Peace Protests

[KoS PY.nq.ict]

3rd? To my knowledge I've only posted it twice. Besides...half of the posts in this thread only reiterate what the previous ones says.

[tasty]

Destructo, we start our protests at noon because that's when maximum visibility time is in the University community. Your little fantasy about protesters all being lazy hippies that never work couldn't be more wrong, most of the protesters here are either students or employees of the university. Very few protesters would ever consider using violence against anyone, including the po-po (most are pacifists). Contrary to what you may believe, many of the loved ones of 9/11 victims have spoken out strongly against the war. In fact, 75% of New Yorkers oppose the war. Almost every statement you make is a massive generalization about all protesters based on the actions of a few.

Your post doesn't display any common sense, only a complete lack of thought.

[Cossack]

Wow Dest, you sure arent that smart. Do you seriously think we are all pot smoking hippies? I have never touched marajuana in my life, I work hard to make ends meet, my parents are protesters and they immigrated here from Russia with barely any money and  now they are highly renown middle class artists whose art is owned by many renown people. Even George W. Bush owns a mosquite table we built for them. You are a steryotyping menace.

[Destructo]

Cossack, spare me the story, my parents are immagrints also and came to this country with 45 bucks. I have no family in this country; My father now has a successful constrution company, and have chapters all over Canada and the US. so stfu.

What you people don't understand, is that assholes like the one in the middle east cause people to run and fear for their lives. If you have a virus in your system, do you not kill it?

In fact, 75% of New Yorkers oppose the war. Almost every statement you make is a massive generalization about all protesters based on the actions of a few.

I'm sorry to say, the people for war outweigh the ppl against it 3 to 1, and that's fact.

Hate for the westren world, freedom peroid, does not discriminate. Protest all you want, a nuke does not ask itself, these ppl are against the presidents actions, and war, so I won't kill them, i'll just fly by, on the conterary, he'll target you first b/c you will sit back and "debate". We tried to debate, and it failed b/c the bitch does not want to co-operate with the rest of the world.

Don't forget, that war got you your freedom. And if war is the way it has to be protected, then so be it. If the Us has the balls to rid the world of an anti-christ, who only shows his strenght against the weak, then not only am I for it, sign me up.

How can you guys talk about how you want to rid the world of terrisiom, and then protest against taking out one of the top terrorists. I guess it looks so wrong when your sitting at home on your comfy couch doing whatever the fuck you want, because well, you have the right to. What is so wrong with giving other ppl that same chance?

It's funny how you guys play a game based on death, and scream "DIE" to  other people in the game, yet when real actions must go that same route you protest it.

You say i'm not that smart, well I say that you must be blind as a bat if you don't see the dangers ahead. Your very way of life has been attacked, the way of life that thousands b4 you died for, and now again that way of life as become under seige and you want to protest it's protection?

Keep protesting peace, but know there are thousands who volunteered to protect you and your family from harm.

Like I said before. If that was your mother or father who died. You would be singing a different tune.

[Cossack]

I wont spare you the immigration story because you brutaly steryoptyped all protesters as pot smoking hippies. Your pompous asshole assumption sickens me. You say Iraq has gone agaisnt the world, the US has too. You know the UN, France, Germany, China, and Russia all major world powers have come out against the war along with countless other countries. The US is going against the world. Bush did not try diplomacy, it was not a failure of diplomacy, it was no diplomacy. Over and over we asked him to use diplomacy, he did not. He said we will not be diplomats with Sadaam Hussein. He said this over and over for months and months! We also caused many problems for weapons inspectors.
 
Our very way of life has been attacked BY Al Queda! Sadaam has never attacked us, we attacked him, twice now! The links between him and Usama are speculation still. Not to mention this will severley destabalize the region. When is it our problem what Sadaam does to his own people? Go invade Myanmaar for mistreating their citizens, invade China for mistreating Uighers, invade Indonesia for mistreating the Timorese, invade Russia for mistreating the Chechens, invade Rwanda for attacking Congo. To go to war with someone because they are mistreating their own people is ludacris.
Many 9-11 victims are against this war, there is a group called Not in my name. Anyways how would you know what they felt? Are you a 9-11 victim? Go on your little crusade Destructo, go to the Desert and fight the Iraqis. You said, "sign me up." Why arent you in Basra now?

[Mr.Wuggles]

 :)The protesters just need to block their own work places instead of making other ppl pissed off.

I would loooooove to be one of those riot policemen now. Cuz, I would be saying in my head "C,mon c,mon riot! Riot so I can leagally beat the crap outta them without a lawsuit..."

[Destructo]

You want a smart comment, i'll give you one to think about.

The UN. Ah, the powerful body, the only body which can provide a legitimate call for action. But ask yourself this, how can the UN provide legitimate action when it refuses to credibly enforce its very own resolutions? This is a body which has passed a long line of resolutions against Iraq, 18 in fact, including the recent resolution, which incidentally requires full and immediate cooperation with UN Weapons inspectors. In the months since the resolution has been passed there have been no real signs of Saddam Hussein fulfilling these terms and disarming.

Only with substantial pressure of war has he begun the smallest of disarmament activities - the destruction of a few al Samoud missiles. But these weapons are neither the chemical or biological weapons which he has shown no sign of destroying, or providing proof thereof.

If you look back in the UN records, we've been trying to use diplomacy for the last 12 years. How much more time can we give them? One year? Five years? Ten years? Or should we wait until smoke fills the sky in another city?

Our very way of life has been attacked BY Al Queda! Sadaam has never attacked us, we attacked him, twice now! The links between him and Usama are speculation still.

Worldwide Intel indicates that Saddam's regime has aided and abeded terrorist organizations that have targeted and attacked the US and US embassys. Not to mention intel has shown that this regime seeks nuclear capabilities and already possesses chemical weapons. If you can honestly sit back and not feel threatened by that, than you deserve to be commended on your tolerance. What will make your tolerance subside? 2 planes into the WTC was enough for me. Even if Saddam's regime didn't give a penny to the cause, I'd just as soon not give him the chance to help fund the next one.

Just for argument sake, let's say there is no direct link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. But the idea that an active cooperation is likely to form is reasonable. Whatever differences there have, they both come from the same region, share language, and formal religion, and therefore there is ease of contact; more important they share a common enemy, the USA/freedom. I for one would feel a hell of alot better if that tie/contact did not form.

Saddam Hussein is a man who has led Iraq to war in Iran and Kuwait, he is a man who has secretly produced chemical and biological weapons, he is a man who fired weapons at Israel in hope of provocation. Saddam Hussein is not a dictator who wishes to sit happily in his Palaces and watch the world go by. He is a dictator who has always been the aggressor, and the response of Britain, the US and its allies is not one of aggression but one of defence.

To go to war with someone because they are mistreating their own people is ludacris.

What is so wrong with freeing the Iraq people from a brutal dictator? That is just a bonus that comes along with it. Not only will taking Sadam out of power eliminate some and put the Us in a good position to hunker down on Al Queada, it gives te Iraqi people what most of them want anyway, and that is freedom. Just like the US is protecting your freedom, and eliminating the enemy threat, along with there allies.

All and all, I am sick of writing about this. Let's just leave it at this;
We agree to disagree because god knows we can go back ond forth for hours.

I'm going to bed.

[Cossack]

I guess you are right on that. Neither of us will convince eachother of the others viewpoint, especially on an idiodic gaming forum. The reason I am citing the UN and beleive me I think it is very weak in enforcing its resolutions. Yet we are going to war because Iraq broke a UN resolution and International Law, we are breaking International Law to go after him.
This brings me to a whole new point. Imagine if the UN did enforce its resolutions by force. The UN would be in numoerous Wars. They would be in China, Rwanda, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Myanmaar (Burma), countless African countries, Lybia, the list goes on. Nations would not be nations, they would not be sovreign entities. Beleive me I am for Civil Liberties, but not at the price of an independent nation's sovreignity and right to govern itself. Would you like the Chilean government influencing domestic policy in the USA? That is my rant of why I think the UN enforcing its resolutions with force is a bad idea.

[Destructo]

and it's "not in our names" not what you said.

[Cossack]

Oops got singular and plural mixed up.

[jn.loudnotes]

Also, everything you've mentioned, dest, about why Saddam Hussein is bad is old news.  Saddam hasn't attacked Iran, Kuwait, or Israel in years.  There is limited evidence that he has secretly manufactured any weapons for a while as well, or aided terrorist organizations.  While the UN hasn't shown force, over the last 12 years they and the US have kept Iraq very well in check.  Even without "full compliance," which could render Iraq susceptible to attack from its neighbors, Iraq has been well regulated.  

People ask why after 12 years, Saddam should be allowed "another chance".  I ask, why are we attacking now after 12 years of limited or no hostility?

Ultimately, to keep more in topic of this thread - whether you believe we should be at war or not, anyone has the right to voice their opinion.  Immigrant, 9/11 survivor, or not.  Yes, violent protests are uncalled for, but you can't fault everyone with a strong opinion for demonstrating it peacefully.  We aren't all pot-smoking hippies, either.

[tasty]

Not that there's anything wrong with pot.