|
6
Nerd-Its
|
|
current event
by Seattle's Port of Olympia has been a hot spot of anti-war activity lately, as protesters attempt to prevent U.S. military supply shipments from departing for Iraq and Afghanistan. Previous tactics included blocking supply trucks with human chains, causing delays often as long as 17 hours. The latest attempt to disrupt the war supply involved pouring concrete on train tracks leading into the port. No arrests were made, and the concrete was cleaned from the tracks.
Add a Comment (9)
Email This
Message Author
I personally support the troops. I believe in what they stand for. I don't like the fighting and death and injury and suffering we all experience. But seriously, what else can we do? I know it is very complicated at times. Human nature is what it is. Freedom does not remain as a static entity. We have to keep fighting for it over and over again. I imagine these protesters get "all bent out of shape" because they don't like war and it's effects either but they should be thankful that their forefathers fought for them to have the freedom of assembly and speech. Crazy world isn't it?
The thing that gets me (as an Iraq War vet) is these people have zero chance of going to war, I seriously doubt many of them even know anyone in the military who has been to war, and except for their protesting (which is, of course, voluntary) this war has minimal impact on their lives at all! Yet they must be heard! We all must pay attention to them!! They don't like this war that affects them almost not at all so, by God, they will be as disruptive as possible because they are right and everyone else is wrong and the hell with 25 million Iraqis they are willing to abandon to death squads and religious tyranny! To hell with the military who have died, let them die for nothing, it's what they get for being baby killers! The extreme arrogance and smug self-righteousness of these people angers and disgusts me.
Is your logic about only vets having the right to oppose the war based on their experience giving them a superior insight, or is it that their service grants them a right to object by removing any doubts about cowardice?
Both arguments are forlorn in my view. All Americans are involved in a war being fought by American forces. Just like for abortion, if they have a fundamental belief that it is wrong and unjust then they have an obligation to oppose it. Few would claim that only those involved in abortion have earned a right to comment on its legality.
I think that the insight that our vets have gained into the futility or otherwise of the war is interesting, and their views should be given a serious weighting because of that experience - but let's hear from all Americans, and the world, about whether we should stay there.
Is your logic about only vets having the right to oppose the war based on their experience giving them a superior insight, or is it that their service grants them a right to object by removing any doubts about cowardice?
That would be neither. Just as intellectually lazy people throw out the "chicken hawk" appellation to avoid actual debate, so would the reverse. What I was referring to in my post is the abject childishness and supreme arrogance of these war protesters who go beyond carrying their stupid signs and chanting their vacuous slogans (which is their right) to actively attempting to undermine the war effort by blocking military shipments. I have a hard time distinguishing their "protests" from enemy sabotage.
but let's hear from all Americans, and the world, about whether we should stay there.
Yes, let's listen to the "world" which has shown time and time again it's collective willingness to abandon any people to death and chaos for the sake of political expediency, or to give the US a black eye and go "nyah nyah na nyah!" Or, we could listen to the Iraqis who are increasingly taking control of their country... naaah, they're a bunch of stupid A-rabs, Europe know what's best for them, and that would be death squads and religious tyranny.
Or we could assume that there are a lot of sensible people in the world who still look to America for leadership, but who would like to listen to and contribute to the debate. If our case is strong it will stand up to this sort of examination. America is not the only country going to the aid of peoples in distress. and/or making a botch of it.
This is a very difficult thing to do well, and we should encourage others to advise us. For example, the Australians, in East Timor, Papua New Guinea, and the Solomon Islands seem to have a superior way of managing these things with their military and police contingents. Even in Afghanistan, they seem to be getting on better with the local popuation and minimising their causualties while still participating indangerous operations.
Our differences of opinion have been well established in previous debate. I agree with you that the effect of our intervention has been to put off a murderous retaliation against the Iraquis who we have supported and who have supported us. That is the essence of our dilemma. How long will Americans be prepared to go on making the sacrifices that they have been making for the last three years. I suspect not for many more years, and then the retaliation will happen anyway.
There has never, ever been in Iraq or Afghanistan a moderate government that America would be happy with, so any attempt to make one now would require vastly more resources than Congress would ever be prepared, or capable of, allocating. I am sure you have seen the analysis of this proposition by Prof Hugh White I recently posted elsewhere on this forum
I suspect that being an anti-war activist in America is far from being a childish or safe preoccupation. Blocking transport is the most common form of protest in France because it forces everyone to think about the issues. It may be infuriating but it is effective in attracting attention. As you say mere ranting would be totally ineffective, and the protesters are not stupid. They may even be very patriotic people who are trying to help this coutry to get out of a very bad situation that mindless "partiotic" support for very the poor foreign policyof the present Administration has gotten us into.
A country like ours ought to be able to handle such a trivial protest peacefully - without silly vitriol, and without causing any harm to our wor effort. It is a symbolic tactic and symbols are merely token mental props, having only the meaning that we allow them to have.
Sorry, messed up my login again. That last anon was from me.
The thing that gets me (as an Iraq War vet) is these people have zero chance of going to war...
Tell me, the people that currently know the most about the War, your former comrades, are they even allowed to criticize the War publicly? Not really, right?
I seriously doubt many of them even know anyone in the military who has been to war...
The anti-war protesters I know go to lectures and events where they meet anti-war veterans and anti-war people who have been to Iraq during the War. They get to hear from extremely biased people (sure), through their own biased colored glasses (I'll give you that one too), but that doesn't mean this makes them completely ignorant about the situation there or completely ignorant about the needs of the American soldiers or the Iraqis.
To hell with the military who have died, let them die for nothing
Does this mean you would have supported the anti-war protesters if they had been able to stop the Iraq War from the get go? They would have saved many American military lives if they had succeeded then.
RSS
Logic Anyone? by gnifyus :: NR7 :: on 15 November 2007
I'm trying to understand the logic. At first after a sort of 'not-paying-attentiony' reading I was ready to go into a tiny tirade about the activists keeping much needed supplies from our soldiers who are always in need of anything no matter what anyone thinks of the war.
Then I reread:
demonstrators blockaded the Port of Olympia and halted military trucks carrying equipment from Iraq bound for Fort Lewis.
What possible good (besides publicity I suppose) does it do to block things coming from Iraq?
RE: Logic Anyone? by LordDilly :: NR8 :: on 15 November 2007
One: I messed up the news post, as it should have read as you pointed out "coming from Iraq and Afghanistan."
Two: The equipment coming back, one presumes, is stuff that needs to be repaired, maintained, etc. By attempting to block stuff coming back, they are in-a-roundabout-half-assed way screwing up the supplies that will eventually go back, I think. Either way, at what point isn't this sedition?