Re: Question for the antiwar protesters
Question for the antiwar protesters
The war in Iraq is in full swing and the protests go on. What do the protester want the US and it's partners to do? Could it be they are calling for a secession of hostilities and a return to the status quo leaving Saddam in power?
No, definitely not - not me, anyway.
Now that the war started, I hope it'll be over as soon as possible - which would imply a speedy US victory. The only risk about that outcome is that the US administration will only feel emboldened in projects to take on a next country like this, and then a next, with the same disregard of international law and institutions, of local sensitivities and possible repercussions in creating new support for terrorist groups, with the same - blooy-mindedness, to put it crudely.
I personally want the US to win this war now that it started, but I want it to please play by the rules again next time, because I deeply believe that though this war might free the Iraqis (on the short term, and in a relative sense, in any case), it has made the world as a whole a more dangerous place.
There's my reason for "continued peace protests". We have to at least try to make clear that supporting the soldiers now that the war started does not mean we want this experiment to be repeated. Whether it is naive to hope that this message actually gets through, I don't know. But it's always, fundamentally, worth trying.
One additional (minor) reason for continued protests is to emphasise again that support for the current war effort is more conditional than for any previous one, and that the way it is carried out will therefore be critically monitored.
The only good thing about this war I can see is that it will liberate the Iraqis from their current dictatorship. Showing now that we are critical of Bush's motives and that, if we do support some war effort, it is only
for this goal, ensures that it wont be easy for the administration to install a 'friendly dictatorship' after the war, for example (as it has done so often before), or to disregard the fate of the Kurds if the Turkish allies do pull in en masse - or for it to OK war strategies that take needless amounts of civilian lives. By saying we believe this war was not (yet) necessary, we are also saying that we will not accept (in as far as we have anything to say) the kind of onslaught on civilians and retreating soldiers that took place in the last Gulf War. Thats the watchdog-function part of the story.
This is just how I see it, of course. For every demonstrrator another story, I think ...