Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Anti War Protests
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="canon" data-source="post: 165136" data-attributes="member: 8423"><p>The biggest problem I have with these generic "end the war" campaigns is the absence of any realistic solution other than merely bringing the troops home. I do however, support their right to voice their opinion... no matter how childishly simplistic the solutions come across. </p><p></p><p>Iraq has been conquered, that bell can't be unrung. We wont get into all the Iraqi violations of the UN resolutions that justified our actions, because the UN already did that for us: </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>or, from the more recent Resolution 1441: </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>With or without weapons of mass destruction, the UN (read "member states" from above UN 668) granted authority to enforce UN resolutions. Some disagree tho, and claim it means something else. Some people say Bush is a war criminal. But in the post 9/11 atmosphere, there were very few in opposition (politically speaking, in America). That momentum propelled us into a pre-emptive position on deflecting terrorism, which ultimately led us into Iraq. Right or wrong, we're there. Again, for this discussion, deciding if Bush is a criminal doesn't end the war so we'll move on. </p><p></p><p>The bottom line remains that <strong>it violates international law to conquer a country and leave it helpless for the power vaccuum that would follow</strong>. <em>We can't just leave</em>. So "End the War!" becomes the latest Bush bashing slogan with little to no thought behind it. No duh.. end the war. Brilliant. Now tackle the slightly more difficult question: How? </p><p></p><p>Until one of these bright individuals with more freetime than sense comes up with something a bit more thought out than "bush sux", I'll have to support the current efforts as outlined by international law. It dictates the occupying force is tasked with providing security while they help the conquered country establish their own means for defense. If the idiot terrorists really wanted America out of Iraq they would stop the bombings long enough for the world to see we aren't needed there.</p><p></p><p>Diversity rules, and we all have different opinions. The protests are amusing, but I'm glad those in charge know better than to just "end the war". When I see pictures of the demonstrations, I can't help but notice they all look like they really believe that holding a sign up on a sunny afternoon is going to convince the US to violate international law and leave the Iraqi citizens open for a future of oppression worse than when Saddam ruled. </p><p>Hypocrites.</p><p></p><p>Freedom of speech isn't only for political dissenters. What surprises me the most is that nobody credits Bush for not bowing to political popularity.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="canon, post: 165136, member: 8423"] The biggest problem I have with these generic "end the war" campaigns is the absence of any realistic solution other than merely bringing the troops home. I do however, support their right to voice their opinion... no matter how childishly simplistic the solutions come across. Iraq has been conquered, that bell can't be unrung. We wont get into all the Iraqi violations of the UN resolutions that justified our actions, because the UN already did that for us: or, from the more recent Resolution 1441: With or without weapons of mass destruction, the UN (read "member states" from above UN 668) granted authority to enforce UN resolutions. Some disagree tho, and claim it means something else. Some people say Bush is a war criminal. But in the post 9/11 atmosphere, there were very few in opposition (politically speaking, in America). That momentum propelled us into a pre-emptive position on deflecting terrorism, which ultimately led us into Iraq. Right or wrong, we're there. Again, for this discussion, deciding if Bush is a criminal doesn't end the war so we'll move on. The bottom line remains that [B]it violates international law to conquer a country and leave it helpless for the power vaccuum that would follow[/B]. [I]We can't just leave[/I]. So "End the War!" becomes the latest Bush bashing slogan with little to no thought behind it. No duh.. end the war. Brilliant. Now tackle the slightly more difficult question: How? Until one of these bright individuals with more freetime than sense comes up with something a bit more thought out than "bush sux", I'll have to support the current efforts as outlined by international law. It dictates the occupying force is tasked with providing security while they help the conquered country establish their own means for defense. If the idiot terrorists really wanted America out of Iraq they would stop the bombings long enough for the world to see we aren't needed there. Diversity rules, and we all have different opinions. The protests are amusing, but I'm glad those in charge know better than to just "end the war". When I see pictures of the demonstrations, I can't help but notice they all look like they really believe that holding a sign up on a sunny afternoon is going to convince the US to violate international law and leave the Iraqi citizens open for a future of oppression worse than when Saddam ruled. Hypocrites. Freedom of speech isn't only for political dissenters. What surprises me the most is that nobody credits Bush for not bowing to political popularity. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Anti War Protests
Top