably get shot for saying so).
We are not going to win the war on terrorism by sitting around picking daisies, drinking papaya and burning American flags in ignorant protest of what needs to be done. I am in the Navy and I'm going over to Iraq very soon -- and guess what ? I support it!!! I am more than willing to risk my life because I believe it is the right thing to do for OUR COUNTRY. Everyone in my squadron feels the same way -- everyone.
America is hated because it is the most successful nation on earth (economically, politically, etc...). We (and our way of life) are a threat to any backward country's government, who suppress their people under the guise of nationalism or religious fundamentalism. They teach their people to hate America no matter what America does - as long as we prosper, we are a threat. What other country does more to help the world than America? What other country provides billions in foreign aid? How many countries sends their troops to every trouble spot to act as a peace keeping international meals-on-wheels? What country beat back fascism and communism in the last century? Which country will take the lead to beat back Islamic Fundamentalism in this century?
The looming war in Iraq has nothing to do with oil. If you believe that, you will believe anything that the idiots in Hollywood tell you (You probably watch the TV show JAG, and think that's a realistic portrayal of the life of a Naval Legal Officer). Granted, most of our fat, ignorant, Oprah watching population does not have access to all classified military intelligence - but I think there is plenty of evidence available to anyone that illustrates the threat that Iraq poses to the US.
Another thing.. All you hear today is how America should do more to appease everyone that hates us (for whatever reason). "Oh, we should build schools and bridges for this country because they are poor & they hate us & they have tribes that fight among themselves" ----- BS "Oh, we shouldn't build a tall replacement for the WTC because it would be an arrogant symbol of our evil power & make more people hate us" My god... Yes, skyscrapers are symbols... symbols of our prosperity, hard work and optimisim & we shouldn't apologize for them or anything else "American." Being American is nothing to be ashamed about -- we should have our spines re-attached and have some pride in what makes our country great. Millions of Americans have worked very hard to make this country prosper. If people around the world would put half as much energy into some "hard work" to build their own countries, as they do into the protesting and attacking our's, we wouldn't have so many problems. They blame us for all of their problems and then expect us to solve them, when only they are ulitmately responsible for fixing them.
Anyone who says Iraq is poor deserves to be slapped repeatedly. The Iraqi people are repressed under a extremely wealthy dictatorship. They have the means to be a prosperous nation & getting rid of Saddam will only benefit the Iraqi people in the long run (and most of them support our effort - believe it or not - you just don't hear about it since they would probably get shot for saying so).
We are not going to win the war on terrorism by sitting around picking daisies, drinking papaya and burning American flags in ignorant protest of what needs to be done. I am in the Navy and I'm going over to Iraq very soon -- and guess what ? I support it!!! I am more than willing to risk my life because I believe it is the right thing to do for OUR COUNTRY. Everyone in my squadron feels the same way -- everyone.
I wonder how all these Peace acitivists arrived at the protest site, by bicycle I hope. Otherwise they can not say "No Blood for Oil", Where did the gas that thier SUV consumed come from?
I wonder how all these Peace acitivists arrived at the protest site, by bicycle I hope. Otherwise they can not say "No Blood for Oil", Where did the gas that thier SUV consumed come from?
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$155.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network