Date: 2/15/2003 8:17:00 PM
From Authorid: 47218
firstly, I would never personally insult a service-person for being in the military. A person volunteering to put their life on the line for their country garners all of my respect. And I do not hold a person in the services accountable for the decisions of the government. They really don't have a say-- they go where they're told to and do what they're told to do. That said, I do not think that the people in the services should take war protests as a personal attack. Occasionally, our government makes bad decisions, and our citizens have a right to demonstrate against that. They are not attacking the soldiers, they're exercising their right to put pressure on their government to forego a decision that they do not agree with. That is democracy. And I do not think that our government should ever have the power to supress demonstrations. That would be a violation of our constitutional rights.  |
Date: 2/15/2003 8:21:00 PM
From Authorid: 32806
You say you think its wrong to protest against what the governments policies are???...."I believe it is wrong to protest our governments policies in other countries"..... so whatever the government do, we only talk about it within our own borders??? You need to look more closely at WHY they are your enemy when you were supporting them and arming them not so long ago.....I totally agree that abusing military personnel is wrong, they are not the ones to blame for the situation. On the other hand, if military personnel are guilty of killing children or any other type of war crime then they need to be brought to account as well.  |
Date: 2/15/2003 8:21:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
I agree Mollycat-so far as they can protest all they want in the U.S.-but I believe protesting overseas is wrong....BTW-good reply, and thanks.  |
Date: 2/15/2003 8:24:00 PM
From Authorid: 61977
I believe that people do have a right to protest and make their beliefs known to the world. I no longer have that right anymore. You see I am a service member and I do not have to like everything my commander in chief says but I do have to follow him regardless of my feelings on any matter. I gave up those rights. I salute the people who speak and who can voice there opinion. That is there human right. People have many veiws on who our ememies are. If someone wants to find out for themselves to be a true judgement of their character instead of what they hear everyday on the news and what is fed to them in the media more power to them. Peace All. Mrs. Mommie Nealy  |
|
Date: 2/15/2003 8:36:00 PM
From Authorid: 42310
I do agree with you in saying that war protestors should not be verbalally abusing our solders. Evin if I am compleatly against this war I do have a large amount of respect for those who enter into millitary service because they are dedicating their lives to something larger than themselves. It is something worthy of our respect and honor evin if we are not for the cause. |
Date: 2/15/2003 8:48:00 PM
From Authorid: 15228
I've been wondering why so many American celebrities shoot there mouths off overseas, but not here at home...Do they think anti-Americanism helps sell their movies??  |
Date: 2/15/2003 8:50:00 PM
From Authorid: 14226
If an american doesn't believe in the war, they wouldn't believe theres an enemy. Any american has to the right to go and meet with Iraqi. But I do agree leave the military personal out of the protests, they are only doing their jobs. Ive been holding this in for awhile now but I can't hold it in any longer.. I don't believe its right for the USA to start this war and take Australian troops that are my personal friends to be get murdered or murder others in war that the USA instagated. The USA gave Iraq these weapons of mass destruction and now my friends are paying for that stupid mistake. I'll go whereever I bloody well want to protest something that could kill my friends and family. luv,  |
Date: 2/15/2003 8:50:00 PM
From Authorid: 12133
My ONLY comment on here, without going off too bad is..Fonda should have been shot, not tried  |
Date: 2/15/2003 8:55:00 PM
From Authorid: 12133
Ok...my turn/ Iraq uses T-54/55 tanks..Russian. T-62 tanks..Russian. Scud missles...Russian... AK-47 rifles..Russian.. Where do the Americans get as being the ones who gave them to them?? Another thing...Iraqi air defenses..set up according to the SOVIET doctorate...seems to me you need to do at least a LITTLE research, before you blame US for something. huh?
|
Date: 2/15/2003 9:39:00 PM
From Authorid: 47296
Mommie Nealy, thank you for saying what I was thinking. I too was a part of the military. I spent years holding my tongue, even when I knew what was being done was not the right thing to do. Those that serve, and the ones who have served, did it so that others have the right to speak their piece. I do agree that military personnel should not be the target of protests, but te fact is, the military is the tool the the government uses, and they are the ones who come in contact with John Q. Public. I am sure if the politicians put themselves out in public that they would catch the brunt of the protests, but as we all know, no politician is going to put himself in a position to be publically ridiculed.  |
Date: 2/15/2003 9:41:00 PM
From Authorid: 32806
The following is taken from an unclasified CIA document, if your in any doubt about who supplied who,,,,,,,,,As was the case in 1998 and 1999, entities in Western countries in 2000 were not as important as sources for WMD- and missile- related goods and materials as in past years. However, Iran and Libya continued to approach entities in Western Europe to provide needed acquisitions for their WMD and missile programs. Increasingly rigorous and effective export controls and cooperation among supplier countries have led the other foreign WMD and missile programs to look elsewhere for many controlled dual-use goods. Machine tools, spare parts for dual-use equipment, and widely available materials, scientific equipment, and specialty metals were the most common items sought. In addition, several Western countries announced their willingness to negotiate ACW sales to Libya..........prior to 1998 UK and USA were the main allies of Iraq in their war with Iran, as you can see in the first line it says "As was the case in 1998 and 1999, entities in Western countries in 2000 were not as important as sources for WMD- and missile- related goods and materials as in past years". So who didnt the west supply Crash??
|
|
Date: 2/15/2003 9:52:00 PM
From Authorid: 12133
One, in 1998 Iraq wasn't at war with Iran. 2, I never said we didn't give or sell them ANY of thei weapaons, but we didn't sell them the majority of them |
Date: 2/15/2003 11:09:00 PM
From Authorid: 21867
I completely agree that those brave souls who risk all for their country deserve more respect - and on the whole it must be said that respect is accorded to them...its normally only the very vocal minority who are a problem. That said...I also believe any person, any citizen, anywhere in the world should at least be accorded the simple right to speak ones mind...if you are to remove that, suppress that, demonise those who utilise that...then sorry, but that smells alot like actions a communist dictator would take...and you certainly wouldn't wish to become guilty of the very thing your country has stood against for decades - would you?  |
Date: 2/15/2003 11:14:00 PM
From Authorid: 53689
Why is protesting oversea wrong? What we do effects everyone, not just us. They have the right to express their displeasure with what our government is doing. I was involved in a protest today, a very peaceful one, after all, it is peace that we want. Yes, there are some people who take it to extremes and call our troop "baby killers" but for the most part, those who are protesting are doing so because they don't want our boys going over there and risking their life for a very senseless war. And why don't americans have the right to go and meet with the "enemy"? I am happy that someone took the time to find out for themselves exactly what IS really going on over there, rather then depend solely on the biased media.
With all that being said, yes I support our troops, in fact my older brother is already over there, but I don't support this war. It isn't needed at this moment. I have yet to see a reason for my brother to risk his two baby girls losing their father. I could support this war if it had some value, but it doesn't...and I have found that most of the anti-war protesters that I have met feel the same way.  |
Date: 2/16/2003 7:43:00 AM
From Authorid: 57225
i am against going to war right now, but i have no hostility towards our soldiers, and i would never say something negative about them just b/c i dont support the war. it takes a lot of courage to go out there and fight and i have a lot of respect for them.  |
Date: 2/16/2003 9:24:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
Let the protester protest, heaven forbid they would do something else like go to work or class or something. People like to have a cause, the attraction of the anti war cause is it requires very little in the way of personal commitment, courage or danger. Plus it's politically correct and you get to be on the same side as the likes of Sheryl Crowe and Alec Baldwin. Cool Huh? And yes I'm ready for the comments about how commited you are and how you're looked down upon and discriminated against for being anti War/ Government/ Military. Save it.  |
|
Date: 2/16/2003 9:55:00 AM
From Authorid: 15228
The picture of the Australian on stilts, dressed as Uncle Sam at the Peace rally yesterday REALLY changed my mind about things! Stilts=Peace. Not to mention the woman walking beside man-on-stilts, dressed in a tasteful red, white and blue pointed bra. I get it. I realize now how committed and serious these Love-Pixies are. Makes me want to get my own bra and my own stilts and march for peace, maybe get drunk afterwards to celebrate making a difference in this world (I would remove the stilts before I got drunk) . |
Date: 2/16/2003 10:45:00 AM
From Authorid: 49150
War is wrong, free speech is not. It is also wrong to allow our government to support middle eastern countries that torture and terrify their people (Saudia Arabia for one), just because we need their oil. This is why Muslims and Palestinians hate us so much. Our government has supported and participated in the torture of people like you and me just for oil. Is it worth it, ask the family's of the world trade center victims. Do you still think it is wrong to protest our policies in other countries? Are you saying you support the US compliance to torture and murder just for some oil?  |
|
Date: 2/16/2003 10:47:00 AM
From Authorid: 49150
Let me also add, protesting is one thing. What Jane Fonda did is pure traitorous. She should be tried as a traitor to the service men that were tortured and murdered because of her. They were only carrying out orders from higher ups. |
|
Date: 2/16/2003 10:49:00 AM
From Authorid: 47218
Well, what you do when you feel very, very strongly about something, BCar? Go to a website and complain about it anonymously? Now THAT'S productive. |
|
Date: 2/16/2003 12:12:00 PM
From Authorid: 2030
Typical drivel from you MollyCat, seems I posted mt opinion and my name. And you have no idea about what I have or currently do about things I feel strongly about. The blood for oil arguement fails to hold water in ant way shape or form. We get less than 30% of our oil from the middle east. And Palestinians and Arabs hate us because they are told daily that they should, and because we support Isreal. The last place they turn their animosity on is their own corrupt leaders and governments as they should. This may very well all blow over, the peacenicks can celebrate, and next time the bomb, or plane, poison gas weapon will kill someone YOU know. Will you still be ready with a bouquet of flowers and a peace slogan. It's about security people. |
|
Date: 2/16/2003 12:58:00 PM
From Authorid: 15228
BCAR, it does hold some water if you apply the "it's all about oil" question towards France. They've signed a 5 billion dollar contract with Iraq recently and stand to lose a lot if we go to war and take out Saddam. |
|
Date: 2/16/2003 3:41:00 PM
From Authorid: 2030
France was and is the biggest backstabber in the NATO alliance. They've supplied IRAN and Iraq with weapons and weapon technology. Defied sanctions, refused assistance in the gulf war and refused fly over rights to American aircraft during the Libyan conflict. Everything that the "Blod for Oil" crowd claims can be laid right at the door of France. |
Date: 2/16/2003 4:17:00 PM
From Authorid: 19613
Well, at least if there is war, a corrupt dictator with access to weapons of mass destruction will be removed from power. I'm sure Bush will be just as eager afterwards to turn his attention to North Korea, Pakistan etc. etc. etc.  |
|
Date: 2/16/2003 4:20:00 PM
From Authorid: 47218
Guess I'm just responding to drivel with drivel. You complain about my presumptions about you, and yet you've made the same generalizations about the protestors. I don't know you, and yet you know ALL these people personally, and are privy to their thoughts and desires? Doth it occur to you that these people may be genuinely opposed to the war? Has it occurred to you that there may be other sincerely motivated people on the planet outside of yourself, or do think there's something special about you? And this brings me back to my original question, Bcar, which you didn't answer-- how should these people respond to an action of the government that they don't agree with, if demonstrating is just a way to "be part of a cause." Sit around and do nothing? What would you do if the tables were turned, if the government did something you were strongly against? |
Date: 2/17/2003 8:21:00 AM
From Authorid: 15998
I pretty much agree with everything you're saying. Like I think it is okay to protest, but sometimes they get WAAAY out of line. For example, people from my school went to the Bush inaugeration as a field trip for music class. They were beatn with signs, pushed and pull around, kicked, and thrown to the ground by protesters, THEN tear gassed by the police. I mean, c'mon, these were high school kids. Things like that make it seem like a lot protesters are irrational people, and who would listen to the views of an irrational person if they aren't going to make any sense anyways? They can't expect to be heard and taken seriously if they act like that. lol I hope that makes sense. Like I said, I'm okay with protesting, but when it comes right down to the line people need to support their country or get over it or something. They don't have to agree with it to be like "i'll stand by you through thick and through thin". I may not want to go to war, but I watch the news and I understand why Bush wants to go so I'm not gonna be like "BOO BUSH!" or anything. I respect his plans, even if they do not coincide with my own and I think some protesters need to learn to understand that... not all, but some. I also think they need to back off of the military. Are these people really just risking their lives for this country only to be trash trash talked and tortured? One would think not. My boyfriend if going into the militray this summer, he signed up a long time ago. If anyone ever did anything to him because of that, ooo I'd be on them sooo fast! This really is a complicated subject (protesting stuff), because there are so many ways to see and understand things. But protesting in other countries is 100% wrong. It is our business and should be kept at home. Countries can protest amongst themselves all they want, but don't be degrading and go to another country to do it. If these people really hate America that badly, they might as well just leave all together.  |
|
Date: 2/17/2003 8:43:00 AM
From Authorid: 15228
Mollycat, dressing up in bizarre costumes that would fit better in Gay Parades, weird slogans that have nothing to do with Iraq and reworked chants from the 60's (example: In Austin the speaker shouted "What do we want"?! crowd answered, "Freedom"!!! over and over, what does this have to do with the war on Iraq?) makes me think many protestors aren't sincere about there desire for world Peace, but rather have many different agenda's, not just "Peace in our Time". |
|
Date: 2/17/2003 8:50:00 AM
From Authorid: 15228
Also, In San Francisco, a large group of “anti-war” Love-Pixies were so overcome by the spirit of peace and love that they went on a 4-hour rampage of vandalism and violence, assaulting police officers, smashing store windows and spray painting cars..yeah, Peace in our Time brought to you by people who don't really know what the heck they're talking about. |
|
Date: 2/17/2003 5:21:00 PM
From Authorid: 15998
ya know what? i think protesters just like to protest... like they don't even know what they're talkign about, they just protest to protest. |
|
Date: 2/17/2003 6:21:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 15070
you know-I agree. There are some people who need a cause. Maybe it makes them feel "special", or like they have some kind of power. Maybe they just like to be "one of the crowd". I find it wrong to protest overseas. Like I said, if you want to protest here in the U.S,. I will always defend your right. But to me, protesting overseas, is WRONG & in very poor taste |
|
Date: 2/18/2003 1:12:00 PM
From Authorid: 2030
MollyCat freedom of speach of course applies to everyone. But what I see from the anti war crowd is not any solutions to the threats of terror and unstable regimes, I see the same old tired "war is bad, give peace a chance" stuff that offers absolutely no solutions, and brands everyone in government or in agreement as "War Mongers" and nothing could be further from the truth. |
Date: 2/18/2003 10:11:00 PM
From Authorid: 37900
Americans have the right to express opinions against this country's policies and even anti-American sentiments. Unfortunately, too many of us regard celebrities as something more than they are; some of us think that if someone can convincingly portray someone else, he or she must have intelligent opinions about every other matter. I think that once we resolve our ideas about that issue, the rest will take care of itself.  |
