jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:28 PM
Original message |
The "anti-war" left. I really take offense to that label. |
|
I hate war. I wish to God that there never was a war. But, I do realize there are times that we have to go to war.
Just because I am totally against this war in Iraq and want it to end ASAP doesn't make me 'anti-war'. It is an unfair talking point that has now been used as a label against anyone that is speaking out against Iraq. Or against anyone that is speaking out against pre-emptive war.
How dare people put a label on me!
|
bunkerbuster1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:33 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I prefer "America-hating pinko." |
|
And then there's the good ol' "pro-terrorist" -- yeah, I'm all about the religious subjugation of the womenfolk.
Guess my point is, most every right-wing label is demonstrably retarded. "Anti-war Left" no more so than the rest.
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Coming from the right wing wackos (my fav label) is understandable |
|
But it is coming from members of the Democratic party.
Afterall, they have to appease the 'anti-war left'. barf
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. They don't have to appease us. They only need us once every two |
|
years or so. We're their cheap dates? lol
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. If they don't appease me this week with this funding bill |
|
they may need to go to match.com to find another date.
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. I'm about ready to take an effen candle and just sit on Pelosi's office |
|
steps until I fall over or she gets a brain. Because I don't know what else to do.
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
12. All I can say is that I wouldn't want to be Pelosi right now. |
|
I am sure she is not resting too well these days. How to appease both the administration, and the anti-war left at the same time?! oh my :)
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
13. That would be her anti war extremist left wing DISTRICT. |
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:37 PM
Response to Original message |
3. I am fond of "Anti war left wing extremist". It's like a good yoga stretch. |
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:40 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Questions: what are the circumstance you find war justifiable and... |
|
..would you take to the streets if another war was waged not based on what you think are justifiable reasons?
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. I have to question that - while I agreed that we did need to go |
|
into Afganistan after 9/11... which was before I questioned 9/11... we didn't even get OBL and the taliban is back and in full force. So did we really need to go to that war? Right now, I would have to say no.
But then you look back at history, we helped the situation in Bosnia, took down Hitler, etc.
Would I take to the streets if this administration started another war? Damn right!
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
14. that isn't really what I asked. |
|
Sure, the current administration has zero credibility now in terms of military adventures, but what are the circumstances that would make you support a war.
Do we have to be attacked? Does one of our allies have to be attacked? Does a country ruled by a fundamentalist dictator with a nuke have to threaten to use it? Genocide within another country's borders?
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
17. If we were really attacked - probably yes. |
|
All of the other circumstances you mentioned....No..unless it was necessary and ALL OTHER OPTIONS were first used. And never alone.
It is hard to guess, without any exact circumstances.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
19. heh! Imagine the current president was never selected, and the Iraq fiasco never happened... |
|
Edited on Wed May-23-07 03:09 PM by wyldwolf
..now imagine a president you would approve of (Kucinich? Fiengold?) came to the American people and said, "We are positive a certain country has WMDs, is seeking nuclear bombs, and is supporting terrorists that have attacked us. We've sent in inspectors. We've tried to reason with them, but to no avail. I feel the only recourse is to assemble a coalition and take them out."
OK by you? Hard call for me, but I would lean "yes" if I trusted the president.
I'm for military intervention in Darfur now.
|
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
20. Military intervention in Darfur only if we have the support of the UN |
|
Biden is pushing for this, and I have mixed feelings about it.
I trusted Clinton (Bill - geez you have to add that these days) when we went into Bosnia. So again, it would all depend on who was in charge.
|
wyldwolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
21. the credibility of the president is paramount. We agree there. |
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
18. Intervention in a genocide, preferably with a UN consensus, |
|
and IF it would do more good than harm. But, I'm a pacifist so, fwiw.
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
15. I was against going into Afghanistan and rearranging rocks there. |
|
The people suffered and died as we knew they would and nothing came of it, as some of us suspected at the time.
And that was before I questioned 9/11, too. :shrug:
|
More Than A Feeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:43 PM
Response to Original message |
8. I like it, personally. |
|
Edited on Wed May-23-07 02:45 PM by Heaven and Earth
I have made a promise to myself that I will not support any war that I wouldn't be willing to go fight myself. That qualifies for the anti-war label, I think.
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:46 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Is "anti Iraq War left" acceptable? |
jillan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. Yes - or "people that think the war in Iraq is a bunch of BS" |
|
Edited on Wed May-23-07 02:49 PM by pirhana
but that wouldn't fit on a bumper sticker. And definitely too many words for chimpy - lol
edit for typo
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-23-07 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
16. Sure -- just as "anti-cronyism" is or, "anti slaughter because our |
|
idiot pretender can't hold a conversation" is also good.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 15th 2024, 06:56 AM
Response to Original message |