War Protestors: Anti-American or Patriotic?

[Solly]

"What do you think the long term consequences of no war will [likely] be?"

Saddam uses his weapons of MD against Western countries (I include Israel in this).

But this depends what happens if there isn't a war - forceful but peaceful invasion by US and UK troops in order to get of the weapons would work.

"What do you think the long term consequences of a war will be?"

Cheaper oil as we take over Iraq.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by Boddington's
I personally think the consequences of not acting will be far more terrible, but feel free to be short-termist and not see past January.

Personally, I'm not so sure about who's "being a short-termist" in this context...

[MikeH]

Ok, see what I have a problem with there is your over simplistic idea of what happens after a war.

[Solly]

Well that's because it depends on about twenty different things and any professional commentator/journalist will tell it better than I.

[Giancarlo]

Somebody said something about pro-war people being insane? Well that is a lie. Sometimes you have to be pro-war based upon the circumstances. If you honestly want to keep Saddam Hussein in power you are completely insane. In the case of Iraq that is and war must occur immediately in that case.

I don't like nor do I promote war, but sometimes it has to happen. In the Iraqi case, to protest would just be a show of pure ignorance and foolishness.

[TheStinger]

Why aren't we going after North Korea they seem far worse

[Solly]

Here, here Fez.

It's not often I say that, but this time you are reasonable and logical.

[MikeH]

Fez didn't disagree with anything I said.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Boddington's
Here, here Fez.

It's not often I say that, but this time you are reasonable and logical.

Boddy, I would rather you not say anything at all to me because it will only make me look bad.

MikeH:

Oh I didn't?

Of course. Anyone who's pro a war in Iraq is still insane.

[uh Clem]

What's un-patriotic about distrusting the government?

They lie (a lot), and they lie most of all when they're seeking an excuse to go to war, like 1898, 1964, 1990. There's nothing patriotic about accepting the administration's words at face value, although there are lots of people who'll say otherwise.

[Arrian]

Why aren't we going after North Korea they seem far worse

Funny you mention that...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20021215/ts_nm/korea_clinton_dc_2

As for the topic, what a silly question. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but that's totally subjective and largely irrelevent. Whichever it is they have the right to protest what they believe is wrong. Overall, I think it's a good thing to have some opposition.

-Arrian

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Fez

MikeH:

Oh I didn't?

No Fez, you didn't. Try to understand what he said - that you can realize war is bad but think it is unfortunately necessary in some cases (like you do with Iraq). Unless of course you think that Iraq should be attacked constantly and without remorse, killing everyone regardless of who their leader is.

[Kontiki]

As for protesting, MtG hit it right on the head - it depends upon the reasons behind your views. Frankly, there is nothing less patriotic than believing "my country can never make mistakes". If you love your country, it's because it stands for something. If your government does something that goes against what your country stands for, nothing could be more patriotic than opposing that.

[Solly]

"If you love your country, it's because it stands for something."

Why not just love what it is that your country stands for?

Love freedom. Love democracy, etc.

It just seems a little daft loving a scrap of land, which is also countries are.

[axi]

patriotism is in the eye of the beholder

I agree with that. No two people can agree what patriotism is if they cannot agree what "patria" is. The english language has the insufficient term "homeland" or "fatherland/motherland", but it is something more than that. What it is exactly and what incorporates it is still a question which cannot be answered uniquely by people from different cultural and social backgrounds.

The bourgeois right wing in the US feel that it's patriotic to defend the interests of their oil companies, f.e., because they are interested in the imperialistic domination of their country, because they have property and individual interests in that.

The left wing and the anti-war protestors feel that it's patriotic to try to prevent their country of commiting an agressive action which is morally wrong, and furthermore, will cost billions of $ of their tax money without them getting any benefit and worst of all ,will cost the lives of some of their peers.

So what's really behind patriotism is interests: the economic basis of society. All patriotic sentiment and all instances of people supporting the side in which they have no interests with (Hollywood actors opposing the war on one hand or the average jingoist Joe on the other) is part of the ideological superstructure that helps us define our patriotism. Most of the time this is dominant so "patriotism" or "un-americanism" looks like it is dependent on your current state of mind and on the kind of newspapers you read. However the economic basis of interests lies deeply beneath it.

That's why relatively few Americans oppose the war comparatively with the Europeans; this is basically a war for the American imperialistic interests and as long as it is an agressive action of the American imperialism against all competition, it is not liked by anyone who wants to compete with it, be it the European capitalists or the worldwide anti-capitalist mouvement.