With all of this talk of impending war, many of us will encounter "Peace Activists" who will try and convince us that we must refrain from retaliating against the ones who terrorized us all on September 11, 2001, and those who support terror.

These activists may be alone or in a gathering.....most of us don't know how to react to them. When you come upon one of these people, or one of their rallies, here are the proper rules of etiquette:

1. Listen politely while this person explains their views. Strike up a conversation if necessary and look very interested in their ideas. They will tell you how revenge is immoral, and that by attacking the people who did this to us, we will only bring on more violence. They will probably use many arguments, ranging from political to religious to humanitarian.

2. In the middle of their remarks, without any warning, punch them in the nose.

3. When the person gets up off of the ground, they will be very angry and they may try to hit you, so be careful.

4. Very quickly and calmly remind the person that violence only brings about more violence and remind them of their stand on this matter. Tell them if they are really committed to a nonviolent approach to undeserved attacks, they will turn the other cheek and negotiate a solution. Tell them they must lead by example if they really believe what they are saying.

5. Most of them will think for a moment and then agree that you are correct.

6. As soon as they do that, hit them again. Only this time hit them much harder. Square in the nose.

7. Repeat steps 2-5 until the desired results are obtained and the idiot realizes how stupid of an argument he/she is making.

8. There is no difference in an individual attacking an unsuspecting victim or a group of terrorists attacking a nation of people. It is unacceptable and must be dealt with. Perhaps at a high cost.

We owe our military a huge debt for what they are about to do for us and our children. We must support them and our leaders at times like these. We have no choice. We either strike back, VERY HARD, or we will keep getting hit in the nose.

Lesson over, class dismissed

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" />

*Chuckle, snicker*

I could never do something like that (not that you were suggesting that), but it sure makes you think.

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Petals

And those “Peace Activists” can only be out there solely because of those military over there standing up for what’s right.

I refuse to call them peace activists, anti-war protesters or whatever Orwellian newspeak they choose. Let's call them exactly what they are - Supporters of Saddam .

They would choose to let Saddam continue the torture, rape and murder of the country's citizens and gather WMD than to actually DO anything. Chamberlain would be proud.

Thanks Phyxius,

I know our soldiers are fighting for the rights of the protesters to protest. Perhaps the responsible action now would be for them to choose not to act on their rights at this time. Perhaps they could debate this war after it's over. Not while our sons and daughters are in harm's way.

My son recently graduated from Basic Training. He and his fellow soliders recited a four paragraph Soldier's Creed. I was never so proud of him and our country. I wish all protesters could have heard those young men and women who bravely, proudly, voluntarily defend them.

In my prayers,
landslide

There really is no problem with people exercising their rights to free speech at this time.
Our system allows that. Even in WWII 35% of the American public did not agree with the war.

The idea of our system is that we discuss and debate. Then when the time comes we vote for those who we believe will rule the way we want them to. When our candidate looses, we stand behind the winner. After all, when our candidate wins we expect others to do the same. If we do not follow this, our system falls apart.

What the anti-war protestors who are using civil disobedience do not get is that they are turning off most people, even those who might otherwise agree with them. It is also a turn off when a person argues a point, such as anti-war, and yet cannot even argue their point with any knowledge of world events.

One of the examples that gets me the most is the argument that Bush has turned poor Saddam into a daemon for his purposes, that Bush is making up the charges of atrocities by the Saddam regime. What rock have these people been hiding under for the last 20 some years?

In the past few weeks the anti-war protesters here have blocked traffic, kept ambulances from reaching the emergency rooms of our University Hospital and all the other forms of civil disobedience that some how seems to pass as freedom of speech to some folks.

I was at a ‘Support our Troops’ rally on Friday (Albuquerque, New Mexico). The crowd was in excess of 2000. It was larger than any of the anti-war protests that have been held in our city. Did this pro-troop rally make national news? I doubt it as it as the press worldwide seems to be leaning to pro-Saddam.

The people in his rally did not have to lay down in the traffic, stop ambulances, vandalize stores, and stop the normal flow of business. We exercised our freedom of speech and our right to peaceful assembly. We did it with peacefully.

At one point some anti-war protestors showed up. It was not a large group. My bet is that they were reluctant to challenge a bunch and veterans. (hm… ??) Anyway they started to chant and yell in an attempt to cause trouble and deny us our right to free speech.

I was very proud of the people in our rally. It was all handled very peacefully. Most simply ignored them and continued with the rally. A group, mostly veterans formed a wall in front of the anti-war protesters and started walking them out of the area, chanting “Go home coward”. No force, no violence, no civil disobedience.

I bet that was not shown in national TV either.

One of the things our troops are taught is the controlled us of violence. They are taught that violence is the action of last resort, to control their actions and avoid it at all costs. That is exactly what we saw.

The anti-war protesters then took up a stance on a corner across the street. And that’s ok. They have the right to free speech. And even though they did not have a permit as they were supposed to have they were still allowed their protest of our rally.

Zorweb,

Agreed, the Supporters of Saddam do have the right to free speech. What they fail to understand is that free speech and the right to assemble peacefully is not synonymous with civil disobedience. They are also woefully ignorant in thinking that free speech extends to mean that they must be heard.

When one, just one, is able to put forth a logical argument that is absent the anti-American invective that is the dominant feature of most of their arguments and is able to refrain from "kitchen sinking"...then I will listen.

Least you think that the anti-war movement in the USA, or even world wide, is a grass root movement coming from the hearts of people who are concerned you may want to take a look at these sites. The anti-war movement is well organized and funded by long-time left (socialist and communist) organizations. They are taking advantage of the well intended who may disagree with the war. There is NOT ONE good word about the USA on these sites. Any balanced organization and/or site would have a discussion of both the good and the bad. Anyone who shows up to these protests is participating in an anti-American protest. If you think I’m being ‘paranoid’ about this take a look at these web sites.

International Answer
“A CENTURY OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS SPREAD TRUTH ABOUT U.S. WAR - Know your facts!” This column on the web page is of particular concern as it is a laundry list, with no facts, background, etc. It only shows times our troops were called up for both external and internal reasons. For example it does not state which of them were UN actions that the USA was part of a coalition and did not act alone. It does not tell how many of these interventions were at the request of a countries government. It even includes WWI and WWII as USA follies.

“Information, Activism, and Resistance to U.S. Militarism, War, and Corporate Greed, Linking with Struggles Against Racism and Oppression within the United States” [url=http://www.iacenter.org/ International Action Center [/url]

“Workers and oppressed peoples of the world unite!” Worker’s World (by the way, wasn’t that the slogan of the communist parties?????)

Here is a new one that is popping... helping our soldiers and their families

Here is a link to a pro-troop/pro-war site. Protest Warrior

Zorweb,

Yes, I know about who/what is organizing these protests. It really, really sickens me. ANSWER is directly related to Workers Party, and yes, that was (is?) the slogan.

These people are not really against atrocities, they are virulently anti-American, so much so that any remnant of rationality has since left the building. The extreme left has turned the corner and met itself in the extreme right. They out-fundamental fundamentalists.

Re: Protest Warrior -one of my book-marked sites. I can't recall whether they posted the Supporter of Saddam placard "We support our troops when they turn their guns on their officers" or not, but it was a very telling photo and when I became aware that they really aren't pacifists. Not at all. It's all a ruse.

Re: Protest Warrior -one of my book-marked sites. I can't recall whether they posted the Supporter of Saddam placard "We support our troops when they turn their guns on their officers" or not, but it was a very telling photo and when I became aware that they really aren't pacifists. Not at all. It's all a ruse.

I’m not sure I understand what you are saying here.

Are you saying that the anti-war protesters had a sign that said "We support our troops when they turn their guns on their officers"?

And that Protest Warrior might have posted a photo of that sign?

That’s what I think you said. (too many “they’s” lol)

You are right. They are anything but pacifists. They are also not worried about the truth. Certainly anything but worried about human rights and how barbaric Saddam’s regime has been all these years.

The reason I posted the links to these sites is that some people were wondering (on the other thread) who was organizing and funding the protests.

I don't believe that all protesters are anti-american. Maybe just the opposite. They're very american and hate to see our soldiers die. I don't believe that Saddam had much, if anything, to do with 9/11 and I have to wonder if there's another country out there who would jump in and fight for us if our leader was to start torturing us or leading us into a lifetime of poverty and hell. I kind of doubt it.
I am not against this war though. I do support it but mostly because my H is over there doing his job, although safely on board a ship. But if he wasn't in the military and I really had to look at this I don't know how supportive I"d be. I think Pres. Bush backed himself into a cornor by giving an ultimatum and when it wasn't met he had no real choice but to go to war. If what we're fighting for is to get rid of a man who has weapons of mass destructing well, I"m sure we do too. We have our nuck weapons too. We're just less likely to use them and never use them as a threat to another country.
So what exactly is this war for? Are now going to start wars with every leader and his country cuz he tortures his people and forces them into poverty? Is it because we are so arrogant to believe that our democracy is the only way people should live and therefor we want to force down the throats of other cultures?
I"m just not sure what to think about all this. I just wish it would end quickly.

A little more in the same vein...

Snappy Answers to Anti-War arguments

There is always another way of looking at things. Here is another view...

Snappy Answers to Anti-War arguments... By Tom Adkins 3/1/03

Young Americans will die in battle. -->Would you prefer they die in skyscrapers?

The United States is taking unilateral action against Iraq! -->So far, it's a 90-member worldwide "unilateral" coalition.

We are in a rush to war. -->A 12-year rush?

Tough inspections can disarm Saddam Hussein without invading Iraq. -->12 years of inspections have done wonders so far.

We should let the inspectors finish their job. --> We did. They didn't. We will.

Why fight? The Iraqi military is weaker than in 1991. --> But their biological weapons and chemical weapons are much more dangerous.

There's no proof of weapons. --> We know they have 'em, we know they hide 'em, and we have tape recordings and photographs. What more is needed? An Iraqi rocket in Martin Sheen's shorts?

If we invade, Saddam Hussein might use those weapons of mass destruction against us. --> I thought you said Iraq didn't have them?

But terrorists might attack if we invade Iraq. -->Oh, so if we don't attack Iraq, terrorists will never strike again?

We shouldn't go to war without a UN resolution. --> ANOTHER resolution? What about the last 18 resolutions? Shall we use them as wallpaper? Or shall we use the same resolutions Bill Clinton used in Bosnia? (he didn't go to the UN on Bosnia)

We don't have a real declaration for war. -->It's called "Joint Congressional Resolution #114."

If North Korea has nuclear weapons, why aren't we invading them first? --> Uh...hello...isn't that the point?

European leaders are against the war. --> The Reichstag wasn't attacked. The Grande Place wasn't attacked. The Kremlin wasn't attacked. And the Jerry Lewis Lifetime Achievement Museum wasn't attacked. America was attacked. And besides, except for the tantrums of France, Belgium and Germany, only three European nations aren't willing to defend freedom. The entire rest of Europe is with America.

The French don't support the war. --> Oh, did they surrender already?

Germany objects to this war. --> Germany objected to Reagan's "attitude" towards the Soviet Union. Of course, they objected to our presence in 1943 as well.

Belgians are against the war. --> I can live without waffles and ice cream.

Russia doesn't support the war. --> They are still angry over Reagan's brilliant Cold War victory.

Polls show Europeans are against this war. --> Polls show Europeans believe their freedom was achieved by endlessly debating in marvelous dining halls, conveniently forgetting their right to be pompous blowhards was granted with American blood, not fabulous wine and brie.

We should build a coalition with our friends. --> With friends like these, who needs enemies?

What happens if we can't build a United Nations coalition? --> Who cares?

But the UN is the world's most respected governing body. --> Not as respected as the US military.

America has always waited until enemies attacked. -->Now that oceans can't hold back enemies, pre-emptive war is forever a necessity.

War will cost billions! --> S o how much is YOUR city worth?

President Bush says he's willing to violate the 1976 executive order forbidding assassinations of foreign leaders. --> As soon as the ink is dry on rescinding that idiotic order, will someone please pull the trigger? The line forms to the right.

Many Senators don't support Bush. --> Are you speaking of the Senators from Bordeaux?

Tom Daschle says George Bush has a "credibility gap." --> When was the last time we came to Tom Daschle for the truth?

These problems didn't happen under Clinton. --> Actually, they happened. But Clinton ignored them. Now, Bush will clean up his mess.

But Clinton didn't start a war. --> Unless his girlfriend was testifying before congress.

Bush senior should have taken out Hussein in '91. --> That 1991 UN resolution forbade a march on Baghdad. Remember?

Millions of peace activists are demanding we stop the war. -->Millions of Iraqi's are begging for us to start the war.

Thousands of innocents will be killed or injured. --> That's a lot less than Hussein is killing right now.

Protesters have genuine objections to war. --> Just like they did in WWII? Korea? Vietnam? Panama? The Gulf War? Somalia? Haiti? Bosnia? Afghanistan?

People are coming from all over the world to act as "human shields". --> Quick...hurry up...before the bombs start dropping.

This is about American Imperialism. --> So which country do we own? Name our colonies? What nation sends us their tax dollars? If America was imperialist, we'd already own the entire world. Who could stand in our way?

This is Blood for Oil. --> The only blood is the Iraqi people tortured, starved and killed while Hussein builds massive palaces to hide nuclear weapons...all financed with Iraqi oil. America produces 40% of its oil needs and gets the remanining 60% from three sources: Mexico, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Don't you think Saddam Hussein would LOVE to sell his oil to the USA?

This is a racist war. --> America happily endorses a multi-cultural attitude towards anyone who dares to take away our freedom. Regardless of race, color, or creed; we will hunt them down and kill them.

A U.S.-led invasion of Iraq is a great recruiting tool for terrorists. --> Have fun recruiting people into oppressive misery as they enjoy their first taste of freedom.

An attack on Iraq could seriously undermine and destabilize Arab nations. --> Destabilize the region? What stability? The sooner we topple these oppressive 14th century terrorist regimes the better.

Are we prepared for a multi-billion dollar occupation? --> Were we prepared to liberate Europe and Japan in 1945? South Korea in 1953? Grenada? El Salvador? Kuwait? The Eastern Bloc? Afghanistan? Nations aways love Americans when we rescue them from tyranny. The price of freedom is never free.

Polls show Americans are more concerned about the threat from al Qaeda than from Iraq. --> It's not a war against Al Qaeda. It's not a war against Iraq. It's a war against terrorism. Anywhere we find it. One nation at a time.

American opinion is against the war. --> No, it's not. A majority of Americans (66%) want to fight now, not later.

According to a recent poll. --> You know what? Screw those polls. We're in a war against terrorism. If you don't want to fight the ones who would murder you and your family in a heartbeat, get the hell out of the way. Go visit Paris. Or Antwerp. Or Berlin. Or Moscow. And stay there. Forever. But this time, don't call us when the heathens are at the gates.

Zorweb,

Sorry, I wasn't real clear there! LOL!

Protest Warrior (I think) took pictures of that particular sign that an (my new name for 'em) Appeasement Activist had. It was disgusting. PW wasn't promoting that, just reporting it.

Check out ejectejecteject.com for a brilliantly written and moving essay entitled "History." Don't know how mushy you are, but if you are mushy...have a box of tissues handy!

I'm glad you're posting the sites...people need to know!

Shedawg, I believe you are right that most of the protesters aren't anti-American. However, the most strident are and those who aren't most likely don't know who is organising these protests. My prayers and thoughts are with you, your husband and all the troops and their families. I wish you and all of the previously mentioned knew how grateful we are. Now, I've gotta grab my own box of tissues!

Crayongirl,

Thanks for that site, it's a great article.

Phyxius Thanks for that, I’ll be using some of them.

shedawg

You are so right that many anti-war protestors are not anti-American. My main point was that they good hearted, well intended are being use by a very dangerous group or organizations.

We all hate to see our soldiers die. But the best way I’ve heard it put is that each generation much fight for their freedom. I served in the Army and did my time doing just this. I was lucky in that I did not go to battle. But I did have plenty of times I was not in the safest places, in the dark, standing guard alone. It was a cold war then but a war nonetheless. A war that got my father assassinated.

As I watch the world react to what is going on now, I think that thanks to the Clinton administration we have just about squandered the hard earned winning of the cold war. I did not like President Bush when he was running for office. Actually did not like Gore either. I was very concerned about our choices. But today all I can say is thank goodness Bush is in office. Gore would have simply done more appeasing.

Saddam may or may not have had anything to do with 9/11. But we know beyond a doubt that he supports terrorists through funding, training, and supplying. We also know that he has used his WMD on his own citizens and his neighbors. He will use them on us give half a chance.

You are right that no other nation would probably come to our aide if our leaders started to torture us. But does that mean that we have no responsibility to protect ourselves? Remember that our first mission in Iraq is to remove a regime that has support terrorism worldwide. Wouldn’t this be a wonderful world if all nations policed each other so that no nation could do to it’s people what Saddam’s regime has done to the Iraqi’s, what North Korea is doing to it’s people, and what so many despots are and have done? It would have been nice if the UN had grown into a viable organization for world peace instead of world appeasement.

As I said before, I’d love to see the world band together after this and start standing up to regimes that are like Saddam’s…. North Korea comes to mind. Actually it would be hard to know where to start.

When Pres. Bush gave that ultimatum he fully intended to go to war if Saddam did not follow the UN resolutions. He did not back himself into a corner. He gave Saddam options.. comply or be removed from power. Saddam choose to be removed from power.

Yes we have nuclear weapons. But we do not have biological and chemical weapons. The difference is, as you stated, we are not going to use the weapons. They are used as a way to prevent war. “My stick is bigger than yours so don’t attack us.” Saddam on the other had has used them and will give half a chance. That is a huge difference.

So what exactly is this war for? Are now going to start wars with every leader and his country cuz he tortures his people and forces them into poverty?

No this is not the reason we are there. But while we are there we are very happy to set those poor people free. They have been through hell and back. I’ve wondered since his first attack on the Kurds in the 1980’s when someone was going to help them. Internal revolt had proven to be impossible because of his mad-dog regime.

Is it because we are so arrogant to believe that our democracy is the only way people should live and therefore we want to force down the throats of other cultures?

What we are doing has nothing to do with forcing our way of life down the throats of the Iraqi’s. We make no attempt to change their culture. Only to remove a brutal dictator and his power structure. Remember that we are not conquering Iraq. They will maintain control of their government, their culture, their oil and other resources. That is how the USA does it. It was the Soviet Union and ever other country in this world since the beginning of time that was taken over countries to ‘own’ them and force a ‘better’ culture on them. We are the first and only nation to have ever helped nation after nation rebuild itself after we defeated them in war. And for this we are despised worldwide.

Saddam’s regime has nothing to do with religion and culture. It is nothing more than a bunch of thugs. I have heard many Muslims and Arabs say that they Saddam represents neither, he is a thug who needs to go. And yes we hear many Muslims and Arabs say they want us out of Iraq. But theirs is a concern for the Iraqi people, not for Saddam.

One thing that comes to mind when deciding where I stand on this war is that when the USA send a rock through Kadafe’s (spelling???) bedroom window he stopped his terrorist activities against the USA. Amazing how that worked.

Did you ever notice that few terrorist attacks were ever carried out against Soviet interests world wide. Kadafee made that mistake once. The Soviet’s kidnapped his brother in law. So Kadafee threatened to kill their the Soviet hostages he held if his brother-in-law was not returned. The Soviet’s sent a package to Kadafee.. it contained certain private body parts of the beloved brother-in-law. They promised Kadafee that they would return his brother-in-law one piece at a time until the Soviet hostages were let go. Kadafee released the Soviet hostages. He got back his maimed brother-in-law. And no one ever again dared to kidnap a Soviet hostage again. There is a lot to be said for appearing to be just a little bit crazier than the terrorists. I’m not at all suggesting that we use the Soviet model of hostage negotiation, only that playing hard ball against terrorist is very affective.

But in recent years other peoples around the world have seen the USA as a weakening, oversized, spoiled, decadent, and ineffective. After all have done nothing, or very little about that the terrorist attacks against American for many years now.

None of us are totally sure what to make of this. I hope your husband will come home save very soon. I too hope it’s over soon.

One of my favorite slogans on www.protestwarrioar.com is Except for ending slavery, fascism, nazism, and communism, war has never solved anything.

Unfortunately the human race has not yet evolved to the point where discussing things over a cup of tea solves all problems.

<small>[ April 01, 2003, 08:20 AM: Message edited by: zorweb ]</small>

Fixing your last link Z....

http://www.protestwarrior.com/

you had it misspelled I think... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Thanks JTW... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

fgb

<small>[ April 01, 2003, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: KalGrl ]</small>

fz

<small>[ April 01, 2003, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: KalGrl ]</small>

fgb?????

fz????

I personally think it's appropriate that there are people out there spouting over anti-war guk --- it just kind of proves that there's a reason why we are there.

If we don't fight to keep that right - to say what we want --- FREEDOM --- we loose it!!!

Jan