If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Alternet)   Marches can change American politics   (alternet.org) divider line 284
    More: PSA  
•       •       •

3951 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jan 2003 at 2:54 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



284 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-01-19 03:30:30 PM
CARL CONRAD:

If the true motive behind the upcoming war is clearly the sinister quest for more oil, and that is a horrible motive, doesn't that make the motive for the war horrible?

If we see that something is promted by greed or other unsavory ideals, shouldn't we be the "good" country and not initiate conflicts based on greed?

Seems kinda obvious, eh?
 
2003-01-19 03:32:16 PM
"Peace marches are a good idea. Makes it easy to identify all the spineless cowards."

That's funny, when protestors fight the cops (In full riot gear, with tear gas/horses, pepper spray, batons), we're lawless evil anarchists.

But when the same people march to stop a war that will kill 50 000 civillians, and wound 500 000 more, we're "spineless cowards".
 
2003-01-19 03:34:23 PM
"That's the thing, they don't.

There have been protests against the war on Iraq for the last few months, and maybe 1% of them make it onto the evening news."

Si Senor

and remember the 25 person strong protests in Iowa City don't make it on the news unless the news notices, or they stomp a Vietnam vet to death

"When they do, all they show are 'crazy hipies' and give one or two people a 2 second sound bite, ussually ones who are speaking against the 'violent protestors'."

Uh huh... so they showed three people out of those thousands in DC and SF?

I guess C-SPAN did the same, eh?

"When was the last time you saw an editorial or debate in the corporate media talking about the Iraq war and oil?"

I'm sorry if this isn't Yellow Times

"The entire left believes this is a war for oil"

Have you asked them all? :)

"but it's a viewpoint that is pretty much never seen in the corporate media."

whinewhine.. i'm sure if I taped every news show, I could find something that mentions the idea of "war for oil"

"Whether or not you agree with it, you have to admit that it's a viewpoint that must be represented."

What about the viewpoint that the war with Iraq is being controlled by Mossad, Sharon and the Israelis, as some claim. Do you want that represented also?

RF
 
2003-01-19 03:35:53 PM
I can just see all these anti-war Democrats in 2009 when a Dem president is serving his first term. Iraq will attack
a neighboring country (or a US city) with a biological weapon the dumb masses will be screaming "we had a chance to get rid of Saddam but Shrub wouldn't do it!"

This isn't about war, it's about politics, I'll bet 98% of these marchers vote straight ticket Dem every election.
Where were the marches when Clinton had his bombing campaign
in Bosnia? They were nowhere to be found. Where was the Hollywood crowd? Silent.
 
2003-01-19 03:35:58 PM
If the government spent as much money on education as it does on the military, the people would know from their history class that what America is doing by invading countries and expanding their empire is repeating what the Romans, Huns, British, Dutch and other superpowers of their day did. Collapse under the weight of trying to maintain control of the world while ignoring the problems at home.
 
2003-01-19 03:36:50 PM
and for the record, I'm a Democrat. I'm just against idiots and misguided people.

And I won't vote for Lieberman or Hillary.

RF
 
2003-01-19 03:37:27 PM
Hey acid head socal college kids! this propaganda link is for you!


RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE VIA THE BMW YOUR PARENTS BOUGHT YA

PENISTALLY!!!!
 
2003-01-19 03:38:00 PM
Zencentral:

the Dutch?

how veird! the Dutch hav a vorld empierr! How toight is dat?

RF
 
2003-01-19 03:38:58 PM
At the "anti-war" demonstration in San Francisco, "peace activists" non-violently smashed windows and lovingly vandalized the INS building. Here's a nauseating page at a nauseating site-Indymedia, what else-where the peace activists exult over the success of their peaceful tactics and discuss ways to peacefully smash more stuff in the future while avoiding the evil, violent police: SF INS Building Smashed and Trashed! Lovely bunch of people. Peaceful to a fault.







Scott
 
2003-01-19 03:40:42 PM
Figures, I fark up my Boobies on here trying to link pictures. Here are the other 2....



 
2003-01-19 03:40:58 PM
I bet that Mike Rivero (Whatreallyhappened.com) will ignore those crazy Francisanitos in San Francisco

or call them FBI agents

RF
 
2003-01-19 03:42:33 PM
Marches can change American politics
Uh, no. Money talks, bullshiat walks.
 
2003-01-19 03:42:43 PM
"Peace marches are a good idea. Makes it easy to identify all the spineless cowards."

I agree, now off with the hood.

 
2003-01-19 03:45:54 PM
The Sacramento Farking Bee? What the hell is that? I'm talking about the National Newspapers, the ones people actually read. The ones that set policy (NYT, WP, SFC). Or the major cable news networks (ABC, MSNBC, CNN, FOX).

I think you can trust me that the vast majority of leftists agree that the US wants to attack Iraq for oil. I read about 15 leftist online newspapers every day and there is no disagreement on that subject. Not a scientific method to be sure, but I can say that I have never seen an article published on any of those websites that argued the war wasn't for oil.

Well, you make a good point there, should the opinion that "the war with Iraq is being controlled by Mossad, Sharon and the Israelis" be represented aswell? I think it should be 'mentioned', but should not be brought up very often, maybe as often as the 'war for oil' viewpoint is now.

Why? Because the 'war for oil' viewpoint is the left's position (almost exclusively). That entire spectrum of political thought believes it. To ignore that is to completely shut out the left from political discussion. While the "controlled by Mossad, Sharon and the Israelis" thing is clearly only believed by a very small percent of the population, and as such shouldn't be given as much air time.
 
2003-01-19 03:47:14 PM
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.


/Mark Twain
 
2003-01-19 03:49:33 PM
**That's funny, when protestors fight the cops (In full riot gear, with tear gas/horses, pepper spray, batons), we're lawless evil anarchists.**

No it just sounds like you guys show up unprepared
 
2003-01-19 03:50:02 PM
Anyone for this war is being duped. This war is nothing more than an insurance policy for Bush to get re-elected. Drum up a tangible bad guy, one whom we CAN locate and CAN attack, invent a weapon scare, convince everyone they're the enemy, time the war close enough to campaign time to allow for the drowning out of any real issues under the auspices of "Well, we can't worry about that now, we're at war. Re-elect me, and I'll take care of it when we're done here."
Anyone who can't see what's really going on here is naive or Republican. If Bush cared about retaliating against those responsible for 9/11, we'd be at war with Saudi Arabia. If he wanted to overthrow those with WMD, we'd be marching towards North Korea right now. Instead, we're picking a fight with the weakest enemy we can find, waiting for the so called "inspections" to end, spin whatever results arise into justification for war, then all Hell breaks loose. It's not oil, it's not revenge, it's insurance. Nice job, sheep.
 
2003-01-19 03:51:09 PM
"Peace marches are a good idea. Makes it easy to identify all the spineless cowards."

One cant march without a spine...it's not possible. One can wheel or crawl, but marching is out of the question...

(one assinine comment deserves another)
 
2003-01-19 03:51:39 PM
Idle question: How is this a war for oil? No one needs iraq's oil except the iraqie people. Even with the Venezuala disruption, has anyone noticed? If Saddam wants to control all the MidEast oil, like about 10~12 years ago, then the war is about oil.

Iraq is a threat to everybody, not the least of all America, because of the "Arab/Muslim" connection. If there is doubt about training/aiding OBL or others, well it escapes me. SH wants power, not Islamic State, but I bet he believes the bad guys he helps somehow work for him, power. This is so sad for the Islam.

NK is not (as big) a threat because they are not connected to anybody and are more "in your face". I sort of doubt we'll see any NK suicide attacks.
 
2003-01-19 03:52:27 PM
BakerMan - The administration is saying that it's for "good" reasons. I don't believe that it is, but the reasons they give are partly valid. I'm saying that motives aside, the Iraqis will be better off in the long run if there is a war.

Again, I'm indifferent to it, but was at the protests in D.C. this weekend and left more in favor of the war than opposed. Someone needs to make a good case NOT to go, because I can't really think of one. This will, eventually, help the people of Iraq and will probably help our own economy (selfish, yes; but it's more of a that I've heard from the opposition).
 
2003-01-19 03:52:29 PM
Here's an alternate solution to war: Bush could always ask America's jewish overlords in Israel to have the Mossad assassinate Hussein and his entire cabinate, ergo giving the iraqi people the opportunity to revolt.
 
2003-01-19 03:52:35 PM
Well guys, i went down to DC for that, i was amazed. So many people sticking up for what they believe in, I was actually inspired. So many people with signs, so many hippies, so much pot. Hell, Chumbawumba even played at the rally!

But, why have a war in Iraq, when we REALLY need the money here. I know that in my state of Massachusetts, we're in deep economic shiat. Our farkin Governor is laying off teachers, when we don't have enough of them. The billions it would take to fight over there, would not be goin to good use! Anybody with me when I say this?
 
2003-01-19 03:52:57 PM
I guess they have to march, ever since marching got bussing called off.
March, shcmarch.
 
2003-01-19 03:54:11 PM
Cyprocosmo....Maybe if Ted Kennedy wasn't raping your state's money to fund his booze addiction you might have some left for schools.

Scott
 
2003-01-19 03:56:13 PM
Worthlessjuan

"If there is doubt about training/aiding OBL or others, well it escapes me."

Perhaps you should pay more attention then. The first thing you should have noticed was that there exists no evidence linking Saddam and Al Queada. The second is that Osama Bin Laden and Saddam are mortal enemies, they hate each other. Saddam's secular Baathist party and Bin Laden's extreme islamic thought just don't mix.
 
2003-01-19 03:58:07 PM
"The Sacramento Farking Bee? What the hell is that? I'm talking about the National Newspapers, the ones people actually read"

So, the Bee isn't read by anybody. Not even the 285,000 people in the Sacramento Area. Not even enough to get it's own Fark logo for the submit page?

"I read about 15 leftist online newspapers every day and there is no disagreement on that subject."

Are you sure that they're not all just following the same line of thought?

15 leftist papers represent millions of leftists, all of them, rrrrrright.

"I can say that I have never seen an article published on any of those websites that argued the war wasn't for oil"

and of course, if any articles were to be written, the leftists you speak of would be tolerant enough to publish them, right?

"I think it should be 'mentioned', but should not be brought up very often, maybe as often as the 'war for oil' viewpoint is now."

It's nice to know that the "massive Jewish conspiracy" POV won't overtake the "War for oil" idea.

"While the "controlled by Mossad, Sharon and the Israelis" thing is clearly only believed by a very small percent of the population, and as such shouldn't be given as much air time."

and how big is the percent of the believers in "War for Oil" (remember the US population is like 280 or 380 million)

RF
 
2003-01-19 03:58:17 PM
Hikikomorii: Lousy Smarch weather...
 
2003-01-19 03:59:03 PM
Saddam doesn't have a religous leaning. And the hijackers trained in a Boeing hull just south of Baghdad.
 
2003-01-19 04:00:46 PM
Operation Desert Storm lasted 80 hours in actual comnbat time. I heard that statistic on the History Channel. Maybe we can finish this job in less time.

Conrad is right, anti war demonstraotrs have no clear message excpet that "war is bad, peace is good". During Vietnam, protests such as these would have been much more effective since a "forced" draft was implemented. Today, the men and women that fight for our nation are doing so based on their own choices and volition, not conscription.

I belive in a bigger picture. Once a democratic regime is encated in Iraq, the war on terrorism will also be mutually helped. As in Afghanistan, the downtrodden will have freedom of choice and antisemitism will not have as strong as a pull. The Iraqi people do not have substantial media since thier media is of course run by, you guessed it, the Iraqi government. Their media has alos told them that they had won Desert Storm and the the recent United States vendetta for regime change is to, "enslave Iraq." Terrrorists wil no longer have an anti American hotbed if the Iraq's are freed of thier own repression.
 
2003-01-19 04:01:32 PM
Good point brooks, he's quite the sloppy drunk.
 
2003-01-19 04:03:06 PM
If Fark is in any way indicative of the level of critical thinking skills of today's college educated young people, I'm saddened. I'm angered a generation has been cheated out of a full life. Instead, what we have are short-sighted, cowardly posers more concerned with how they look in their new jeans than ensuring a safe, stable world for their children and grandchildren. Selfish, spineless, simpleminded saps who gather together, chanting, "War is bad, war is evil". What a bunch of dunderheads, incapable of critical, foreward thought.
"Oil, oil, it's all about the oil". In a few days that will sound incredibly feeble and prosaic. Fools, all you so-called peaceniks.
 
2003-01-19 04:04:22 PM
"But, why have a war in Iraq, when we REALLY need the money here. I know that in my state of Massachusetts, we're in deep economic shiat. Our farkin Governor is laying off teachers, when we don't have enough of them."

Cyprocosmo-
I'm with you. I know it's trite, but there are song lyrics that should make you feel better:


Don't you know that we got smart bombs
It's a good thing
That our bombs are smart

Glad we got smart bombs
It's a good thing
our bombs are clever
It's a shame
That our kids are dumb, now
But our bombs are smart
What a lucky thing now.

They only kill bad people.

Hope that helps.

10 points to anyone who identifies the song.
 
2003-01-19 04:05:24 PM
Worthlessjuan

"How is this a war for oil?"

Well, several alternate scenarios exist. It could be about WMDs and the Iraqi threat to America. It could be about liberating the Iraqi people, especially the Shiite Muslims and the Kurds. The third possibility is to get Bush re-elected, as his poll numbers are rapidly falling. The last possiblity is that this war is to gain greater control of the middle-east and it's huge oil reserves.

The first two possibilites are laughable. No evidence exists to show that Iraq has any WMDs or is developeing any. Even with the CIA feeding them information, all the inspectors have found is a few boxes from 1988 covered in dust and bird droppings that the Iraqis forgot about.

The second is not only laughable, but outright deceiving. The US does not give two shiats about the Iraqi people. A month after Iraq gassed the Kurds, the US was still shipping chemical weapons components to Iraq. The US did absolutely nothing when Turkey was (and still is) violently repressing their own Kurd population. No wait, they did do something, they increased weapons shipments to the Turkey government. And of course, there's the end of the gulf war, when the Shiite's rose up in rebellion against Saddam. The US not only did not aid them, as they had promised to, but they allowed Saddam to violate the no-fly zone to bomb them. Then we consider what effect a war would have on the Iraqi population (that the US cares so much about). A UN study reveals 500 000 civillians will be wounded, 2 million displaced from their homes, and a report from a Nobel-Peace Prize winning organization estimates their deaths at 50 000.

This leaves the last two possibilities. Most likely it is a mix of the two.
 
2003-01-19 04:08:02 PM
KnickKnolte

It saddens me to see people fool themselves into thinking they are taking the high ground when they are convinced that anyone who doesn't agree with them is automatically a "selfish, spineless, simpleminded sap." Horray for critical thinking and trying to see things from both angles, though. Good job.
 
2003-01-19 04:08:59 PM
Horray for <\b> tags too. Whoops. Point still stands.
 
2003-01-19 04:10:42 PM
ThreeLittleSmurfs - of course Bush does what he does to get re-elected. I do what I do at work so I don't get fired.

The fact is, no leader in history has lost an election because they were seen as overly agressive. Lots have lost because they were seen as placaters (Chamberlain, Carter, etc)
 
2003-01-19 04:11:18 PM
Maybe we could copy/paste the thread from yesterday about protesters and prevent a little carpal tunnel?
 
2003-01-19 04:12:48 PM
RobbieFal

I'm sorry if I can't convince you that the vast majority of the left believes it is a war for oil, but there's no hard evidence I can offer you. And I can't even dredge up poll numbers to guess at home many people that might be, as far as I know, no such poll exists.

And sorry, the Sacramento Bee does not qualify as an International or even National Paper. Could it be perhaps that Drew lives in or near Sacramento? Or one of the other old members. I mean, Fark has a "Florida" tag, that doesn't make Florida any more important that the other 51 states.
 
2003-01-19 04:14:14 PM
"Could it be perhaps that Drew lives in or near Sacramento?"

Drew lives in Kentucky
 
2003-01-19 04:14:48 PM
LudovicoTechnique

I'm not saying doing things to get re-elected is a bad thing per-se. But when you're planning on killing 50 000 civillians to do it, that's when things get a tad disreputable, no?
 
2003-01-19 04:15:18 PM
ThreeLittleSmurfs -- other 51 states? Eh?
 
2003-01-19 04:15:37 PM
LudovicoTechnique-

But he's doing nothing to get re-elected except going to war. Continuing your analogy, it would be like you getting promoted for doing nothing more than killing off all your competitors instead of doing actual work. That's what I have a problem with.
 
2003-01-19 04:16:35 PM
"There has never been a just one, never an honorable one -- on the part of the instigator of the war. I can see a million years ahead, and this rule will never change in so many as half a dozen instances. The loud little handful -- as usual -- will shout for the war. The pulpit will -- warily and cautiously -- object -- at first; the great, big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, "It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is no necessity for it." Then the handful will shout louder. A few fair men on the other side will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity. Before long you will see this curious thing: the speakers stoned from the platform, and free speech strangled by hordes of furious men who in their secret hearts are still at one with those stoned speakers -- as earlier -- but do not dare to say so. And now the whole nation -- pulpit and all -- will take up the war-cry, and shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who ventures to open his mouth; and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception."


-- Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger c.1910
 
2003-01-19 04:18:31 PM
Gas is $1.48 here. That sucks.
 
2003-01-19 04:18:53 PM
Paranoidandroid

The other 49 states. Sorry, I'm an idiot.
 
2003-01-19 04:19:45 PM
I always think "50 states plus the two freak states, Alaska and Hawaii". Damn the Simpsons.
 
2003-01-19 04:21:26 PM
I don't give a shiat about the peaceniks. I don't give a shiat about the White House War Mongers (Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Rove, Rumsfeld). I don't even give a shiat about Iraq.

Nuke Earth.

/proud American
 
2003-01-19 04:21:27 PM
Sure, the Clinton adminstration cared about marches. people could actually do something. Not so under the Shrub.
 
2003-01-19 04:23:03 PM
only dumb biatches march...
 
2003-01-19 04:24:15 PM
Paranoidandroid:

He's probably counting canada and iraq. :)
 
Displayed 50 of 284 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report