Images And Thoughts About September 24 War Protest

I think the invasion of Iraq will always be seen as having been launched under murky pretense. Many people see it as a diversion from what was originally a plan to root out terrorism. The U.S. had many countries on its side after 911 and even after the invasion of Afghanistan. International relations have been strained ever since the Iraq invasion.

Many are also frustrated with the lack of accountability from govt officials regarding Iraq. They want to know what progress is being made for the cost of money and life. They aren't getting many straight answers from DC. Rumsfeld was questioned in a Senate hearing about how many Iraqi troops have been trained. His response was that he couldn't tell because it would give the insurgents an advantage. Stock phrases like that don't give Americans any assurance about progress.

No real exit strategy has been stated by the administration either. Again, the stock phrase used by the Pentagon is that it would give the insurgents an advantage. Bush's line is that 'we'll leave as soon as possible but not a moment sooner'. People need better answers than that.

.

 

Trained troops .. i can understand the reluctance.. the other information comes out govermental sources media sources to a endless stream [conflicting sometimes though].. If the goverment [i include my own as well] start talking about the positive then it is quickly brushed over as 'seeing things with rose tinted glasses' or 'hiding the reality of the chaos' etc.. I don't think some DO listen to the goverment...its all swings and roundabouts..

If firm answers were given then that creates problems.. being vague in certain circumstances is prudent.. It is being reviewed and we all have personal preferences .. not likely to liked by others.. I read that iraqis should vote when 'we' should leave.. very dangerous , but worth a thought.

 

If the govt was doing well with the number of trained troops it wouldn't be reluctant to let it be known. That tells me that they don't really have all that many Iraqi troops trained. The fact that Rumsfeld won't answer tells the insurgents that things aren't going all that well. It's almost a no-win situation for those in DC right now.

I question what we even mean by trained Iraqi troops. What guarantee do we have that after they are trained and armed that they won't splinter off into various factions?

.

 

About the effectiveness or lack thereof of protests… historically speaking, protests have done the job in the United States. Just look at women’s suffrage, civil rights, or Vietnam. What you’re seeing when 150,000 or more people flood the streets of Washington, DC is the direct involvement of a very large group of people and the beginning of mainstream dissent towards the war. The sheer diversity of the crowd was astounding- there were Republicans who supported the president, but not his war, veterans, teenagers, seniors- all converging to accomplish a common goal. It’s easy to dismiss protest and say that it yields no immediate effect, but it’s also foolish to think that the message of this sort of mass protest is not getting through to the government. The message is that people of all economic backgrounds, from all parts of the political spectrum in America are slowly beginning to join the great majority of the world in believing that this war was started on false pretenses and for every person that was able to participate directly in the anti-war movement there are ten other people who would’ve liked to be out there on the streets with us. Think of the people in New York who couldn’t get into Washington, DC because of a power outage and started a spontaneous protest in Penn Station! There will always be people with different intentions at demonstrations (some see them as social events, others an opportunity to make money) but that’s no reason to discount the entire anti-war movement, or the act of demonstration in general. I believe very strongly that mass protest is one of the most powerful ways to create change, and I would encourage anyone to directly participate in any cause that they support in this manner- whether on a large scale like what we saw this Saturday, or on the smaller scale of local marches.

 

When small peace groups all around the country are getting visits from hsec agents demanding membership rosters, sponshorship donors lists, affiliations, meeting minutes, etc... everything.... somebody in the gov is paying attention.

The diversity of people waking up to the idea that Washington is corrupt is widening as well as the numbers. The mass protest is only a spike in the groundswell. It continues on day in, day out. And there will be more protests, bigger ones.

 

Yes, each trip starts with the first steps.

 

It's a start Gilligan...give it time. During the first Gulf war in '91, there were I think approximately zero.

 

Gilligan, do you like war ?

 

Yes the causes and nature of war are complex. Directing your attention to one of many aspects: There are people who openly enjoy the prospect of war and there are many more, especially young men, who secretly enjoy the prospect of war; you read too much into the question due to the apparent context, the apparent 'flow,' of the thread. The question is part of a number of possible sequences of questions that I have in mind. Should I assume that your answer is "no" ? Gilligan, do you like war ?




.

 

The first anti-war rally I attended was comprised of 8 people (outside a draft board in Downey, Calif., in '67). We were spat upon by passers-by, with shouted comments from others like "get a job", "get a haircut" and "go back to Russia".
But I must have been doing something right. The last ralley I attended (San Francisco) 3 years later drew 100,000 people.

One thing massive protests do is change the attitudes of the majority of people who did not attend. The see people protesting and they may look past the b.s. bushco is slinging.

I was saying, even before the current invasion/occupation that a war in Iraq would turn out the same way as the Viet Nam war. Massive deaths of civilians, with the end results being the U.S. bugging out with a few Iraqi U.S. puppets hanging onto the struts of the last helicopter out.
The U.S./coalition is going to lose this war. The majority of Iraqi's do not want invaders killing their countymen and raping their country.
In a few weeks, when the U.S.-brokered constitution is rejected (setting the process back to Feb. of this year), we may see a full-scale civil war break out, with the current Iraqi gov't on the run. Then what will the U.S./coalition do? Shoot everyone they see?

 

1500+??????? but CNN said there was only 2000, they must be right, the antiwar people are just a minority that thinks there a majority and they are wrong, 1500+ people would never go to a protest, it must have only been 2000 like CNN said (Sarcasm haha)

 

Pre empting a situation and then dismissing everything that follows with supposed comparative crap from 30-35 years ago.. thats they way to do it.
I would draw your attention to how many iraqis are being killed daily, because they are trying to have a normal life under democracy..but instead they are being routinely bombed for wishing such a small thing.

Shudder to think if Coalition/Iraqis are doing anything together and against the scum that don't wish for peace.

This what i am thinking .. fingers in ears going lalalalalalala 'bring our boys home' lalalalalalala 'bush is a bastard' lalalalalala 'nothing good is happening'lalalalala

 

yea we had a small one in my little town in florida, about 250 protestors, 70 counter-protesters, it was good though, met lots of great people.

 

Throughout this post I speak to my sense responsibility as an American about the actions of our collective, and to this extent I will say "good" or I will say "not in my name" to my fellow citizens, and to fellow citizens of the global community, who read this post.

Saddam was/is madman, a mass murderer, and needed to be stopped. Not considering for the moment a number of serious relevant transgressions that have occurred in the more than 20 years prior to the present time including "deeply misguided" people in this country who participated in arming Saddam(1), we have to understand that we live in a world filled with great dissonance and anguish and we must start from where we are now with a healthful cognizance of related history without foolishly arguing for limitations or inhibiting honest and open consideration of the issues at hand. We, the USA, have gotten into a very difficult situation with Iraq; as Colin Powell warned the President before the 2003 invasion, "You know you're going to own the place" meaning that if we invade we are committed to repairing the infrastructure and leaving the place in "relative harmony." We are stuck; the present administration made a huge mistake by conducting this illegal invasion and Colin Powell was correct. However, to use an analogy, a person, or a people, of integrity do not just walk by a "mugging" but, instead, will try not to get injured or killed in the process of rendering aid; this balance can be subtle and, for the people in our democracy, requires leadership 'from a place of wisdom' with clear and truly noble intention. And if a leader is committed to "debts" that cause that leader to stray from decisions of wisdom then, as implied, that leader has erred. These are extremely serious matters where people are dying and great damage has been, and is being, done; and as with all matters in life, this should be approached with 'balance,' and integrity.

Given the present situation, I believe that, we need a new direction including real time tables for troop withdrawal, we need to invest more money and resources; to directly let insurgents know, barring those wanted for murder, that we want them to participate in the political process; to cease in attempting to manipulate the political process with interests other than that of forming a reasonably enlightened democracy. Another diffuculty with all this is that a proper adjustment in policy and action, as I see it, will tend to drive our economy further downward, but this is something that we have to stand by because of the profoundly "'misguided' commitments" of this administration and others influencing these events. In short, respectfully and not considering other areas of great error, this administration has endangered, and is endangering, the integrity of America and future integrity of Iraq.

We also need to 'sweep before our own doorstep' by recognizing that there are many in our collective who are directly involved in "troublesome" activities, for 'power' and 'profit,' that ignore important moral, ethical and legal issues that directly and indirectly affect, and have affected, our present situation in Iraq as well as having affected other areas of serious concern; the initial FEMA response to hurricane Katrina being but one example; we need to become more aware that, in one form or another, most of us indirectly and unknowingly participate in these activities, and that we should not rationalize that "there is nothing that we can do." Included in these activities are mass murder and maiming of civilians; "there is nothing like having it happen to you and or your loved ones to bring about a change of perspective;" we need to cultivate greater compassion and strategy by thinking with more empathy and in a more dynamic manner; and the good that we have done is no excuse to avoid looking for, and "finding," the truth. We need to honestly look for what the true nature of the motivation/s for any particular conflict is/are and not resolve that we have nothing to learn in so far as finding improved ways to resolve a particular conflict. We need to, further, openly and honestly look at what defence really is and how we can best do this while we lead in helping to transition our world to a better world; these two are actually inseparable. I believe that our country was concieved in and of great ideals and slowly we are being forced to live up to these ideals.





(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_sales_to_Iraq_1973-1990




.

 

Matthew,

With more time and focus time I'll 'hash it, but for now I'll keep it compact without much elaboration:

Humm, then 'illegal' AND illegal ?

From my conscious awareness, I did not think anything of the sort while writing that post and I would have to investigate the technical nature of the rules regarding Presidential impeachment. But given my limited understanding of this it sounds like this may be underway with House Simple Resolution 375 (H.Res 375).

Actually, I need to think-out this concept more because there appears to me to be a number of potential technical/legal difficulties with the U.S. "directly" offering amnesty to select insurgents. I believe that the idea of entraining select insurgents into the democratic process is worthy of deep consideration but my proposal is not adequate and I withdraw it as it was expressed. I will not, at the present moment, address the second portion of the quote because of the actual complexity of the issues that relate to the assumption that you are making.

To detail for you the history of this invasion would take awhile, time that I do not have at the moment; but I will say, "what do you think Powell meant," and clearly we are over budget, serious damage to our standing in the world, and the list goes on. I point to these two resources one of which I excerpt from following:




"Economic Costs

The Bill So Far: Congress has already approved four spending bills for Iraq with funds totaling $204.4 billion and is in the process of approving a “bridge fund” for $45.3 billion to cover operations until another supplemental spending package can be passed, most likely slated for Spring 2006. Broken down per person in the United States, the cost so far is $727, making the Iraq War the most expensive military effort in the last 60 years.


Long-term Impact on U.S. Economy: In August 2005, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the cost of continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at current levels would nearly double the projected federal budget deficit over the next ten years. According to current estimates, during that time the cost of the Iraq War could exceed $700 billion.

Economic Impact on Military Families: Since the beginning of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 210,000 of the National Guard’s 330,000 soldiers have been called up, with an average mobilization of 460 days. Government studies show that about half of all reservists and Guard members report a loss of income when they go on active duty—typically more than $4,000 a year. About 30,000 small business owners alone have been called to service and are especially likely to fall victim to the adverse economic effects of military deployment.
"

​

source: http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/quagmire/



and, http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/09/25/usint11776.htm

this second link is interesting because it points at a method by which 'higher-ups' can influence the use of torture by subordinates and provide themselves with deniability. Also, as the verified accounts of torture add it appears as if torture is endemic amoung the U.S. And I'll add that this is very, very far below what we are supposed to be, let alone our ideal; a U.S. soldier is honorable, we don't do this and anyone who does is engaging in abject cowardice and evil.

I was being more general than just referring to the Haliburton issue or control of oil, how about selling weapons to Saddam as one example; this statement was intended to focus on policies and practices, in general, that ignore important moral and/or ethical and/or legal issues in making decisions.

OBL is a dangerous mass murderer and I would be happy to know that you and I are really defending each others homes, in spirit side by side, and I sense that there are many areas where I can learn and I am open to this; as one general example type: when I see a child starving because a product is being made 'cost-effectively' by what results in his/her misery I will not turn my head, I will not say "live and let die," and lie because of some concept about what I feel I need to believe but instead I will look at the truth and work to make myself, my country and our world better. But there are many who do not think this way and they often hide in the name of being "hardened" and "really knowing what survival is about." And I can, for the most part, only imagine the rage that could make such a child vunerable to an OBL. Yes, "sweep before our own doorstep." And, we should, ultimately, not blame anyone for our own madness.

Thank you for the compliment. As for the crushing denial of my attempt to communicate that we can do better, that we should be truthful and honest in our dealings, and that there are significant errors resulting in ten of thousands of deaths, and maimings, and other damage; I will say to you that I can summon nothing productive to say except that I wish you well.


David




.

 

What do you mean ??? The ''war'' was not illegal.. i have no idea what your trying to say.

Not in the slightest...it is being voiced by the anti-war types who think that the president should be.. but in the real world Bush could not be impeached for the choices he has made. Mr Blair was 'threatened with the same [impeachment]..http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3600438.stm completly self opinionated delusion.

?? Having tried the option of talking with the 'enemy' we can assume that any further discusion or a peaceful diplomatic resolution is off the table....

''War'' costs money..wow this suprises me.

I am not suprised hrw make hyperbolic references to 'human rights' thats their job... it would be dull to shoulder the blame on a few idiots.. much better to put the blame on 'higher ups' as the idiotic nature nature of the few is a lot more difficult to 'protest'.

As has been pointed out thousands of times..we sold saddam maybe 1% of his weapons.. International diplomatic relations is a difficult thing to understand.. http://www.isn.ethz.ch/ if you can make any sense of it other than the 'we should remain enemys with our enemys' simplistic notion , then i am all ears....

Globalisation , changing markets..differing free trade / fair trade agreements has nothing to do with OBL... 'our own madness' what are you talking about ?.

Well when OBL justifys killing tens of thousands of people for no good reason.. and you seem to think we should justify it for him , then all i can say is ...... ?.

 

Matthew,

For me, it is good to communicate with you. Thank you.

Actually, we are both sharing opinions about an issue, or set of issues depending on the view, that is/are presently being debated and the subject of numerous investigations among governments and international-law experts. So you say 'legal' and I say 'illegal;' You must have some awareness of this and that it is a fact that, presently, it is an 'open question;' you must have some idea about what I am "trying to say."

Yes that is correct, to my recollection I was not thinking that; and there are significant efforts that are presently moving forward. Also, the evidence and facts surrounding the investigations [and our debate] of UK and USA activities relating to justifications for the 2003 invasion of Iraq are extremely complex the gathering and processing of which is ongoing; however, given this, there are very strong indications of numerous forms of illegal manipulation having been involved. Following I provide a .pdf of a recent request by our House of Represenatives in connection with the above mentioned investigations, and the following four links are largely out-dated but follow, in time, the older link that you provided.

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/letters/bushsecretmemoltr5505.pdf
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1470795,00.html
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1306481,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3988889.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1622378,00.html

And as for your 'absolute' statement "completly self opinionated delusion" I will say that although we have opinions about the evidence involved, and although there is an adamant and self-assured sound to your statement, that we should keep an open mind in considering these issues; there are a wide range of possibilites involved. And it might be a good idea to be more cordial and respectful in our interactions.

No, considering the significant loss and destruction in many forms that has occurred and is occurring, I believe that as we are in any particular mode of action that we should continue to investigate potentially improved options.

The fact that you put quotes around the word "war" in the response sentence that you wrote is potentially an interesting piece if information; this is war. And, yes, war is very expensive. All the more reason to act decisively, legally and with wisdom; no 'shooting from the hip' and no lying to fellow countrymen charged with making these decisions.

No, that is not their job and, in fact, it is the job of any citizen of integrity to protect human rights. These organizations are important and, I believe, that if you were being tortured that you might reconsider your flagrant and irresponsible dismissal of the significance of these check mechanisms. Do you propose doing away with all non-government human rights monitoring entities ? And, you say "a few," that's not my understanding of the situtation; sounds more like intel and SpeOps are heavily inolved in this. Maybe you should read the article at the link that I provided, for starters ?

I am going to more closely analyze the numbers as I believe that although it is close to what you quote that it is higher but regardless of the numbers that x% can have a very significant effect and, primarily, it is the principle that is important here. As for your statement "if you can make any sense of it other than the 'we should remain enemys with our enemys' simplistic notion , then i am all ears...." what exactly are you referring to ?

You appear to miss the point; peoples personalities are to a great extent formed by socialization. If you were to raise the baby who was named OBL that child would be much different than the OBL we know of today. We need to get at the source of crime without becoming tyranical and thus propogating what we were originally trying to stop; this is a common problem in life, a common problem in our world.

I do not understand what you are saying. Yes, OBL is a dangerous mass murderer and needs to be stopped. And we are strongly tending to justify OBL in the minds of many poor angry people and this is but one of the many reasons why the Saddam issue should have been approached much differently than it was; but we must start from where we are.


David




.