What happened to the anti-war movement?

www.hotchicken.com ^ | 10-10-05 | www.hotchicken.com

[thebiggestdog]

n the lack of opposition to the continuing war in Iraq. After thinking about it over the weekend, I am a little mystified about the lack of open oppostion to the war.

Typically five or six days a week I research a newsworthy story and write about it on this website. Some people agree with what I have to say and some don't. Readers will write and give me their opinion and why I am full of bull. When that happens, I am forced to re-examine my position. Most of the time my mind doesn't change, but sometimes it does.

[thebiggestdog]

I think maybe what Al G-whore said last week struck a nerve with me. Where are all the anti-war protestors? If war has divided the country, why don't we see people marching in the streets, and sit-ins at every college and university?

[right right]

Even kooks have lives. They may be out of drugs and need to resupply. Maybe their check for protesting is late and they can't afford to protest. Maybe they unionized and want benefits. Maybe there really isn't a REAL anti-war movement.

[cripplecreek]

The anti war movement is too incoherent to form any real group of protesters. The protest in DC a couple of weeks ago seems to have frightened some of them when they realized that there were some dangerous people among them.

[The_Englishman]

Egos play a big part. Too many fame seekers trying to get their 15 minutes for any kind of coherence.

A great number of these protesters just wanna appear in documentaries in 30 years time about their "anti-War" activities when they were young and rebellious.

[rightfielder]

Hot chicken writes "I am not someone who supports the war just because W. made the decision to take out Saddam." However, we must remember that...

the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions. Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us It wasn't just Bush's decision. We all voted to go to war in Iraq, because we elected the house and Senate, and they voted to go to Iraq. Ah the beauty of democracy! And if Walter said...

Americans are ignorant when it comes to picking our leaders and the political process.

Then maybe he would offer a form of socialism as an alternative! I support the War, the Troops, and the mission. We all started it (unless you didn't vote the last 5 years or so!) We must all support the military 100 percent until the job is done.

[HolgerDansk]

That's because most of the "anti-war protesters" are really anarchists or communists, who will protest anything.

[Fenris6]

I've debated alot of anti-war peeps. Most are just guilty liberals who feel a need to oppose some great evil [in this case, American "Imperialism"]. Its personal selfishness - they need to justify their wealth/waste/trivial lives when confronted with the 3rd world - like a man who justifies molesting the babysitter with "but I believe in world peace, so I can't be all that bad".

Also, very few anti-war peeps are "anti-war". They're anti-American-war. Che, Mao, Stalin, et al get a free pass. As do the tryants in the ME and sub-sahara Africa. They're hyprocrites of the first order, and will quickly resort to physical violence when the debate turns against them.