The one reason why I know that Bush is out of his mind, because #1, Sadamm did not threat the U.S. but he is a threat to us. We should have done something to Sadamm when we were in the Gulf War. We would not have this problem if America did not intervene in the situation. We are always stopping things for nothing, even when its something important. The only reason why Bush wants to do this war thing is because he is taking vengence for his DADDY!!!! We should know why. I can't stand why he thinks he can speak for every American. He doesn't speak for me at all. And also if he wants to fight or have war whatever he wants to do why doesn't he go over there and fight himself. If only people who knew who they were electing at the time, they would have chosen Gore. I know that he would know what to do. And if Cliton was never impached or wahtever he would have done something ever since 9/11. That is why the Oaklahoma City bomber is dead now. I hope whoever reads this know where I am coming from about Bush. He is no good and I don't want him as MY president anymore!!!! He doesn't know what he is doing!!! Thanks for allowing me to say what's on my mind. Peace!
I don't know about LA, but Bay Area organizations are really good about posting their peace/anti-war events on UnitedForPeace.org. It has events listed from all over the world, just go to the little navigator thingy on the left.
First of all, Bush doesn't want war? That's news to me. Secondly, some democrats support a war with Iraq, and some republicans don't; plus, some of the people protesting the war are NOT democrats, but independants, Libertarians, Green Party, etc. Thirdly, what the heck does Bill Clinton and his sexual past have to do with this?! And lastly, unless you have forgotten, this is the United States of America, and last time I checked, this was basically a free country (for now...). Anyone can support or oppose the president or any other politician. If you believe that every citizen must support and love der Fuhrer... I mean, their president, then maybe you'd be happiest in a country such as, I dunno, Iraq.
I'm sick and tired of Democrats just being against Bush because he is Republican! You don't support our PRESIDENT one bit. But when Bill Clinton got head, you still loved him. What does that tell you? You're all immoral! Nobody wants war, Bush doesn't really want it either. But if we don't do something about it and Saddam nukes us, you're gonna blame it on Bush, when he knew about it from the beginning and because YOU didn't support him, it happened!! Please, get your head out of your *****, Democrats!
There was a huge march against war with Iraq in my area over the weekend, and I didn't hear a word about it! URGG...! Even though I live near one of the largest cities in the world (L.A.), I might as well be living on a desert island. It would be the same thing... only without freeways and shopping centers. ;P
What I can't understand is, WHY NOW? Why all of the sudden? Didn't Bush, before he was elected, say that he didn't support his father's decision to invade Iraq, that he wanted America to mind its own business? Why the sudden change from isolationist to (trying to think of an objective word here) militarist, besides 9-11? Does it have anything to do with the struggling economy, the upcoming congressional elections, the failure to find Bin Laden and put al-Qaeda to justice? I think I've found out some answers myself, but ask yourself these questions, guys.
And ask yourself, what are the consequences if we did invade, without the approval of the U.N. Loss of allies in Europe, east Asia, and especially the Middle East? Increased hate of the U.S.? Would more terrorists be born out of this action? Would more terrorists attack us, both here and at our military bases in the Middle East, or around the world for that matter? And, why would a country, who had lost a war to us 10 years ago, has a depleted military with lowered morale, a population that can't stand another war, and has the suspicions of every other nation on the planet, attack a superpower with thousands of weapons and trillions of dollars at its disposal, and enough nukes to destroy the world hundreds of time over?
While I agree that Saddam and his regime must go at some point, right now the Middle East is extremely unstable. We must work to solve more pressing issues, such as helping Afghanistan obtain a stable government, and cooling down the situation in Israel/Palestine. If we invade now, the Middle East will become even more unstable, and nations with moderate governments that basically support the U.S will be in danger from fundamentalist, anti-U.S. terrorists. Invading will do exactly what we don't want: increase the threat of rogue terrorists.
1. Iraq will likely never be able to attack the US. At best estimates now they could barely hit Israel. 2. What wrong with "giving [someone] freedom"? Since when is freedom a bad thing to America? 3. Bush can be "only human" but Clinton has to be perfect? 4. The truth, if true, can rarely be considered "awful". The man who must start a war to make himself feel safe does not deserve dominion over other's lives. The power to send other people's children to battle to die should be invested in a person who knows that should never be required of him.
did the thought ever cross your mind that he actually does have a nuke? and he's got his finger on a button, waiting for us to invade. and when we do, the situation will get what..... better?????
when all these civilians get hurt over seas by our hands, i wonder how bush justifies it to himself. casualties of war??? what would THEY call it. justified?
if we do invade iraq, WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS, then other countries could follow our example using our precedent, and then what would we say. "you can't nuke pakistan, india! i know you've got terrorism there and you want it stopped but you just can't bomb people!!!!" then the line becomes blurrier, and law is a joke. action is neccisary, but caution should be taken in this delicate situation. i know bush has made his case, but i just think he's eager to go to war. i just hope it doesn't turn out bad.
I know no one likes the idea of war. I don't like the idea of war, either, but I think sometimes we don't really have a choice. Sometimes you actually have to step up to the plate and deal with your issues. As Alexander Hamilton said... "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." We need to stand up as a nation and deal with Iraq, because if we keep giving them the chance to have freedom and go about their own business, I truly believe they WILL attack the United States before we can attack them. I think President Bush is getting a bad rep. for nothing. People are overlooking all the positive things he has done for our country and focusing on the tiny little faults he has. HE IS ONLY HUMAN, PEOPLE! And isn't it reassuring that he has tightened security so much that we have been catching all these criminals and terrorists the moment they do something suspicious?! When former-president Clinton was in power, he laxed on terms with Iraq and wasn't firm in homeland security. I, for one, feel a lot safer with President Bush being in power instead of someone who wouldn't do anything at all and oppose a war and set us up for another attack. A lot of our problems with Afghanistan and Iraq right now were partly the fault of Clinton...he let a lot of people walk all over us and I believe President Bush is doing the best he possibly can to "clean up" the treaties and guidelines with other countries. Iraq is not interested in just being friends and on good terms with America...they want to see America tumble and if they have to develop nuclear weapons to do it they will! So if they won't let inspectors into the country, they obviously have something to hide and war will be our only choice. It kinda comes down to the awful truth that you must "attack your enemy before your enemy attacks you".
redjill for president. (i'll start lobbying this week.)
it would seem that they're truly set on this... i don't know what we can do anymore. just wait i guess. for what? they won't say, so f*** it i'll just sit here in the dark, and vote greenparty on the upcoming elections.
i don't understand why they don't utilize alternative energy sources!!!!!!!! are they going to wait till all the oil runs out, and we have to wear those paper masks and spf 6 million before they even consider it!!!!!!!! i hate them. they are dummies.
This is a response I got from my representative. Tell me what you think, and how/if I should respond:
Dear Jillian:
Thank you for contacting me to express your views towards Iraq. I appreciate hearing from you.
I believe the United States must seriously consider the option of using military force to remove Saddam Hussein from power. As you know, the Iraqi dictator aspires to attain nuclear capabilities and has no reservations towards using his stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons. In fact, he has used chemical weapons on his own people in recent years, spraying poisonous gas over the villages of the Kurdish minority. Following the Persian Gulf War, multi-national inspection teams were able to disrupt Iraq's weapons program and provide a setback to Iraq's ascension as a nuclear contender.
Unfortunately, former President Bill Clinton and the United Nations (U.N.) allowed international inspectors to be forced out of Iraq without reprisal. Since then, untold advancements may have been made in Iraq's weapons capability and this rogue nation continues to pose a threat to stability in the Gulf region and U.S. national security. Under recent pressure from world leaders, the Iraqi government has conditionally offered to comply with mandated weapons inspections. However, Hussein's previous record of empty promises has eliminated our ability to trust him. Through eleven years of defiance, Saddam Hussein has exhausted all ability for the world to tolerate his ambition to control the world's energy supply through the use of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Unfortunately, he has left the world with few options but to act swiftly and through the use of military force. Consequently, after giving our country's situation grave consideration, I intend to support authorizing the use of force when Congress considers an Iraq resolution. While we may not completely agree on this issue, I am confident that in the future we will see eye-to-eye on other matters of importance.
Again, thank you for contacting me. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.
The most you can hope to do as an individual currently is to continue to call and write (a letter/call per day or per week). Write/call your senators, your representatives, the president, the cabinet, political party leadership, anyone. The more they hear the more they listen. The angrier you are and the more you tell them you won't vote for anyone that supprts the war the more they'll listen. Also talk about a wide range of issues. Demand specific goals, demand certain questions be answered, demand democrats speak out, demand more international support, demand more time for UN weapons inpectors, demand a renewed focus on domestic issues. Explain what matters to you more than the war. And encourage like-minded individuals to do the same so you are collectively heard. Reports are that the calls/faxes/letters coming into congressional offices are running 90% opposed to war. A war resolution will probably get passed, but it can get wattered down, softened, delayed, made conditional, and made clear if the leadership is pressured to do so. It also helps if you know people who are rish and/or famous.
Bush receives a 63% positive, 36% negative job performance rating in September. In August, Bush received a similar 64% positive, 36% negative rating.
Results also show that when considering the Bush administration's push for a war with Iraq, the prospect of both U.S. and Iraqi causalities, significantly turns majority support for the war, into majority opposition.
The latest Zogby America Poll was conducted September 25-27 of 1,028 likely voters nationwide. The poll has a margin of sampling error of +/- 3.2%
Results show that more than two in three likely voters (70%) consider Saddam Hussein a legitimate threat to the safety and security of the United States, compared to 25% who believe Hussein is just another ruler who policies are anti-American. A slim majority of voters support a war with Iraq even if it meant thousands of Iraqi military causalities (51% support, 39% oppose).
A majority of voters oppose a war with Iraq if it were waged without significant United Nations or international support (40% support, 52% oppose), if it were only comprised of bombing the country (36% support, 52% oppose), and if it meant thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties (38% support, 52% oppose).
A slim majority of likely voters similarly oppose a war against Iraq if it meant hundreds of American casualties (41% support, 50% oppose) and if war meant thousands of American casualties (39% support, 50% oppose).
Voters are split if a war against Iraq meant sending in hundreds of thousands of U.S. ground troops (45% support, 46% oppose) and whether they would send their sons or daughters to held remove Saddam Hussein from power (45% support, 46% oppose).
Two in three voters believe the U.S. can actually remove Saddam Hussein from power (67% agree, 23% disagree), but a plurality disagrees that if the U.S. does remove Saddam Hussein from power, the nation of Iraq will then become friendlier towards the U.S. (37% agree, 46% disagree).
Other Zogby America Poll results show that economy/jobs is named the number on issue that will be most influential in the way voters vote during the upcoming Congressional and Senate elections. Economy/jobs is the number one issue most influential for 22% of those polled, followed by terrorism safety (10%), taxes (10%) and the war (10%).
Other issues receiving support include education/schools (8%), healthcare (5%) and Social Security (5%).
Pollster John Zogby: "There does not appear to be a national consensus for war as things stand today. Probing more deeply into what Americans are thinking, we find a split over supporting a war involving casualties on both sides, a willingness to send a son or daughter, and the use of ground troops. A nation that was split down the middle in the 2000 election, then was unified after the events of September 11, seems to be split evenly again as we enter the final swing of campaign 2002."
Marine, I knew you were going to say something... can't follow your own principals of keeping your mouth shut, can you? I wasn't addressing you; I already know what you think (more than I like to know). I get your point already... everyone does, and they don't care! According to a recent poll in the L.A. Times, its true that about 60% of the people surveyed support Bush, but only 30% surveyed would support the war if the U.N. opposed it. Still, 60% isn't a large majority. But this isn't the point. The point is that my voice and the voice of others like me is not being heard. I refuse to sit here staring at my monitor and my TV with my eyes glazed. Unlike you, I am hoping to do better than sit on my butt and complain, complain, complain....
good idea, marine. if people disagree with you, just stay silent and go along with what others tell us to do. war is peace, right? the fact that your principles fit so well with the nameless forces in 1984 and fahrenheit 451 is highly ironic for someone who is always proclaiming the superiority of democracy.
Here is what you can do jill, nothing. It is a wasted effort. Hate to break it to you, but the majority of America backs the war on Iraq. So protest all you want, but it will get you or your cause no where. You are simly part of a faction jill, that lacks numbers and tries to compinsate by using louder voices.
Topics 
Even though I live near one of the largest cities in the world (L.A.), I might as well be living on a desert island. It would be the same thing... only without freeways and shopping centers. ;P
