Protestors

[cowboystu]

I will throw is mu view as an American overseas...

A lot of the protests throughout other parts of the world are based on the assumption that the US is acting with empirialistic desires.

I pose this question (hypothetically...since I plan my travels to stay clear of places with protesting) to those who are under this belief:
Do you think that the US would put itself into a situation where we do EXACTLY the opposite of what we claim? We are already coming under enough scrutiny as is. This is causing some economic recourse. If we were to use this for empire building, lots of the world would embargo. And we are a debtors nation...we would not be able to survive such economic issues.

And I will end on a quote from Powell:
Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.

He answered by saying that, "Over the years, the United States has sent
many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom
beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."


My opinion...
Stu

 

[Iceman]

Colin Powell would make a good president.

 

[mike04456]

Colin Powell is one of my favorite people, but that statement isn't quite accurate. It's certainly not accurate if you're talking about conflicts before WWI. But we were a different, younger country then, and the people who made those decisions are long since gone. I think if we were going to conquer Iraq, we would have done it the first time.

One interesting little paradox: Much has been made of our decision to leave the Shiites to their fate when they rose up after the first Gulf War, and I've seen a lot of criticism, some of it valid, of how that disaster unfolded. But that decision was based precisely on the desire to maintain Iraq's territorial integrity--to not let it break it up into several warring states. In other words, we let Saddam kill tens of thousands of people because we weren't out to take away part of his country.

I think Powell will run for president one day. It depends a lot on what happens in 2004.

 

[Iceman]

> After hearing that the state of Florida changed its opinion and let a
> Muslim woman have her picture on her driver's license with her face
> covered this is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in
> a Tampa newspaper. He did quite a job; didn't he? Read on, please!
>
> IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT. I am tired of this nation worrying
> about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the
> terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in patriotism
> by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from the attacks had
> barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining
> about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others.
>
> I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is
> seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost
> entirely made up of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few
> things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently
> some born here, need to understand. This idea of America being a
> multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our
> national identity. As Americans, we have our own culture, our own society,
> our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed
> over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and
> women who have sought freedom.
>
> We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese,
> Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of
> our society, learn the language!
>
> "In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right
> wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and
> women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly
> documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our
> schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of
> the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.
>
> If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you
> should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are
> happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't
> care how you did things where you came from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our
> land, and our lifestyle. Our First Amendment gives every! citizen the
> right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do
> so. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our
> flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly
> encourage you take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE
> RIGHT TO LEAVE.
>

>
> AMEN
>

 

[Iceman]

The Marine general said that what has surprised him most about the first week of fighting is the extent of war crimes carried out by the Iraqi regime. In addition to the execution of POWs, he said, Iraqis have used civilians as human shields, stored weapons in schools, set up command posts in hospitals and pretended to surrender only to open fire.

In one case, an Iraqi woman was hanged after she waved to coalition forces, Pace said.

Feel good about living where you can protest

 

[AGBF]

Iceman wrote:

"Feel good about living where you can protest

"

I do feel good about it. I am in favor of the Bill of Rights. What is your point? That it should exist but that people should not be allowed to use it? That is a singularly stupid notion.

 

[Iceman]

I see you jumped on that one

Feel good about living in a country that you can exercise those rights.

Please speak up. But don't cause more confusion?

Love the country that gives you all your freedoms, stop bit-ching about everything and enjoy what you have.

Stop being an arm chair General and let them do what they do best. When did you ever get a copy of the battle plans ? Get all
the facts before you go and protest! Stop looking at your own country as if its against you.

If you don't like what they are doing there are different ways of expressing yourself then to lay down in the middle of the street
and protest and cost us tax payers $500,000 to clean it up.

There will always be protesters.

I would love to see the future on events if we did not take this step or others? You might be wearing something to cover your
face

or be speaking German ? Or still be a colony under British Rule? I would have loved to see you protesters live back in
those days, maybe you would look at things different.

Protest all you want , but in front of me do not , and I mean do not speak poorly about a country that I love. My son turns 18
soon and can not wait to enlist to serve his country.

Good or bad , stand behind your country. The war will be on the home front soon, will you protest that? The nights you cant
sleep, the nights that you are a POW????? The nights were the enemy is camping in your house? Believe me that these days
are not far away. I would love to talk to you then.

Do you think about these people over in the Middle east when your going to sleep in your bed ? Or eat a big meal ?
To me you are for us or against us, no two ways to look at it. Your lucky you can stand behind your bill of rights and say what
ever you want, remember that.

Just remember who gave you that bill of rights and how many died for that. After you think about that long enough maybe you
will love this country as much as I do.


Just be thankfull for what you have.
I guess that is what the little sentence means

 

[AGBF]

----------------
On 3/28/2003 4:25:46 PM Iceman wrote:

I see you jumped on that one

Feel good about living in a country that you can exercise those rights.


Please speak up. But don't cause more confusion?


Love the country that gives you all your freedoms, stop bit-ching about everything and enjoy what you have.


Stop being an arm chair General and let them do what they do best. When did you ever get a copy of the battle plans ? Get all

the facts before you go and protest! Stop looking at your own country as if its against you.


If you don't like what they are doing there are different ways of expressing yourself then to lay down in the middle of the street

and protest and cost us tax payers $500,000 to clean it up.


There will always be protesters.


I would love to see the future on events if we did not take this step or others? You might be wearing something to cover your

face

or be speaking German ? Or still be a colony under British Rule? I would have loved to see you protesters live back in

those days, maybe you would look at things different.


Protest all you want , but in front of me do not , and I mean do not speak poorly about a country that I love. My son turns 18

soon and can not wait to enlist to serve his country.


Good or bad , stand behind your country. The war will be on the home front soon, will you protest that? The nights you cant

sleep, the nights that you are a POW????? The nights were the enemy is camping in your house? Believe me that these days

are not far away. I would love to talk to you then.


Do you think about these people over in the Middle east when your going to sleep in your bed ? Or eat a big meal ?

To me you are for us or against us, no two ways to look at it. Your lucky you can stand behind your bill of rights and say what

ever you want, remember that.


Just remember who gave you that bill of rights and how many died for that. After you think about that long enough maybe you

will love this country as much as I do.



Just be thankfull for what you have.

I guess that is what the little sentence means

----------------

Gee, Ice, I hate to see you at such a loss for words!

For your info, big guy, I'm *NOT* a protestor. But if I *were* protesting something I'd dare to do it in front of you. We are a society of law. I have a right to say what I want and if you punch me out, *YOU* answer for it.

You don't want to mix it up with me, Ice. You really don't. We've known each other *waaay* too long, fella

 

[AGBF]

Ice wrote:

"I would love to see the future on events if we did not take this step or others? You might be wearing something to cover your face or be speaking German ? Or still be a colony under British Rule? I would have loved to see you protesters live back in those days, maybe you would look at things different."

This is a trifle convoluted, but I'll try.

If we didn't invade Iraq I might be wearing something over my face? Iraq is a secular country, albeit Muslim. Women there do not need to cover their faces.

If we didn't invade Iraq I'd be speaking German? How would that work?

If we didn't invade Iraq we would still be a colony under British rule? Is a time machine involved?

Ice: I am NOT one of the protestors.

I am making an argument for free speech. If I were a protestor, not invading Iraq would NOT put me at risk of wearing a chador (or speaking Arabic...I already explained about the chador) since Iraq cannot take over the US.

I would not have opposed war with Germany in 1939. I wouldn't even have waited until 1941. Germany's invasion of Poland would have been enough for me, as it was for France and Great Britain.

I would not have opposed the treasonous rebellion against George III. I would have supported it. But remember: the Canadians did not!!!

 

[Iceman]

Let me expand on this for you ~

If we didnt stop hitler you would be speaking German.
If our for fathers didnt stand up for freedom we would still be a colony

How big of a country do you need to be to take over the world???? Japan had a good grip and it only was a little island. There are 5 million alone in the city of baghdad!
If you want to live in the land of oz go right ahead

Start to get the hint on what I was saying

Im for free speech, Now we have to live with that, if it's peaceful. We don't have to live with it if somebody sets a police car on fire or throws a brick through a window, and too often these things are either overlooked or not prosecuted, and I say it's a good thing if you guys toughen the law to include jail terms for violent protesters. Am I wrong?

Police officers were assaulted. One officer had acid thrown. He had had his face shield down, fortunately, but the acid hit his face shield. Another officer ended up in the -- with 10 stitches that night, and all of this out of so-called peaceful protests.

And, of course, the organizers say, well, it's not our fault, we just organized a peaceful protest that got out of hand. Three freeways shut down. Three major bridges shut down.

an ambulance driver who couldn't get across to the trauma hospitals in the city because the protesters deliberately shut down and blocked the street.


If your not part of the solution your part of the problem.

Why are you not protesting Saddam ????????

Why dont you use your free speech to tell me what you think we should do if we do not belong over there?

I would like to know what you think , I have a boy going to be 18 in a few months and he wants to go! Im proud of him.
If I could I would be over there also.

 

[AGBF]

On 3/28/2003 8

1:16 PM Iceman wrote:

"Let me expand on this for you ~


If we didnt stop hitler you would be speaking German.

If our for fathers didnt stand up for freedom we would still be a colony


How big of a country do you need to be to take over the world???? Japan had a good grip and it only was a little island. There are 5 million alone in the city of baghdad!"

Ice-

You are being illogical.

If we had not won World War II we would have been conquered by the Axis Powers.

If our forefathers hadn't fought the English we would still be a colony.

That does not mean that if we don't fight Iraq we will be colonized by Iraq.

Germany and Japan were world powers in the 1930s.

England was THE world power in the 18th century.

You cannot equate Iraq today with a major power of yesteryear. It is *ludicrous*.

President Bush never even said anything as silly as that if we didn't go to war that Iraq could conquer the US. (And he has said a *LOT* of silly things!!!)

The reason I am not protesting the war is that we are in it and, given the loss of life, I would like to see it won. I *HOPE* we do not back out and once again (as after the Gulf War)leave the Iraqis who sided against Hussein to be murdered by him.

I have grave reservations about whether the loss of life was worth it.

If we hadn't attacked, Hussein would have continued to torture and murder his countrymen. Since we did attack he has continued to torture and murder his countrymen *and* the coalition has lost a great many good young people. And the bombing has made Iraqi civilians suffer.

This is not, in my eyes, a happy situation. It's a lose/lose scenario.

 

[Iceman]

But be that as it may ~



You are saying its better to leave Saddam in power so he can kill more then he has
now? Do you read the totals this man has put to death ??? To me that is genocide !

If you think its a lose / lose situation then what is the right way to do this?

I think this is the only way. So to me if your not for the war then you are for
Saddam to stay in power.

If You would live over there, that You would pray for the USA to come over there
and help.

If your protesting the War then your protesting our boys being over there . Why
don't you protest Saddam ????????
Why don't you people put your energy in the right place??????

If you all did a little more research on what Saddam has done it would ruin your
perfect day in your perfect world in the USA.

So if you all want to live in the land of OZ then be my guest. You either back the
troops and the war or you back what Saddam is doing.

If you don't agree then lets here some of that freedom of speech and tell me what
you arm chair Generals think can be done?

 

[Iceman]

KEEPING IT SIMPLE
By Dennis Miller

All the rhetoric on whether or not we should go to war against
Iraq has got my insane little brain spinning like a roulette wheel. I
enjoy reading opinions from both sides, but I have detected a hint of
confusion from some of you. As I was reading the paper recently, I was
reminded of the best advice someone ever gave me. He told me about the
KISS method ("Keep it Simple, Stupid"). So, with this as a theme, I'd
like to apply this theory for those who don't quite get it. My hope is
that we can simplify things a bit and recognize a few important facts.

Here are 10 things to consider when voicing an opinion on this
important issue:

1) President Bush and Saddam Hussein.....Hussein is the bad guy.


2) If you have faith in the United Nations to do the right
thing, keep this in mind. They have Libya heading the Committee on
Human
Rights and Iraq heading the Global Disarmament Committee. Do your own
math here.

3) If you use Google Search and type in "French Military
Victories," your reply will be "Did you mean French Military Defeats?"

4) If your only anti-war slogan is "No war for oil," sue your
school district for allowing you to slip through the cracks and robbing
you of the education you deserve.

5) Saddam and Bin Laden will not seek United Nations approval
before they try to kill us.

6) Despite what some seem to believe, Martin Sheen is NOT the
President. He just plays one on TV.

7) Even if you are anti-war, you are still an "Infidel" and
Bin Laden wants you dead, too.

If you believe in a "vast right-wing conspiracy," but not
in the danger that Hussein poses, quit hanging out with "Steven" the Dell
computer dude.

9) We are trying to liberate them.

10) Whether you are for military action, or against it, our
young men and women overseas are fighting for us to defend our right to
speak out. We all need to support them without reservation.

******* SUPPORT OUR TROOPS *******

 

[AGBF]

On 3/29/2003 7:46:34 AM Iceman wrote:


"You are saying its better to leave Saddam in power so he can kill more then he has now? Do you read the totals this man has put to death ??? To me that is genocide!"

Unfortunately, now that we have started this I don't think leaving Hussein in power should be an option. As I *believe* I already said, we exposed many Iraqis to his vengeance after the Gulf War. We cannot enter the country, lead the people subject to Hussein's whims to believe he will be gone, then leave them to be murdered by him.

I *WAS* saying the war wasn't such a great idea. (Read what Edward Peck, former military officer, Ambassador to Iraq under Ronald Reagan, and advisor to Ronald Reagan on terrorism said about it.)

I am afraid it's all too late now and, as I have said ad nauseum, you will therefore *NOT* find me protesting the war.

It is a fait accompli. A done deal. All that's left to do is to support the troops and their families and try to get aid to the Iraqi population.

 

[Rank Amateur]

AGBF, I like your stance on this one. Since when did we start agreeing?

I think Iceman is arguing with somebody else, not you.

 

[AGBF]

On 3/29/2003 10:22 AM Rank Amateur wrote:

"AGBF, I like your stance on this one. Since when did we start agreeing?"

I dunno, R/A, but it must be recent. It is a very unusual feeling, to be sure!

 

[andrea]

I must admit. Everything Ice say's, goes for me as well.
I'd make my own posts, but I'm afraid I'd be redundant.
Keep up the good work.
My husband, and I support you 110%.
What branch of the military is your son looking in to?
Go Navy

My husbands family was big into the Navy.
He's a Chief builder in the Seabee's, and his sister is a Lt. Commander. She used the navy to put her through medical school. She's a general surgeon out in CA thanks to uncle sam's dollar.

His Dad is retired navy, along with several others on both sides of our family.
You can't get much closer to your country than being military.

 

[Rook]

Although I am 100% behind my country and governments decision to go to war, I am also 100% behind the freedom to protest the war.

But, here are a few things I find hard to understand.

1) Why are protesters degrading the American Flag?

The American Flag is not a symbol of war or peace; it is not a symbol of Bush or Clinton; it is not a symbol of republicans or democrats. It is a symbol of the freedoms and liberties that this great country is founded on. The very freedoms and liberties many of us take for advantage every day.

For a protester to degrade the flag, either by burning it, hanging it upside down, destroying it, or urinating on it, they are not make an anti-war statement, or an anti-Bush statement. They are making an anti-American statement. They are in effect protesting against the very liberties and freedoms that insure their right to protest.

I can understand Bin Ladin making such a statement, but for Americans to make an anti-American statement is more a statement of their ignorance than a protest of war.

I fully support peoples right to their opinions and to protest. I even support people rights to make ignorant statements by degrading the flag. In fact I am proud that we live in such a great country that even the most idiotic of use can exercise our opinions. But, I just can’t understand it.

2) Why do all of the celebrities cry “freedom of expression” when they want to protest, then bitch when others exercise their freedoms to disagree?

When that girl from the Dixie Chicks made the statement heard around the world, a lot of people boycotted their albums and songs. While I am not a fan of them, I do not think what they said was really that bad. But, how can they claim they have the right to make such statements, and then cry when the public exercises their freedom of expression to boycott their albums. Many celebrities are outraged saying the Dixie Chicks are being unfairly criminalized. Do they not realize that these freedoms go out to everyone, not just those with celebrity status?

3) Why does everyone think they know better than the Government?

Again, I fully support the right to have a difference of opinion, but what is this anti-war sentiment based on? Many celebrities have voiced their opposition to the war, but collectively very few have graduated high school, not to mention college. Yet they think they know better about the status of the world the war and Saddams threat to the U.S. than Bush and all of his staff and advisors who collectively have many higher level graduate degrees, who receive up to the minute, top secrete reports from top military advisors, and who have the CIA, FBI, NSA, EU, NATO, UN to discuss the issues.

Most of the information all of us base our decisions on (including myself and all of us on this board) come form one-sided, biased, half-truths and propaganda, be it from CNN, Fox, NBC, ABC, PBS, NPR. None of us are even remotely as informed as the government is. So, how can any of us claim to know better than the Government? Do you really think they would go again the UN without good cause?

Just my idol rant.

 

[Rook]

----------------
On 3/28/2003 10:48:15 PM AGBF wrote:


On 3/28/2003 8

1:16 PM Iceman wrote:

"

Ice-

You are being illogical.

If we had not won World War II we would have been conquered by the Axis Powers.

If our forefathers hadn't fought the English we would still be a colony.

That does not mean that if we don't fight Iraq we will be colonized by Iraq.

Germany and Japan were world powers in the 1930s.

England was THE world power in the 18th century.

You cannot equate Iraq today with a major power of yesteryear. It is *ludicrous*.

----------------

Germany, Japan and England did not have nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the means and desire to use them against the U.S. and severly cripple the American people.

 

[mike04456]

----------------

Germany, Japan and England did not have nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the means and desire to use them against the U.S. and severly cripple the American people.

----------------

England? No. But Germany and Japan most certainly had chemical and biological weapons and the desire to use them. They didn't because they didn't want them used against them. The horrors of WWI were still too fresh in everyone's minds. Germany also had an active nuclear weapons program, and might have beaten us to the punch had we not bombed their research facilities over and over. You'd better believe Hitler would have used them if he had them. He had the V-2s to hit England and a U-boat fleet to get them to the U.S.

I think AGBF's point was that Germany and Japan were much greater threats to world peace than Iraq is, which is a point that's beyond rational dispute given the historical record.

 

[Rook]

Granted,

But my point is that Iraq is very much, or at least they were prior to the war, capable of attacking the U.S. in a substantial maner, and that, IMO, justifies the War. That is the reason Bush went into this war. Although he change his tune to be one of liberation, the purpose of the war was to disarm Iraq and remove Sadam and his regime before they attacked us.

I think the only reason Bush is now stressing the liberation idea is to gain world and public sentiment, which I don't necessarily agree with that tactic. But, this is just a guess IMO.

 

[AGBF]

I wrote:

"If we had not won World War II we would have been conquered by the Axis Powers.
...
Germany and Japan were world powers in the 1930s."

to which Rook inexplicably replied:

"Germany, Japan and England did not have nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the means and desire to use them against the U.S. and severly cripple the American people."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'll be darned if I understand your point.

We *did* go to war against the Germans and the Japanese in 1941 (and against England in 1776).

Are you saying we had no reason to do so? Are you saying the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was insufficient cause for the United States Congress to declare war since (in your words) the Japanese "had no nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the means and desire to use them against the U.S. and severly cripple the American people"?

I am truly puzzled about what you are trying to say.

 

[AGBF]

A Lesson About Democracy


On 4/8/2003 2:18:59 PM Rook wrote:


"3) Why does everyone think they know better than the Government?
...
None of us are even remotely as informed as the government is. So, how can any of us claim to know better than the Government? Do you really think they would go again the UN without good cause?"

Rook,

In a democracy the people are given *ALL* the information and they then make a choice about what they want done by their government.

Only in a tyranny are the people not told everything (therefore leaving them to know less than the government) and then expected to FOLLOW what the leaders want.

In other words, in a democracy *WE* should know EVERYTHING so that we can make wise decisions. Our leaders don't tell us what to do; we tell them.

In a democracy there is no leader who says, "Just trust me. I'll handle everything. I can't explain my reasons to you."

 

[Rook]

First in responce to your reply about a democracy. Yes you are correct on how a true democracy runs, but the U.S. is a republic, not a true democracy. We do not hold town hall meetings to discuss what should be done. We hold elections and appoint representitives to make decisions on our behalf. Most of the time we know very little about what is going on. Which I think is good. First it would be impossible for us to know everything that is going on in the government. There is way too much information for any one person to deal with. Second, in times of war and national security, certain information needs to be withheld from the public. Not to deny them the right to know, but to keep it secret from our enemies. If the gov/cia/fbi/ect. told us everything that they knew, our national security would be at risk.

About my response to your earlier statement, which obviously was not made very clear, I only mean that I believe Iraq was a serious threat to the U.S., as was expressed by Bush. You seemed to say that since Iraq is not a major power in the world like Germany was in WWII, then they are not a threat. I disagree. There ability and desire to destory and attack the U.S. is just as strong, if not stonger than that of Germany. I doubt you could say Al-Quada is a world power, yet there ability to attack was made very clear.

While Bush has not really given us much direct evidence of why Iraq is an immienent threat, I have faith in him that that will be made more clear with the end of the threat. I find it hard to believe that they would risk having this war with out solid reasoning, as that would cause such a tremendous uprising of the American people that no politician would risk it.

 

[AGBF]

On 4/9/2003 11:28:56 AM Rook wrote:

"First in responce to your reply about a democracy. Yes you are correct on how a true democracy runs, but the U.S. is a republic, not a true democracy. We do not hold town hall meetings to discuss what should be done. We hold elections and appoint representitives to make decisions on our behalf. Most of the time we know very little about what is going on. Which I think is good."

Rook,

I find this observation very disturbing. The United States being is both a republic and a DEMOCRACY.

That it was not created as a *DIRECT* democracy (but as a republic) was not so that the people could abrogate responsibility for thinking and remain ignorant!!!

I find it frightening to think that you feel "we know very little about what is going on" and that you think this "is good".

I make a concerted effort to remain informed and I think that a democracy can only be as good as the decisions of its people, so that it behooves all of us to do our best to remain informed!

If we, the people, run the country (as we, thank God, do in the United States) we have a responsibility not to let it be run by morons.
_________________________________

I would also like to comment on the latter part of your posting but have to drive my daughter to a class. I hope to be able to return to this later.

 

[AGBF]

Class is over and I am returning to Rook's posting for further reflection.

On 4/9/2003 11:28:56 AM Rook wrote:

"While Bush has not really given us much direct evidence of why Iraq is an immienent threat, I have faith in him that that will be made more clear with the end of the threat. I find it hard to believe that they would risk having this war with out solid reasoning, as that would cause such a tremendous uprising of the American people that no politician would risk it."

You are stating that someone (Mr.Bush) has not given you proof, but you "have faith in him". You do not state WHY you have faith in him. Is it for any specific reason? For example is it that you have followed his record and it has been good? I would like to think so and that you simply failed to mention it. (When making a case you *should* mention why you have faith in someone if belief in him is part of your argument!!!)

However, I cannot rid myself of the memory that you said you "know very little about what is going on" above!!! So perhaps you have *not* followed Mr. Bush's record.

That makes me worry that you have faith in him without any reason for having such faith.

You just feel he wouldn't risk "having this war without solid reasoning" because it would cause a risk of a "tremendous uprising".

If the American people do as you suggest (remain ignorant) Mr. Bush would be able to act in bad faith with no risk of a tremendous uprising. If the people remain ignorant who would ever know he acted in bad faith?

I believe in democracy and your comfort with living in ignorance disturbs me greatly.

 

[Rook]

Actually I follow politics, the law and this war very closely. I constantly keep updated with various newspapers, TV broadcasts and public radio and I have read many of the documents that the government has made available. I have visited many pro-war and anti-war rallies and websites trying to understand both points of view, but yet I still feel I know very little about what is going on. There is much information that is sensitive to national security that the government bases its decisions on. Such as ties to Al-Quada, evidence of weapons of mass destruction, and surely a great deal more than we could ponder.

Do you really think you know that much about this war and the reasons the government decided to attack at this time in this manner, against the U.N.?? Who is being ignorant here? The first lesson any intelligent person learns is that they do not know as much as they may think.

Bush has constant updates concerning this war, yet you think your profound knowledge based from half-truths you see on the nightly news makes you educated on the war.

I have discussed this war with many protesters and war proponents and the first thing that is obvious is that they know quite a bit less than they think; yet they think they know it all.

I do think I am quite educated about this war for an average citizen and I think I understand what the government will need to do and show to the world in order to justify this war and calm the anti-American sentiment that is ravishing the world. I feel that Bush is smart enough to realize this as well and therefore I am quite sure Bush will be able to justify this war when the treat against national security has lessened.

In regards to your statements about demoncracy. Did you get to vote whether or not to go to war? I sure didn't. Hmmm. You said this was a demoncrasy, what the hell, where is my vote? This is a quasi-democrasy at best. And that is the only way it could be. Could you imagine have to gather the mass public to vote on whether or not to approve a tax bill? Just would not work, hense the republic government.

And yes I do think people are generally ill-informed about current events. Try to think of the person you know with the most average intelligence. A person who maybe graduated high school but never went to collage. Yes that is the average intelligence. Now, half of the country is dumber than that person. Yet you think they are intelligent enough to decide the fate of the country with information they heard from watching an hour of news each night? Sorry I disagree.

It is because of this that we have a government decide how to run the country. Of course if the people disagree they can vote the government out, or vote in those with like viewpoints, but the government makes the decision and runs the country. No one can claim to be as well informed as the government is on the war.

 

[AGBF]

Rook,

I do not agree with your reasoning, but I am not in a fit state of mind to post. (Friends don't let friends post in anger and upset .)

My mother has been in the hospital for several days and I am worried about her and spending many hours with her. My car just got a big orange "Violation" notice slapped on it while I was parked at a grocery store. (I was *next* to a handicapped spot. I would *NEVER* take a handicapped spot illegally.) The store manager said it wasn't their staff who did it.

I am angry and close to tears. I have to take care of my family.

Maybe another day I will feel well enough to post about this topic. For now I will just say that I am sure you want only the best for the people of the United States and of Iraq...and I assure you I do, too.

Peace?

Deborah

 

[Rook]

I am very sorry to hear about your mother and your troubles. I sincerly hope that all works out for you and your mother feels better.