January 18th--anyone going

My husband and I and seven others marched in the October 26th ant-war march in DC. So far all that attended that one are planning on being there on January 18th. I got a call from a church group organizing here in my home town...this will be big! The weather may be a factor if the crowd is smaller, but I certainly hope not.

Do all of you really think GWBush and company will listen to any anti-war rally? I don't think so. c.i.

Maybe not now c.i., but the public and the media eventually will and that is what we are working towards. The movement is gathering momentum and I think Bush is not unaware.

Aside from the internet and a small circle of friends, protest events are one of the few forums we are allowed these days. If it catches the public's imagination, we will eventually be heeded. I personally cannot attend - financial reasons. But I will in spirit.

Vietnamnurse, I think (humbly) that your cause is worthy, and more people should show interest in trying to influence our government in the right direction of an anti-war stance. Unfortunately, the people surrounding our president are mostly hawks, and the handful that have Bush's ear has more influence than millions at home or abroad. That's the reality of the current situation - as I see it. Bush is working towards a war, somewhat patiently, but with a mindset that any anti-war demonstrations will not alter. c.i.

Bush does appear hellbent for leather, but we have to at least try to stop him.

steissd, That's the problem with Bush's war with Iraq. He still has not made a case for war. All I hear is alot of bluster from both sides. Where's Saddam's WOMD's? Where's the connection that Saddam is supporting terrorism? c.ii.

I guess, that this information is classified and cannot be publicized without harming the CIA global operations. Maybe, something will be released after Saddam is replaced with someone more predictable and less hostile toward the USA and the West.
The draft Provisional Government of Iraq is not so much attractive, to my mind: the pro-Iranian Shi'ite faction is overrepresented there. Imposing such a government on Iraq will be a blunder comparable to assistance to bin Laden in '80s against the USSR.
Some Iraqi liberal completely dependent on his Western masters is to be retrieved and installed in Baghdad after the military victory over the current regime is achieved.

steissd, I don't believe in putting the cart before the horse on such an important action by the US. We need the support of the world community - before we attack Iraq. Not afterwards. c.i.

steissd, When I say "world community," I'm talking about the majority of countries that are interested in fighting for the security of world peace. Even if France and Saudi Arabia are against the war on terrorism, the "world community" is still the majority of nations that are shooting for the same goals. Those pariah nations will always exist, but their voice will become less important, if the rest of the world spoke with one voice and effort to eliminate terrorism. c.i.

I am not so optimistic, and I do not believe that absolute majority of countries really want to fight terrorism. Many of them would like to enjoy the results of victory over terrorism, but to not take part or even not to grant verbal support to the American effort. Some leaders consider that this is not the highest priority of their country, some may be scared with possible response of terror organizations, some may be strongly dependent on the Arab oil, some may dislike the USA more than they dislike Al Qaeda and Saddam's regime, etc., etc.

That's the biggest problem as I see it -- searching out those countries who can be proven appease and finance terrorism. We're like to be surprised that it operates very much like Mafia protection schemes. Saudi Arabia is already in a bad light on that issue -- don't attack us and we'll give you money and/or allow you to operate within our borders. I support the liberty to protest war, especially one which has proceedings that are so secretative -- reminds me of the secret war in "1984." Governments have been known to hold up five fingers in front of the populace and insist that you must see four fingers. Too many people who read the novel don't get the parables. It isn't meant as a predicted scenerio any more than "Animal Farm" means we'll all turn into pigs and geese. (Hmmm, are we sure they're aren't pigs and geese among us disguised as humans?)

LW, We are all aware of the terrorist rings hidden in almost every country of the world. Most government are cooperating in seeking out who they are, and doing what they can to minimize their activities. This world will never eradicate 100 percent of these extremists that wants to do harm to innocent people. We have them in our own country, born and bred Americans. The most we can do is to continue to seek out who they are, and take them out of society where they can do no harm. There is no other alternative. All we can do is continue our war on terrorism. c.i.

Saudi rulers, to my mind, have sincere sympathies toward terrorists. The only thing that prevents them from open support of bin Laden is their dependence on oil revenues whereas the main customers and the main enemies of bin Laden are the same countries. The Saudi regime acts differently toward the countries that do not purchase Saudi oil: for example, it openly supports the Chechen separatists acting against Russia.

I will be marching on Jan 18 as I did on Oct 26, despite the naysayers who think it won't advance our cause. Frankly, there aren't a whole lot of avenues available to those of us who object to the Iraqi War and imo, it is better than doing nothing at all. So...hope to see some of you in D.C.

Wish I could be there too jo_lee. Bush is a real screwball who has to have something put in his path to stumble over before it's too late.

Attention all:

Debate guidelines for the Politics Forum have now been put in place. Please read and abide by them.
http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2594