Massive World Protests Tomorrow

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Agathon
They would protest if they really cared or if they were sure that they wouldn't be outnumbered.

That is not correct. You claim unless people don't act the way you do then they must not care. The reality is most of the silent majority believe the correct way to voice their concerns isn't through rioting and street protests but instead by writing newspaper articles and through the election process. It's a difference of philosophy and I'd say their way achieves a greater success rate then a bunch of hoodlums writing stupid signs and smoking pot.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Oerdin


That is not correct. You claim unless people don't act the way you do then they must not care. The reality is most of the silent majority believe the correct way to voice their concerns isn't through rioting and street protests but instead by writing newspaper articles and through the election process. It's a difference of philosophy and I'd say their way achieves a greater success rate then a bunch of hoodlums writing stupid signs and smoking pot.

What a load of c**p. You really are a clown.

- Womens suffrage

- Democracy

- Civil rights

- NZs anti nuclear stance

- The nation of India


All came about because ordinary people took action.

And you have forgotten the anti-abortion marches - so much for "silent".

If you want war then that's fine, just don't snipe at people who are of better character than you - people who care enough to stand up for their political opinions. I'm sorry but the people who act don't listen to the wet fish who don't.

Nuff said.

[Jac de Molay]

[

It's a difference of philosophy and I'd say their way achieves a greater success rate then a bunch of hoodlums writing stupid signs and smoking pot.

Blatantly stupid generalizations get you nowhere.

[Dinner]

Go ahead and call people names but it doesn't help your cause and it doesn't make you look any better. The truth is in a democracy the best and most productive way to change the government's policies is to vote for people who have policies similar to your own. Colonial India wasn't a democracy so off course protests were they only thing which could effect change. Women's sufferage had a lot of rallies but in the end it was a democratic vote which made the changes reality.

BTW I happen to be a gore voting Democrate you dim wit! I don't agree with Republican stances on many issues but I take the time to understand their positions. Maybe if you weren't so busy trying to judge other people's moral character then you might have time to do the same.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DetroitDave
Blatantly stupid generalizations get you nowhere.

You would know. You are a master of them.

[Jac de Molay]

How so? I'm not the one writing off an entire mass movement,of all ages and backgrounds, as criminals, drug users, or, better yet, "saddam supporters".

You should know better than that.

[Dinner]

I have never called them Saddam supporters Dave. Why don't you reread the posts, but, then again it is much easier for you to continue to generalize and make stupid statements. Isn't it?

[Jac de Molay]

The "saddam supporters" jibe was directed to people in the thread who equate resistance to the war with support for Saddam. It wasn't necessarily directed to you.

Now, lets go back again......

It's a difference of philosophy and I'd say their way achieves a greater success rate then a bunch of hoodlums writing stupid signs and smoking pot.

If you can back up this statement with one iota of evidence that the anti-war is some vast hippy conspiracy, I might take your posts half seriously. The fact is, you'd rather spout off and make generalizations about movements that dont fit your worldview.

In all of the examples you mentioned, civil protest and disobedience were the catalyst for change.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Tell me, how many times have the French moved for the sanctions to be lifted recently?

Define recently. A few years back, they, along with a few other countries, tried to sponsor moving to smart sanctions which would allow more food, medicine, and the like to go into Iraq. The US nixed it.

Really, what point is their continued trying when the US has stated clearly it will go for nothing less than full compliance or force?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by The diplomat
If they really are pacifists, they should protests all wars.

Being opposed to a specific war and being a pacifist are two different things. You write as if only pacificsts have a right to oppose war, and everyone else should support the war-mongers. You're an idjit.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
In Gulf war one I remember lots of "peace" protests lead by leftist types. They didn't even think we should intervine when Iraq invaded Kuwait. As far as they were concerned the military should be disbanded and if we just showed our love for people like Saddam then they would be converted to socialism and give up their evil ways.

There were almost a dozen different attempts to negotiate a peaceful exit from Kuwait by Iraq, other Arab states, the USSR, Europe, etc. The US refused them all. The US did everything it could to ensure that it could fight a war, sabotaging every peaceful effort. That war had little to do with Kuwait, and everything to do with proving American military power in the waning days of the USSR. The whole point of that war was to say to the world, "See how mighty we are, we are in control now."

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
There were almost a dozen different attempts to negotiate a peaceful exit from Kuwait by Iraq, other Arab states, the USSR, Europe, etc.

What was there to negotiate? The only reasonable terms in that situation were leave or be forced out.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

What was there to negotiate? The only reasonable terms in that situation were leave or be forced out.

A redrawing of borders forced upon them by Britain was reasonable. Discussion of compensation for stoeln oil would have been reasonable. Discussion of Kuwaiti pumping rates would have been reasonable. Renegotiation of Kuwait's loans to Iraq would have been reasonable. When the rest of the world feels that these are reasonable opics for negotiation and the US is a lone holdout, then it is the US who is unreasonable.

[DinoDoc]

None of which should have been on the table when they were occuping a foreign country. Since when are you want to reward aggression anyway?

[chequita guevara]

Kuwait was deliberately trying to crash the Iraqi economy, was stealing their oil, and refused to negotiate with the Iraqis. Not that I condone military adventurism, but what was Iraq supposed to do when it was under economic attack by its neighbor?\

Granted, if it was me, I'd have just occupied the contested areas and defaulted on my loan to Kuwait. Better yet, occupy the whole country, arm the guest workers, and leave. That woulda messed up the Emirs.