War, what is it good for?

Okay so I am a peace loving Democrat who finds war reprehensible BUT do you know what I find even more disgusting? Hypocrites.
I am talking about aggressive anti-war protestors. It saddened me to hear of yet another police officer injured for doing his job by a "peace" activist.
This is ridiculous. Injuring people and damaging buildings to get your opinion across. Sound familiar? I put these people in the same category as pro-life activists who bomb abortion clinics because they are against murder. Insane.

So what does a peace loving Democrat such as myself do during a time of war. I support the warrior, not the war and pray for their safe return.

------David


Mark writes...

I am against war. Politically, ethically, and perhaps even irrationally. I just don’t like the idea of peace keeping or promoting democracy by means of deadly force. I can, however, understand and appreciate the need for war. I am grateful that I do not have to be the person to make that decision.

That being said, the current state of the world greatly disturbs and frightens me—the war that’s being fought over seas and the one here. By that I’m referring to the droves of protesters, high school students with a cause, and that guy on the grammy’s who’s anti-war opinions are far from peaceful. Why is it that those protesting war become assaultive. Is it because violence begets violence? Maybe, maybe not.

The protestors that I am referring to can be seen all over the news. They truly feel they are supporting a cause worth, get this, becoming violent. Hitting cops, blocking traffic, sneering at our troops, hating George Bush, and most of all they are disturbing the peace.

So do they accomplish anything. Yes and no. They certainly get noticed for fighting (literally and figuratively) for a cause. However they do absolutely nothing for the promotion of peace. They’ve missed the point. They are fighting about their belief and not their cause. In any culture a person’s beliefs are his or her most prized possession. That cannot be taken away. Unfortunately that’s the same driving force behind a war, a protest, violence.

So what do you do if you are against the war. Pray if you believe in God. Help support our troops. Support each other. Hold a peace vigil. Most of all think of the larger issue and remember that supporting the troops and the law does not equate with supporting war and violence.

Well said David and Mark!

I dunno...maybe the anti-war protestors get violent because they are confronted by screaming, bullying "patriots" calling them traitors and morons and dirty and filthy and scum and old hippies and unemployed losers and anti-American and communists and giving them the finger and spitting on them and telling them to get a life or get a job or take a bath or go to hell or move to Cuba or move to Iraq, and on and on and on...

I take the same stance with the anti-war protestors that I always have when it comes to Madonna over the years: they may go too far or cross the lines, but their antics drive the right-wingers completely and utterly insane with outrage. And that always gives me a warm feeling deep inside.

Fight the power!

[ March 29, 2003, 06:12 PM: Message edited by: Joe in Philly ]

And that's a Good Thing. © and ®, Martha Stewart.

How can you people support folks who lay in the middle of the street and stop traffic for miles? The ones who puke in the street?

The mayor of SF said it was costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to police this peace protesters cause they cant protest peacefully. Now, instead of the police doing their job and protecting america, they are pulled away to clean up the puke, broken windows, and newspaper stands. Who's causing the violence now? These poeple are no better than the Pro-lifers who go overboard. How many people are they turning off from their cause because of their actions????

Look at the pictures of these folks, i'd say a bar of soap and some shampoo would go a long way towards solving the problem... LOL.

I already answered...because they drive people like you insane.

Fight the power!

[ March 30, 2003, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: Joe in Philly ]

How can they fight the power if they're against war...

They are for PEACE, yet want confrontations with the police!! Fight the power? Is that "power" police, government, huge corporations? Please explain Joe in Philly! :confused:

I hope Jane Fonda (Hanoi Jane) does not protest this war. She has been keeping a low profile lately. Maybe she learned her lesson after Vietnam and the media fiasco she caused.

I've watched a lot of news and reports on the protests, but have not seen any confrontations as you describe. The news has shown anti-war protesters getting violent with police.

This is just silly. I've not seen or heard of any pro-Iraqui-freedom people going completely and utterly insane with outrage over these incidents. Most war supporters just roll their eyes and think they're idiots for puking on the steps of city hall, breaking the windows of innocent bystanding businesses, and trying to bring cities to a standstill. And by the way, not everyone who supports our freeing of Iraq is a right-winger. 75% of Americans support our action according to polls taken over the weekend. Oh, and what I meant by "silly": I wanted to use a different word, but I'm trying to be polite. I think it's "silly" to get pleasure out of seeing other people get outraged.

Thankfully, here in KC the protests have been peaceful and respectful on both sides. There was a support-the-troops rally from 2-4 yesterday, immediately followed by a peace rally from 4-6 at the same location. The local news showed a debate between one guy arguing for the freedom of Iraq, and the other guy's response was: "Yeah, well..." Then he stopped, and didn't have anything else to say.

(I edited this to take out any implication that I'm a right-winger. I'm not. But I do support our efforts to free Iraq.)

[ March 31, 2003, 06:58 AM: Message edited by: maxallen ]

Hmmmm......I haven't seen any "rightwingers" going "completely and utterly insane." Actually, I've seen very few "rightwingers" speaking out at all. Most people seem to be - like the majority of the American electorate - very moderate politically, yet still support the current campaign. And, if you believe NBC and the Wall Street Journal this morning, that includes 40% of Democrats. So I think we can dismiss the kneejerk charge from the left that if you disagree with them you are clearly a "rightwinger," for it is clearly baseless here. As for demonstrators, I didn't see any of the behavior JIP is attributing to bystanders at the NYC demonstration last week. Most people not demonstrating simply wanted to run their weekend errands, get to the movies or other dates, etc. and were annoyed by the inconvenience of having streets closed, police diverting traffic, etc. But they didn't take it out on the demonstrators; I have no idea, what they were thinking, of course - personally I was thinking they were silly and overly idealistic, but that their misplaced idealism would do more harm than good. But that's just me. So I stood there for twenty minutes waiting to get crosstown, then saw the end of the demonstration in lower Manhattan, and didn't see any of what's being depicted. I did see a group of demonstrators reach 23rd street, and attempt to start marching west in the hopes of closing the commercial district between Fifth and Seventh Avenues, but the police were very firm in lining up mounted cops and a senior officer telling them they had to stick to the route they had a permit for. It got heated for a few minutes, with the demonstrators starting to chant "our streets, our streets," but cooler heads prevailed.

JIP, these people have done nothing to disrupt my life.. other than on the news here i saw they tried to shut down a major street by ASU...

However, if you are trying to get people to support your cause, how is blocking traffic going to do it? Doesnt that turn people off who might otherwise support you?

I find it odd that it is the peace protest that have people arrested for getting out of control. Causing havoc for the police, puking in the streets... ect ect ect... Arent you for peace? Shouldnt a pro-war protester be causing damage?

I am not for war. I do not like war. Who does? I never have and I never will, however, when you see your high school classmates, college buds, co-workers, men & women in the gay community who are now out in Iraq and Kuwait, I feel that I want to support them in this unnecessary war. I, actually, wish I was with them. I cannot now - I have asthma. I support the troops. I just find the protesting ridiculous. Granted, I do not like this at all, however, there are many of our loved ones out there and I hope and pray that they will be safe and return home soon. I know that is idealistic and I know this war may last longer than anticipated, however, I want the troops - gay and straight - to be safe and to come home quickly.

I feel is I protested against this war, I'm turning my back on the people serving in the Armed Forces. It's not serving a purpose at all except to piss off commuters during their protests. I just change the channel when I see another DAMN protest going on. I find the anti-war protests redundant. Okay, we ARE at war! The whole peace thing isn't going to work right now.

Anyway ... that is my 2 cents. - Allen

I'm wondering who does support those sort of protests. Certainly no one will admit that they do. Even the protesters seem to have really gotten that message here in SF and it's all stopped cold. They realized that people were coming to hate their guts for what they were doing to the city, the money they were costing us and the aggravation and assaults on police and cars.

Now they say they might just target certain government buildings or corporations, but not the street blocking and stuff like that anymore. Finally.

I think they changed far more minds the other way than they wanted than they could have ever imagined.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/030407/...inion/7john.htm

He brings up an intresting point, Clear channel was brought up because they were accused of promoting the war and that is bad... but NEVER EVER point out that organization who support communism sponsor their events, that is not important.

How does one best protest this war?

The answer came to me today ... on my bonus check that I work very hard for. Nearly 50% was taken by my state and federal governments. A good chunk of this money is being used to fight a war on behalf of bigger interests (oil companies) not to mention other corporate welfare programs. To deny this would be delusional. And the executive in the oval office and many others in Congress want more of what is mine (and yours).

No way. I'll let my voice be heard in November of 2004.

Hey 6iron... Bonuses are always taxed like that.. It's been that way forever. That is not a bush thing, that is not a clinton thing... that is the american tax system.. the more you make the more you pay.

The money will be refunded to you at the end of the year. I do believe it's because (for example) if your bonus was 5k and you are paid bi-weekly, it comes up to 130k a year, and that is how you are taxed. Basically, you're taxed as someone who makes 130k a year.. Then again bonuses could be taxed automatically at that higher percent.. I think it depends on how they classify it on your paycheck.

Thats how it works in a progressive tax system, the one where people who make more are taxed more. And accordinly (democratic view) people who make less are taxed less... shame on you for getting a bonus, you deserve to pay more taxes for making money. LOL...

Dont worry, when that dividend tax cut comes through we'll all be rolling in the dough!

Lets cut taxes to the working families.. who need it... to which none of us are... CHILDCARE credits.. The new democratic motto... have another kid you cant afford, it's a tax break.

Just do it your own way: it's YOUR life.

Hey PhillyFan: thanks for the lesson in Payroll 101. But the point remains: the war is an incredible expense to our nation and to our economy. You and I (and the protesters and all other American citizens) are paying for this exercise. We are the investors in this profit making scheme.

My question to all of you: is it worth it? When I saw my paycheck, I knew it was clear.

Vote 'em out in 2004.

Mansfield boys - I just got a chance to read this thread . You make a lot of sense!

Do you really believe that, copman?

What if the abolitionists, or the pro-Female Franchise protesters, or the Civil Rights protestsers, or the anti-abortion protesters, etc., had decided, oh well, maybe we're annoying people, so we should stop? That's just ridiculous. You protest as long as you feel a policy or state action is unjust. Our forefathers enshrined that right, and while it may annoy some people, it's important, because right now we have no opposition party, the Republican Party is function in Stepford fashion, and there's no independent mass media in this country to ask many of the basic questions that need to be broached.

BTW, I saw today that moderate Republicans from Bush I's tenure are hatching a plan to meet with W. and try to counsel him away from the reckless plans being pushed by Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, et. al. These multilateralists (Scowcroft, Baker, etc.) fear that W. is too dazzled by the macho rhetoric and highblown world-building, and could be plunging the U.S. into a unforeseeably long international disaster.

If we end the war and Iraq then uses Weapons OMD, what will all the crybaby war protesters be saying then ?

Then they would say, we the horrible americans deserved it....

The major media is not liberal? how about altering photos to make them look worse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...4-2003Apr2.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/showcas...ote_blurb.blurb

This photo was changed, strangly doesnt it make it look like the british soldier is now telling the civilian to stand down?

[ April 02, 2003, 09:26 AM: Message edited by: PhillyFan ]

I was watching Wolf Blitzer yesterday afternoon, and they were talking about the massive, and growing anti-American sentiment growing in the Arab/Muslim world. Even Egypts' President Mubarak said if this war gets drawn out, there could be "hundreds of Bin Lindens born".If not already. I agree. Things are getting so bad that if these protests get any larger or more out of hand, they could threaten and destabilize countires and their leaders. Supposedly U.S. officials are concerned about this, as well they should be.

First two words in the _Post_ article: "Photographer Fired"

Right after they ran the altered photo on their front page...

I think that was Bill Clinton's fault, wasnt it?

When you protest in a city like SF that is already against the war, that's preaching to the choir.

But when you have groups of thugs going around and harassing people in their cars or people coming out of shops (happened to a woman I work with) and disrupting the city, you're going to lose support for your cause.

I have no sympathy for any of the protestors. They are costing the city hundreds of thousands of dollars in police overtime. The police could be better used in high crime neighborhoods but no, they're babysitting a bunch of ass****s with nothing better to do than block traffic.

How dare anyone compare these people to the abolutionists or the suffergets (can't spell)?

I dared to do it because the war protesters believe that the war is morally wrong, just as the abolitionists believed that slavery was wrong, just as the suffragettes believed that women had a right to vote, just as anti-abortionists believe that abortion is morally reprehensible.

The parallels are quite , so how DARE you not even figure out the obvious equivalence?

Moreover, the majority of Americans during the years 1840-1861, to take one example, found the abolitionists obnoxious, a nuisance, a threat to public order, and so on. Yet their cause was right. If we were to take your tack, then we'd just accede to anything this illegitimate government comes up with, which the Democratic Party, in the main, has done.

WHERE ARE THE GREENS WHEN YOU NEED THEM?

Sorry to say but the anit-war folks havent caught on. Maybe in SF, but even that town grew tired of their antics. perhaps if most protesters were actually anti-war, and not anti-bush they would have more of an effect.

Well, I fully expect you to post an indignant rant similar to that the next time a St. Patrick's Day Parade, a downtown rally for a team that's won a championship or--as completely makes a weekend in my neighborhood hell to get around in because it goes by a block away--a marathon or any thing similar happens.

Does anyone really believe in that "the media is liberal" crap any more? For every altered picture, the left could show dozens of examples of right wing bias.

So everything you 0wrote are one-day events that are planned for far in advance. Parade for st pats day, once a year... chamionship parade, once a year. Baseball schedule is put out way early and i think the police plan accordingly... then again, when the people spend money to go to those games and parades, at least some tax money is coming in to offset those events and the added police.

If you look at the protesters in SF, doesnt look like most of them can hold down job, let alone spend that tourism money.

These people were out there, day after day after day. They were blocking traffic and causing havoc on folks just going to work... Takes more cops to take care of that problem than anyone who is leaving orderly from a baseball game.

liberal media? pick up the LA paper and get back to me wont ya.

My co-workers, my friends, my relatives, my son and daughter's friends... I don't know a single person that is on the side of the protesters.

Who are these people ??

Gee, could they be professional cause-demonstrators that don't hold down full time jobs ?

Jim,
I have to say that a lot of people do still believe that the media leans to the left, especially after this recent "conflict" in Iraq. Maybe it's just the Buckeye blood in me, but most people around hear know the "slant" goes to the left, weather it's newspaper or TV. Let's face it, the media is big business with it's own political agenda, whatever corporate wants, the story "slants" that way.

If the media is so slanted to the left why is it that virtually every time a gay-related issue is the topic, there is some ultra-right Christian from some idiot group involved in the debate? Why is it, when they do stories on a church issue, they don't automatically have atheists on to debate?

The only church issue i saw lately were the priests who molested children and the press FRIED the conservative church.

I've never seen an athiest mad that a church exists. They speak up when they think the govt is being involved with the church... ie the pledge.. Then they go ahead and offend 99% of america.

Gay issues? Whenever i've seen them they have been on talk shows for the most part, and it makes for pretty boring tv to only show the one side of the debate.... Gay issues are usually debated more than reported as actual news, the most news i see reported is when there is some parade and i get to see 10 drags queens pictured LOL...

Exactly. The major broadcast media are very quick to have the conservative viewpoint represented by some \"ultra-right Christian from some idiot group,\" rather than a more mainstream conservative.

What do you mean by a "church issue"? The media rarely cover internal church issues. And whenever I see a debate touching on a church/state separation issue (e.g., football game prayers, or the Pledge of Allegiance), the debate always includes an ACLU-er, or a People for the American Way guy, or the truly vile Barry Lynn. But, then again, I watch fair-and-balanced Fox, so maybe that's why I'm seeing multiple sides of issues that are being debated. wink

[ April 02, 2003, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]

Well, seeing as it's nearly that time of year, there are stories on TV and in the papers: Catholics locally and around the world commemorated Good Friday...services were held to celebrate Christ's resurrection on Easter Sunday...and on and on and on. Not discussions of "issues" per se, but there is no news in the fact that Christians are celebrating Easter or Jews are commemorating Passover and so on...it's merely a barrage of favorable publicity. But these people have the nerve to rant how the media is biased against them if they write articles that are even remotely critical in any way.

They're anti-American, commie pinko liberals who LOVE Saddam and hate our troops. It disgusting, how dare people in this free country dissent from our selected leaders.

They aren't all those melodramatic things, but they are for the most part people who do this sort of thing for a living, so to speak. That is not grassroots politics in the true sense. We in San Francisco don't need these people coming in from God knows where to block our streets and act like fools. We have enough fools here and we can handle it just fine. When the dumbasses were arrested and id'd, it was in fact revealed that the vast majority were from other places just come to town to wreck us.

People all have their opinions, but I was there for these protests and they were inane, blatant stupidity. I saw people jumping on people cars and screaming inside their windows. They blocked my bus just to say that they hate President Bush. It was all ignorant nonsense and did nothing but make everyone disgusted.

I am so against this war, but even more against those sorts of ridiculous juvenile acting out behaviors.

We've also had legitimate peace rallies here which were huge and successful and productive and mind changing and powerful. We also had permits, police cooperating with us to block streets and keep order and we didn't fight them or harass our fellow citizens. It's called responsibility. This is still our country, and San Francisco is our city, I for one don't need to trash it to make a point that I am against the war. Imbeciles.

Excellent stuff there, Mattkorey.

I recently saw on TV a story about a rather large protest by military veterans, are they the ones who do this for a living?

I was speaking specifically about the ones here, can't vouch for others.

Many of the anti-abortion picketers were and are professional protesters.

While I don't agree with their tactics or their beliefs, I will say that their persistance has reframed the debate on abortion in this country. Abortion is still legally protected, yet it is now very difficult to get in many states, many abortion clinics operate as if under a state of siege, many public hospitals no longer offer abortions and many private non-religious ones have opted since the violence of the 1980s not to as well, abortion doctors feel as though they are under a death threat, some medical obstetrics programs do not even teach students about how to perform safe, emergency abortions, and the public discourse on abortion, particularly on TV, is anti-abortion, so that even on shows on the major networks, abortion is usually left out of the discussion as much as possible.

I remember that more than once on "Popular," "Melrose Place," and "90210," in unwanted pregnancy scenarios involving the female characters, getting abortions wasn't taken seriously at all--I mean, it is an option that thousands of women, of ALL political stripes, religions, etc. exercise, yet the public framing of the issue had shifted to the point that the storylines would not even discuss it openly.

So peaceful protesting is a legitimate action, it's a constitutional right we have (unlike the Iraqis or Syrians or Chinese or North Koreans), it often does work, and people who would want to shut it down--as opposed to stopping anarchistic types who use the pretext of protest to live out some kind of Bakunian frenzy-orgy of destruction--are several steps down the road to fascism.

[ April 03, 2003, 02:46 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Let's not go there with abortion protestors - i luv when older or younger men (doesn't matter) are the ones all upset about women getting abortions yet they are the ones that sleep around unprotected all the time, and when was the last time they raised a kid on their own.

I thoroughly enjoyed this column.

Shutting up protest: the coward's way out

Meanwhile, going way back to the first post in this thread, which started out: "War, what is it good for?" reminds me of something I heard this morning on the radio. As part of their looking back on the opening of the Vet this weekend, the Phillies were playing songs from the early 70s over the loudspeakers at times--and one of the songs played happened to be Edwin Starr's "War."
A caller this morning on the sports-talk station told of how he heard the song at the Vet and called the Phillies to complain that it was unpatriotic, and apparently they didn't play the song again. Edwin Starr just died not long ago. No doubt he's already rolling over in his grave.

I think the Puke In got their point across and changed alot of minds. Taping themselves together in the middle of the intersection proved that war is bad too... it also proves... soap and a shower are good things.

Yes, I agree protest yes- but you have no right to impede traffic or damage property or assault people. It seems that the protestors are afraid they might be ignored if they stuck to just speaking and so they feel they have to disrupt to make a point.