Major anti-war rallies in Washington, San Francisco

I think they are misguided. They had the "beware of entrance to a quarrel" right but for got the "being in" part.

They should be campaigning to take the quarellsome lads out of the Whitehouse rather than advocating that we leave a job undone just because the job's initial justification was a brainfart.

But to their defense I think they see US occupation as a danger and that reconstruction is being used as a euphemism for molding a nation in the image the leaders would prefer.

It will have two unintended consequences both of which will in the long run be destructive to our efforts in Iraq.

1. Stiffen the resolve of the enemy

2. Further decrease the moral of our troops.

The organizers of the demos want the above ---- the sheep in the demos are being used as pawns.

Which is as good a reason as any I can think of why wars should not be fought in the first place.

Especially when that war is engaged over a carpet of exaggerations, prevarications, and fabrications.

I think:

Sadly, when our politicians get us into these things, it is with a certain knowledge on their part that the choice can never be to cut and run. The only real solution as I see it is more international cooperation allowing us to get out of where we are clearly just stirring hornets. But this will require circumspection apparently not on the Administration menu.

The eerie parallel with Viet Nam is to be found in that famous word, Vietnamization. It was an identical situation, and we know where that went: a ten year war that ended in national frustration and then another decade of stagnation as we paid for the war that we financed by running the printing presses.

But where does the current situation lead us in the short term? If you let the Iraqis govern themselves there's a good chance it will not be the government Bush and Co. want, to their later regret, so we stay in there with our unpopular Chilabi, with Turks at the Northern border bugging out the Kurds, with our constantly assaulted troops getting edgier and edgier. Will this then lead, as it did in Viet Nam, to our troops killing civilians left and right simply because it is no longer easy to tell who the enemy is? I fear that process has already begun. I am certain that despite the recent gloss from Washington, many of our service men and women over there see this getting worse. They will surely come back and amplify the demonstrations.

A polarized America will further tear at itself, all while the republicans plan permanent electoral control of the country and no viable alternative to their rule will be permitted. It's all a formula for public anger and loathing...

These are dark times for our nation. If next year's election comes out a popular loss and a contrived electoral victory for Bush, there is going to be an explosion of anger and it will not be pretty. What's certain is that the war in Iraq will still be with us throughout the election, and that's never a good thing for democracy.

PDiddie
The how and why we are there is now irrelevant. The question is can we now just cut and run or is it necessary to finish what has be started? In addition what are the consequences of a pull out, as advocated by the demonstrators. And last but not least do you think the demonstrations are useful or ill advised?

Those who would have us pull out continually preach that there is a parallel to Viet Nam. That may be a good rallying cry but it is way off base. In Viet Nam the enemy was a well trained and determined army. What we have in Iraq is a hit and run guerilla operation. An operation IMO that will lose steam as the infrastructure is repaired and conditions are stabilized.

We've been fighting a war in Iraq and at home with protesters from grass roots all the way to Ted Kennedy, if one war (Iraq) subsides, the other will still escalate.

There is no way to quiet it unless the protesting politicians stop it, I'm afraid it is out of control and will do much more harm and no good at all. It's one thing to exercise your free speech, and another to throw salt in our countries wound for the sake of expressing an opinion.

Brand X,

If you think the war is against protesters then I am prepared to say that your war is also against the USA.

I'm not against protesters, I'm against accelerated protesting at this point, it's counterproductive IMO.

What is it that would be the most useful tool for our enemies to use against us? Our nation showing division amongst ourselves, I hate to see this fueling their fire.

While it's true that our enemies can find comfort in our protests I find that a faulty argument. The protests are not meant to aid the enemy and the help it gives to them is greatly exagerrated in the case of the War in Iraq.

One could just as easily argue that the war helps our enemies. One could argue that the war is creating enemies.

The people shooting at our troops in Iraq in large part were not our enemies before we decided to invade their country.

Brand X, I hate to tell you, but our nation is dicided against itself. It's been for a while and it promises to get worse.

And AU, I recall the Viet Nam War pretty clearly, and there were stages when it was described as a hit and run guerilla war. What appears to be happening in Iraq is that the 'hit and run' guerillas are coaescing, and becoming better and better organized. Just because Iraq is not Viet Nam in its final stages, doesn't mean we should overlook the similarities in the early stages.

Anyway, clearly we cannot cut and run. And we will not withdraw for so many reasons. But what are all of those of us who disagree to do? Not exercise our rapidly atrophiing freedom to express?

We are pretty much being told that we have no power. We have an unelected government claiming mandate when there is none. We see the party in power redictricting all the key states to ensure vicory against the will of the people...

Are we supposed to wait till it's ten times worse to say something?

I can't and won't. If the salt hurts someones wounds... who infliucted those wounds?

It's always counter productive, misguided, etc. to protest, according to Bush apologists. There will never be a correct time. I believe in demonstrations to make the govt. aware I am dissatisfied with their policies. Not all protestors are of the same voice, just as not all sheep who follow Bush are of the same voice. My solution, for instance, would be to vote Bush out of office, then engage world nations in diplomacy that leads to allowing Iraq to form its own government. It would mean America having to take its chances on the world market for Iraqi oil. Perhaps seeking out alternative energy sources.

Beedlesquoink
I can assure you that I remember Viet Nam as clearly as do you. Although they used in many instances guerilla tactics the North Viet Namese were a well disiplined national Army. I wonder what tactics we used. Oh yes hit and run and count bodies.

As the good book says for every thing there is a time. This IMO is not the time.

au
You make it sound as though Americans in Vietnam were not trained.

There have been plenty of in-depth interviews with march organizers, not to mention a long overview from Todd Gitlin, revealing that now, as during the Vietnam War, there are many shades of opinion within the anti-war protest. There are quite a few, for example, who think we should be there but that we should complete the job we started. They are in Washington because they are against the original invasion and want to show their opposition. There are others whose view is that we shouldn't have gone in and should get out having carefully turned over the reconstruction to the UN (or a coalition of countries).

So let's not assume that all protesters are of one mind. Even within each organization, a variety of views is represented. There is no single, ideological "they" there.

By the way, there's every reason to believe that those whom the Bush administration considers "the enemy" are hardly influenced one way or another by American anti-war protests. There is plenty of evidence that our poor handling of the post-invasion realities in Iraq have created new enemies. That's been documented, reported on, and is discussed almost daily in the news, with each new incident.

Some of the greatest and most significant damage was done in Vietnam, over the long term, by guerrillas. That was the message of the discussion among generals (one a Vietnam vet) I heard in mid-July (and reported on then) that, should the anti-American actions increase (they have), the situation could then be said to parallel Vietnam.

Hello AU old friend!

The true enemies of America are the ones who would silence dissent! Only a traitor would do such!!

Anon

edgarblythe
I never suggested that. They did what they were told to do. We could not fight that enemy on his home ground any more than the French could.
That aside I cannot equate that action to the one in Iraq. Not only is the strength and makeup of the enemy different but the terrain which made the action in Viet Nam so difficult is completely different and much more manageable..