what protest is "OK"? - Page 2

Seahawk · 02:11 PM

Quote:

as for the intelligence community, i've never had a spook tell me that protest in the us seriously affect our operations overseas. that isn't what drives them. domestic effect, yes.

You were talking to the wrong spooks...covering the whole waterfront, domestic effect is exactly what drives our operations overseas. From Operation Linebacker to not bombing Hanoi (it was an f'ing war), to Bush I's failure to complete the job, domestic effect was the key to further loss of life since the military is run by politicians, the most weathervanning goobers ever put on earth.

I'm not going to pull the, "I've been there card", but our foes count on the domestic effect since it drives the political decisions that kill our troops.

BTW, I've got more clearances than most.

HardDrive · 09-24-2005, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bryanthompson
okay, how about this one.

If al Qaeda were to lead a protest against the USA, how would it look any different than the one being held today?

The last al Qaeda Protest in American killed 3,000 innocent people. Care to rethink that statement?

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

sure bryan. when your best friend is on the ground (and in choppers) there for going on 7 months and gives you the straight poop (thru his eyes, which have some bias, but I know what it is). I never said it was gospel, but they are first-hand accounts and impressions.

skipdup · 09-24-2005, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nostatic
"vote" is one honest answer. but what is the next step beyond that? you can write your representative. but how about if that gets you no traction?
....

So, you want yet another alternative, in case things don't go your way??? It just doesn't work like that.

The system works. It's not perfect, but it works better than anything else.

- Skip

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

seahawk, I'm not questioning the domestic effect. the theory I referenced is that protest affect the enemy and our troops directly (not via domestic decisions).

but that is getting away from the question: if you disagree, what can you do? we are in agreement that politicos are problematic...but what can citizens do if their actions will "kill our boys"?

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by skipdup
So, you want yet another alternative, in case things don't go your way??? It just doesn't work like that.

The system works. It's not perfect, but it works better than anything else.

- Skip

then why do we have the 1st or 2nd amendment? if the "system" works (which if I understand your reasoning, includes voting and writing your representative), then why do we need free speech and to bear arms? the system will take care of us as long as we vote and write, right?

island911 · 09-24-2005, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nostatic
....
I ask this in all seriousness,.

hmmm. Okay then...

Do you not get that war protestors are protesting more for the "Hey, Look at ME . . . I'm for less BAD and more good happy understanding."

It's human nature I suppose. Thing is; if it's really something important, people find a way to be heard. An anti-war protest is like an employee yelling at his boss during a puplic meeeting. If the employee really wanted to be effective he would speak privately with the boss, or write a clear memo outlining the problem AND A SUGGESTED SOLUTION. (oh, right . . . the lib's got nothing there -- never mind)

Mulhollanddose · 09-24-2005, 02:26 PM

Mulhollanddose · 09-24-2005, 02:27 PM

I am sure the protesters objected strenuously to this guys sentiments...or not.

skipdup · 09-24-2005, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nostatic
then why do we have the 1st or 2nd amendment? if the "system" works (which if I understand your reasoning, includes voting and writing your representative), then why do we need free speech and to bear arms? the system will take care of us as long as we vote and write, right?

OK. That's a valid point and one I wish I'd thought of before my last post.

However... assuming we're still operating under the premise stated at the beginning of this thread (protesting = soldiers lives)... Does that mean that the lives of soldiers are an acceptable loss for those who choose exercise their right to protest? The price seems way too high to me.

And by the way... I've struggled with this question for a long time. I'm confident there isn't an easy answer.

I'd hate it if I were against this war... But, I can't imagine ever joining the likes of the "people" in DC today, or any protest. I'd vote.

- Skip

hardflex · 09-24-2005, 02:57 PM

If Iraqi insurgents can be energized by anti war protests here, don't you think it's possible the pro-democracy citizens in Iraq could be energized by seeing Democracy at work in the US, something they didn't have under Hussein? It can work both ways.

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

skip, we're actually in agreement on some points. the question of acceptable loss question is hard. in part it is because the alternative (not speaking up) could cost even more lives. that is what each individual needs to decide. but I do agree that people need to be aware of the possible consequences of their actions (ie personal responsibility)

dd74 · 09-24-2005, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Halm
To help me put your comments in context, were you ever in the active military?

No.

Halm · 09-24-2005, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dd74
No.

Thanks

gavinlit · 09-24-2005, 04:22 PM

It's the land of the free right? So why shouldn't people protest? What's happened to your country? It sounds like there's a significant proportion (although still a minority) of people who would prefer it to be some kind of quasi police state. "You must support the government. You will not protest. Trust us, we are your government".

How can you talk about exporting democracy (a fragile concept to begin with) when you don't exercise the freedoms that are supposed to go with it in your own back yard.

When you couple these types of restrictive attitudes with a large military force, aggressive foreign policy and arrest & imprisonment without charge, it kind of makes the whole 'democracy, freedom & the greatest country on earth' thing seem a bit hollow.

bryanthompson · bryanthompson's Garage

gavin, you missed most of the show.

Most of us are arguing that they can protest and have every right to do so, but it's the appropriateness of them that is debateable. Nobody is saying that they have to support the government.

it's their right to make themselves look absolutely stupid. It's our right to laugh at them, question their motives, question their sources of funding, and question their effects.

gavinlit · 09-24-2005, 04:31 PM

Nope, I've been watching the whole show but trying to bite my tongue because it's your country not mine. I'm not sure what you mean by the 'appropriateness of them'.

I guess I must have misinterpreted the sentiment because I'm pretty sure a few on this board have been pushing the line that protest = treason. Seems a stretch to me that's all.

I agree it's your right to question, laugh etc. That's fine & if everyone had that attitude I suspect we wouldn't have seen this thread in the first place. I just don't see why people get upset about protests. As you said, if you think it's stupid & laughable then it's not really worth getting upset about.

skipdup · 09-24-2005, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nostatic
.... in part it is because the alternative (not speaking up) could cost even more lives. ...

This is exactly why I know it's a tough question with no easy answer. And, why I'm sympathetic to some on the other side if this issue.

However, before anyone thinks I'm going pinko... I am in no way sympathetic to the yahoos protesting today in DC. There is a huge difference between what I think you're talking about and what the people running/organizing/participating in the protests today want.

I also believe that it is definately possible to finish what we started in Iraq. To walk away now would be disastrous. Even if you disagree with starting the war, it seems to me that people should see the importance of finishing it.

- Skip

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by skipdup
This is exactly why I know it's a tough question with no easy answer. And, why I'm sympathetic to some on the other side if this issue.

However, before anyone thinks I'm going pinko... I am in no way sympathetic to the yahoos protesting today in DC. There is a huge difference between what I think you're talking about and what the people running/organizing/participating in the protests today want.

I also believe that it is definately possible to finish what we started in Iraq. To walk away now would be disastrous. Even if you disagree with starting the war, it seems to me that people should see the importance of finishing it.

- Skip

Skip, in the other thread I posted about how a lot of groups that showed up today had nothing to do with the war...opportunity knocked and the fringe elements answered.

I believe that we have to finish what we started because we have destabilized the region, but I think it needs to be done as quickly and cleanly as possible. That being said, the point of the protest (or at least what *I* think the point should be) is that we think twice before we go off into the next country.

skipdup · 09-24-2005, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nostatic
Skip, in the other thread I posted about how a lot of groups that showed up today had nothing to do with the war...opportunity knocked and the fringe elements answered.

I believe that we have to finish what we started because we have destabilized the region, but I think it needs to be done as quickly and cleanly as possible. That being said, the point of the protest (or at least what *I* think the point should be) is that we think twice before we go off into the next country.

Seems clear to me they wanted to end the occupation of Iraq and New Orleans today - along with other stuff.