To the Peaceniks - When will you hold Saddam responsible?

The world needs to focus on the evil of Sadaam, no the agressive nature of the US. There is a difference between defense and agression but our news media in this country fa to see the difference. But they are the same media who defended a vile Billy Boy.

 

Too bad WND doesn't know the difference between news and commentary.

 

If the world focused on exactly what Saddam has done to the Kurds, then the United Nations might actually have to do something instead of pretending not to acknowledge the real issues.

 

Johnv, who said this was supposed to be news? It was a very good commentary. I think Mr. Mac was right on target! When is the world going to hold saddam accountable? It is beyond me why anyone would not see this.

 

they all think if we hold hands and hug trees all will be well. sorry, reality shows that we must stop the inhumane dictators if we want a little peace.

 

I agree J...Good post SheEagle!

 

If this is truly what the "other side" thinks, then it just shows how little they actually know about those who oppose this war/action and pacifists in general.

 

If this is truly what the "other side" thinks, then it just shows how little they actually know about those who oppose this war/action and pacifists in general. </font>[/QUOTE]Stubborn,

This isn't far off. When I log onto CNN.com and see reports of the latest anti-war efforts (people prostesting naked) I can't help but think they are a bunch of idiots. I'd bet my next paycheck that 90% of all these war protesters are also pro-choice baby killers as well. The're a confused bunch with thier feet firmly planted in mid-air.

 

Ah, yes. Because we all know the press covers the least prurient story . . .

I'll readily admit that the most visible protesters fit that bill, and those are the ones who do the damage to the credible of us. There will always be knee-jerk reactors like the naked protesters, thinking they're directing attention to their cause, when they're only directing attention to their ridiculous antics.

The people doing the actual work have a somewhat greater vision than tree hugging and holding hands.

 

I've yet to see it

 

http://www.fcnl.org/issues/air-violence/terror/stmt_tenpoints.htm

I'm by no means completely versed in the alternatives to war proposed by all the peace groups, but this is a list from Friends' Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) that includes a lot more than tree hugging and hand holding. In fact, I don't see either of those as a listed viable option.

My point is just that many "peaceniks" as some of you call us, are more rational than some of those prancing around naked and little else. It is too often assumed that those who oppose war also oppose any effort to eliminate adversaries and the conditions that are leading some to pursue military action. That's simply not true. Pacifism is not a synonym for passive, contrary to uninformed (intentionally or not) opinion.

We tend to agree with the rest of you on the ends, just not the means. Yet somehow, the fact that we share the same ultimate goal is overlooked by those who want to discount peace activists as nutty, tree hugging peaceniks.

[ March 04, 2003, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: stubbornkelly ]

 

But Sister Stubborn,
What do we do with the book of Revelation where the Lord Jesus Christ comes and war is waged against Him? Is there not any other way to avert this comeing war written in the book?

Your buddy,
Blackbird

Sometimes peace can only comes through the use of war.