Moving On | Choose your lifeMoving On | Choose your life
Safe Passage Foundation - Support to youth raised in high demand organizations


Saturday, January 31, 2009    

Home | New Content | Statistics | Games | FAQs

Getting On : Catching up

Anti-war Protests on February 15

from Jules - Wednesday, February 12, 2003
accessed 1466 times

On February 15 (this upcoming Saturday), people all over the world will be joining in a mass rally to protest the looming war against Iraq.

I want to attend the local protests here, which at least will make me feel I am participating in some way to speak out against Bushís policies. To be honest the world post-September 11 scares me a great deal and the fact that a lot of people donít seem to care scares me even more.

I wanted to ask what people here think about the protest and the war in general? Do the Americans here support Bush? Though I canít claim to understand all the issues, I just donít understand why an invasion of Iraq is necessary? Everyone agrees that Saddam is nuts and dangerous, but I donít understand what has changed in the last few years to justify a war against him.

I just saw that the documentary Bowling for Columbine was nominated for an Oscar, and although I admit I havenít seen it yet, I was looking at their web site (hmm, why is that the story of my life?) and came across this outline of events regarding US foreign policy towards terrorism.

http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/wonderful/index.php

I TARGET="_new">http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/wonderful/index.php">http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/wonderful/index.php

I wasnít aware of some of these events, and to see it outlined like this I have to wonder just where the logic lies in some of these policies.

The book I am currently reading is called Fences and Windows, by Naomi Klein. Itís a collection of essays on globalization and US corporate and foreign policy. Itís a very interesting read, and explains a lot about the hostility towards the US in many developing countries.

If you are interested in more information on the anti-war protests, you can find international events listed on this site.

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/">http://www.unitedforpeace.org/>

Reader's comments on this article

Add a new comment on this article

from pharmaboy's doing his part for peace
Friday, February 14, 2003 - 01:21

(Agree/Disagree?)
Jules, this might interest you...

www.masturbateforpeace.com

Newest Masturbate for Peace Bumper Stickers

War's for squares, play downstairs.
Stop war now, milk your cow.
When you jerk it tonight, keep peace in sight.
Wank, Spank, Stop that Tank!
Don't enlist, use your fist!
Down with war, stroke some more.
War is cruel - flog your mule.
Don't attack - play with Jack.
Get peace fever, rub your beaver!
My pussy doesn't meow, it roars -- for peace.
Give your Bush the finger!
For peace to work, you need to jerk.
War is heinous, thumb your anus.
You Can't Beat Off with Nuclear Arms.
War is Mean, Flick Your Bean.
War is wrong, whack your schlong.
My 'friendly fire' harms no-one.
Palms Not Bombs.
I'm going blind for Mankind.
War is silly, whack your willy.
Think globally, whack locally.
Don't smitten, kill a kitten.
(reply to this comment)
From No Bush
Friday, February 14, 2003, 13:45

(
Agree/Disagree?)
Truly awesome. (reply to this comment
from Monk
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 19:04

(Agree/Disagree?)
The Middle East solution:

Arm all the lesbians & feminists in the Western world to the teeth & have them prove once and for all reverse domination of the sexes. - Let them take control of Saddams nuclear arsenal(throw in Saudi Arabia as extra incentive), elect a lesbian leader & become a female-dominated super-power rivalling the US. - And they lived happily ever after!



(reply to this comment)
From Middle East Alternative
Wednesday, February 12, 2003, 23:24

(
Agree/Disagree?)
I'd just send you in Monk, you have about enough rage to get the job done.(reply to this comment
From Monk
Thursday, February 13, 2003, 00:03

(
Agree/Disagree?)
Ha! - You're probably right, as well as for getting it done properly! But overall I can think of more reasons for sending the lesbians & feminists. - Sort of a "peace in both worlds" outcome.

Just as well you've written under an alias cause if I did go you know where I'd be posting the N-bomb.(reply to this comment
from Athena
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 18:04

(Agree/Disagree?)
Do you really think Sadam will be the one to be taken out? It'll be all the civilians so its really pointless. As much as I dislike Sadam, Bush and Blair have no real proof that Iraq can do any harm at the moment,that is why most countries (Germany, France, Russia etc..) are completly against any such action.
Bush is understandably frustrated about not having gotten revenge concerning Sept 11th but he's going to have to come up with some better reasons/proof of why this war is so necessary because he's not convincing the media or public.
Anyway, if I was convinced they could somehow take away Sadam's position and thats it...I would be all for it, but frankly I think anyone that thinks thats possible is naive and no I dont think any more innocents should be killed over this!
And thats all I had to say about that....(in a Forest Gump voice).
(reply to this comment)
From MGP
Thursday, February 13, 2003, 15:41

(
Agree/Disagree?)
10 of them for every 1 of us. Whats that, 30-40,000? Sounds fair to me.(reply to this comment
from Anthony
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 17:55

(Agree/Disagree?)
One word: Assasination. Let's keep our soldier girls and boys at home. I don't see the need for an expensive ( in lives and money)invasion.
(reply to this comment)
From Andygirl
Sunday, February 23, 2003, 21:58

(Agree/Disagree?)
I don't know if it's juvenile of me but I think that they should at least try to assasinate the moron before they start a full scale war!
(reply to this comment
From XenophobicBrit
Wednesday, March 05, 2003, 09:10

(
Agree/Disagree?)

Firstly, they can not Assassinate him, they have tried and failed many times

Secondly, If they did another Despot would take his place quicker than the time it takes for his corpse to hit the floor

Lastly, We (US/UK) are the worlds policemen, we police countries and sometimes kill civilians by accident, we can not be seen to be a bunch of murderers, as if we don't have enough global hatred as it is.(reply to this comment
from EyesWideShut
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 13:09

(Agree/Disagree?)
If I had any questions before, the State of the Union Address clarified things for me.

I agree with Bush that the only real defense against random and unpredictable terrorism is an offence. He's damned if he do and damned if he don't. If he waits around for terrorism to strike first--and they will strike--he get's blamed for not seeing it coming. If he head's them off at the pass, he's critisized for taking unnecessary action. How can one ever be too protective of those they love. As much as I hate guns, if it were my family that was threatened, I'd shoot the bastard in the head without a second thought.

IMHO, regardless of Saddam's ability to wreak havoc on the US, he's a dirty dude and his people are suffering for it. It's common knowledge to the Iraquies that Saddam shot and killed his own two sons point blank. I say get the bastard outta there so that the Iraquis can begin receiving aid and rebuilding their once proud country.

They don't deserve the prolonged pain they've had. I was there. I met them. They're smart, intellectual, big-hearted, and valuable people that have endured injustice for too long.

Politically right or wrong, it's a good thing that the US military will be doing for the majority of the country. Some innocent people may die on either side, but when it's over Iraqui women won't have to endure cesarians without anesthetic and children's hospitals will be more like hospitals and less like cardboard shelters under a bridge.

After weighing the issues as I understand them, I think that this war will be fought for more good reasons than any before it.

Modern man needs oil--and lots of it. It's a reality we can not currently escape. If the powers that be feel that it's a good enough motive for war, so be it. But there are other valid issues here: Preventing a disaster that could kill thousands here or in other USA-friendly countries is just one of them.

Having been to Iraq, I can't imagine that they'd have the resources to put up too much of a fight, which means that our boys and girls should be in and out. Granted, there's nothing so scary as a desperate man's last stand, but compared to previous rightly-protested wars, this ought to be a short story with a happy ending for everyone but Saddam Housein.

Basically, it's a situation where Bush simply cannot allow another disaster on his watch. It's not cold hearted to say, "put them outta their mystery", because that's what I really think this war will eventually accomplish.

I'm curious as well to know how many of our members are for or against the looming war, and why.


(reply to this comment)
From No Bush
Thursday, February 13, 2003, 13:24

(
Agree/Disagree?)
And yes I have shaved it off in further support of that statement.
Lets see, reasons I'm against....
It's seems that dear old Bush is using 9/11 as a means to gain a tight grip hold on this country.
Patriot Act I
Patriot Act II
"If you're not with us then you're with the terrorists!"???? No! That Bush's bully tactics. No one can hold a differing opinion about what to do in this crisis with out being labeled a terrorist. Donald Rumsfeld put Germany in the same category as Lybia and Cuba - who are part of his axis of evil - for not siding with his war plans. How dare anyone else think differently. Does this give you any flashbacks of some place that we all just left??? Besides under the Patriot Act they can accuse you of being a terroist, hold you indefinately, not actually charge you with anything, give you no access to a lawyer...and it will only get worse if the Patriot Act II ever gets put into place. No more rights, does that remind you of anything?
Corporate control over the media...the rest of the world mocks us at how little we know about them...maybe that's because - unless you know where to look - the real events going on in this country and all over the world are filtered. The everyday person is not being given accurate accounts of what is going on.
Try freespeech radio or indymedia.org
Meaningless wars and bullying tactics that the US and it's allies use is what creates the need for terrorists in the first place. If we stopped using terrorist type actions then maybe we could change this whole thing around. How can I be for trying to improve the rights of another nation when the people trying to liberate them are the same ones trying to take our rights away from us. And that is why I will be protesting the war this weekend.
What about NYC denying it's citizens the right to march in protest of the war? And Mr. Tutu saying that it reminded him of his days in S. Africa in it's appartied days, when they were not allowed to protest their conditions. Am I the only one concerned about this? Evidently not as the number of protesters is constantly rising.
War always hurts the children, plain and simple. It will not be "a few civilian casualties" although they will try and report that, it will be so much worse. And then you can count on those suicide bombing that you are so afraid of. If we do go to war, that is probably the only thing that you can count on.
Besides doesn't the whole Blair/plagerism, essay more than 10 years old factor, make you wonder about the US and British intelligence?
(reply to this comment
From No Bush
Thursday, February 13, 2003, 16:28

(
Agree/Disagree?)
Sorry, that was Judge Jones who denied NYC to march against the war, not the mayor.
(reply to this comment
From wanderndan
Wednesday, February 12, 2003, 20:04

(
Agree/Disagree?)
I'm not for or against but if it happens I'll most likely end up there. This thing has the feel of a higgins/mc clain feud. "you dis'd my daddy" bush is so heel bent to fight that we gotta do it or look weak. six months ago it could have been avoided but now too much face would be lost.

I just wish we'd be honest about it and say the truth , that Iraq is a threat to american control of the mideast. they are not a threat to the US but if we let them get off it sets a bad president for all the other countries around the world that hate us for being bullys.

for too long has the states pushed the third world around. now we have so many enemies that if we start acting soft they will band together and make sept 11 look like the warning shot that it was. Mr nice guy won't work anymore. too many sons have lost their fathers and grown up on "death to america"

I don't see any other way. we are going to go to Iraq and then the next one and the next and on and on untill in about ten or twenty years we get our ass kicked and a new super power comes on the scene. China, Europe, simbabwai it doesn't matter.

so enjoy while you can. a generation or two the combined population of india and China will be 3 billion and they will come.(reply to this comment
From wanderndan
Wednesday, February 12, 2003, 20:06

(
Agree/Disagree?)
oh for a spell check on this site. president? and so many others please forgive(reply to this comment
from Poli Sigh
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 13:07

(Agree/Disagree?)
What scares me most about Bush is his effort to erode the separation of church and state. A close second is how he personalizes stuff, e.g., "I'm sick and tired of (insert dignitary's name/action here)," like a spoiled parent whose mood swings are what determine US foreign policy and the fate of nations which he seems to think he can treat like "kiddies."
(reply to this comment)
from MGP
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 12:16

(Agree/Disagree?)
I agree, we should be bombing China instead.
(reply to this comment)
From Jules
Wednesday, February 12, 2003, 12:23

(Agree/Disagree?)
But why bomb a country that can bomb you back?(reply to this comment
From wanderndan
Wednesday, February 12, 2003, 19:51

(
Agree/Disagree?)
we only bomb contries that can't bomb us back. and as long as korea has a nuke and is ready to use it they are safe. It is just sadam's luck that he doesn't have a nuke or anything that can hurt the US. if he did we wouldn't be there.(reply to this comment
From MGP
Wednesday, February 12, 2003, 14:42

(
Agree/Disagree?)
Strike the yellow perils before they have a chance to respond. Combined Nuclear & Chemical & Biological strikes from NATO to wipe em out!(reply to this comment

My Stuff


log in here
to post or update your articles

Community

66 user/s currently online

Web Site User Directory
5047 registered users

log out of chatroom

Happy Birthday to demerit   Benz   tammysoprano  

Weekly Poll

What should the weekly poll be changed to?

 The every so often poll.

 The semi-anual poll.

 Whenever the editor gets to it poll.

 The poll you never heard about because you have never looked at previous polls which really means the polls that never got posted.

 The out dated poll.

 The who really gives a crap poll.

View Poll Results

Poll Submitted by cheeks,
September 16, 2008

See Previous Polls

Online Stores


I think, therefore I left


Check out the Official
Moving On Merchandise
. Send in your product ideas


Free Poster: 100 Reasons Why It's Great to be a Systemite

copyright © 2001 - 2009 MovingOn.org

[terms of use] [privacy policy] [disclaimer] [The Family / Children of God] [contact: admin@movingon.org] [free speech on the Internet blue ribbon] [About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]