In the city where I live, Portland, Oregon, 10,000 people showed up to peacefully march the streets last weekend in protest of the Iraq war.
The crowd came bearing signs and banners, chanting and singing protest songs as they wove through city streets, shutting down traffic from dawn until dusk. The people were of all ages and demographics; the crowd diverse yet unified, reminiscent of Vietnam-era protests.
For me, seeing the protests was very personal. Many places where I have been hundreds of times, where my parents work, where I grew up, became a sea of bodies last Saturday. The crowds marched along the waterfront of the Columbia river, where passing trains’ passengers could only read the protesters’ signs in awe as traffic crept by.
The protests marked the 5th anniversary of U.S. occupancy in Iraq. Thankfully, there were very few arrests, and the 10,000-people strong protest was remarkably peaceful. Cries of "peace!" rose up from the crowd, as they passed through some of the city’s most densely populated districts.
There have been previous protests here in Portland. There were protests five years ago, when war was initially declared; there were protests on the second anniversaries, the third, the fourth. The protests had begun with much more anger than was expressed last Saturday. It seems that bitterness and anger over the war has slowly waned to a more solemn—yet equally passionate—cry for peace.
The day after the protests, March 19th, there were few traces of the previous day’s events. A few torn "Pray for Peace" signs littered the sidewalks, but traffic flowed freely as if nothing had happened. I will walk again on many of the protest sites myself very soon, some of my favorite places, where it is hardly apparent that 10,000 footsteps passed just days before.
I have to wonder what more it will take. How can we express our dissent more effectively than peaceful protests happening all across the country, and a now majority U.S. disapproval of the war in Iraq? I don’t want to see my Portland friends and family’s tireless march last Saturday become another statistic, easily swept away off of city streets, brushed off by authorities everywhere.
I have to wonder where our "we the people" value is today, and what our democracy has become here on home soil.
Are we powerless?
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| PDXriot.jpg | 185.3 KB |
| war-protest-portland.jpg | 55.87 KB |
I suppose as long as there is war there will be those who feel it is not just or right to go to war. The sad truth is ... there is no peace without war. What I cannot understand is why our own people are against their own country for trying to keep peace (successfully) here on the homeland. If we had not responded to 9/11 by entering Afghanistan and Iraq would we have continued to have bombings here in America?
I think so. I believe it would have emboldened bin Laden and others to go up against the most powerful nation in the world and have no response. To have no response from us would have given them bragging rights to the terrorist world: "Hit America! She won't fight back because she's soft and weak."
Our country is at war. Right now. But we are so politically correct in allowing free speech that we let the morale of our country be drained by these people.
Hate to break it to you folks, but this ain't Vietnam. It might look like it, but we aren't allowing it to get it that. The left-over hippies of the 1960s are trying to use the same page out of the same playbook they used during Vietnam by demoralizing and losing the war on the home front.
But it's different this time. Way different.
----------
If I write anything here that offends you, please use the comment feature to let me know. I may want to offend you again, so your help in that regard will most certainly be appreciated.
"The sad truth is ... there is no peace without war."
Sadly by today's standards there is no peace without war because everyone thinks that their way of life is the right way.
"If we had not responded to 9/11 by entering Afghanistan and Iraq would we have continued to have bombings here in America?"
Here's the thing, our reason for going over into the Middle East in the first place was to catch Osama. And as the years went on it went into Iraq, and the "Axis of Evil", then the "war on terrorism" which I think is very similar to the "war on drugs", its going to be an ongoing battle. Our reason for being in Iraq for one part is because of bad intelligence. True, what Saddam did was horrible killing thousands of people. So what do we do? We go over there put him out of power. Oh but wait, theres a borderline genocide thats been happening since early 2003 in Darfur, what do we do we impose "sanctions". We only stand behind the U.N when its convenient for us. We took Saddam out of power because we can, but we rushed into it without a detailed plan. You can't go to war based on an emotional decision, just like you shouldn't make major decisions in life after a stressful emotional situation. But when people REALLY need our help there's not much we can do on a large scale(as far as the military goes). I am against the war because of the fact that he lied to the American people after the fact he found out about the bad intelligence he still tried to justify it under those same circumstances (he was not a threat to us, if he wanted to put him out of power he should have just said so, maybe or maybe it wouldn't have worked). If he and the white house would just be a bit more honest (I know it's hard to picture that) with the people, maybe they wouldn't have to deal with so much crap right now.
"Our country is at war. Right now. But we are so politically correct in allowing free speech that we let the morale of our country be drained by these people."
These people? Who are these people? You mean the people you interact with? "These people" are just as American and patriotic as you are (I'm assuming you are). The government works at the will of the people and the majority of the people are saying we shouldn't have been there in the first place, or we should have thought it out more, or to bring our troops home. You might say "well we should get the job done" but will it ever be entirely done?
"Hate to break it to you folks, but this ain't Vietnam. It might look like it, but we aren't allowing it to get it that"
We (as citizens)? You? Or the "government"? The difference between Vietnam is that now, is that as a whole, we respect the people who are fighting over there reguardless if you are for or against the war. You seem to think "against the war" = "against the war, against the soldiers, against the government, against freedom, and supporting the terrorists".
Have A Nice Day :)
Hey guys thanks for the comments. Both had some GREAT insights.
And to anyone who might read this--we need to stop polarizing our ideas. It's not like if you're against the war then you support terrorists, or if you protest the occupancy then you think that the U.S. should have sat back and done nothing after 9/11.
Obviously, I think that the U.S. had to do SOMETHING post-9/11, be it only for the morale of the people. I never protested, disputed, or questioned that.
But it's now 2007; 9/11 was six years ago, our war now five years old. NOW I think that we have the right to question the efficacy of our occupancy in Iraq. Some of the people who strongly supported the war in 2001 showed up to protest last Saturday in the streets of my city.
We have seen a lot of destruction, but also accomplished some good things through this war. It is the LENGTH of it that I find tiresome, unnecessary, and maybe not getting us anywhere albeit great human sacrifice.
It's 2007; our minds, missions, motives are different than in 2001. We need to get out foreign policy up to speed.
Allison
"Be the change you want to see in the world" ~Mahatma Gandhi
Hey guys thanks for the comments. Both had some GREAT insights.
And to anyone who might read this--we need to stop polarizing our ideas. It's not like if you're against the war then you support terrorists, or if you protest the occupancy then you think that the U.S. should have sat back and done nothing after 9/11.
Obviously, I think that the U.S. had to do SOMETHING post-9/11, be it only for the morale of the people. I never protested, disputed, or questioned that.
But it's now 2007; 9/11 was six years ago, our war now five years old. NOW I think that we have the right to question the efficacy of our occupancy in Iraq. Some of the people who strongly supported the war in 2001 showed up to protest last Saturday in the streets of my city.
We have seen a lot of destruction, but also accomplished some good things through this war. It is the LENGTH of it that I find tiresome, unnecessary, and maybe not getting us anywhere albeit great human sacrifice.
It's 2007; our minds, missions, motives are different than in 2001. We need to get out foreign policy up to speed.
Thanks so much again,
Allison
"Be the change you want to see in the world" ~Mahatma Gandhi
"Sadly by today's standards there is no peace without war because everyone thinks that their way of life is the right way."
Tolstoy actually said that. Not exactly 'today's standard.'
"We go over there put him out of power. Oh but wait, theres a borderline genocide thats been happening since early 2003 in Darfur, what do we do we impose "sanctions"."
First thing is first. Iraq. Freedom. Safety for America. For if we don't secure that, what difference will the rest make?
"he was not a threat to us..."
Yea, right.
"These people? Who are these people?"
That's easy.
Liberals.
And I hate to break it to you, but no matter how you slice it, they are NOT just as American and patriotic as I am.
"We (as citizens)? You? Or the "government"?"
We as the once silent majority--who are no longer that silent anymore. We cannot afford to be anymore. We are rising up in one voice declaring, WIN the WAR! Victory in Iraq!
"You seem to think "against the war" = "against the war, against the soldiers, against the government, against freedom, and supporting the terrorists"."
Prove me wrong.
-----------------------
If I write anything here that offends you, please use the comment feature to let me know. I may want to offend you again, so your help in that regard will most certainly be appreciated.
"First thing is first. Iraq. Freedom. Safety for America. For if we don't secure that, what difference will the rest make?"
Oh yeah, you're right! Forget about trying to find the person responsible for 9/11, lets go to another country and spread "democracy". Lets put our domestic issues on the back burner and focus mainly on this one thing. Because, after all, we're America, no one messes with us, don't even look at us the wrong way, or we'll put a boot in your rear end, and you'll like it. And if you don't feel that way you're obviously a trader and probably a liberal...that makes TOTAL sense.
"Yea, right."
Really? So you're saying that his army could have easily invaded our land if we didn't go in there? I don't think so. And Maybe this wouldn't have happened if we didn't help aid him we he first took power.
"That's easy." "Liberals."
Then why are there wives, husbands, fathers, and mothers of dead soldiers protesting the war also? I dare you to go up to them and say that their un-American or not as patriotic. I dare you to go up to a soldier who's against the war but still served his tour there, that he's not as patriotic as you are (yes there are people like that). Can you please try for one second to not see everything in black and white because that's what you seem to be doing. Just saying liberals would be the same as me stating that all the governments problems are caused by the right (which is not true) you CAN'T place the blame on one particular party for all of the problems, maybe if people wouldn't have their head so far up their ass about which side they belonged to (this goes to Dems, and GOP's both) maybe, just MAYBE we could get something done that would benefit the people. Notice I've never called myself a Democrat or a Republican, nor did I place blame on just the left or right.
"And I hate to break it to you, but no matter how you slice it, they are NOT just as American and patriotic as I am."
Define American and patriotic, I bet we will have 2 totally different definitions. And to say they aren't as American and patriotic as YOU are makes you sound like an irrational person (which I hope you're not).
"We as the once silent majority--who are no longer that silent anymore. We cannot afford to be anymore. We are rising up in one voice declaring, WIN the WAR! Victory in Iraq!"
So that's what it's all about? Winning? Not once did you mention the well being of the innocent American civilians, or a lot of the innocent Iraqi people and their well being.
"Prove me wrong."
You never proved your point in the first place.
Have A Nice Day :)
"And if you don't feel that way you're obviously a trader and probably a liberal...that makes TOTAL sense."
If you are going to debate/attack me. Please use spell check. The word is spelled 'traitor.'
"Really? So you're saying that his army could have easily invaded our land if we didn't go in there?"
No one can beat our army. Period. Of course they couldn't. But they've got these things called nukes. You know, big metal things that go boom. Ask the Kurds about things like those. While you can say all you want about Iraq not having nuclear weapons (which is a lie...the truth of the discoveries being WAY downplayed by the MSM, just look up all the sarin and mustard gas warheads uncovered), their ability to get them was in question. Would they use them against us? HECK YES.
"So that's what it's all about? Winning? Not once did you mention the well being of the innocent American civilians, or a lot of the innocent Iraqi people and their well being."
The well being of our innocent American civilians was addressed when terrorists flew planes into our buildings. And as for the innocent Iraqi people, it called collateral damage. You cannot fight a war without that. No matter how you slice it. It stinks, but you just have to suck it up and accept it. And are Americans purposely going out to seek and destroy innocent civilians?
And as for the whole patriotism/protester thing--To protest is, in my opinion, a slap in the face to every red-blooded American who fights for us, who dies for us, who is trying to do the right thing for us. Sure. You have the right to protest -- it's guaranteed in the Constitution. But I find it hard to believe you have the conscience to do it. Peace. We all want it. But some are nieve enough to think it doesn't come with a price. Others know better. And when those of us who know better speak up, the Left tries to silence us by calling names and with personal attacks ... but we can't let them silence us. We can't allow them to cower us. We have to stand up for our country and against the anti-war protesters ... stand up against the leftists and socialists ... stand up for our future. We must stand in unity.
Freedom isn't free.
----------
If I write anything here that offends you, please use the comment feature to let me know. I may want to offend you again, so your help in that regard will most certainly be appreciated.
"If you are going to debate/attack me. Please use spell check. The word is spelled 'traitor.'"
I am in no way trying to "attack" you, I do take your comments into consideration when I reply.
"No one can beat our army. Period. Of course they couldn't."
At least we agree on one thing.
"While you can say all you want about Iraq not having nuclear weapons, their ability to get them was in question. Would they use them against us? HECK YES."
I never said that, I said he wasn't a threat to America. We have the most nuclear weapons of any country in the world, only second to Russia, I think. Lets just say (for this situation) you're right. Iraq did have WMD and he did want to use them to attack American soil. I mean the guy was a horrible person but I'm sure he wasn't stupid. There's little to no chance he could have done that without us, or one of our allies finding out, and then we would have done what we did (and what we're still doing now), which is take him out of power, overthrow his government, go to war, etc. But at least it would have been, without a doubt, justified and backed by the American people and government, 100 percent.
I also found this quote to be interesting about the U.S. aiding Saddam:
James Woolsey, former director of the CIA, April 2, 2003 :
"Yes, it’s true. We did. We certainly didn’t put in Saddam, the Ba’athists did that on their own. But we did back him in some limited ways in the 1980s in the war against Iran. He represented himself to be, and the Reagan administration at the time felt that he was, essentially, the lesser of two evils...."
So we knew this guy was bad news from the beginning, but we hated Iran's leader just a little bit more? I'm aware of the saying that goes "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer", but now it seems that we have made that mistake one too many times and we're paying for it dearly. I think one the actual reasons for invading Iraq was because of Iraq not obeying the no-fly zones in northern Iraq, which goes back to the Gulf war, but we don't hear much about that of course.
"Americans purposely going out to seek and destroy innocent civilians?"
In some cases, yes they are. This goes for both sides, not just Americans, but we aren't always the victims.
"And as for the whole patriotism/protester thing--To protest is, in my opinion, a slap in the face to every red-blooded American who fights for us, who dies for us, who is trying to do the right thing for us."
Like I said in my previous comment...What about the soldiers who are against it? What about the families who had their mothers and fathers die because of it? They protest against the war also. Go tell them they are a slap in the face "to every red-blooded American who fights for us, who dies for us, who is trying to do the right thing for us.", I'd like to see their reaction
"Peace. We all want it."
Wow, another thing we agree on.
"But some are nieve enough to think it doesn't come with a price."
Before you give me a hard time about misspelling a word, you must 'practice what you preach'. The word you're looking for is "naive". Nieve is actually the Spanish word for snow.
"And when those of us who know better speak up, the Left tries to silence us by calling names and with personal attacks ..."
Personal attacks are pretty low I agree, but blaming the left for all of your problems is just irresponsible.
Finally, after all of this "debate", I think we can agree on one main thing...we both want peace right? I think that the way of how to go about bringing peace is where the conflict happens.
<<"Americans purposely going out to seek and destroy innocent civilians?"
In some cases, yes they are. >>
Wow. Do you really believe that?
We are fighting an enemy that uses bombs against civilians on a daily basis as a matter of policy. I tend to defend the right of people to protest the war, and freely express their opinions, but they should at least inform themselves of the facts. If your statement above was not a mistake of rhetoric you may be a traitor to this country.
If you are against the current American action in Iraq, perhaps you could consider the results of UN sanctions after the first gulf war:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011203/cortright
"a comparative analysis of the more than two dozen major studies that have analyzed malnutrition and mortality figures in Iraq during the past decade. He estimated the most likely number of excess deaths among children under five years of age from 1990 through March 1998 to be 227,000. "
Compare these deaths of innocent children with the 4,101 coalition deaths and 28,009 U.S. troops wounded in action.
Another thing to consider when opposing the war is the effects of troop withdraw. Are you willing to risk hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Iraqi lives to save a few hundred or thousand American ones?
The heroes fighting for YOUR rights in Iraq deserve more respect than your comments show them.
A fact is always better than an ideal
There are those who I know who grew up during Vietnam who remember the hate-filled protesters of that day ... and we're not sitting back silently watching as they do it again.
There are the Vietnam veterans who were at the receiving end of those hippies' actions during Vietnam, who were treated disrespectfully and threatened by protesters. Their government told them not to wear their uniforms when traveling home on leave in America because it was too dangerous. What was wrong with that picture? Where were honorable Americans to stand up to that?
We are standing up to it now. They can march and write as much 'anti-' stuff as they wish... but I'm going to be out there to stand up to them because I'm doing this for my relatives and neighbors who were Vietnam-era veterans and for my others my age who have to live in the world our elders leave behind.
I'm doing it for every man and woman who enlists because they love this country and believe in the mission.
And I'm doing it for those who have given the supreme sacrifice because I don't want their families to feel that they died in vain. They died to keep me free. They died to provide safe streets so I can drive without worrying about a bomb going off under my vehicle. They died to keep homicide bombers out of our malls so I can shop in safety.
They did not die in vain.
----------------------
If I write anything here that offends you, please use the comment feature to let me know. I may want to offend you again, so your help in that regard will most certainly be appreciated.
"If I write anything here that offends you, please use the comment feature to let me know. I may want to offend you again, so your help in that regard will most certainly be appreciated."
LOL
Blog on Brother!
A fact is always better than an ideal