Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Useless Protests 31

Journal by pudge

Today, many people protested against the Iraq war with the stated goal of ending the American occupation of Iraq. But it already will end, on June 30. The occupation is scheduled to die in three months, and there is no indication whatever that it will get a reprieve of any kind. This has to be the most useless large protest, ever. "End the occupation!" "Um, OK."

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Useless Protests More

Useless Protests

Comments Filter:
  • Good to see you are back at the keyboard.

    Agreed. It would be foolishness to withdraw right now. Even if you disagree with the war, performing the occupation and withdrawal needs to be done orderly. Somehow I bet these are the same folks who said we would leave Afghanistan high and dry after taking out the Taliban. Instead we are rebuilding both countries. Yeah, there are still some insurgence, that is why we need to have our troops there until native forces are trained and capable of settling the nati

  • Really (Score:2)

    by Otter ( 3800 )
    This ceased to be at all about achieving a political end once the war started (What was the US supposed to do, give Basra back?) and entirely about venting rage and feelings of impotence, and declaring the protesters' righteous. Anyone who wants a US pullout before things are stabilized is either a fool or hoping to create a disaster.

    In fact,it's far from obvious to me that the war was a good idea. But these idiots (have you seen the woman in LA carrying an al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade poster [yahoo.com]?) are so repulsive,

  • This is nothing but Kerry trying to get votes. *shrug*
    • Erm, excuse me, but Kerry has, as far as I know (feel free to correct me), never demanded the occupation to be ended. It's rather the opposite. He has called for an increase in the number of "active service troops" to "ease the burden on troops who have been deployed from one global hot spot to the next." He has also said that "the United States, having gone to war, must meet its responsibility and act in its national interest by staying to achieve a peaceful and stable Iraq." (link [washingtonpost.com]).
      • I don't know what Kerry has to do with any of this. These worldwide protests would have happened with or without him. Regardless, Kerry has called for the occupation to be ended, in the sense that it is a real occupation: he wants to turn over power to the Iraqis and the UN, which is what the US is right now working to do: once the Iraqis have political control, the occupation is over. We will still have troops there, but we still have troops in many nations; no one believes we are "occupying" Germany.

        S
        • I don't know what Kerry has to do with any of this. These worldwide protests would have happened with or without him.

          My point exactly.

          So the thing here is that "occupation" means something specific, it means you are -- usually with the military -- in control of a nation.The US currently controls Iraq. That ends June 30, despite the continued presence of US troops, who will not be there by US force, but by Iraqi agreement.

          If it only were that easy. Formally, the occupation will end on June 30th, but the

          • Formally, the occupation will end on June 30th, but the perception of the situation may vary.

            Yes, some people think occupations exist where they do not. But that enforces my point: these protestors want an end to something that will end on June 30, and will likely continue to wish it to end after it does end. That is, these are silly people.

            Theoretically, by having troops stationed in Iraq, the US (and coalition) forces are still in control.

            This isn't a matter of theory. It's a matter of whether th
            • This isn't a matter of theory. It's a matter of whether the military forces will be in control; they will not be. The Iraqi government, whatever it is, will be.

              Well, it's rather a matter of ideology: the fact that US military forces would still be stationed in Iraq would give some people a pretext (can you be completely free in what you do if there are large numbers of foreign troops stationed in your country?) to call the Iraqi government a "puppet-regime". I'd say the occupation will only be over if the

              • can you be completely free in what you do if there are large numbers of foreign troops stationed in your country?

                If you have the power to ask them to leave, then yes, of course. And they will have such power.

                to call the Iraqi government a "puppet-regime"

                Only until elections, but yes. However, the UN endorsing this interim government will go a long way toward reducing such criticisms.

                • can you be completely free in what you do if there are large numbers of foreign troops stationed in your country?

                  If you have the power to ask them to leave, then yes, of course. And they will have such power.

                  No, they won't.

                  One of the goals of the invasion of Iraq was to establish a friendly government in the region that the US could use to project force into Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. The US will not want to conterfit such goals

                  If you think the UN is going to stop them, you are forgetting th

                  • No, they won't.

                    Yes, they will. That is what "sovereignty" necessarily means. Iraq will regain sovereignty on June 30; that necessarily means they can ask the U.S. forces to leave. They'd be stupid to do so, of course, and the Iraqi people largely DO NOT WANT the U.S. forces to leave yet.

                    One of the goals of the invasion of Iraq was to establish a friendly government in the region that the US could use to project force into Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

                    No, it is not about projecting force, but freedo

                    • Yes, they will. That is what "sovereignty" necessarily means.

                      The US interim government in Iraq says the Iraq will regain sovereignty on June 30. That does not make it true.

                      If we wanted to be able to project force against Saudi Arabia, why not just leave our troops IN Saudi Arabia?

                      Politics. The Saudi family is struggling to keep control of Saudi Arabia and any cooperation with the US weakens their position. With the US's current position in Iraq, they can exert more power than ever in the region

                    • The US interim government in Iraq says the Iraq will regain sovereignty on June 30. That does not make it true.

                      Yes, until it happens, it is not true. But everyone believes it will. And when the UN blesses it, who will argue that it hasn't happened?

                      Politics. The Saudi family is struggling to keep control of Saudi Arabia and any cooperation with the US weakens their position. With the US's current position in Iraq, they can exert more power than ever in the region, without causing the huge damage to a f

                    • The US interim government in Iraq says the Iraq will regain sovereignty on June 30. That does not make it true.

                      Yes, until it happens, it is not true. But everyone believes it will. And when the UN blesses it, who will argue that it hasn't happened?

                      I will. The US will give the new Iraqi goverenment as much power as self-determination they can. It makes people happy, and makes things easier on them. But there are a few things they will not allow, and one of those things is a complete withdrawl of

                    • I will.

                      And I will claim the sky is mauve!
                • I envy your optimism.

            • Yes, some people think occupations exist where they do not. But that enforces my point: these protestors want an end to something that will end on June 30, and will likely continue to wish it to end after it does end. That is, these are silly people.

              This is a Strawman's, if I ever saw one...

              • This is a Strawman's, if I ever saw one...

                It's not, as helpfully proven by another poster [slashdot.org]. :-)

                • Aw, c'mon, I've even highlighted the terms of the unwarranted deduction. I have no problems with the opinions expressed (even if I don't share them); just with the logic.

                  Ob. topic: When asked if I'd like to go to the protests (in Buenos Aires), I replied: "I don't do politics". Which, for me, is a way of saying "I don't brush shoulders with the left", whose groups were heavily represented in the meeting.

        • which is what the US is right now working to do: once the Iraqis have political control, the occupation is over. We will still have troops there, but we still have troops in many nations; no one believes we are "occupying" Germany.

          Having lived in Germany as an Army brat for close to 10 years, I have to disagree a tad on this. There are many Germans, especially young Germans who do look at the US as an occupying force. The "Go Home F*cking Americans" grafitti on many of the walls leading to our base was

          • OK, some people believe we are "occupying" Germany, but they are wrong.

            it is naive to say that the "occupation" will end June 30th. Tell that to the family of the Black Hawk helicopter flight mechanic friend of our family who will be starting his second Iraq tour at that time. We will have forces on the ground, June 30th will just be a big turn-over of those forces. Those coming in will still have targets painted on their backs.

            You're missing the point. Saying the occupation is over has *nothing to do*
  • is that what was going on? I took my kids to the waterfront here in seattle yesterday and saw all the people with their "impeach bush" signs. Glad I don't live downtown, those bleeding hearts would drive me crazy...
    • Yeah, I got picked up at SeaTac yesterday midday, and it was a lot of traffic trying to get north of the city.

      I was seeing them all and hoping that Bush wins WA's electoral votes this year, because I would love to see them all cry. :-)
  • Do you sincerely believe that all 'the boys' are coming home june 30th? The occupation ends when only iraqi citizens are in iraq....
    • Do you sincerely believe that all 'the boys' are coming home june 30th? The occupation ends when only iraqi citizens are in iraq....

      So U.S. is occupying Germany [af.mil]?

      Sorry, that's just wrong. The question is who is in control of the country, not whether there are foreign troops in the country. That's the whole point: people don't know what "occupation" means, or they don't know that it is scheduled to end on June 30.
      • I've heard of the June 30th deadline, skeptics say its too early, and i'm not sure where I stand on it.
        Bush always showed his dislike for 'nation-building'.

        Are US soldiers the victim of many suicide bombings
        while stationed in germany? rhetorical. Germany is no longer a hostile country.
        • I've heard of the June 30th deadline, skeptics say its too early

          But it is the date, nontheless. And the first elections are to be held around January next year, so this government taking over in June will be temporary.

          Germany is no longer a hostile country.

          And neither is Iraq.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The medium is the massage." -- Crazy Nigel

Close