Quoting:
  I love how everyone we disagree with is "nationalist", and all of our friends are "patriots".

End Quote

It was exactly because of your postings that I thought of this. It seemed to me that some people thought some of your comments may have been unpatriotic - but, if they did, I don't agree.

Quoting:
I love Australia, and I love being Australian. End Quote

I totally agree with this statement ;)  I love Australia, am very proud to be an Aussie, and wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world.  If this makes me a patriot - them I'm a patriot :)

Quoting:
The older I get, the more conservative I get. End Quote

that reminded me of a quote I heard from Sen. John McCain once:

"If you're not a liberal by age 20, you have no heart.  If you're not a conservative by age 40, you have no brain..."

Quoting:
Well, I'm an 18-year-old leftist, so I guess I can keep both my heart and my brain in tact for now. End Quote

Yep. Just wait until you are 40... (scaring ya now, aren't I? :o ;D )

Quoting:
But I'd argue that most liberals keep their brain past age 40. I have heard many conservatives complain that colleges have been taken over by liberal and feminist Profs. They didn't get where they are now by being brainless.
End Quote

One can be brilliant and brainy and still be completely lacking in common sense.

Quoting:
I think the biggest difference between liberals and conservatives is how they judge people based on wealth. Conservatives tend to blame poverty on those who are poor. They see the poor as lazy bums who leech off of our tax dollars. End Quote

Although I lean right of center, I have compassion for the poor. Many of those that "leech off our tax dollars" are not lazy, but have simply fallen into a hole that they do not know how to get themselves out of. I support welfare reform, but realize that many cannot 'pull themselves up by their bootstraps' without a helping hand -- skills, education and opportunity must be provided. The days when any honest hard working American could go get a job at a factory and live the American dream are gone. So I guess that puts me with one foot on the left... ::)

Quoting:
The older I get, the more conservative I get. I support this war against Saddam; I believe that the President and our governmental officials are doing the right thing to protect our country and other countries from future terrorism.

Now, with that mindset, and because I am of a passionate nature, my immediate reaction to those who are protesting this war is extreme annoyance. And I react very positively to statements like: "Now that we are at war we should all pull together as Americans and support the President and our troops." And this is coming from someone, who, 20 years ago, would have probably have been out there with the anti-war faction, waving a banner... ;)

However, there are a lot of people in this country and in the countries of our allies who truly believe that this war is morally wrong. I may vehemently disagree with them, but I recognize their right to that heartfelt opinion. And if they continue to protest, does that make them bad citizens? An interesting analogy would be Germany or Italy during World War II. Should those German or Italian citizens who disagreed with Hitler and Mussolini during the War have "shut up and been good patriots and supported their government and the troops?"

(And now the anti-war faction on this board is dancing with glee, as they just believe I have accidentally called Bush a Nazi or a Fascist... hee hee -- enjoy it guys; it was the best analogy I could come up with at the moment ::) ).

Anyway, I am trying to understand and respect the views of the other side. I would truly like to see everyone in this country standing behind our president and supporting this war. But should those whose consciences do not allow them to agree be expected to shut up and fall in line or be labeled unpatriotic?

Just some food for thought.  ;)

End Quote

Thank you for a very balanced and thoughtful post.  I can very much understand the impulse to "fall in line" - I feel it to because I respect and honor the young people who are bearing the brunt of the descisions made by those who have never heard a weapon fires in anger, but are nevertheless willing to sacrifice those young lives.  But my feeling of outrage at the arrogance (and stupidity) of our leaders forces me to conclude that the only real patriot must oppose the foolhardy acts of our "leaders"  (please read the latest Newsweek - 3 articles on U.S. foreign policy, none favorable, and in the mainstreem media!!!??)

Patriotism is loving your country enough to acknowledge that it is sometimes wrong, and trying to make it right - or at least better.

Quoting:
Well, I'm an 18-year-old leftist, so I guess I can keep both my heart and my brain in tact for now.

But I'd argue that most liberals keep their brain past age 40. I have heard many conservatives complain that colleges have been taken over by liberal and feminist Profs. They didn't get where they are now by being brainless.

I think the biggest difference between liberals and conservatives is how they judge people based on wealth. Conservatives tend to blame poverty on those who are poor. They see the poor as lazy bums who leech off of our tax dollars. Liberals tend to see money as the root of all evil (at least all of it in the hands of a few people). They see the poor as they are portrayed in the Bible, people who are kind of stuck where they are because of forces beyond their control.

Just some random thoughts.
End Quote

Dear John, you bright young man.  Let me add that the heart of the conservative movement at its top (I mean its VERY top) are those who want to preserve the staus quo BECAUSE they ARE on top.  I really don't understand non-elite conservative who gain nothing from protecting the, as Cat calls them, "fat cats".  It really amazes me that the average American voter almost always votes against his/her real interests.  

Another angle  of patriotism is trying to get people to see how our country has been expropriated by the rich few, who now run it for their own interests, and mobilize those people to take it back to what it was meant to be - a land, as Ol' Abe said, of, for, and by the people.  Keep the faith baby - I mean my young friend ;D

Quoting:
My Grandma did the whole thing backwards. She was a pretty strong conservative when she was young. In her old age she has mellowed out and gone more liberal.

I don't think she's heartless or brainless. In fact, I love my Grandma very much.  ;D
End Quote

Hi again John,
Back in '64 both my dad and I were Goldwater conservaties (I was still too young to vote then) - "Moderation in the pursuit of liberty is no virtue...".  I learned, quicker than he, that these works were code for racism and the status quo.  Now me at 56 and he - remarkably - at 83 have , like your grandma (bless her soul and preserve her) seen the light and moved to the left - I, admittedly, further than my dad.

Quoting:
I also see where San Francisco firefighters and policemen were commenting that the protests today were causing them to have to miss several real emergencies.....End Quote

regarding the SF rally, I saw where the SF Police Cheif said it was "nothing short of anarchy".  And that the people were throwing bottles, rocks, rebar, metal, etc.  They can wave their little signs and chant all they want, thats their choice, but stopping traffic and injuring police officers is no way to gain support for their cause(not that they are in the majority anyway ;).

Oh how those protestors must feel proud to know they are now seen as a joke by the majority of the rest of the country. ::)

Quoting:
Winston Churchill once said that "democracy is the worst form of government... except for all the other".  Its messy, sloppy, unpredictable and a real pain in the a** to the powers that be, but what would you prefer?  That all of us retreat to our comfortable homes and pray for peace and justice?  If God really did take an active part in human affairs that might be a good choice, but He has given us free will - for better or worse - so its up to us to decide what kind of a world we will live in.  To do that, we need to, first, decide, and second, make it happen.  That's what those protesters are doing.  Prayer just will not cut it.  
End Quote

And what, exactly, do those protesters have to say when they find out that someone died or someone else's house burned down because they were busy blocking traffic? "Oh, sorry, ma'am/sir, but my protest was far more important than your emergency?"

Modified to say that I support someone's right to peaceful protest 110%, but not at the cost of someone elses home or life.

Quoting:


And what, exactly, do those protesters have to say when they find out that someone died or someone else's house burned down because they were busy blocking traffic? "Oh, sorry, ma'am/sir, but my protest was far more important than your emergency?"

Modified to say that I support someone's right to peaceful protest 110%, but not at the cost of someone elses home or life.
End Quote

I would agree with your gripe.  But taken to the extreme, this could be very chilling.  Civil disobedience and passive resistance goes back a long way - to Gandi and before - and often costs people their lives, usually those resisting.  And what of the lives they are trying to perserve? Are they of less value?  Admittedly, these are hard moral questions, and I don't pretend to have the answers.  I just raise the questions

Quoting:


Let me add that the heart of the conservative movement at its top (I mean its VERY top) are those who want to preserve the staus quo BECAUSE they ARE on top.  I really don't understand non-elite conservative who gain nothing from protecting the, as Cat calls them, "fat cats".  It really amazes me that the average American voter almost always votes against his/her real interests.  

End Quote

 This part of your post is ass-backwards. It is left, not the right, which wants to keep people from getting rich.  Why is there only a tax on new income, but not a tax on people that are already rich but don't work (kennedys)?  How come the richest people in congress are not conservatives, but instead liberals? How come people that make over $30K a year pay almost all the taxes?  Is 30K a year a "Fat Cat"? The hard working "fat cats" who run their own businesses, and provide jobs for the "average Joe" are the ones who get screwed when the left is in charge.  The only people that benefit with the left are people that work for the government or people that don't work at all (ie: Losers).

Quoting:
Oh how those protestors must feel proud to know they are now seen as a joke by the majority of the rest of the country. ::)
End Quote

But not by the majority of the rest of the world!
How proud do you feel to know the majority of people on this planet see you as a terrorist?

...just asking ;)

Quoting:

But not by the majority of the rest of the world!
How proud do you feel to know the majority of people on this planet see you as a terrorist?

...just asking ;)
End Quote

The only protestors that are making a joke of themselves are the ones who turn violent.  Don't you think it is a little ridiculous to turn violent to call for a peaceful end to anything.  There is nothing wrong with peaceful protesting, it is a right.  I just think it is wrong when they start blocking roads and throwing bottles.  All it does is make them look like a bunch of asses.

Yesterday we had a bunch of high schoolers walk out in protest of the war.  They just stood on the side of the road and held signs, and waved at passing cars.  Nothing extreme...this is how a protest should be.

Quoting:
The only protestors that are making a joke of themselves are the ones who turn violent.  Don't you think it is a little ridiculous to turn violent to call for a peaceful end to anything.End Quote

Yeah, you're right! - Turning violent in a peace protest is a little hypocritical   :P
But I would like to hear your views on the 2nd point.
What do Americans feel about the fact that the majority of the world is against you?  Do you believe you're right and we are all wrong?

Quoting:

Yeah, you're right! - Turning violent in a peace protest is a little hypocritical   :P
But I would like to hear your views on the 2nd point.
What do Americans feel about the fact that the majority of the world is against you?  Do you believe you're right and we are all wrong?
End Quote

I'm confused.  The majority of the world is against who?  Our government?  The protestors?  The American people?  We are terrorists because we are trying to oust this man who has basically said "F you" to the rest of the world?  A man who has killed his OWN people just because they disagree with him?So be it, I guess. ::)

As far as the protests go, if they want to sit in front of a building or walk along a side of the road, etc. I have no problem with that, as long as they aren't impeding other people.  In the Chicago protest last night, they had traffic blocked on Lake Shore Drive for miles because they were walking IN traffic.  The police could not even get there because traffic was so messed up.  Not to mention the ambulance that was stuck in this traffic jam.  What are you proving by stopping the cars of people who may or may not agree with your views?

Quoting:
I'm confused.  The majority of the world is against who?  Our government?  The protestors?  The American people?End Quote

America in general - I imagine a lot of people can't seperate government, country and people.  Educated people (who oppose war) will be against the government of the US and those who support it in this instance.

Quoting:
We are terrorists because we are trying to oust this man who has basically said "F you" to the rest of the world? End Quote

Well, I could suggest that America (see above) is the one saying "f**k you" to the rest of the world but that wasn't my point....

What I was getting at was the democratic issue (ie the majority disagrees with you)
Have you ever considered that your view of the situation might be incorrect?
Is it reasonable that you know better than pretty much everyone else?  Surely the rest of the world can see what's happening, Europe certainly has TV, internet access and freedom of press!

NOTE: When I write you I assume the question will be answered by someone who supports the American action in Iraq, it is not meant as a personal attack on any individual  ;D

Quoting:

But not by the majority of the rest of the world!
How proud do you feel to know the majority of people on this planet see you as a terrorist?

...just asking ;)
End Quote

Currently, the caolition is comprised of over 48+ nations.

To put that into perspective, our coalition for this war is the 2nd largest coalition for a war in the history of this planet.  The largest being WWII.  

Yes I know 48+ nations is not the majority of the world, but its a hell of a lot of support, don't you think?  Especially since its the largest support for any country in any war since WWII.  



On a side note:

I am not a fan of polls, but one worth noting is the latest poll taken shows 76% of Americans now support this war, and I am proud to say I am one of them. ;)  (source: USA Today)

Quoting:
Currently, the caolition is comprised of over 43+ nations.
End Quote

Do you have a link for this, I searched a variety of engines but couldn't find a list of these nations.
I also have to question, how many of these nations represent the views of their people (The UK is certainly not one of those)

Quoting:
I am not a fan of polls, but one worth noting is the latest poll taken shows 76% of Americans now support this war, and I am proud to say I am one of them. ;)
End Quote

I'm proud to say I'm in the 63% of Britains who oppose war (only 26% support it)
MORI poll: 17/03/2003
http://www.mori.com/polls/2003/iraq3.shtml

Quoting:
I'm not saying that the US should have gone to war without UN approval.  However, I don't agree that a majority of the world feels that something didn't need to be done.  It is a fact that Saddam used chemical weapons against the Iraqi kurds.  It is a fact that, in the previous inspections, he stopped complying and kept building his arsenal of weapons.  

I don't know who is right and who is wrong.  What I do know is that something needed to be done.  Are we doing the right thing?  Who knows?  How long is long enough to wait for the diplomatic measures to work?  Should we have waited for him to attack first?
End Quote

I think you have said it all, Cheer.

Quoting:


I think you have said it all, Cheer.
End Quote

I agree! :D

Quoting:
Do you have a link for this, I searched a variety of engines but couldn't find a list of these nations.End Quote

I don't have a link, but I do have the Coalition list.  The list was printed in our local newspaper this morning.

Curent coalition nations list: (45 nations officially allied, plus 3 nations allowing us to use their land to station troops)


As of 3-20-03:

Afghanistan
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain
Turkey
Uganda
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan

3 nations allowing us to station troops on land:

Qatar, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia.


Total:  48 Nations

Quoting:


 This part of your post is ass-backwards. It is left, not the right, which wants to keep people from getting rich.  Why is there only a tax on new income, but not a tax on people that are already rich but don't work (kennedys)?  How come the richest people in congress are not conservatives, but instead liberals? How come people that make over $30K a year pay almost all the taxes?  Is 30K a year a "Fat Cat"? The hard working "fat cats" who run their own businesses, and provide jobs for the "average Joe" are the ones who get screwed when the left is in charge.  The only people that benefit with the left are people that work for the government or people that don't work at all (ie: Losers).
End Quote

Pt. 1.  Why indeed no more taxes on the wealthy?
Pt. 2.   All those turkeys in Congress (almost) are rich.  The Senate has been callede a millionaire's club.
Pt. 3.  30K is no where's near a fat cat.  Hell, I make more than that.  And you're right, it IS the middle class that gets shafted.
Pt. 4.  How do you know this since  "the left" has never been in  power in this country??? ???  

Quoting:


Currently, the caolition is comprised of over 43+ nations.

To put that into perspective, our coalition for this war is the 2nd largest coalition for a war in the history of this planet.  The largest being WWII.  

Yes I know 43+ nations is not the majority of the world, but its a hell of a lot of support, don't you think?  Especially since its the largest support for any country in any war since WWII.  



On a side note:

I am not a fan of polls, but one worth noting is the latest poll taken shows 76% of Americans now support this war, and I am proud to say I am one of them. ;)  (source: USA Today)

End Quote

Yeah, wow, 43 nations!!!!  Spectacular!!!  Read the list.  Cameroon?  How many people even knon that there IS such a nation (not to brag, but I even know where it is).  These are tiny countries very much dependent on U.S. assistance, and it is their governments (not all of them even democracies) that support U.S. policy, NOT their people.  Man, that's the kind of support I would want to launch a war ;)  :-/

Quoting:
Yeah, wow, 43 nations!!!!  Spectacular!!!  Read the list.  Cameroon?  How many people even knon that there IS such a nation (not to brag, but I even know where it is...End Quote

actually its 48 not 43, but thats ok. ;)

And considering it is only a few nations less than the support we had in WWII, I consider that a lot of support.  

And regarding Cameroon, they aren't even on the list so I suggest you read it again.  I don't even know where you got that. ::)

Quoting:These are tiny countries very much dependent on U.S. assistance...End Quote

I think Japan, Italy, UK, Spain, S Korea, Singapore, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands, Denmark, Costa Rica, Columbia, etc etc, just to name a few, would beg to differ with your statement.

Yea those are all just some tiny countries on our support aren't they? ::)  

Quoting:

Yeah, you're right! - Turning violent in a peace protest is a little hypocritical   :P
But I would like to hear your views on the 2nd point.
What do Americans feel about the fact that the majority of the world is against you?  Do you believe you're right and we are all wrong?
End Quote

I can't speak for the rest of america, but I don't mind being thought of as a bully.  I think what we are doing in Iraq is right.  That isn't saying that I think everyone else is wrong.  They have a different opinion or belief than mine.  I look at it like this will end soon and something else will come along to take it's place.  I think that differing opinions are what keeps most people on their toes.  I for one like to read the opposing posts to see how others believe.  I know that in some instances my opinions have changed from reading other views.  

I don't mind people disagreeing with me and those that believe as I do, I just want it to be done peacefully on both sides. :)

Quoting:
Of those 48 nations that "support" us, how many are doing it annonymously?End Quote

annonymously?  Considering they have publicly given us their support, their is no annonymity(sp?).  Your question doesn't really make sense.

Quoting:How many are doing it just to get on our good side?End Quote

considering we are on pretty good terms with all of them, I would say none.

Quoting:How many of those countries have populations that are overwhelmingly against the war?End Quote

As I said here before, Real Leaders lead and make decisions based on what they feel is the right thing to do.  They don't allow a crowd of people holding signs to determine foreign policy.  Nor should they.

Quoting:
As of 3-20-03:

Afghanistan
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain
Turkey
Uganda
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan

End Quote

With all due respect, I think it's rather telling that Iran, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and (most tellingly), Israel, are not on that list. Nevertheless, I didn't start this thread to further an argument on the war, merely to ask (in a round-a-bout way) if opposing it makes one unpatriotic. I, for example, support our troops who are there putting their lives on the line in the name of our country, but don't support the government's desire for involvement. Even if (or when, really) the current regime is displaced, there's too many open-ended scenarios about what will happen next.

Quoting:
With all due respect, I think it's rather telling that Iran, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and (most tellingly), Israel, are not on that list. End Quote

actually, the paper listed Cyprus, Egypt, Jordan and Isreal as "unofficial" allied nations.  There description for this was that they were allied prior to the start of the coalition, therefore were not listed in the actual coalition list.  So, technically, they are also part of the coalition, they were just always there to begin with. ;)

Quoting:
As I said here before, Real Leaders lead and make decisions based on what they feel is the right thing to do.  They don't allow a crowd of people holding signs to determine foreign policy.  Nor should they.
End Quote

Actually, it's dictators that lead with complete disregard for the views of their people.  In democracies the people have a say.  In democracies the representatives ask the peple what they want and they act accordingly.
So I'm told, I don't live in one!  >:(

Quoting:


actually, the paper listed Cyprus, Egypt, Jordan and Isreal as "unofficial" allied nations.  There description for this was that they were allied prior to the start of the coalition, therefore were not listed in the actual coalition list.  So, technically, they are also part of the coalition, they were just always there to begin with. ;)
End Quote

Whatever. It looks like straw clutching to me. Sure, there's some players in there like Spain and Portugal, but seriously, the Solomon Islands? Micronesia? Mongolia? Uganda? Rwanda? Since when has anyone ever cared what they think? Might as well add Swaziland, Kiribati, Papua New Guinea and Chad to the list. Without Russia, China, France and/or Germany, and possibly a few other places with some real international status like India and Belgium, it's not much of a list. The point is probably moot now, but this just looks like another lame attempt to justify the conflict. The US has already said it would have gone into Iraq even without Iceland and Denmark, so it doesn't really matter who's given token support, does it?

Quoting:


And regarding Cameroon, they aren't even on the list so I suggest you read it again.  I don't even know where you got that. ::)
End Quote

Cameroon was listed in my local paper.  Maybe they got it wrong, or maybe you missed one.  

Also, many of the countries on that list ARE dependent on the U.S. in one way or another, either economically or militarily.  How many of them are bowing to the inevitable?  How many are truely representing their people?

Quoting:

Actually, it's dictators that lead with complete disregard for the views of their people.  In democracies the people have a say.  In democracies the representatives ask the peple what they want and they act accordingly.
So I'm told, I don't live in one!  >:(
End Quote

Yeah man, that's how its suppose to work, but we don't live in a democracy either.  I'm told its a Republic, whatever that means. :'(

Quoting:
Also, many of the countries on that list ARE dependent on the U.S. in one way or another, either economically or militarily.  How many of them are bowing to the inevitable?  How many are truely representing their people?
End Quote

George Bush -
"More than 35 countries – including some you all have even heard of, like the invaluable Nicaragua – have been handsomely compensated to suppress the will of their peoples and offer up insincere hosannas of support to me, the Supreme and Imperial Ruler of the World.  Each of these nations has chosen to bear the duty and share the honor of extorting your tax dollars to provide me with the politically necessary illusion of international backing."  ;D ;D ;D

(whitehouse.org)
http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2003/031903.asp

Quoting:

George Bush -
"More than 35 countries – including some you all have even heard of, like the invaluable Nicaragua – have been handsomely compensated to suppress the will of their peoples and offer up insincere hosannas of support to me, the Supreme and Imperial Ruler of the World.  Each of these nations has chosen to bear the duty and share the honor of extorting your tax dollars to provide me with the politically necessary illusion of international backing."  ;D ;D ;D

(whitehouse.org)
http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2003/031903.asp
End Quote

Brillient my dear Taoist, just BRILLIENT.  I sure hope the dogs of war go to that site (hint hint).

Quoting:
Going back to the original topic of the thread:  I will give my definition of Patriotism.

I just returned from a "Rally for America" here in my city.  It was nothing short of spectacular.  There were an estimated 20,000 people in attendance.  The rally was sponsored by radio host Glenn Beck, and his speech was very moving.  We honored our veterans, we honored our active duty troops fighting right now, we had music and guest speakers, and it all came together flawlessly.  

CNN was there, but I wouldn't count on seeing us on tv tonight, after all, there was a little pathetic 100 person anti-war protest across town, and CNN has a way of putting them on priority. ::)




But anyway, I felt so proud to be in the midst of 20,000 patriots who all support our Military, our President, and our Country. :)
End Quote

As always, some people want to equate support for our troops with support for the administration.  I too support our troops.  They are doing a magnifisent job executing the orders they have recieved from their commanders.  They seem, from what I have seen on the various news outlets, to be treating those who surrender with great humanity and respect, under the circumstances.  They seem to be doing their best to avoid unneccessary violence.  In short, they seem to be conducting this war in the most humane way possible.  I have no gripe with our troops.  I do have a gripe with dubya, Rummy, Condie, Dicky-boy, Wolfy, et al, who ordered this madness.  THEY are the war criminals who should be brought before the International Court of Justice.  They are the ones who are unpatriotic, having put our troops in harm's way for no good reason except their ideas of world domination (see the Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld (I think) Kristol, et al late 90's position paper).  Like good soldiers, our troops do what they are told, and I support them and wish them well.  That DOES NOT mean that I support the decisions made by their superiers.  Lets keep these two issues seperate.

Quoting:
Going back to the original topic of the thread:  I will give my definition of Patriotism.

I just returned from a "Rally for America" here in my city.  It was nothing short of spectacular.  There were an estimated 20,000 people in attendance.  The rally was sponsored by radio host Glenn Beck, and his speech was very moving.  We honored our veterans, we honored our active duty troops fighting right now, we had music and guest speakers, and it all came together flawlessly.  

End Quote

How was it?  I wanted to go to one of these but there isn't one close.  I was there with you in spirit.

Quoting:
As always, some people want to equate support for our troops with support for the administration.End Quote

well, beleive it or not Carlos, many many many many many many of us(majority) support both. ;)

Quoting:
How was it?  I wanted to go to one of these but there isn't one close.  I was there with you in spirit.
End Quote

If I had to use only one word to describe the whole experience:  Amazing :)

Quoting:


If I had to use only one word to describe the whole experience:  Amazing :)

End Quote

I'll bet it was.  I listened to his description of the event and he sounded amazed by it all, too.  I am glad these rallies are getting support even though I have yet to see any coverage.

Quoting:


I'll bet it was.  I listened to his description of the event and he sounded amazed by it all, too.  I am glad these rallies are getting support even though I have yet to see any coverage.
End Quote

  Coverage?  CNN has been covering them all day.  As for California, the Anti's have taken-over San Francisco while the Pro's have taken it to Sacramento.  

Quoting:


well, beleive it or not Carlos, many many many many many many of us(majority) support both. ;)


End Quote

I understand that 80s, but you miss the point.  Many of us support the troops in the  execution of their missions, and hope for their safety, and hope they come home soon, but oppose the policies of our government that sent them there.  I understand and respect your right to support BOTH.  Please understand our REAL  support for our troops, but our opposition to the policies that put them in harm's way.  There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between the two.  You seem intelligent enough to understand that difference.  Don't let your strident conservatism to cloud that intelligence and stoop to calling dissent  treason.  You SEEM, IMHO to be on the verge of that.  Please, step back, take a deep breath, and think about the Frist Amendment.

Quoting:


  Coverage?  CNN has been covering them all day.  As for California, the Anti's have taken-over San Francisco while the Pro's have taken it to Sacramento.  
End Quote

Really?  I have only seen coverage of the anti-war demonstrations.  I guess I haven't looked at the right time.  Good to know that the rallies for america are getting some attention, too.

Quoting:
Good to know that the rallies for america are getting some attention, too.
End Quote

w.r.t. the topic of this thread....  all these rallies are "for America", the only difference is the course these people believe is best for their country.

Quoting:
Really?  I have only seen coverage of the anti-war demonstrations.  I guess I haven't looked at the right time.  Good to know that the rallies for america are getting some attention, too.
End Quote

I tuned into CNN as soon as I got home and am still checking in occasionally to see if there is even any mention of our 20,000+ person Pro-America/Troops/Administration rally, and I have yet to see it.  While the anti-war rallies are getting a dedicated time-frame each hour.

Of course, when Glenn Beck came out on stage and noticed the CNN camera crew, he let them know his distaste for them.  Maybe that had something to do with it? ;D


Whats ironic though is the anti-war people they in NYC etc interviewed are complaining they aren't getting the media coverage. ::)  Thats all we see!

Quoting:

w.r.t. the topic of this thread....  all these rallies are "for America", the only difference is the course these people believe is best for their country.
End Quote

Um, Tao, these rallies are specifically called "Rally for America".  People who thought what we are doing is right wanted to rally and "Pro-war" isn't right either.  No one really wants war, sometimes it is inevitable, though.

Quoting:


Hey, Don Carlos: How many times has the USA government inflicted torture on you? How many times has it kidnapped your relatives, had soldiers rape your female relatives, killed your relatives? Don't compare us to the disgusting dictatorships around the world. I think someone suggested earlier if you don't like what our country does get out.

Same for you Taoist, has your government tortured you lately? Has your government punished you for being so very vocal about your views?

For those of you who are so obviously anti-American, or anti -Coalition: the truth is you don't want to and refuse to see that by everything you are saying today now that the war has began,you are objectively "Pro-Saddam". If the Coalition backs out of Iraq now, that would leave Saddam there and stronger than ever, and every other country would have to deal with him, not to mention the torture his regime would continue to inflict.

We can't back out of Iraq now, no matter how many people hold their breath and throw tantrums, block the streets and make it harder for policemen and fire depts to do their job effectively around the country.

As far as the protestors go around the USA anyway, 9 out of 10 of those protestors don't even know where Iraq is on the map, let alone who Saddam is! They just know it is "cool" to go down and march. It looks good.. that is what most of them care about.  ::)


In a related topic:
I find it very ,very, very ironic that the French coward leader is now saying that he thinks the UN should run the reconstruction of Iraq.Pure ridiculousness considering the UN didn't support removing the old regime. It is just a way for him to deal himself back into the game, now that he and his countrymen have not put any effort, money, time or troops into removing the dictator that is there. What a scumbag.

Ok, you can go back to your griping and whining and sniveling about how horrible your governments are.......
End Quote

Well "guest" - are you really or are you a troll? - you are right.  My gov't has never done any o these things to me PERSONALLY.  But it HAS done these things, or sponsored and supported others who HAVE done them, in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Chile, Brazil, and even covered up (therefore condoning) rape at the U.S. Air Force Acadamy.  These are FACTS documented in many sources too numerous to mention, and can't be denied, so the U.S. gov't doesn't come across any better than the b***rds in Iraq on those moral issues.

And as to "getting out", I heard that s**t in the '60s when McNamara and the rest of the crew were knowingly  lying to us while knowingly pursuing a wrong war.  Don't tell me to leave my country because I oppose my gov't's actions.  Maybe YOU should leave.  Find a place where opposition to the gov't isn't permisable.   You might  find it more in line with your authoritarian tendencies.  You might also find out how precious the right to respectfully disagree really  is.

As to being "pro-Hussain", what a crock!  The guy is a bloody dictator, and I wish that the people of Iraq had been able to get rid of him.  Too bad that George 1st didn't have the gonads to help them do so.  The Shiia AND the Kurds tried, expecting his help, but he wimped out.

As to being "anti-American, I suggest that you read the basic documents that define what it is to  be American.  As I read the Dec.  of Independence and the  Const. I have the right to hold whatever opinion seems right to me, and to voice that opinion in any forum available.  Would you deny me that right in the name of blind patriotism (read jingoism)?  If so, than it is YOU who are anti-American, and I might suggest that if that is your position, than you come dangerously close to being a facsist.  

As to the protesters not knowing where Iraq is, DO YOU?  And who cares?  What they know is that their gov't is waging a war of aggression against a forth rate power for no good reason.  They "know" that (I agree with them - we may be wrong), and  have a right to express their anger and frustration (see 1st amendment to U.S. Const.) whether YOU like  it or not.  As I have said on this board at least twice, democracy is the most messy form of gov't. there is.  If you don't like it, go somewhere where you can't disagree with your gov't.  You might find it more comfortable to be told what to believe, and find no challenges to that - alive.

Quoting:


As to the protesters not knowing where Iraq is, DO YOU?  And who cares?
End Quote

Who cares?  If you are going to protest a "war of aggression against a fourth rate power for no good" (as you said) don't you think you should at least have the gumption to pick up a map and figure out where it is?  Isn't this part of being informed of the facts before forming an opinion?

Quoting:


Who cares?  If you are going to protest a "war of aggression against a fourth rate power for no good" (as you said) don't you think you should at least have the gumption to pick up a map and figure out where it is?  Isn't this part of being informed of the facts before forming an opinion?
End Quote

My Dear Dagwood,
Without wanting to be condecending, although it will be difficult not to, I know very well where Iraq is, and Afganistan, and Cambodia, and Camaroon, Figi, etc.  and in refering to the lack of geographical knowledge I was refering to "guest Patriot's" quote, which I included so that you might clearly see to what I was responding (you might want to READ more carefully before you write - just a thought).  All the people who are protesting against this war that I know are very well aware of the geography of the region - and especially of where ther oil is.  Jeeze - too bad Moses wasn't clued in - didn't ask directions?

Quoting:


My Dear Dagwood,
Without wanting to be condecending, although it will be difficult not to, I know very well where Iraq is, and Afganistan, and Cambodia, and Camaroon, Figi, etc.  and in refering to the lack of geographical knowledge I was refering to "guest Patriot's" quote, which I included so that you might clearly see to what I was responding (you might want to READ more carefully before you write - just a thought).  All the people who are protesting against this war that I know are very well aware of the geography of the region - and especially of where ther oil is.  Jeeze - too bad Moses wasn't clued in - didn't ask directions?
End Quote

I think that you mean to be condescending.  I never implied that you didn't know where Iraq is...I was referring to this:

Quoting:As to the protesters not knowing where Iraq is, DO YOU?  And who cares?  What they know is that their gov't is waging a war of aggression against a forth rate power for no good reason.  End Quote

This implies that it doesn't matter if you know where a country is to protest an action.  It does matter in my opinion.  If you consider yourself truly informed then you should know where the country is.  Again I am not saying that you don't know where it is.

And, please do not call me dear.  That is very condescending.

At this point, I choose not to respond to you anymore.  You do nothing but make me incredibly angry and that is not a good thing.  

Quoting:


  For those of you who are so obviously anti-American, or anti -Coalition: the truth is you don't want to and refuse to see that by everything you are saying today now that the war has began,you are objectively "Pro-Saddam". If the Coalition backs out of Iraq now, that would leave Saddam there and stronger than ever, and every other country would have to deal with him, not to mention the torture his regime would continue to inflict.

End Quote

  Pro-Saddam?!  You can't possibly support this assertion!

  What the hell is this crap? What is it that the War Party can't figure out about the fact that this is not a dualism?!

  Jesus H. Baldheaded Freaking Christ on a Pony on a Crutch on the Cross!

  I just don't understand why the war-party has to invent limits to reality in order to justify this war. If it's a proper war, then it's a proper war and you shouldn't have to rely on presumptuous dualisms to frame the case for war.

  The ends do not always justify the means. Just do yourself the favor of never wondering why some people in the world distrust Americans.

  Certes the Iraqis will cheer our soldiers on arrival. The Iranians cheered the Ayatollah Khomeni when he came to power. How long will the Iraqis continue cheering?

  You know, as I look around at the arguments put forth by the war party, they're parroting their president as if it's Gospel truth on many occasions. Objectively, despite our best intentions, we do not have a good history at "building" democracies. Furthermore, the administration and the war-party have really tried to avoid certain facts (e.g. history) while exaggerating others (e.g. history). If George W. Bush can stand in front of me without spin and honestly convince me to support this war, I would. But it hasn't been honest. It has not involved open debate. It has not involved practical consideration of the issues. It has concerned itself largely with justifying an important step in an political game.

  We admit in this country that our politicians are crooks. We are disgusted with them every day. But when they get up and pitch a dishonest case for war, we rally behind them because hey, it's a friggin' war, so why not? I just don't get it. How is it that an incoherent, blithering, possibly criminal frat boy dealing from a stacked deck suddenly speaks the Golden and Gospel Truth? I won't make it specifically about Clinton, for instance, but .... People who criticize Clinton have looked to him for legitimacy in the case of Iraq; suddenly the Arkansas clown who couldn't say the word "honest" with a straight face is being looked to for justification for human destruction (this actually happened in a debate here); people who distrusted the government in general under Clinton now seem to think that the government can't lie (this is an observation of the culture in general). I don't get the flip-flop. It seems to me that people are tired of a bad economy, pissed at their government as usual, and greatly look forward to a slaughter to take their minds off their woes. Seriously, it's bizarre how suddenly so many people I know and read and watch on TV who distrust their government seem to think George Bush couldn't tell a lie to save his life.

Quoting:  
As far as the protestors go around the USA anyway, 9 out of 10 of those protestors don't even know where Iraq is on the map, let alone who Saddam is! They just know it is "cool" to go down and march. It looks good.. that is what most of them care about.  ::)

End Quote

  Why put ridiculous side issues out there to muck up your point? It's an old political trick in this country. Like coupling the support of our troops with support of the cause. I would have voted against it on the grounds that one can support one without the other.

 It's a way of avoiding the issue while trying to score a cheap point.

 It was cheap then, Patriot, and it's cheap now.

 

Quoting:


I think that you mean to be condescending.  I never implied that you didn't know where Iraq is...I was referring to this:


This implies that it doesn't matter if you know where a country is to protest an action.  It does matter in my opinion.  If you consider yourself truly informed then you should know where the country is.  Again I am not saying that you don't know where it is.

And, please do not call me dear.  That is very condescending.

At this point, I choose not to respond to you anymore.  You do nothing but make me incredibly angry and that is not a good thing.  
End Quote

Hay Dagwood
OK you're not "my dear" although I do respect your posts.  On the one hand, its a cultural thing.  We latinos first consider everyone "dear" (I took my partner to Puerto Rico for the holidays and her comment was "I have never been kissed by so many strangers in my life") and if they cross us "enemigo".  On the other  hand...I'll leave it for you to decide...

What I was trying to get across was that it really doesn't matter where injustice is taking place, and we may not really know right off the bat - I konw that Fiji is somewhere in the south Pacific, but would have to look at a map to find it - where it is  taking place to stand up against it.  Why should it matter?  If people are dying, being repressed, loosing freedom, isn't our OBLIGATION to stand up and say NO, we protest?

I'm not really clear on why I make you so angry.  I don't mean to.  My aim is to challenge, confront, inspire thinking.  if I'm not doing that for you, please explain why, either here or send me a personal (whatever it's called) message.  I look forward to understanding why I make you so angry.  PLEASE EXPLAIN.
D.C.

Quoting:


Well "guest" - are you really or are you a troll? - you are right.  My gov't has never done any o these things to me PERSONALLY.  But it HAS done these things, or sponsored and supported others who HAVE done them, in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Chile, Brazil, and even covered up (therefore condoning) rape at the U.S. Air Force Acadamy.End Quote

Don, you're really running the risk of becoming a parody of the burnt out radical.  You've answered the question: You haven't been tortured, family members haven't been kidnapped.  
 And yes, Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Tailhook....  And yet, somehow you know about these things.  The facts have come out, and those who brought the facts out are still free, still plying their trade.  You and I are allowed to rant and foam on this messageboard.  We may even go outside, right now, with our "Bush is Hitler" sign and PROTEST.  We don't even have to know what or who or why we're protesting... and the brown shirts aren't going to come out and take us away.  

Quoting:  These are FACTS documented in many sources too numerous to mention, and can't be denied, so the U.S. gov't doesn't come across any better than the b***rds in Iraq on those moral issues.End Quote

Facts known and discussed here.  True, Tailhook was covered up... but because of a FREE PRESS, because of a vigilant press and a society that accomodates it, the FACTS CAME OUT.  Careers were lost and the guilty were brought to the bar of justice.  

Quoting:And as to "getting out", I heard that s**t in the '60s when McNamara and the rest of the crew were knowingly  lying to us while knowingly pursuing a wrong war.  Don't tell me to leave my country because I oppose my gov't's actions.  Maybe YOU should leave.  Find a place where opposition to the gov't isn't permisable.End Quote

So much for grounding the revolution in love.  Vietnam has been over for a generation.  

Quoting:   You might  find it more in line with your authoritarian tendencies.  You might also find out how precious the right to respectfully disagree really  is. End Quote

It's not coming across as respectful disagreement.  It sounds like a one-eyed attack on anything and everything American, while somehow blind to the faults and crimes of other nations.  And it also sounds like knee-jerk reactionism -- anything George Bush says must be a lie and deception because it's coming from his mouth.  That, in my opinion, is simply groundless cynicism.

Quoting:As to being "pro-Hussain", what a crock!  The guy is a bloody dictator, and I wish that the people of Iraq had been able to get rid of him.  Too bad that George 1st didn't have the gonads to help them do so.  The Shiia AND the Kurds tried, expecting his help, but he wimped out.End Quote

Yes, and it's too bad Italy's Banca Nazionale del Lavoro funneled $5 billion worth of loans to him between 1985 and 1989...

Quoting:As to being "anti-American, I suggest that you read the basic documents that define what it is to  be American.  As I read the Dec.  of Independence and the  Const. I have the right to hold whatever opinion seems right to me, and to voice that opinion in any forum available.  Would you deny me that right in the name of blind patriotism (read jingoism)?  If so, than it is YOU who are anti-American, and I might suggest that if that is your position, than you come dangerously close to being a facsist.  End Quote

Well, a number of honorable men and women have, from conscious, quit the United States.  Paul Robeson and James Wright come immediately to mind.  

Quoting:As to the protesters not knowing where Iraq is, DO YOU?  And who cares?  What they know is that their gov't is waging a war of aggression against a forth rate power for no good reason.  They "know" that (I agree with them - we may be wrong), and  have a right to express their anger and frustration (see 1st amendment to U.S. Const.) whether YOU like  it or not.  As I have said on this board at least twice, democracy is the most messy form of gov't. there is.  If you don't like it, go somewhere where you can't disagree with your gov't.  You might find it more comfortable to be told what to believe, and find no challenges to that - alive.
End Quote

And OTHERS have the right to point out that you are tiresomely viewing anything and everything through the prism of a bankrupt political ideology.  
They tell you to love it or leave it, you call them a fascist.  

 ;D God bless the USA.  

Quoting:
Strangely enough, this sounds like another team everyone home is rooting for ;)
End Quote

Twins team home root for me  ;D

Quoting:
Thanks, to both Don and Steve.  You guys are great fun to watch. :)
End Quote

Indeed. I'm willing to admit I had not known of someone like Don Carlos and John Harvey since 1987, when I was living in Latin America. As Steve_H would put it, the fact that they can freely state what they feel like stating speaks volumes in itself. You can't do that in 99% of the world (I made up that number, btw ;) ). It's one thing to be on an FBI list and another to be in fear of the secret police/death squadron (both of which exist in Iraq and probably still do in some parts of South America like Colombia and Peru).

I have spoken with some friends of mine on the subject and they think of the invasion as a good thing for the most part. They are Iranian, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it ;) I was almost convinced, seeing as to how they know a lot more on homefront subjects than I do. They lived in great proximity of it for over half their lives. I have to do some serious thinking and reading about this. Spring Break is here, so I may catch up on lib arts 8) or sleep my daze away in ignorance: "Trapped between apathy and hedonism." Yeah, you know who you are!

Quoting:


Indeed. I'm willing to admit I had not known of someone like Don Carlos and John Harvey since 1987,
End Quote

What do you mean? Haven't you met a liberal in 16 years?

Anyway, here's what I really wanted to say. Just because being on an FBI list isn't as bad as being executed for speaking out against the government, that doesn't mean it's justified.

Quoting:


What do you mean? Haven't you met a liberal in 16 years?

Anyway, here's what I really wanted to say. Just because being on an FBI list isn't as bad as being executed for speaking out against the government, that doesn't mean it's justified.
End Quote

No, I haven't met certain kinds of liberals in over 16 years. I haven't met anyone who actually believes and speaks of Socialism as a solution to our governmental, economic, and societal problems in over 16 years. There are all kinds of liberals, John, but few and far between would put stock in Socialism. Usually, what you and Don Carlos write about is something I would have heard at a FMLN, FSLN, Sendero Luminoso, or FARC clandestine radio broadcast many years ago (I'm not kidding!).

*****Off topic*****

I think Socialism is a good idea, but it depends on the situation. Our economy, our situation, is not a situation that I would grant such an idea much value. I might be wrong. I do happen to room with an economics student working on his post-grad degree and he laughs at the notion of going backwards economically. Reforms are good, but we need reforms for THIS economy. The system needs to be reformed, but we can't apply an Occam's Razor to this delicate procedure. I wish I could have a better opinion on this, but economics is not my forte. All I can have is an opinion from the few, past references I've come across. Example: Before the bloody coup in Chile, Salvador Allende from the years 1970-1973 was their elected president and he ran the country under a Socialist platform. In three years, the economy plummetted and many grew discontent with the system. I think it would have been better if he had been elected out of office, but the CIA had other plans for him (a case of political assassination). Still, while he was in control of the nation, the economy failed. It failed miserably (much to my disappointment). I don't know if three years were much to start with, but it sure skyrocketted whatever little they had in the first place. Enter Gen. Augusto Pinochet Ugarte and his reign of terror began: It was a brutal military dictatorship coupled with Capitalist reforms (a style called "Independiente" by sympathizers, but it's more close to Fascism). Strangely enough, the economy of Chile is one of the better ones in all of South America to-day...

It's not black and white, and I've had to kick myself in the head for believing that Socialism was the cure for all our ailments.

Viva la Revolucion!

Gracefully, Respectully,

Carlos The Jackal