First of all, just because the ‘damn, dirty hippies’ dont have a step by step plan to resolve this conflict does not make them idiots.
In this time of high emotions, people advocating a peaceful solution are being thought of as fools. I think a peaceful resolution is the hardest thing to do, and I think the US government is to willing to take the easy way out and start the bombing. This is not the answer.
And not all of us non-violent pseudo-hippies are singing songs around the campfire, some of us are trying to make a difference. Writing senators and petitioning for non violence and such.
I hope to see peace in my time. If this makes me a fool, then so be it.
I dont think the government of any country has the right to kill ANYONE, civilian or murderor, terrorist or tyrant. Violence begets violence, maybe, if we give it a chance, peace will beget peace.
JB
You said that better than I could ever hope to. Thanks. Sums it up perfectly.
Am I the only one who thinks it’s ironic that a group called By Any Means Necessary is opposed to military action?
What have we done? We haven’t bombed anybody. You people are criticizing Bush and the US for something that hasn’t happened. Do you even follow the news? What channel are you watching because the channels that I’m watching aren’t showing the mass destruction of innocent people that you are railing against. It’s showing threats against governments that sponsor, support, and house these terrorists. If you have a problem with that, then you are seriously fucked in the head.
If you want a peaceful society, then I suggest writing your letters and making your phone calls to Osama Bin Laden and the other terrorists because they are the ones causing all this. Send him some granola and tofu, maybe that will change his mind.
I think if we do nothing Bin Laudin will giggle then kill more of us.
I would love to hear of a peacful plan of action that would actually solve this situation, but it simply does not exist. Writing Senators and petitioning for nonviolence might make you feel better, but it isn’t going to make a difference. It’s just a distraction from doing what must be done.
Your desire to see peace does not make you foolish, it’s you inability to see reality.
I think it would be far easier to simply sit back and hope the whole problem goes away. Fighting this war is going to be anything but easy.
So even if they meet your standard of proof what do you suggest? Maybe we can send you with an arrest warrent or a polite invitation to come on over for the trial.
mswas,
Wake the fuck up! Do you watch the fucking news? Do you actually listen to what people say, or do you simply assume that because the are part of the “establishment” they are automatically evil, war-mongering fascists?
I keep hearing you say (I paraphrase)“We shouldn’t indiscriminately bomb innocent people.” Well, the administration has said time and time again, “We are not going to indiscriminately bomb innocent people.”
You say,“I don’t want to give up my freedoms at home.”
The administration has said, over and over, “We will not compromise our freedoms at home.”
They have said, not just once, but dozens of times that they are going to conduct a careful investigation before acting; that they are mindful of the possible repercussions of their actions; that they are at war with a small group of fanatics, not the people of any specific nation or the Islamic faith.
Oh, never mind, it’s not like you will listen to me when you obviously haven’t listened to a single word anyone has said that doesn’t fit into your smug little worldview of Us vs. Them.
And let me just say (no longer adressing idiot mswas), that I never expected to find myself defending George W. Ferchrissakes Bush on anything. But, as has been said before, it’s a different world now.
{CNN} In a stunning development, U.S. Army Rangers were deployed in Afghanistan with paint ball guns…in an effort to “show those meanies that we mean business”.
U.S. Navy SEAL teams were fully stocked with super-soaker water guns…ready to “rain down heck on those bad guys”
A satisfied mswas remarked to the families of NYC and Pentagon victims…“Well, if we have to do this icky war thing, there’s no reason to be unfair about it”.
{/CNN}
Blackclaw: Pissing and moaning and shouting ‘I want blood!’ on a message board wont help in the real world either.
beagledave: you can have me on the record for believing in non-violence, for being an idealist, for thinking the US is not the boyscout that most think it is, for believing it is better to talk out problems than to fight, for never haven tasted either tofu or granola, and for not getting the saukraut joke. Got it? good.
peace,
JB
What, precisely, are you objecting to? That people would protest a military action? Or that they’re jumping on a bandwagon? That they’re stating their opinions without knowing exactly what the administration plans to do?
Someone help me out here. At this point I can’t even tell if the OP is on topic.
Well of course I never said the U.S. was a boyscout…I guess you prefer that kind of a response, rather than a direct answer to my question?
Well let me 'splain it for ya…since you still haven’t answered my direct question about whether you were opposed to American involvement in WWII (among other conflicts, in cluding the American Revolution)…I guess I have to assume that saying you never want use violence means that you think U.S. involvement in WWII was wrong.
If the U.S. (and other nations) had NOT participated in WWII…guess what you’d be eating now? Get it? Good.
Let me try once me:
Do you think the U.S. should NOT have participated in WWII?
2)…in WWI?
…in the American Revolution?
A direct answer to those questions will help to clarify your “no violence” stance.
I think we can agree that people get violent with each other for various reasons. Some in the middle east I’m sure are unhappy with America due to our foreign policy decisions. The wisdom of our government’s actions in that arena is certainl open to debate. There are some people however who use violence and force as a tool to get what they want. These sorts of people may not have been wronged in any way and simply wish to impose their ideology/laws/regime.
Would Hitler have stopped his aggression if the allies had continued to respond to him in a non violent manner? Obviously the situation here isn’t the same, however the point still stands. Some people are cruel and WILL abuse/murder/rape/destroy/massacre people without provocation. How do you, as a non-violence advocater, determine if an enemy of the nation is of the first type (provoked by perceived wrongdoing of US action or inaction) or if the enemy is of the second type (evil opportunist attempting to use force to gain desired ends) ?
I’d wager that some of those now circulating petitions calling for Peace At Any Cost were circulating petitions demanding that the US government Do Something About the Taliban last month.
This is certainly true. However, I would not consider ramming an airplane into a building an acceptable debating technique. Would you?
Are you seriously suggesting that if the world just sent Hitler flowers and loving thoughts, he would have given up his ambition to impose German rule on the world? This is simply too ludicrous to be worth further comment.
WHAT point???
It doesn’t make one goddamn bit of difference what somebody’s motivations for attempting to kill you are. If someone is trying to destroy you, the only rational response is to do whatever it takes to stop them, including, if necessary, killing them.
Er, okay. Sorry, Grim. I’m in flamethrower mode.
But really, it was not that clear from your last post what your position was. However, going back and reading your other posts clarifies the matter.
Again, my humble apologies.
I never said there was some great wisdom in my non-violent plan, it is just something I believe in.
I want to see the terrorists come to justice as much as anyone else. My non-violent plan mostly concerns civilians, but I would rather see bin Laden on trial then to just kill him.
beagledave: I am against the US’s involvement in any war that needlessly kills civilians, so that takes care of WWII. I must admit I dont know much about WWI, but it seems to me another case of the US getting involved in something that isn’t their business. In ‘the war between the states’ I think the US became hypocrits, because didn’t they just ‘suceed’ from Great Brittain a few years before? I dont think that war was fought because of slavery, but because the US’s pride was hurt when so many states disagreed with their policies.
The revolutionary war I can get behind because it was a grassroot effort to over throw ‘the evil empire,’ not just needlessly fighting a country which we will crush with total disreguard- as I feel we will with Afghanistan.
Sorry if I rambled, and I’m sorry if the collective ‘you’ disagree. I am not here to try to bring you to my side, just to state it.
peace,
JB