How to respond to "Peace Activists"

[LeiDeLi]

[quote]All I've done is present my opinion on these threads...I really don't feel I have to back it up with facts.[/quote] I guess that sums up your arguments pretty well. :) I am not really trying to debate with you, personally, because obviously no facts will change your mind. I am just presenting some verifiable facts in parallel with your opinions so that the unbiased observer can make up their own mind. :) Peace, LeiDeLi

[LeiDeLi]

dogfur: I visited both your sites. I agree that we should be mindful of these potentially politically influencing connections, but let me bring out two points: 1. Yes, it appears as though GWB's position on the air standard was influenced by the coal industry. But let's keep that in perspective. Republicans, and GWB have always traditionally wanted a minimum of regulation. And an air standard is not a "hard" number where there is a definite line between acceptable and unacceptable. Also, relaxing a position on an air standard is a LONG, LONG, LONG, WAY FROM COMPLICITY IN A TERROR BOMBING ATTACK. :) So your argument just makes me see JWB as a somewhat sleazy politician, not a mass murderer. :) I already knew he was a little soft on business and the environment, and I didn't vote for him ! :) 2. The article about the corporate ties is exactly the sort of vague innuendo that I am warning against. Everyone has ties to some corporation ! I have ties to corporations. Most Americans own stock, or work for, or have relatives and friends that work for large corporations. So *certainly* the President, Congress, and Senators (the wealthiest and most influential men in America) HAVE MANY STRONG TIES TO CORPORATIONS. What does that prove ? Again, if there is a specific allegation of wrongdoing, and evidence to back it up, bring it out ! (Whitewater anyone ?) Otherwise, get out and help campaign for Gore, or Nader, or run for office yourself. It is a democracy ! :) Peace, LeiDeLi

[Dogfur]

[quote]Originally posted by LeiDeLi: [b]dogfur: I visited both your sites. I agree that we should be mindful of these potentially politically influencing connections, but let me bring out two points: 1. Yes, it appears as though GWB's position on the air standard was influenced by the coal industry. But let's keep that in perspective. Republicans, and GWB have always traditionally wanted a minimum of regulation. And an air standard is not a "hard" number where there is a definite line between acceptable and unacceptable. Also, relaxing a position on an air standard is a LONG, LONG, LONG, WAY FROM COMPLICITY IN A TERROR BOMBING ATTACK. :) So your argument just makes me see JWB as a somewhat sleazy politician, not a mass murderer. :) I already knew he was a little soft on business and the environment, and I didn't vote for him ! :) 2. The article about the corporate ties is exactly the sort of vague innuendo that I am warning against. Everyone has ties to some corporation ! I have ties to corporations. Most Americans own stock, or work for, or have relatives and friends that work for large corporations. So *certainly* the President, Congress, and Senators (the wealthiest and most influential men in America) HAVE MANY STRONG TIES TO CORPORATIONS. What does that prove ? Again, if there is a specific allegation of wrongdoing, and evidence to back it up, bring it out ! (Whitewater anyone ?) Otherwise, get out and help campaign for Gore, or Nader, or run for office yourself. It is a democracy ! :) Peace, LeiDeLi[/b][/quote] LeiDiLi; I don't want to compare our leaders' lack of integrity to the terrorists' attacks. I do want to point out that our current administration has compromised itself in the past for corporate interests ( especially in foreign countries where the rules can be bent ), and that it is possible that this behaviour was in some way partly responsible for people on the other side of the world to lash out in a despicable way against us. I am 100% in agreement that our nation as a whole needs to immediately address in the most serious way how to best eliminate the chances of this ever happening again, but as we do all sides of this must be considered. It also seems to me that once you become a "public servant" your right to be bought by anyone is no longer relevant, and your influence must end. Your job is to serve the constituancy, not the highest bidder. As far as "vague innuendo" goes, the fact that no criminal charges are brought against politicians for accepting payment for legislation and policy does not blind me to their actions, and shouldn't become an excuse for us to let them get away with it. The system has been broken by the people we hire to maintain it. To let these same people proceed with deadly actions against others, for whatever reason, without at least discussing these issues is very, very dangerous. Dogfur

[the stranger]

Did he have a pin on? :D

[michael saulnier]

From the original thread title... [quote]How to respond to "Peace Activists"[/quote]IMHO, say "thanks"... It's nice to see people taking a stand for what they believe in... It's too bad some would hijack the "goodwill" of these folks for their own twisted agendas. guitplayer

[Bill Heins]

The thanks are owed to the men and women who have given their lives and continue to place themselves in danger so that we can and will remain free to voice our opinions and live the lives that we choose! Darkon the Incandescent

[michael saulnier]

Ummm... well, yes. Them too! :wave: guitplayer

[strat0124]

As a former military man, I have mixed emotions on the subject matter. At the time my patriotism was at an all time high, chest out, head high going to war for what I thought at the time was a just cause. When I became curious with the reasons behind the war I was in, I suspected that I had been duped into believing that for corporate gain...ie OIL. I felt and still feel like I was a gangster for capitalism, and though I believe in a free market system, you shouldn't oppress people to do so, or invade countries to insure you get a piece of their pie. That is beyond wrong, and I'll go to my grave believing that. So anybody who wants to "kick their ass, and take their gas", please sign up....they're looking for a few good men.

[coyote]

Agreed that thanks are due the troops. They do put themselves in harm's way, for what is believed to be our freedom. The intelligent individual, however, makes a clear distinction between supporting the troops and supporting the policies in which those troops find themselves enmeshed. The GOP was right to question Clinton's deployment of troops to Bosnia. The Dems are right to question the motivations & methods of the Bush Administration in conquering Iraq. [quote]Originally posted by Darkon the Incandescent: [b]The thanks are owed to the men and women who have given their lives and continue to place themselves in danger so that we can and will remain free to voice our opinions and live the lives that we choose! Darkon the Incandescent[/b][/quote]

[Peake]

How to respond to "Peace Activists": Walk up to one and say, "Hello fellow American, thank you for exercising your right to free speech and dissent. You were so very correct regarding the ill-conceived subjugation of a sovereign nation, the theft of its resources, and the world corporate interests behind all of this, who now have a foothold in the region. You were correct regarding the lack of any imminent threat whatsoever, despite the government's harping upon it. You were correct regarding Iraq's inability to even defend itself, despite government claims of imminent threat. You were right regarding Bush's family and others, who own stock in Haliburton and other construction companies who exist to win no-bidding contracts to rebuild the countries we bomb. You were right about so many things; we feel silly for wanting to punch you, my fellow American. Thank you for alerting me to the fact that the Pope was against this war (I wouldn't have wanted to have to punch HIM! Hoo boy! Egg on my face at the pearly gates!) So in conclusion, I'd like to say that I'm very sorry and would like to buy you this nice dinner at the local Ruth's Chris Steak House. Enjoy, and we're lucky to have had your level perspective and cool heads in the face of our government creating an unprovoked attack upon another nation, the first time this has ever happened. I'm now more frightened of the US government than of Al Queda. Thank you, I look forward to learning more of your perspective! Love, your (previously) fascist bully-boy war fanatic. (grin)

[Wow]

[quote] How to respond to "Peace Activists" [/quote]You tell them to take the fucking blinders off their eyes and realize that we are in a war.

[Peake]

Absolutely. The point is, it's not in Iraq, and it wasn't in Iraq. However, how many billions of dollars later, Bin Laden is still skedaddling around somewhere. A little focus on the actual enemy would have been nice.

[Peake]

My bad... NOW the enemy is in Iraq. http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/19/sprj.irq.al.qaeda.magnet/index.html

[burlingame2]

My first response was `what rock did these people crawl out from underneath?` I had once again concluded, in my haste that there was no point of view other than mine. I like to think I am pretty good at putting myself in the other guy`s shoes. Well, I just want to jump in, and say it is not just wanting to bomb Saddam that seemed ill-advised. It is the eagerness. The justification in finding an adversary. Forty years was too much time for `Peace`. We had dealings with corrupt people (heads of state), and they tore down their own countries for financial security, and GOT AWAY WITH IT. The worst part is that we call this `growing up`, `maturing`, `living in the real world`,`being an adult`. I guess the world has some surprises, is at the least, an understatement. I am just sorry I`ve cultivated so much negativity, when there are people who somehow find the strength to try to really turn things around. Just defining those princples that it takes to live by would give people, with there hearts in the right place, so much a better quality of life. So much the better. It beats the lessons taught about us in islamic schools, and the participation in some shenanigans and wreckless acceptance that redefine what we do make this a better place. At the least, leave it as well as we found it. Nathan

[coyote]

Not according to Mr. Bush or Mr. Rumsfeld. GWB landed on an aircraft carier which sported a banner proclaiming "Mission Accomplished". He then went on to say "Major combat operations in Iraq have concluded". Rumsfeld cannot bring himself to acknowledge our current engagement in a guerilla war, evven though his own generals call the current status exactly that. [quote]Originally posted by Mr. Wow: [b]You tell them to take the fucking blinders off their eyes and realize that we are in a war.[/b][/quote]And tell me what your statement here means!! Does it mean: a) people striving for peace are irrelevant? Hmmm, Israael & Palestine are in a similar 'war' yet President Bush has laid out a "road map" to peace. Is he irrelevant for trying to bring peace to a region which has shown a remarkable resistance to peace for the past 5000 years? b) calling for peace in the midst of war is somehow disloyal to the nation, just because the president wants this particular war? I wonder who is really wearing the blinders here.

[Wow]

You successfully twisted that into an A or B category, with neither answer amounting to shit. DONT be blind to the fact that this is a war. If you can't see that , then I am NOT here to convince you. What are the peace activist marching for exactly? Do you want us to pack up our bags and bring them all home? That will make things 10x for the worse in the long run.

[Peake]

I can easily see that this is a war. I'm not for peace in response to the aggressors, far from it, I'm for stopping the US government from using the attack to line their own pockets with no-contest reconstruction contracts against countries uninvolved in the attack, as well as Bush oil profits and oil grabs, "homeland security", a wonderful oxymoron as there is no sign of them slowing down the erosion of our liberties when beefing up the EXISTING intelligence community (which effing warned of suspected bad guys taking flying lessons!), etc. etc. etc. That we are at war is plain to all. That we are at war is no blanket excuse for this government to do whatever it wants, especially with so much taxpayer money mysteriously moving into the pockets of government employees, and privatization of the Iraq infrastructure overseen by US corporate interests, with military spending going crazy (700 count cruise missiles were launched on the first day of the war, at a cost of $1,000,000 each; there was enough "intelligence" to have targets for all of these, mostly to destroy infrastructure Haliburton would then rebuild, yet, with all of that intelligence, they didn't know that there were no chem labs, WMD, imminent attacks, material breaches, and all of the fear-inducing noise they made to work us up into acceptance of a need to trash Iraq...) Way too many rich people are getting really rich from this "war". Too many freedoms are being trashed with zero attention to tracking down Bin Laden. The attack on America by the Government is clear. THAT is what peace activists are against, and it's only a small percentage of the overall picture.

[Wow]

So, the rich get richer, WHATS NEW? Is that what you are really marching for? Seems odd at best.

[Peake]

No, it might have something to do with the dead US soldiers giving their lives for the mad profiteers. Sorry to see that you support their deaths for the financial benefit of a very few.

[silentsoliloquy]

We're in a war over supposed weapons of mass destruction. which were never found. also, look into the carlyle group. a private investing firm based out of washington that offers and trades large shares of stock in defense and aeronautical fields with a company called United Defense Industries, whom the Carlyle group took public only after September 11th. It's important to note that George Bush Sr. works for the Carlyle group. The president of the United States' father is on the payroll of the company that trades the stock for one of the largest defense contractors in the nation. This same company had earlier purchased another company, United Defense LP, which had all the contracts for the US army's infantry vehicles. war is a profitable business for the bush family. also, ironically enough, the flagship product of United Defense Industries is the most high powered piece of field artillery on the planet. It is named the crusader, in reference to earlier skirmishes where christians decided to make muslims nonexistent for no particular reason. it's development has cost the taxpayers close to 3/4 of a billion dollars. to date, the Carlyle group has made roughly a billion dollars from sale of stock related to defense and aeronautics contracts. and george bush sr is confirmed in public media (Washington times, among others) as being on their payroll. war is a profitable business.

[coyote]

I am not blind to it, despite Bush/Rumsfeld's best efforts to persuade me that the war is essentially over. In fact, even as the situation in Iraq steadily deteriorates our Administration continues to insist that no more US troops are needed - this while trying to persuade other nations (most of whom we alienated in the run-up to war) to send tens of thousands of troops to assist. Can you blame those other nations for basically saying "You created this mess, and until you relinquish some control to the international community it will remain your mess"? [quote]Originally posted by Mr. Wow: [b]DONT be blind to the fact that this is a war. If you can't see that , then I am NOT here to convince you. [/b][/quote]BTW, why is this Administration downplaying this ***WAR*** so much? And why did they downplay the negative health effects of post-9/11 air quality - the stuff I was breathing when I returned to my downtown office two days later??

[40hertz]

1)i thought this is a music forum,no? 2)i am sure the music player forums have many non U.S. members... 3)people do not need empires of any kind to survive on this planet. :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave: :wave:

[coyote]

A slight correction, if I may. Unless the (slim) historical records are incorrect, Jesus died as much for lambasting the corrupt 'leaders' of his own people as for pissing off the Roman occupiers. [quote]Originally posted by lrossmusic@hotmail.com: [b][QUOTE]Ironically, both Gandhi and Jesus were killed for standing up face-to-face with their opponents, not whining why their own people "deserved" what they got. Peace, LeiDeLi [/b][/quote]And Moses was not shy about telling the Israelites it was ***their own fault*** they were wandering in the desert for a generation.

[whitefang]

The thing that bugs me the most after six pages of this horseshit is how some people, who I assume are younger than me, sound just like the old farts when I was young in the Nam era. That this war is a good idea because our President says it is. Which was never a good exuse. Or how if you sound the least bit concerned that young men are going to die in order to make fat cats richer, why you just gotta be some kind of commie! War being "in vogue", and rubbing faces in the flag to validate such inhumane monstrosities as war is a sad, sad statement of how far we have yet to go to prove that this nation is the "civilized" one. Whitefang

[the stranger]

Yeah, there gonna make money, but they would have found others ways to rip us off without the war. Yeah, they just want to conquer the middle east and take control of the oil. Yeah, it's really about religion. But, most of all and the reason people discuss the least: Cleaning up daddy's mess. See, our leaders not only have to answer to the people (in theory), they have to answer to history. The actions of a president are scrutinized long after they are dead. This whole thing is about daddy saving face. Before Iraq Part II, daddy was going to be portrayed as the man who lost a war that couldn't be lost. Daddy dropped the ball. And Bill just didn't give a fuck. (I'm not sure what HIllary has planned to save Bill's name.)

[Wow]

[quote]BTW, why is this Administration downplaying this ***WAR*** so much? And why did they downplay the negative health effects of post-9/11 air quality - the stuff I was breathing when I returned to my downtown office two days later?? [/quote]I have never heard this administration "down play" this war. Second, I have no idea why they would down play such a situation as the air quality. I wonder about your definition of downplay. ....just seems like pure hatred on your part.

[Wow]

[quote] (I'm not sure what HIllary has planned to save Bill's name.) [/quote]Can this be done?

[coyote]

Perhaps you didn't read my earlier post about "mission accomplished" and "we're not in a guerilla war". It's just a few posts up above.... And since when does asking reasonable questions amount to "pure hatred"? Heck, the Dems are seemingly afraid to truly hold Bush's feet to the fire so it falls to us liberal libertarians to do so. It's what happens in a DEMOCRACY - leaders are accountable to those who elected them, and the press and public are allowed... no, allowed is the wrong term. It is our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT and DUTY to question our elected representatives, both in conversation (like right now) and in the press. It ain't hatred to try to make public those policy decisions which our Representatives or President would hide from us. I wonder about your definition of "pure hatred". And I wonder why you're resorting to such personal swipes at me - normally adhominem attacks such as this occur when the attacker's logic and reason fail him. Incidentally, it certainly was hilarious to watch Bill O'Reilly get apoplectic when a supposed 'buffoon' like Al Franken got the upper hand in their discussion. [quote]Originally posted by Mr. Wow: [b]I have never heard this administration "down play" this war. Second, I have no idea why they would down play such a situation as the air quality. I wonder about your definition of downplay. ....just seems like pure hatred on your part.[/b][/quote]

[Peake]

Mr. Wow appears to be a typical Republican troll-- never actually answering a question so that it can be examined, endlessly skittering off on tangents, attacking other posters, etc. Didn't some high mucky-muck in the US government declare that "you're either with us or with the terorists"? This implies that to disagree is one step from treason. Without actually deleting the first amendment, they're attempting to create an environment in which it is dangerous to state your own opinion. They're trying to use shame against any opinion other than their own. This is a sure sign of a false front which would not withstand actual scrutiny. Bullying is too nice a word. Terrorism is about using fear to force a target people to alter their behaviour. The US government wants you to be afraid of questioning its actions, using shame and mob psychology (with us or against us). Who was the enemy of the American people? I'm losing track..

[Griffinator]

[quote]Originally posted by coyote: [b]A slight correction, if I may. Unless the (slim) historical records are incorrect, Jesus died as much for lambasting the corrupt 'leaders' of his own people as for pissing off the Roman occupiers. [quote]Originally posted by lrossmusic@hotmail.com: [b][QUOTE]Ironically, both Gandhi and Jesus were killed for standing up face-to-face with their opponents, not whining why their own people "deserved" what they got. Peace, LeiDeLi [/b][/quote]And Moses was not shy about telling the Israelites it was ***their own fault*** they were wandering in the desert for a generation.[/b][/quote]I hate to jump in on a [b]three year old thread[/b] :eek: :eek: :eek: But you are more right than you realize. Pontius Pilate (the Roman Oppressor!) wanted to turn Jesus loose because he couldn't figure out why the [b]Jews[/b] wanted him dead!