Sign the emergency petition to the U.N.

I signed it! Posted the link somewhere but glad you opened a thread on it.

A little last minute, but worth the double posting.

I already did this

But I also recommend you visit

http://www.geocities.com/eradicate_98/The_Next_War/UN.html

There is nothing that can prevent the war, after so many soldiers moved and so much money spent.

I agree Steissd, but at least it is a gesture to show that some individuals in the war-threatening countries don't support the violent solution.

Thanks for the link, littlk.

Neoguinn - thanks for that link. Streissd, I agree with Equus, even if it's unavoidable, I'll still protest.

I already signed it, but thanks for the link Littlek :-)

I believe that the war is already a "done deal". I would hate to see our service men and women treated like the people who came back from Vietnam.

How about a mass gesture of support for our guys in the service, wishing them well, and giving them our vote of confidence!

And when Hitler's actions seemed imminent the good German people should have supported their troops. When his ethnic cleansing was a done deal the Germans opposing it should have simply wished their troops luck.
One of the most insipid tactics known to man is to claim that once something is likely to happen it is better to embrace it. What you just said is that you want people to support something that they feel strongly against. "Gee, I'd hate for any soldier's feelings to get hurt so please support this war once it looks like it's going to happen "
By that logic when Bush took office everyone should have just accepted this inevitability.

Thanks littlek and Neoguin.

Dreamweaver MX- If you do not understand the difference between what Hitler did, and what the U.S. and her allies are attempting to accomplish, it is no use even discussing this further.

If you can't understand how stupid it is to ask people to support something just because it's going to happen you are not worth much in a debate either.

Dreamweaver-



If you really read what I said carefully, what I said is that we need to support our TROOPS, who may be putting their lives on the line. I said nothing about supporting the war.

Two can play the "you can't read" game. If you read my post you will see that I advocated support for Hitler's troops as well I said nothing about supporting Hitler.
It's blindingly naive to expect anyone older than two to not see that supporting troops in a war is only a few steps away from supporting the war itself.

Dreamweaver MX- Please find someone else with whom to fight. I'm outta here. I will not debate anyone with such obvious disrespect for any viewpoint that is not a carbon copy of your own!

I like when people try to imply that showing them respect means swallowing their shaky arguments, it makes themselves look like sore losers. There's a big difference between respecting an opinion and someone who's opinions are so weak that they have to stoop to whining about respect when the opinions are challenged in a way that they can't answer.

Well, ya won the fight, Dreamweaver - feel good?

I would humbly suggest that, notwithstanding the "rightness" or "wrongness" of our respective opinions (and that is all they are), the thing that elevates this forum above the likes of Abuzz is the unrelenting attempts toward civility on all its members' parts.

...just something to ponder...

Dreamweaver, there is a huge difference between "Supporting The Troops" and "Supporting the Policy". The troops have no choice in the matter; they are required to discharge their duty as it is assigned to them by their government. The failure to understand this difference, and to respect it, is chief among the failings of The Vietnam Debacle. I recall, several decades ago, dragging myself, on crutches, through Chicago's O'Hare airport, in uniform, glad to have survived, grieving the loss of close freinds and deeply concerned for the welfare of other freinds still "In Country", and overjoyed to be at last "Home", to the taunts of "Baby Killer" and worse. I will never forget that afternoon; it was for me one of the many horrors of an altogether horrible experience.

Such behavior on the part of its practitioners did terrible harm both to the blameless troops and to the Anti-War Movement. I pray the same mistake is not made again. Whether one agrees with why troops are deployed or not, one must accept that the troops are honoring their oath of service and have no say in how, when, why, or where they are deployed. They are called upon to risk their lives, which they knowingly and willingly do for their nation. For this, they deserve accolade, not censure. Reserve your approbation for the makers of policy, not those commanded to implement it.

Whether you agree with The War or not, The War is not the fault of The Troops. I feel that to fail to support the troops is callow, misdirected, and reprehensible. One does not blame a fire department for a fire, or a police department for crime. Individuals may be singled out for disapproval of personal misdeed as may be appropriate, but the people of The Military are doing as they must. One should not blame The Troops for a war. Their sacrifice, loyalty, bravery, and dedication are to be lauded, even if those who would employ them deserve excoriation. That's how I feel, anyway.



timber

You are right, a call to support troops is very different from a call to support policy. A call to support a polcy is direct and therefore more honest than a call to support troops used to sillence opposition to a policy. A call to support troops can be used to try to silence opposition and try to make wild claims that the troops are blameless.
Passing the buck may feel good but it only erases the blame in your own mind. The bottom line is that if the troops refuse to fight there is no war. If they choose to go along with it they not only sign the policy but spill other people's blood to make it a reality.
If the cause is unjust then the soldier has then tried to ake the lives of others for this unjustice and deserves any discomfort to his fragile ego that he gets.
Trying to make it more human with poignant tid bits only illustrates the stupidity of it all. Either side can produce such sob stories. But we don't like making the enemy human, the rule is to dehumanise them. And to humanize your troops.
Let's all be quiet now with the protests, we don't want to offend the "blameless" fools who are off to kill for the cause you protest against.
As to these kind of protests being hurtful to those making the protest that's a no brainer. It's a dumb way to campaign. But claiming that the soldier who kills to support a policy is not responsible for his actions is equally brainless.