Anti-War = Pro-Terror

[Bodacious]

I have believed this for a while and this essay puts my opinion into perspective.

http://www.citizen-journal.net/gmhome/archives/00000140.htm

Hatred at an Anti-War Protest
By Kieran Michael Lalor
Posted On March 31, 2005 [Post Comment]

As a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom, I visited an anti-war protest a few weeks ago in New York City's suburbs, in White Plains, and was shocked and disappointed at the hostility and venom with which I was treated by people who claim to support the troops.

Anti-War Hypocrisy

When I first arrived, I approached the person I thought was the ringleader. I was ready to show him pictures I took of Iraqis waving American flags and expressing their gratitude toward the U.S. I was wearing a Marine Corps shirt, and perhaps he thought I was a Vet seeking to decry the war and betray my fellow servicemen. Before I could say a word he handed me the microphone, in a scene reminiscent of "Forrest Gump". Seizing this unexpected opportunity to have my views heard, I began to tell how I supported the war and how our efforts had liberated millions of people and planted the seeds of democracy in the region.

Less than a minute elapsed when these so-called "progressives" who claim to be devout supporters of “free speech” unplugged the microphone.

After my impromptu speech was censored and cut short, I mingled with the demonstrators for a few minutes. A woman marched up to me, looked me in the eye and coldly asked, “How many children did you kill?” I showed them the photos I took of my buddies and me with the smiling Iraqi children we befriended and another woman sniped, “You probably gave them candy just like the Nazis did before they killed Jewish children.”

When I showed a woman a picture of my friend in the scorching desert heat sharing his limited water supply with an Iraqi girl she dismissed him as “a killer.” A man walked up to me and with disdain in his voice, called me a “sucker” for volunteering to serve my country.
These slurs from people claiming to want peace were the most vicious and hurtful things anyone has ever said to me. The protesters had no interest in hearing my first-hand perspective of the war and clung to the notion that war is “never necessary.” When I pointed out that the American Civil War unshackled millions of slaves and that WWII ended the holocaust, the demonstrators evaded my point entirely instead choosing to bash the United States as unjust and evil. They spouted empty clichés about President Bush’s “war for oil” and ignored me when I asked if they thought that January’s successful election was a positive step toward peace and stability.

The arrogance of the protesters was such that they sought to educate me, still an active member of the Marine Corps Reserve, about the military and about a war that I participated in. Not surprisingly, though, the leaflet they handed me was riddled with inaccuracies.

Misguided Objectives

The expressed goal of the demonstration and the thrust of the flyer being distributed were to halt military recruitment. This pathetically shortsighted goal ignores the fact that in addition to prosecuting the War on Terror, the U.S military is the conduit through which humanitarian aid is distributed to the most impoverished peoples of the world.

One prominent recent example: When the tsunami devastated Asia in December it was surely not the smug, self-righteous, protesters who risked their lives to bring relief and aid to the survivors. It was U.S. marines, sailors, soldiers, and airmen who fed, clothed and gave medical care to the victims.

Do the protesters realize that if their goal of reducing enlistments succeeds America’s ability to provide humanitarian aid suffers? Do they care?

Aid and Comfort to the Enemy

Amazingly, Saturday’s protesters call for peace but they have the exact same goal as Abu Zarqawi and Osama bin Ladin: The removal of U.S. troops from Iraq. The protesters certainly have the right to express their views, a right countless servicemen have died to protect. The truth, which they surely know, is that their actions benefit those who routinely behead civilians and make the job of our troops more difficult and more deadly.
The terrorist enemy cannot defeat the U.S. military tactically. Their only hope is for the anti-war crowds to swell to the point where politicians are pressured into effecting a premature troop withdrawal. The unquestionable result? The terrorist thugs are emboldened to slaughter civilians and brave public officials in the young democracy unimpeded by the American military.

With the exception of a few well meaning but naïve protesters, what I found at the demonstration were mostly zealous America-haters who blamed the U.S. for 9/11, defended Saddam Hussein as “not that bad” and harbored open hatred of me, simply because I’d done my duty for expressing an opinion counter to theirs.

I have bolded the parts that support the subject for easy reading.

 

[The Monkey]

So just because they don't want hundreds of thousands of people killed means that they're supporting the terrorists. Okay...

 

[Ennui]

It reads like it was written by one of the Protest Warrior guys.

I only skimmed it, but it looks fairly typical to me. Anti-war protestors and terrorists are NOTHING alike; if they have a few of the same general objectives, it's for completely different reasons.

See, now I'm getting pissed. Who the **** does this asshole think he is, comparing PEACEFUL PROTESTORS to ****ing TERRORISTS?!

/me stomps off

edit: whew. ph33r my short fuse temper.

 

[jondy]

It all depends upon the stance you take as to the US' foreign policy; as the issue is so polarised you can't really argue with this source succesfully because it makes the assumption at the start that you support the 'outsourcing democracy' policy. If you don't, his argument falls to pieces.

So it's an issue that has an insurmountable wall between those pro and against, and as such is pointless to debate.

 

[Ennui]

It all depends upon the stance you take as to the US' foreign policy; as the issue is so polarised you can't really argue with this source succesfully because it makes the assumption at the start that you support the 'outsourcing democracy' policy. If you don't, his argument falls to pieces.

So it's an issue that has an insurmountable wall between those pro and against, and as such is pointless to debate.

god, but isn't this whole polarization deal annoying?

 

[Nofuture]

Bodacious, read this. It's not a opion of a one person, but of a group: Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) is a group of veterans who have served since September 11th, 2001 including Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

IVAW Statement on the Second Anniversary of the Iraq War
http://www.ivaw.net/index.php?id=39

"We, the veterans of the war, now know all of these reasons for invading the sovereign country of Iraq were false, and we have paid a heavy price for these lies.

...

Whatever the reasons for this counterproductive conflict, it is now clear that it had nothing to do with helping the Iraqi people. We, the troops, were told that we were not invaders and occupiers, but liberators and protectors of the Iraqi people, and that we would bring them freedom, prosperity and a better life. Specific numbers of the Iraqi dead are not known, since “We don’t do body counts,” as General Tommy Franks said. However, we do know that we shoulder some of the responsibility for the thousands of innocent civilians that have been killed. In addition, important commodities such as food, water, power, and sanitation are not readily available ensuring the continued suffering and death of countless innocent Iraqis. Iraqi Children play amongst explosives and clouds of depleted uranium dust, and bombings of markets and mosques are a daily occurrence. In many ways, we have made the lives of average Iraqis worse, not better, since the invasion. It is no wonder, then, that the terrorism that was not present in Iraq prior to the US invasion is now a daily reality there.

On the second anniversary of this unwise, unjust, and unproductive invasion, Iraq Veterans Against the War call upon our President, the Congress, and all elected officials to immediately and unconditionally withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq and the Middle East. We also demand full funding for the medical needs of our returning veterans, including treatment for post traumatic stress disorder and the effects of depleted uranium. Finally, we call for all citizens of the United States to demand that their government end the pillaging and destruction of Iraq so that everyday Iraqi people can control their own lives and country."

Who are these Iraq Veterans? Terrorists? By no means. They are people who care, they are people who know, they are people who have a sense of responsibility, they are people who are human beings.

 

[Razor]

"On the second anniversary of this unwise, unjust, and unproductive invasion, Iraq Veterans Against the War call upon our President, the Congress, and all elected officials to immediately and unconditionally withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq and the Middle East."

That would be the absolute worst thing America could do, American and British troops should only withdraw once the infrastructure in Iraq is secure enough for that foreign troops are no longer need, or that the Iraqi government asks for a withdrawal.

And i would rather listen to people who have been to Iraq and fought in Iraq about what their opinions on the Iraq war is, both positive and negative, then listen to a bunch of whiners who spend all their time in offices and "planting trees for peace" in some park somewhere, when there are people out there starving and dying, it definately isn't the anti-war protestor who rescues them and saves them.

However, calling anti-war protestors terrorists is wrong. It is just unfortunate that a lot of them are very close minded, like a lot of the pro war people as well. Soldiers have given the people freedom to speak their mind, unfortunately, half of them don't bother to use the freedom to think.

 

[Ennui]

I don't support immediate and unconditional withdrawal, but I would like to get out of there as soon as humanly possible, now that we've gotten ourselves into this mess. Bush knew that we would be stuck there for a long time, so I don't know why he did it :|

 

[el Chi]

Bodacious, your post, and indeed that view as a whole, is blinkered, offensive in the extreme and, well, just down right retarded.
I know you like to bait people to get a response, but for f*ck's sake... Can't we live this black-or-white, with-us-or-against attitude back in the Cold War? And even in that era it was moronic, creating far more problems than positive outcomes.

It's this kind of perspective insults and pisses off people the world over and then the US turns around with Bambi eyes, completely perplexed as to why people have possibly become angered with the Bush administration.

 

[Ennui]

el Chi is pretty much the most sensible person I've ever seen post in the Politics forum.

 

[Bodacious]

hahahaha,

The funny thing is, I, nor the article writer called the anti war protestors terrorists. At most we called them terrorist sympathizers, but not terrorists. The fact that anti war types and terrorists have the same goals is indisbutable, do you disagree?

I will post more later, duty calls.

 

[el Chi]

el Chi is pretty much the most sensible person I've ever seen post in the Politics forum.

I try not to post in the Politics forum since it became over-run with people (with no posts outside Politics) intent on one thing - the utter annihilation of CptStern. And then this place became a barren, hate-filled, poisonous wasteland.

But thank you.

hahahaha,

The funny thing is, I, nor the article writer called the anti war protestors terrorists. At most we called them terrorist sympathizers, but not terrorists. The fact that anti war types and terrorists have the same goals is indisbutable, do you disagree?

I will post more later, duty calls.

<el Chi re-reads thread title> Anti-war=Pro-terror. That, at best, sounds like a bastardised middle-ground of "terrorist sympathiser" and outright "terrorist".
So why the sudden U-turn? All of a sudden you're NOT accusing us of supporting terrorism? But "pro"?
You might want to reconsider your wording, dear boy, lest you confuse more folk.

To say that we share a "common goal" is, once again, you with your offensively broad-brush approach to people's political views.
Some were against the war because they believed (and not without just cause) it was done in flagrant disregard for international law. But f*ck the rest of the world, you don't need them, right?
And then the US turns with Bambi eyes...

I, personally, have a severe distatse for the war and it's questionable motives, however I don't believe we (by which I mean "coalition" troops) can pull out entirely, both on practical and moral levels.
However, even if I did support the idea of a full extraction, that does not mean I support terrorism.

And can we please be careful not to forget the lines between "terrorists" and "insurgents". Granted, the distinction is occasionally hazy, but still...

 

[Ennui]

hahahaha,

The funny thing is, I, nor the article writer called the anti war protestors terrorists. At most we called them terrorist sympathizers, but not terrorists. The fact that anti war types and terrorists have the same goals is indisbutable, do you disagree?

I will post more later, duty calls.

I'm too pissed off to type again.


I should really stop coming to this forum.

 

[The Monkey]

hahahaha,

The funny thing is, I, nor the article writer called the anti war protestors terrorists. At most we called them terrorist sympathizers, but not terrorists. The fact that anti war types and terrorists have the same goals is indisbutable, do you disagree?

I will post more later, duty calls.

Let's see...
Terrorists' goals: To destroy all western culture, and bring radical islam to all parts of the world, even if humanity is destroyed while at it.
Anti-war people's goals: To end the bloodshed of thousands of innocend people, iraqi and american alike. To let the people of middle-east decide about their own fate.

 

[jondy]

I will post more later, duty calls.

Which duty is this? Your duty to piss us off?

Yeah, Chi, the polarisation thing is a ****in' pisstake.

And Ennui, yeah, I've stopped posting here so much lately, it's not worth the endless quoting and bickering

 

[CptStern]

hahahaha,

The funny thing is, I, nor the article writer called the anti war protestors terrorists. At most we called them terrorist sympathizers, but not terrorists. The fact that anti war types and terrorists have the same goals is indisbutable, do you disagree?.

utter bullshit, that article is the equivelant of me saying all US soldiers are baby killers and murderers

btw I cant find the video but I've seen a US soldier yelling at a female protestor something to effect of "you ****ing terrorist, america was attacked by saddam you ****ing coward"


btw:

http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/advocacy/protest/iraq/2003/0330rights.htm

http://www.alternet.org/story/9890/

http://campusantiwar.net/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=67&Itemid=2

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030410-013211-9278r

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/apr2003/oak-a08_prn.shtml

caption: A protestor, who refused to give her name, bears the wounds after she says was hit by Oakland police weapon during a anti-war protest in Oakland, Calif

 

[Bodacious]

Let's see...
Terrorists' goals: To destroy all western culture, and bring radical islam to all parts of the world, even if humanity is destroyed while at it.
Anti-war people's goals: To end the bloodshed of thousands of innocend people, iraqi and american alike. To let the people of middle-east decide about their own fate.

Lets see...
Terrorists' goals: To have the US pull out of Iraq.
Anti-war people's goals: To have the US pull out of Iraq.

 

[CptStern]

terrorist goals: to control iraq

US goals: to control Iraq

 

[KoreBolteR]

these anti-war protesters go to violence to get thier points heared?

thought these people that wanted to get a peace message out would have more sense than that..ffs.

but thier not like terrorists.. terrorists love killing innocent civilians, EVEN children and women. Thats why the US have to fight these heartless killers, otherwise they will keep holding this country held hostage.

anti-war protesters... theres protesters for everything imo.
but as long as thier happy and peaceful, i dont mind them shouting out thier opinions. as long as it doesnt resort to violence.

 

[The Monkey]

Lets see...
Terrorists' goals: To have the US pull out of Iraq.
Anti-war people's goals: To have the US pull out of Iraq.

So just because they share one point, does that mean that they're the same? Do you want to comment my post or just try to find the few things that they have incommon?

 

[KoreBolteR]

terrorist goals: to control iraq

US goals: to control Iraq

Terrorist Goals = To control Iraq, To kill innocent people on purpose, to kill anyone parcipitating with the US and coalition forces, to blow up pipelines, to try and get the Media on thier side, kill americans and anyone accociating with americans.

US Goals = To Stabalize Iraq, Make Iraq safe for the innocent people, kill the terrorists, make Iraq secure itself, Iraq to support itself and have its own government.

 

[firemachine69]

terrorist goals: to control iraq

US goals: to control Iraq

Not quite, though it is an interesting point of view. Time for the US to drop us canadians/french/other countries as peacekeepers and bug the hell out if they don't intend on showing that stance.

Realize still, the few remaining hostiles (bout 200) are creating the fear and uncertainty. No doubt, look at the fear about a dozen men created on the morning of 9/11. It still creeps up and sticks to home. They often create situations which are cowardly and more or less place civilians ON PURPOSE in the crossfire. If they were real men and not pussies, they'd be out in the desert away from the crowds. But their not, they're lurkers who's only goal is unrest. Though in that respect, the US isn't helping by giving them that unrestful state. Again, peacekeepers are needed. Bug out US, before someone starts having a REALLY big beef.

 

[Bodacious]

So just because they share one point, does that mean that they're the same? Do you want to comment my post or just try to find the few things that they have incommon?

I never said they were the saime. I said, in effect, that anti-war types have similar goals that terrorists do. They are terrorist sympathizers.

 

[Ennui]

I'm going to start posting on this forum more so that I can give Stern some help.

That picture is gnarly.

 

[ray_MAN]

It's pretty shallow to compare anti-war activists to terrorists. Who does he think he is, anyway? It's kind of like comparing the anti-war protesters of the 60's and 70's to the Commies!

 

[Bodacious]

terrorist goals: to control iraq

US goals: To liberat the Iraqi people and deliver freedom and democracy to those liberated people.

Fixed

 

[CptStern]

Make Iraq safe for the innocent people

really?

 

[firemachine69]

Read my edit in my last post

 

[The Monkey]

They are not terrorist sympathizers, dammit! They don't share one single viewpoint with the terrorists, except for the thing you mention of course, but the only ones who still don't share that are the hawks in the US.

 

[Bodacious]

They are not terrorist sympathizers, dammit! They don't share one single viewpoint with the terrorists!

Yes they do, I already pointed it out.

 

[The Monkey]

Read my edit.

 

[firemachine69]

They are not terrorist sympathizers, dammit! They don't share one single viewpoint with the terrorists!

Yes, they seek unrest.

Though, it is for peace and withdrawal, as opposed to creating fear. About the only goal they have is the one I posted, unrest.

Except the demonstrators are retards in the case posted by Bodacious. No doubt Cpt, that woman went where she shouldn't have been. Don't try to make out every protestor as innocent. Cause some of them are just as bad as criminals.

On the other hand, I'm sure there are a many reasonable demonstrators.

I support the liberation and freedom of others, but not your point of view Bodacious, sorry.

 

[Bodacious]

The hawks in the US? The "hawks" care about a successfull mission in Iraq. That mission includes Iraqi people's safety and the US' troops safety.

They (the hawks) realize that if the troops were pulled out today chaos would ensue in Iraq and the terrorists will have won. Is that what you want?

 

[CptStern]

No doubt Cpt, that woman went where she shouldn't have been. Don't try to make out every protestor as innocent. Cause some of them are just as bad as criminals.
.

and you know this because you've been to how many protests? btw read the article, the woman was RUNNING away when she was shot in the face

 

[The Monkey]

The hawks in the US? The "hawks" care about a successfull mission in Iraq. That mission includes Iraqi people's safety and the US' troops safety.

They (the hawks) realize that if the troops were pulled out today chaos would ensue in Iraq and the terrorists will have won. Is that what you want?

Surely not, to pull out the troops now would be foolish. But you wont make it on your own, you need the international community's support, and the support of the iraqi people.

 

[KoreBolteR]

really?

Its a Goal Stern, id be surprised if the terrorist werent invloved in that pic.

its an image to spread hatred about the US.

 

[Nofuture]

terrorist goals: to control iraq

US goals: to control Iraq

Who woudn't agree with this ...


Let's see. I've given a definition of people in generally who are against this illegal war:

They are people who care, they are people who know, they are people who have a sense of responsibility, they are people who are human beings.

If we used the white/black approach, then what would be description of people who are pro-war?

And i would rather listen to people who have been to Iraq and fought in Iraq about what their opinions on the Iraq war is, both positive and negative, then listen to a bunch of whiners who spend all their time in offices and "planting trees for peace" in some park somewhere, when there are people out there starving and dying, it definately isn't the anti-war protestor who rescues them and saves them.

Hmm, "On the second anniversary of this unwise, unjust, and unproductive invasion, Iraq Veterans Against the War call upon our President, the Congress, and all elected officials to immediately and unconditionally withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq and the Middle East."

That would be the absolute worst thing America could do, American and British troops should only withdraw once the infrastructure in Iraq is secure enough for that foreign troops are no longer need, or that the Iraqi government asks for a withdrawal.

I know what you mean.
I would rahter consider their statement as a protest of people who have discovered, that this war is a really bad one, and who are now presenting their protest. And they are right.


Btw, would you blame Iraqi people, who e.g. are outraged of lots of innocents being killed in this illegal war, and who are now probably thinking what could be the best target in UK?

Hmm, it's not so easy to say. Would I care about victims then? Yes, I would. I would definitely care about British people who were against this war.
About ones who supported this war, one could say, you've got what you wanted... You wanted a war, now you've got it...

 

[Bodacious]

Surely not, to pull out the troops not would be foolish. But you wont make it on your own, you need the international community's support, and the support of the iraqi people.

Could you please rephrase that first sentance? Double negatives confuse me.

We have the support of the international community and the support of the Iraqi people.

 

[firemachine69]

and you know this because you've been to how many protests? btw read the article, the woman was RUNNING away when she was shot in the face

Tell me, what did she do before the weapon was pointed at her? Probably throw a rock, which of course, she'd never admit.

Got what she deserved probably, you're in the front, you're making yourself bait.

I dunno, I attended a few peaceful protests in my life, I had good convos with a few officers who were over-seeing the crowds. They seemed supportive of our peaceful protest, even the few that didn't agree with it.

Moral of the lesson: If you see the "protest" is turning more into a "riot", get the hell out, ASAP.

 

[Ennui]

We have the support of the international community and the support of the Iraqi people.

reaaaaally...