Oregon March 15th Peace Rally (off topic)

Hay everyone,

There is going to be peace rally and march on, Saturday March 15, south Park Blocks (SW Madison and Park), for the 5th anniversary of the war on Iraq.

You can find more info at:
http://www.pdxpeace.org/

To stay on the Star Wars theme......I believe that in past years there have been costumers in Storm/Clone Trooper Armor ("Storm/Clone Troopers for Peace").

 

lol, those guys act like war is just a universally bad thing. It's such a naive perspective -- war is necessary and has shown throughout the ages a lot of history's great men and shaped great nations. I agree the Iraq War was pretty much pointless and lame, but at the same time now that we are there we must provide stability to the region lest Iraq fall into Civil War and the overall damage to our economy and the world economy, not to mention our public image, be even greater. It's a terrible mess we've gotten ourselves into. Saddam did a much better job keeping order than we have, haha, and that's sad but true. Unfortunately at this point from the studies and research I've seen whether we pull out or stay there, it's going to have massive economic costs. We're all going to be paying for this war for decades to come.

 

I just read a story the other day.

The lowest most estimate of those killed in the war (Iraq, US, etc.) is 100,000 (some studies say up to 1,000,000, but I think that is way too high). On the US side, we are now up to 4,000 US troops killed, and who knows how many US contractors killed.

Next time Bush says that he still thinks the war was worth it, I would like a reported to ask......."so if you knew before the war that more than 4,000 US troops would die, and more than 100,000 Iraqies (most of are which civilians), you would have still made the decision to invade Iraq?"

Think about it...more than 100,000 dead, just because Bush had a personal grudge toward Saddam. 100,000 men, women and children.




P.S. And don't forget, we are now up to about 30,000 US troop injured, most with lost libs or crippling burns. Not to mention that it is estimated that each man, woman, and child in the US ill owe about $2,000 each for the war cost. That means that I owe (with a family of 4) about $8,000. But in truth, that is not Bush's fault, it is my fault for having a family.

 

Yeah, that's true. What a sad, sad waste of money and life.

 

While it is good for people to protest something, it is also another thing to SUPPORT those in harms way whether you disagree with the orders they are given. Remember we have an all volunteer military. They have chosen to support and defend the Constitution and follow the orders given to them. Support the troops and their mission. We do not accept Defeat, Retreat, or give up and surrender what we have gained. We did go into Iraq for a reason, Saddam did violate a huge number of UN Resolutions, plus he was not forthcoming or honest with the weapon inspectors and he did support terrorist activities in his country. Time and Time again I can supply info for those that wish to agrue these points.
If Cogress really wants to end the actions in Iraq, then put forth the Resolution of reauthorization of 2002 Authorization to a vote. After all, it is Congress that make deciosions for these things. Complain to your congress person, raise your voice there, and do protest, but do so in an orderly fashion, non violent and non confrontational with law enforcement. After all, they are there to enforce the laws we have and should respect.

 

First, of all I do support the troops. And I would say that all the people who will attend the rally also support the troops. That is way we want this war to stop, because we do support our troops.

Second, not supporting the war does not equal not supporting the troops. This is just another method by which those who are for the war like to suggest that anti-war individuals are somehow not loyal, and don't love the US. I will not debate this point, because I don't think the American people have fallen for it, and will all know BULL when they see it.

Third, remaining in Iraq just because we are already there and need to finish what we started is not a good policy. That is like saying, it does not matter that we screwed up, and made wrong decisions. Now that we are there, we need to stand by all our screw-ups and bad decisions so that we do not "LOSE FACE". Here is a news flash, we have already Lost Face. The entire world is laughing at us for the mess we are in, that is in-between their tears for the mess we have caused the middle east and the world.

Forth, Yes Saddam was a bad guy. But think about how many bad guys and bad countries there are in the world. Many third world countries have weapons of mass destruction. Many of these weapons we have sold them. But we have no problem ignoring their atrocities. Some of our best allies are mass murdering dictators.

Fifth, what makes you think that Iraq will benefit from our continued presence? Many analysts believe that the continued violence in Iraq is the result of our presence. We can stay there another 5, 10 or 15 years, and it is likely that the country will stay the same, with the same amount of violence. Or we could add more troops, make it a police state, which would reduce the violence initially. And when we start leaving, and the bad guys see that there is no longer a US trooper at each corner, then they will come out of hiding and the violence will be right back where it was. Or we can significantly reduce our troops now and see if the new "democratic" (ya, right) government can hold it's own.

You have to think about what will happen at the end of the day. Do you really think that Iraq will turn into this democratic gem, with freedom for all, and smiles on everyones face, if we stay there and continue the fight? Iraq is screwed up, and will continue to be screwed up if we stay there or not. The only question is how much more money and US lives will it take before we realize that this is a fight we can not win......................YOU CAN NOT FORCE PEOPLE TO LIKE US, that that is what our current policy is trying to do.

 

These are always great events to pick up on women.

Just FYI.

 

We can agree that we disagree on some things.
Just be safe.

 

haha, yeah I would have to say agree to disagree too.

We are there for a reason, and frankly I don't care what anyone outside the U.S. thinks of us until they can prove their country is worth anything. We are the best nation in the world, we have the best military, the best technology, the best economy, the hardest-working individuals, the most celebrities, we rule this world. What any other nation thinks is irrelevant. It's like me saying I think Steven Spielberg's last movie sucked. Ok, who cares? He's Steven Spielberg, the greatest director around, and I'm a nobody in Hollywood. That's exactly what i think of the rest of the world -- their opinions are useless because they are for the most part complete cowards.

I have respect for Asian countries, i.e. Japan and the new Chinese economy, for instance, also South Korea. I have no respect for Europe, a bunch of lazy, socialist morons (outside of the UK, our buds) who wouldn't know a hard day's work if it ran up and bit them in the butt. They are a bunch of pathetic countries that used to be powerful and are now just sad little useless places to visit for tourists and marvel how 500 years ago they did something right. Yay, wow. Well this is 2008 and since when did France, Germany, or any of those countries do anything that anyone cares about?!

There is a purpose to being in Iraq now that we are there, and that is to prevent civil war and do some good. We can still make a difference and have already, it's just not easy when a country is full of freakin' terrorists and morons who have no intelligence whatsoever, they just want to create problems. The Middle East is the armpit of the world, has been for a long time, there's one glowing exception and that's the U.A.E, specifically Dubai.

 

I am going to interject a few opinions here and if I piss anyone off, so be it. I am sorry to offend, but I am not sorry for my views.

The war was a necessary evil. As Eric pointed out, Saddam was a bad man. He was given more time than he ever should have to clean up his act - 12 years! That's right, he had been jerking the global community around for 12 years with his antics. Let the inspectors come in, kick them out again. I suspect he was kicking them out because they were getting too close to the the stash he claimed he didn't have. Conspiracy theory? Perhaps.

The point is it wasn't about avenging Daddy's grudge. It was about doing what should have been done long ago. In hindsight, Bush senior should not have pulled out so soon. He should have gone back in there to set Saddam straight. Everyone wants to blame this Bush for all the trouble we are in. We could blame it on Clinton's inability to act in a manner that is fitting of a sitting President who defends his country. I could go on about how he failed this nation as a President. But it will only fall on deaf ears who think he was the greatest President, ever. He wasn't. He failed to have Osama bin Laden captured under his watch - and yes, there were approximately six occasions when we could have had him in custody for the 1993 bombing of New York's WTC. But folks tend to forget that there are bad people out there who want to do harm to this country. Bad people left unchecked become the next army you have to face in the future. As we can see in the current times, not only with what is going on in Iraq, but with al-Queda, and any other militant bastards out there....

If we have learned anything from our history, it should be that we can no longer allow evil men to continue to prosper at the expense of the weak. There would have been a lot less Jews murdered had the US got involved in the War sooner! It is because of this we will never look the other way again. We will never say, "it is their problem, not mine." It is out problem. It is everyone's problem. You let one dictator loose and he causes havoc that is fallout for the whole world to reap. If we don't stop these little Hitler wannabes early on, how much harder will it be to deal with later on down the road when they are a real threat?

So some say that Saddam wasn't that big of a threat, that Kim Jong Il isn't that much of a threat, and so many more. Chris had mentioned that there are many Third World nations with dictators that kill at random. This is all true. The thing I can say is that for guys aren't a huge threat... yet. And those to comment on the Third World types.... if they had the monetary resources in the way that Saddam did, they would be bigger threats.

Bottom line is this: to secure peace is to prepare for war. And evil prospers when good men do nothing. We have suffered many a black eye for trying to do the morally right thing when we have had those in office who don't live their lives in a moral fashion. I'm all for the freedom of speech. I have always supported that freedom, even if I don't agree with some of those supposed peace protesters. I agree with the war. I am glad we are there. It was one more dictator a-hole removed from this earth - one who can never harm another human being again. I suppose some of my disdain for some of these folks is that they are the biggest hypocrites to walk the earth. Some of you know I work down at the World Trade Center here in Portland. I see these guys down there all the time. They spout off their rhetoric and act like they are the ambassadors for peace and yet they conduct themselves in a semi-militant fashion. In the past they have vandalized the property, they refuse to leave and get themselves arrested. Now I have to ask this: does this kind of activity really lend credence to their cause? Certainly not! If anything, it has made their position moot.

And while rallies are important to these folks. I have wonder of, no question, the wisdom of having rallies on a weekend day like today. We see these rallies happen all the time down at

 

Or what, Bill? Why on earth should someone who wants to partake in a peace rally stay away from "your" site?

This war is a perfectly good reason to exercise the right to protest and disagree with what is happening and has been happening in Iraq for far too long. This country was founded by dissidents, so what's the problem with protests...oh wait...I mean rallies. Oh wait, PEACE rallies. "War is necessary" Give me an effing break.

And, just to play devil's advocate with you, Saddam Hussein was captured OVER FOUR YEARS AGO. And why are we still there? Don't tell me that we "can't leave yet."

And let's see, why would anyone choose to have the rally on a weekend? The same reason you try and organize anything on the weekend, to get more people there.

 

So, how am I doing Colt?

Am I keeping things interesting?

P.S. Lets make this even more fun. I have a conservative friend (no really) that says that Jesus is for the Iraq war and on our side. In fact he says that Jesus is not anti war or anti violence at all, and that Jesus would say that it's OK to kill provided that you are killing evil. He would also say the evil is defined as all which is against the US, but that's another story.

 

1) Why would I not want them at my site? Because they are disruptive in nature. Do they honestly think they are going to sway opinions of those who work at my site because of their disruptive behavior? No, and I say no again. Do they think they win any credence for their cause when they get themselves arrested for trespassing? No, and I say no again. They throw all that they stand for when they break the law and get themselves arrested. Protesting, or voicing a concern is one thing. Breaking the law, disrupting the livelihood of others is another.

Do these people really think that policy makers give a rip what they think? The brutal answer is no. Policy makers have operated on a Jacksonian belief for, well, since Andrew Jackson's day. That belief is that the common people are too stupid to figure how to run a country. And while I am not a fan of that notion, there is something to be said about how a system such as ours has last for so long. It has endured because, even though this is a country of the people, by the people and for the people, it isn't run on the whim of each and every member of our country's citizenry.

2) You are right, Saddam was taken out of the picture 4 years ago. But his legacy still endures. We leave now, and the country destabilizes, just as it would have had we left Germany or Japan so quickly after the war. There is a method to the madness there. When you stabilize a region (if it is possible), the overall benefit is that you create a valued asset in the future. You encourage growth, health and opportunity. We didn't remain in occupation of Germany and Japan to be Imperialistic as some may think. It was a matter of commerce and prosperity. It is the future that we look to.

Again, using the examples of Germany and Japan, we duked it out with these countries. They were the alliance who drew first blood, not us. We went to war. As harsh and evil as it is. It happened. But there was a positive benefit to it... in the long run. The world was hurting from a Great Depression. It was an economic disaster that not just affected our country, but the world. Times were hard on everyone. Germany was suffering from a serious depression that left them practically a broken people. Japan was on the verge of economic collapse. In both situations the only recourse to get them out of their hole was to go to war. Does that make it right? No, but it did happen. War ensued and in the end both countries were in a worse off shape than before. The only silver lining in the conclusion of all the ugliness is that we helped them rebuild. And now 63 years later, we see these countries thriving. They fair better now than they ever have.

This is also true for other nations out there. Iraq and Afghanistan are no exception. There is a thought that when you build up lesser countries (which is why the US practices this policy so much - too much, maybe), as they grow and thrive to come out of their poverty level, so, too, do the more thriving nations. Everyone moved up to the next tier of prosperity. It is a benefit to all mankind, not just for us or the impoverished countries. In this example, everybody

 

Then I would say that your friend doesn't have much of a clue as to what Jesus really stood for. I am a conservative as well. And I am a Christian. I tend not to broadcast that much. Not because I am ashamed, but more so because I wish not to alienate others with my beliefs. I have an aunt that is Jehovah's Witness. She has tried to indoctinate me with that belief system all my life - yes there is a difference of beliefs.

Jesus was anti-violence. He showed his power through his unconditional love for mankind. He never used violence to get his point across. That is a trait we reserve for ourselves, and all religions are quilty of it. The atrocities abound on both all sides. Nobody is innocent. Jews, Muslims and Christians have all used violence to prmote their agenda. Yes, Jesus would have had a problem with that.

Approve of the actions? Probably not. Understand the reasoning and maybe seeing some necessity, probably. Would He do something differently, I am sure of this.

- Bill

 

From what we know of Jesus from the Bible, can we make some assumptions about WHAT He would do differently?

Lets throw around some ideas.

 

Hmmm.... calling someone out by righting his sin in the sand, comes to mind!

- Bill

 

Honestly who cares what Jesus would say? That's irrelevant to the entire situation. Nobody will ever know, because Jesus is dead just like anyone else who lived 2,000 years ago, and his opinion cannot be voiced anymore. To interpret what he would say at this point is silly, it's like when someone says, "If you don't believe in Jesus you are going to hell." Are you god? No. Then you don't know that. So best to keep quiet about matters you don't know rather than look foolish.

 

Well then, our problem does not lie in the relevance of Jesus and His Word, my friends. Rather in the disbelieve of generations.

I expect nothing from saying that, for I am only called to be a witness. (in other words, I realize there was nothing "persuading" about what I just said.)




In continuing with the conversational topic, I shall add this. God tells us to love our enemies as ourselves. The fact of the matter is, if we were all like Jesus there would be no war to be had, no decision to fight or not. We have to live in an existence that would not even apply to Him. There lies the true question: Since the fight does exist, when or how is it okay to fight? (There are many situations.) Therefore we cannot completely come to a conclusion there. But we can scrape up the wisdom we have been left and apply it as much as possible.

 

No no no, your guys religion is all mixed up... that's right I said it. You have to believe in the force! lol jk

 

Larena, I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that it is OK in the eyes of Jesus to fight if the fight exists, or are you saying that we should follow Jesus's example and His desire for us to follow in His teachings?

I find it interesting that most organized Christian religions teach to always follow Jesus's example and try to be more "Christ like", on one hand, then on the other hand imply that it's also OK to participate, and even start, wars. Apparently the idea is that since we live in a fallen world, and have to exist in this world with all it's flawed moralities, then God would understand and even condone actions that are against Christ's teachings, provided that we can somehow justify them based on our worldly morality.

The New Testament does not say that wars "have" to happen and that it's OK to participate in them, it says that wars "will" happen and that we (as believers) should not fear these wars because we will have ultimate salvation. The wars that the Bible talks about are caused by the sinfulness of the world and the evil that exists outside this world. Jesus DOES NOT want us to participate in these wars. Our participation, whether it seem justified in the eyes of man, label us as sinful and those who participated in the downfall of the world, and ultimately label us as the unsaved.

 

Indeed. That was what I was trying to explain. The fact that wars will happen and there is nothing we can do to stop them a lot of the time. In that, we must decide whether or not it is a war that we should or shouldn't fight in.
I've always sort of accepted that there are times where there is no question that we should fight. However lately I've struggled. But that only has to do with me, and the fact that it would be extremely hard for me to have to kill someone. It has nothing to do with what should be done.
It just depends on the purpose. Sometimes even the high purpose of a country still doesn't make it right. Sometimes it does. I was just explaining up to the point of what I know for sure.

Now is THIS war "right"? I really cannot do not want not to get into that, haha. But I shall think for awhile on this. And if I have come to a solid opinion, I shall share.





oh and P.S.

Because of the fact that the christian world of today is severely hindered by
the world they have created around themselves, It's sometimes hard for them to realize
that..... it's just hard for them to REALIZE period! haha!
Because we half-heartedly choose to follow Christ for a number of reasons(the fear of being to "out there" or "spiritual" perhaps) We get only half of Him if not less. The part that really hasn't sunk in is "YES. We WILL be outcast and seen a certain way because Jesus was!"
Christians are trying to "fit in". They don't realize....they can't! Oh yes, they are trying to be a little more user-friendly and try to get a foot in the door...well that hinders them greatly. And they don't even realize it. Jesus stands at the door and knocks. You have to open. He doesn't try to get a foot in your door like us "Christians".
Such a pity...

 

War is necessary, and I feel sorry for people who lack the courage or the strength to understand that. They are as weak as the religions they cling to. War has throughout history shaped nations, made great men rise to the occasion, and caused a lot of good besides the bad that goes with it. Without war there is peaceable mediocrity. One way or another conflict, whether it's war or business competition, etc. tends to sort out the pretenders from the contenders, and the whole idea that no cause is worth fighting for is sad and I feel literally sorry for people who have so little they hold valuable that they won't fight for anything.

A lot of religions teach nonsense that doesn't apply to the real world except in some idealistic fashion, and while that may hold value for you, it doesn't touch reality at any point. It's much better to define your own values based on what you think is right or wrong than to have to consult an outside source for every opinion you have. That's just weakness and mediocrity at its worst.

 

eh, sorry. That was supposed to be ME who posted the smiley, lol. Well...it was. But it wasn't!