Anti-War Protestors Prolong War And Kill More American Military - Proof: The Vietnam War

[madicarus2000]

Originally Posted by Bunky39

you said iraq did not invade us. true but a collection of people closely associated with the power structure of the mid east blew up new york. that deserved some action. so your statement that "they" did not invade i do not feel is 100% accurate.

Your right, close to 80% of the highjackers were from Saudi Arabia who were taking orders from the power structure in Afganistan. Of course we went to Afganistan on the way to Iraq. Iraq had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the attack. But we probably shouldnt focus on those details right? It’s nearby so it’s good enough right?

[madicarus2000]

Originally Posted by Yeledaf

The mistakes made by the president and his administration are manifold. But I would argue that they stem from ignorance of the situation on the ground, an inability to apply skillful diplomacy to ensure allied cooperation, and an unwillingness to apply sufficient force in proper forms to accomplish the purported mission. We are in the untenable positon of using infantry forces as policemen and social workers, with a hostile press and a well-organized political network eager to seize on each example of soldiers either failing at their new "missions" as gendarmerie or case-worker, or of acting like soldiers and lashing out violently at miscreants. It's lose/lose for our troops,

I agree with you on the above statement.

Originally Posted by Yeledaf

and the press and protestors have exacerbated the situation in a way that is patently wrong and arguably treasonous.

This is where differ. I feel that if an administration puts US in the postion you described above, it is our Right and Duty to speak out when these wrongs are committed and try to force change. What else to we have, just be quiet and sit in our rooms and “hope” change happens. No, you protest, you force change. Protesters are not the ones who make the decision to put soldiers in harms way, it is the ignorant leadership who likes the fight so they can “bring it on”.

Originally Posted by Yeledaf

An "anti-war" (really, anti-US) movement that works in effect for the defeat of our country's efforts and thus, objectively, for the deaths of more of our soldiers than would have occurred otherwise?

Let’s see, what puts more soldiers lives at risk, people who say bring them home or people who say add more troops.

[Yeledaf]

Originally Posted by madicarus2000

I agree with you on the above statement.



This is where differ. I feel that if an administration puts US in the postion you described above, it is our Right and Duty to speak out when these wrongs are committed and try to force change. What else to we have, just be quiet and sit in our rooms and “hope” change happens. No, you protest, you force change. Protesters are not the ones who make the decision to put soldiers in harms way, it is the ignorant leadership who likes the fight so they can “bring it on”.



Let’s see, what puts more soldiers lives at risk, people who say bring them home or people who say add more troops.

Putting soldiers at risk, sadly, is asking them to do their jobs. When I served, I knew what I was in for. People who supported my enemies IN ANY WAY were, whether they wanted to admit it or not, engaged in putting my life at greater risk than if they had supported me in my admittedly distasteful mission -- (distasteful, because who, after all, WANTS war? Only a crazy person. It is a tragedy that the price of our freedoms is our willingness to engage those who want it taken away.)

A poem occurs to me in this context:

This is no Case of Petty Right or Wrong
by Edward Thomas

This is no case of petty right or wrong
That politicians or philosophers
Can judge. I hate not Germans, nor grow hot
With love of Englishmen, to please newspapers.
Beside my hate for one fat patriot
My hatred of the Kaiser is love true:–
A kind of god he is, banging a gong.
But I have not to choose between the two,
Or between justice and injustice. Dinned
With war and argument I read no more
Than in the storm smoking along the wind
Athwart the wood. Two witches' cauldrons roar.
From one the weather shall rise clear and gay;
Out of the other an England beautiful
And like her mother that died yesterday.

Little I know or care if, being dull,
I shall miss something that historians
Can rake out of the ashes when perchance
The phoenix broods serene above their ken.
But with the best and meanest Englishmen
I am one in crying, God save England, lest
We lose what never slaves and cattle blessed.
The ages made her that made us from dust:
She is all we know and live by, and we trust
She is good and must endure, loving her so:
And as we love ourselves we hate our foe.

(1915)

[phma]

Originally Posted by ProudCapMarine

Anti-War Protestors Prolong War And Kill More American Military - Proof: The Vietnam War Read some history at:
Anti-War Protestors Prolong War And Kill More American Military - Proof: The Vietnam War

What do you think?

When you keep in mind the broader question of should we have gone there at all ? The question of how to get out of there when it was being fought with no commitment to win ? It was the first living room war. Many people were seeing things they never could imagine and were repulsed by it, seeing no end in sight. They wanted to win it or end it. Seeing no desire by those in power to commit to win it. The people protested to end it. That was the only power the people had to effect change. Then it puts the protest in context.

It can then be view like the WW ll question of using atomic bombs. Does dropping the bomb save American lives in the long run ? Many said yes and those in power agreed. The protest did play a part in ending it. Did it save more lives in the long run ? That is the question and I'm sure your will have plenty of support for both sides of that coin.