what protest is "OK"?

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by fintstone
Millions lost their lives..after we pulled out of Vietnam. It was worse than the Holocaust...but of course most were not white Americans or canadians (seems sorta racist to me)...just as only innocent Iraqis would be slaughtered if we pulled out of Iraq now.... that is until they finished at home...and them came for the other infidels...again.

Fint, you do not understand...the lefties are paving a road made of good intentions for oppressed people everywhere, including America...that road, as we have seen in America and Iraq, is leading to hell.

The liberal emperors have no clothes, their UN corrupt buddies have no teeth except to bite the hand that feeds them.

[skipdup]

Originally posted by cool_chick
Sure.

The question is, and you are IMO erroneously claiming, does a freaking protest do what you're claiming.....

If our soldiers are that wimpy then we're in trouble. But as usual, this is not the case, just unsubstantiated allegation.

As far as redoubling their efforts, I don't get the unrealistic impression they're "redoubling" and seeing "victory" over a freaking war protest. I"m pretty sure they're giving it all they got now....

CC- Wait... How do you think the terrorists define victory?

And, we know that the war protests DID affect our troop moral during Vietnam. Why would you think the same thing couldn't happen today, if protests become more common, larger, etc?

- Skip

[bryanthompson]

The terrorists we are fighting in Iraq are not Iraqis. They are largely made up of militants from the surrounding region.

They do not expect to win against our military. Their sole purpose is to inflict a few casualties every day.

They, in exactly the same way as the vietnamese are relying on the power of our media to exploit those deaths.

Their only victory comes from our withdrawl. They will fight until we withdraw.

Protestors are giving them hope of our withdrawl.

When we achieve victory (meaning: Iraq is strong enough to stand on its own, with its own government, and military), we will leave.

A strong, democratic Iraq will not support terrorists.

Terrorists do not want this.

[skipdup]

Bryan- Don't you realize it's not a black & white issue? You can't believe it's that simple. Come on man, the terrorists think they're right! Who are YOU to say they are not?!?

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by skipdup
CC- Wait... How do you think the terrorists define victory?

And, we know that the war protests DID affect our troop moral during Vietnam. Why would you think the same thing couldn't happen today, if protests become more common, larger, etc?

- Skip

Vietnam is nothing like today. For one, there was a huge drug issue, they were napalming villages.....

That was what was demoralizing. Along with coming home to be spit on. I believe that the protests here had minimal effect on them while they were there, it was other factors. And I'm sure they were not enjoying getting spit on once they came home....that is not happening today.

To compare Vietnam to this situation is not comparable...

You know what, I know a couple Vietnam vets...I"m gonna ask.....

[bryanthompson]

cc, can you at least admit one tiny bit of verifiable fact.

Did the Anti-War movement during vietnam encourage the enemy to continue fighting.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by cool_chick
You know what, I know a couple Vietnam vets...I"m gonna ask.....

Please please do.

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
cc, can you at least admit one tiny bit of verifiable fact.

Did the Anti-War movement during vietnam encourage the enemy to continue fighting.

I don't know. I know that guy said that, but to be honest, I don't believe it was such a big factor.

I look at it this way, I'm fighting a war, I want to win....I'm not going to "slack off" if I feel I'm losing and "give more" because people are protesting.......

I'm going to give it my all no matter what.....

[bryanthompson]

I'm going to give it my all no matter what.....

well, at least we know it won't be much.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by cool_chick
Anti-war protest in the U.S., causes an emboldened enemy=more terrorists=more dead soldiers and innocent Iraqis.

"Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement," Col. Tin told the Journal.

"Through dissent and protest [America] lost the ability to mobilize a will to win," Col. Tin concluded. "

Emboldened enemy=longer war=more American casualties=genocide in Vietnam (insert Iraq).

[cool_chick]

My my, mulhollandose...you really need to get your eyes checked.

I'll try one more time:

Anti-war protest in the U.S., causes an emboldened enemy=more terrorists=more dead soldiers and innocent Iraqis.

Maybe the bold will help you out. But I'm thinking the truth is there is no proof...

[CamB]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
The terrorists we are fighting in Iraq are not Iraqis. They are largely made up of militants from the surrounding region.

This is a talking point, and an old, tired one.

I hope Mul is reading this answer too - I previously couldn't be bothered, but you both insist on continuing to be wrong, so I guess I can be bothered now. The people you are fighting in Iraq - not all of whom are terrorists, are mostly Iraqis. The largest group are former Baathists. Some, but not that many, come from outside Iraq.

Proof?

Its from Time, so discredit all you like, but this was the last thing I read (however, I read this sort of thing about 1x per week):

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1106307,00.html

More than two years into the war, U.S. intelligence sources concede that they still don't know enough about the nearly impenetrable web of what Iraqis call ahl al-thiqa (trust networks), which are at the heart of the insurgency. It's an inchoate movement without a single inspirational leader like Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh--a movement whose primary goal is perhaps even more improbable than the U.S. dream of creating an Iraqi democracy: restoring Sunni control in a country where Sunnis represent just 20% of the population. Intelligence experts can't credibly estimate the rebels' numbers but say most are Iraqis. Foreigners account for perhaps 2% of the suspected guerrillas who have been captured or killed, although they represent the vast majority of suicide bombers. ("They are ordnance," a U.S. intelligence official says.) The level of violence has been growing steadily. There have been roughly 80 attacks a day in recent weeks. Suicide bombs killed more than 200 people, mostly in Baghdad, during four days of carnage last week, among the deadliest since Saddam's fall.

[cool_chick]

Vietnam is nothing like today. For one, there was a huge drug issue, they were napalming villages.....

That was what was demoralizing. Along with coming home to be spit on. I believe that the protests here had minimal effect on them while they were there, it was other factors. And I'm sure they were not enjoying getting spit on once they came home....that is not happening today.

To compare Vietnam to this situation is not comparable...

You know what, I know a couple Vietnam vets...I"m gonna ask.....

QUESTION: I was wondering if you felt "demoralized" about the protests when you were physically in Vietnam?

------------

After a short while, I felt the war was wrong. Although, I had probably already started to feel that way before I went.

After a few months most people there wondered out loud what we were doing there. You can probably get different versions of that.

I felt demoralised by the war, not the protests. I hated it, I hated both sides and I hated nearly every Vietnamese person I met, but not all. However, I was in the bush and only met maybe 6 or 7.

There was a popular cultural revolution happening and most of the guys I hung with were the same.

That war plain s*cked.

We were not made to feel welcome when we got home. Not that I felt we should have been welcomed, but we were actually ostracised. It hurt. But by the time I got back I was so jaded, it was easy to put that pain in a place that didn't matter.


--------------------

I not only was physically in Vietnam, but I was personally responsible - as a commander - for the death of innocents. They shot first so they weren't totally innocent. But, many were kids. Doesn't help much. 37 years ago.

In answer to question - no I was not immediately aware of any protests. As I think I mentioned, my wife used to march in protests. I had mixed feelings when I learned of her participation.


------------------

Two that either didn't know or wasn't bothered by the protests. One more to come....I'll share with you when I hear back from the other.

From what I can tell thus far with these two people, I'm on the right track.

(I"m sorry, but what you guys say never made much sense to me Skidup).

[bryanthompson]

I had mixed feelings when I learned of her participation.

For round two, how about having him elaborate on this point? What mixed feelings exactly?

My guess is that he felt betrayed when he learned that his wife was marching for the enemy. Her reasoning was that she felt that her action would bring him home quicker. Being a woman, she was forgiven for her lack of understanding of the entire picture. Much like yourself.

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
For round two, how about having him elaborate on this point? What mixed feelings exactly?

My guess is that he felt betrayed when he learned that his wife was marching for the enemy. Her reasoning was that she felt that her action would bring him home quicker. Being a woman, she was forgiven for her lack of understanding of the entire picture. Much like yourself.

I have a feeling your guess is probably way offbase. I'll forward your comments.

[bryanthompson]

Well, I would expect your anecdotal evidence to be way more valuable than mine (nods in nostatus' direction), since the vietnam vets I've talked to had exactly the comments I made in my last post. My personal interviews = meaningless, yours = the truth & Gospel (can I say that here?)

As usual

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
Well, I would expect your anecdotal evidence to be way more valuable than mine (nods in nostatus' direction), since the vietnam vets I've talked to had exactly the comments I made in my last post. My personal interviews = meaningless, yours = the truth & Gospel (can I say that here?)

As usual

No, it was the silly "marching for the enemy" garbage. If one is antiwar, one would think they're antiwar for all....

It makes no sense to be antiwar, but to cheer for one who is doing the killing, but not the other....

Either way, we'll see what he says...

[bryanthompson]

I don't think the vast majority of them cheer for victory for the enemy, they just don't think far enough ahead past the emotion of soldiers dying. It's not their fault, democrats and liberals' beliefs are based strictly on emotion. If they had the ability to look past their emotion, they would be conservatives.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by nostatic
tax the churches
tax the businesses owned by the churches

Can I get an Amen?

We'd balance the federal budget and wipe out the deficit in about 45 minutes, and have enough left over to invade and occupy Elbonia.

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
I don't think the vast majority of them cheer for victory for the enemy, they just don't think far enough ahead past the emotion of soldiers dying. It's not their fault, democrats and liberals' beliefs are based strictly on emotion. If they had the ability to look past their emotion, they would be conservatives.

I beg to differ. Rather, I feel conservatives (of late that is) are largely driven by emotion and have a rather difficult time seeing past it.....

They're emotional enough to display a misguided nationalism based on untruths, emotional drivel, which has nothing to do with patriotism. They're happy to keep things messed up because their emotion makes them so afraid.