The US, UN & Iraq II

timber, that letter from the navy man to his mother is another example of how we in this country have been misled, in fact deceived, that this war is being fought against terrorism. The distinction is very clear between attacking a country for whatever reasons our prez can muster and rooting out terrorism. We can never defeat terrorism. It has no home address, (I heard that turn of phrase on a news show today.) You can't get there and bomb it. By its very nature, it must be hunted down and destroyed.

A war started against another country, on our own, with no backing from the rest of the world, is imperialist aggression, especially when the attacked country constitutes little or no threat to us. This attack is not a battle against terrorism. Our attack on Afghanistan was an attack against terrorism.

I suggest you all take a break and think what it is that you are for and what you are against.

I you are against the administration go surround the White House and throw rocks.

I you are against Saddam----put that on your sign.

If you are against all wars then put that on your sign.

If you sympathize with Saddam put that on your sign

If you sympathize with the Iraqi people but are against Saddam--put that on your sign.

No war in Iraq is not specific enough IMHO

Perception -- Most people, including our troops and Saddam, don't need to have it spelled out. If you do, I sympathize. But it's not going to stop me from being as much of a peace activist as I can be.

"Correspondents say the two allies will use the existence of the undeclared drone to push their view that Iraq is ignoring its responsibilities and may have to be disarmed by force.
The two nations are reported to be angry that the chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix did not make more of the discovery of the remotely controlled aircraft."
----------------------------------------
"
But Hans Blix, the chief inspector, shrugged off suggestions by American and British officials that he tried to hide bad news from Security Council Foreign Ministers in his oral presentation last Friday. "Everyone tries to squeeze us to get as much mileage out of us as they can," Dr Blix said after John Negroponte, the US Ambassador, questioned him about the drone in a closed-door session of the Security Council. "We have had a lot of work to get the cluster document together and to declassify it and it does take some time to produce these reports as well."

Tartar

Then would you please spell out YOUR position for me----maybe I have misunderstood.

Are you against all wars? or just this war?

Are you against all authority or just this authority?

Do you support the troops or are they just pawns?

What is there about America that you like---- if anything?

It seems you are against everything---am I wrong?

Dys

You make it sound as though Iraq only had one drone----Blix himself said they had several---how many is "several" and just what is the capability?

i had assumed that somewhere in the 14th century we had moved past the inane supposition that the world can be perceived as an either/or.

It's either night or day----black or white-----up or down---half empty or half full.

Vague positions leave too much to supposition-----supposition is much like assumption and you know what trouble that is.

You nor anyone should object to stating your position.

Kara - what's 'QED'?

perception - another moniker might be more apt for you... may I suggest 'misperception'? and by the by, you never mentioned what hotline gave you your information that soldiers in this coming conflict think war protests are against them.

Against any form of aggression; any authority which has not been clearly and democratically elected, and which is not open, responsive, and fully monitored by press free of financial and political pressure.

I'm neither for nor against the troops -- I feel very badly that, so far, we have been unable to stop their deployment in an aggressive invasion which will put them at real risk, will make them responsible for the death of innocents, and where they are being used as hired puppets - disrespected and misused by our government, not by the people -- at least not intentionally. After all, the military are "the people" too. They know the score -- and they will come to know much worse than that if they are forced to fight this war.

I think America as a nation is behaving extraordinarily badly and stupidly and I don't support it politically. However, it still has a thriving and interesting cultural life, an extraordinarily beautiful land, and people who are humorous, smart, hardworking, fortunate and decent, many of whom are willing to stand up and speak truth to power. Either/or? Rigidity (a character flaw which Bush has in spades) can kill. Diversity, freedom, honesty, and humility are the keys to America and I often feel, Perception, that they make you very uneasy.

America isn't just the America of people who wear flag lapel pins.

Snood

I could consider that a personal attack but I'll just consider the source.

When I was in Vietnam, as well as before and after----I took the antiwar demos personally and I believe most other military did. Ask the guys who were spat upon when they came back. One begets the other.

But then you were probably too young to remember.

BTW try to keep it civil. I have not attacked you and since this is my last response to you perhaps you will follow that rule for other people.

That was also my last response to you, Perception.

Tartar

Nice little dig there Tartar-----FREEDOM is what this country is all about---freedom for you to scorn what you don't agree with.

Freedom is what the people of Iraq DON'T have.

Freedom is what those Eastern European Countries have just had restored----they can appreciate what this country did to help restore that freedom and maybe that's why they support our efforts to restore freedom to the Iraqi people.

Freedom is NOT a birthright----someone had to buy it for you and someone had to pay for it so you could continue to enjoy it.

My guess: Qualified Educational Data. c.i.

perception - you sir, are far too danged barbed with your responses to be thin-skinned, as well!

-and THIS AIN"T VIETNAM we're talking about. We are immeasurably more well informed; this is a much smaller planet - the soldiers are smarter! (Don't take that as a slam, as well - My father was a career Army man who started with an 8th grade education, and rose to the most senior of NCO ranks). Besides, to take your perceptions of what your compatriots felt thirty years ago, and extrapolate that into an assumption that the soldiers deployed in Iraq have their feelings hurt by war protests today... well, that's STUPID!

And if you're trying to threaten me by saying you'll "never address me again", I got news - I DON'T ENJOY THE CONVERSATIONS THAT MUCH, ANYWAY - NO LOSS! BYE!

Tartar

Just something for you to sleep on-----I really don't care if you respond to me or not, but I feel an obligation to prevent some of you folks from getting too smug and comfortable in your little cocoon of hate for this administration.

Ya know, its no wonder The Security Council can't get together on this issue, or that it has confounded both domestic and international diplomacy for years. Just reading back through this thread and its progenitor, its pretty plain this IS one of those 50/50 For-or-Against propositions. Just like the diplomats and politiians, our respective positions strengthen, out stances harden, we even have our little spats. Just like the diplomats and politicians, many have left the room in a huff, or threatened to. At least we're still trying to communicate.

IMHO, The Vote will accomplish very little from a pragmatic point of view. However it comes out (and I see no prospect of The Resolution being adopted), we are going to attack Saddam's Iraq very soon ... likely within mere days.

The young men and women of our Military are honorably fulfilling their obligation to our nation, and doing so at risk to their own lives. Whether one supports the policy which put those young men and women in harm's way or not, if one is to enjoy the rights and priveleges of living in this country, one owes the rank and file of The Military every freedom we have cherished and struggled to preserve from the time of the founding of this country.

Protest The Administration. Lobby against war. Participate effectively in the electoral process. Who's fault was it that thousands of voters, among whom I am sure there were many newly-registered Democrats, in Florida were unable to figure out how to navigate and properly execute the ballot? The ouitrage of 2000 is that so many folks simply did not know how to cast a proper ballot.

But I take extreme exception toward any direct hinderance of or other interference with our uniformed heroes in the discharge of their duty, and to any disrespect shown them. I'm afraid a fair number of folks don't feel the same way. I am gratified, however, that a respect and admiration for our deployed personnel is strongly evident among the opponents of this war who are themselves veterans. I imagine that particular component of their contribution to the Anti-War Movement will be of little overall influence.

Thad saddens me. Its another of the tragedies of war.



timber

timber, All of us who have served in the military understand that we follow orders. That has not changed, and it never will. We also understand the commitment each soldier makes when he swears allegiance to country. Nobody is here to blame our military men and women for following orders. That's all part and parcel of being in the military. For anybody to even imply that we are not behind our military men and women do not understand what this discussion is all about. c.i.

Re. military and following orders:
Having been 'annected' to the services for more than 15 years, one of my primary problems always had been that there were people like me "on the other site": sworn to their country, believing, just they were on the right site. But you are right, c.i., "that's all part and parcel of being in the military".

As said above and Steve pointed out some pages before, public opinion hasn't got much credit by some - not only here.

So it might be of minor interest that public opinion in the Middle East is increasingly backing western critics of a war in Iraq, and questioning the region's own leaders.
But it can have some effects for the future. It will have, I'm sure.

Brian Whitaker explains about this in today's The Guardian:

Opposition attracts