Athiesm, Liberals, anti-Americanism: Portland, yeah!

[CliveStaples]

But remember kids: Don't question their patriotism! And also: atheism only leads to Truth and Enlightenment!


Never forget how much these guys love the troops:



Yup, much love from the Portland area liberals.


Just so you know: I live in Oregon. I have to deal with this crap all the time. Even Zhavric's insane 9/11 conspiracies pale in comparison.

[Apokalupsis]

Of course, you do realize don't you that the response you will get from the liberals and atheists here, will be...

How do you know those in the photo protesting are liberals and/or atheists?

Is there a story or link that explains the event in the photo?

[Xanadu Moo]

But remember kids: Don't question their patriotism! And also: atheism only leads to Truth and Enlightenment!

Never forget how much these guys love the troops:

Yup, much love from the Portland area liberals.

Just so you know: I live in Oregon. I have to deal with this crap all the time. Even Zhavric's insane 9/11 conspiracies pale in comparison.

I'm in Oregon too. Gotta love it, eh? Why are they burning a depiction of a soldier?

The question I have about war protesters is: are they anti-terrorism? Do they think terrorists can be reasoned with? Do they think terrorists hate us because we're hate magnets?

[Apokalupsis]

They think that terrorists are just "misunderstood" and are "freedom fighters". I think this is one of the key flaws in the mindset of radical liberalism.

[Snoop]

Isn't flag burning against the law?

I guess not.

[Enigma]

They think that terrorists are just "misunderstood" and are "freedom fighters". I think this is one of the key flaws in the mindset of radical liberalism.

No, we just don't support invading another country and causing more harm than the previous dictator did.

I can support a war in defense, no offense.

[Turtleflipper]

Ignorance knows many forms, and it is the enemy. Liberal, athiest, or conserv., these names should not interfer with our castizing people like this. The soldier is no more responsible for the war then the raindrop for the flood, and these people don't seem to understand that.

No one's saying athiesm= magic better human ticket. Except clive...apparently? Any philosophy can be hijacked by the ignorant. It is our duty to stop them.

This is not a partisan issue in my mind. It is simply a case of extremists vs. moderates.

[Apokalupsis]

No, we just don't support invading another country and causing more harm than the previous dictator did.

I can support a war in defense, no offense.

Is that all the protesters above are protesting to by burning the American Flag and a life-size dummy of an American soldier?

[Enigma]

Ignorance knows many forms, and it is the enemy. Liberal, athiest, or conserv., these names should not interfer with our castizing people like this. The soldier is no more responsible for the war then the raindrop for the flood, and these people don't seem to understand that.

No one's saying athiesm= magic better human ticket. Except clive...apparently? Any philosophy can be hijacked by the ignorant. It is our duty to stop them.

This is not a partisan issue in my mind. It is simply a case of extremists vs. moderates.

The soldier signed up for the military service. So, in essence it is his fault that he is there. In every way so...

No draft was initiated. Everyone in Iraq right now is there by their own will.


_________________________________ _{Post Merged} _________________________________

Is that all the protesters above are protesting to by burning the American Flag and a life-size dummy of an American soldier?

I can't be responsible for what THEY do. I try to avoid labels because this is what happens when I associate myself with them, one person does something I don't agree with and everyone within that same label is bombarded with insults and accusations.

I don't know what THEY believe in. I merely know what I believe in. I can pick up hints of what they think though, obviously they must hate the soldier itself. Well, they are targetting the wrong symbol.

[Apokalupsis]

Therefore, let's kill all the American troops who are sent to Iraq for they are the oppressors and evil doers, right? If the war is their fault, then they deserve to die, right? And better the oppressors like the American, Australian, British, Canadian, etc... servicemen and women, than those who kill their own people in "protest", right?


_________________________________ _{Post Merged} _________________________________

I can't be responsible for what THEY do. I try to avoid labels because this is what happens when I associate myself with them, one person does something I don't agree with and everyone within that same label is bombarded with insults and accusations.

Sort of like your attack on Consevatives in the Conservapedia thread?

I don't know what THEY believe in. I merely know what I believe in. I can pick up hints of what they think though, obviously they must hate the soldier itself. Well, they are targetting the wrong symbol.

But how so? If it is the soldier's fault...

[Snoop]

Here's how they do protests in Chicago - much more civilized:

Fake dead, blood make argument against war

By Josh Noel, Tribune staff reporter; Andrew Schroedter and The Associated Press contributed to this report

March 20, 2007

Shortly after the third and final protester against the Iraq war fell to the floor at Rep. Rahm Emanuel's storefront office Monday afternoon, a group of schoolchildren walked by.

The protesters, portraying dead bodies, were covered in white sheets smeared with fake blood. The students opened their eyes wide, craned their necks and traded confused grimaces.

"I sort of don't get it," said Victoria Ochoa, 8.

"I get it," said her friend, Evelyn Diaz, 9. "War is dangerous."

On the fourth anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, there were modest anti-war demonstrations in cities from coast to coast. Statements large and small were made across the Chicago area.

At Soldier Field, Ald. James Balcer (11th) led an annual vigil in support of U.S. troops. In Evanston, about 300 people turned out Monday night to sing peace songs, hoist burning candles and wave signs calling for a U.S. military pullout from Iraq.

At Emanuel's office on Irving Park Road, the non-profit Christian Peacemaker Teams staged an act of civil disobedience against the war that ended with three arrests for misdemeanor criminal trespass.

Even though they knew Emanuel (D-Ill.) was not in the office, about 10 people showed up with signs and props to persuade him to sign a pledge against funding the war in Iraq.

"This is about sending a message," said John Volkening of Christian Peacemaker Teams. "Until people are willing to take the same risks for peace that others are willing to take for war, we will never have peace."

Earlier, Balcer gathered with fellow veterans in front of a war memorial near Soldier Field. Most speakers avoided judging the merits of the war and were unified on the need to support the troops with adequate training, supplies and medical care.

"I think the support for the troops is still there," he said. "But we need to come out here anyway and remind them."

[Enigma]

Therefore, let's kill all the American troops who are sent to Iraq for they are the oppressors and evil doers, right? If the war is their fault, then they deserve to die, right? And better the oppressors like the American, Australian, British, Canadian, etc... servicemen and women, than those who kill their own people in "protest", right?


_________________________________ _{Post Merged} _________________________________



Sort of like your attack on Consevatives in the Conservapedia thread?


But how so? If it is the soldier's fault...

I said it's their fault that they are THERE. I'm just saying, I don't have much sympathy for them. They are only there because they wanted to be. If they die, well they knew about that risk in the first place.

I don't want to kill or even injur a soldier. I don't hate them at all, though I dislike a few, especially those who join in now. They'd either have to support the war to willingly join or have been living under a rock or something for the past few years.

In some senses, it's the soldiers fault, because if there were no soldiers there would be no war. At least that makes a tad bit of sense, but I don't place much blame on em in such regards because knowing bush a draft would of been instated if he did not have enough people. I wonder how that would of turned out...

[Xanadu Moo]

The soldier signed up for the military service. So, in essence it is his fault that he is there. In every way so...

Enigma, are you suggesting that we should not have a military? Why is it someone's "fault" for providing us defense? Without that defense, you'd be sitting in a prison camp somewhere wondering why America didn't come to your rescue. Do you want their help or not? Can you handle the terrorists on your own?

In some senses, it's the soldiers fault, because if there were no soldiers there would be no war.

I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this concept... What exactly do you mean?

[Enigma]

Enigma, are you suggesting that we should not have a military? Why is it someone's "fault" for providing us defense? Without that defense, you'd be sitting in a prison camp somewhere wondering why America didn't come to your rescue. Do you want their help or not? Can you handle the terrorists on your own?

No, I'm suggesting that we should not use said army to invade other nations. It's that simple. A purely defensive army is fine by me.

I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this concept... What exactly do you mean?

Huh?

If there are no people to fight...there is no war. Pretty simple. Lol.

[Turtleflipper]

The soldier signed up for the military service. So, in essence it is his fault that he is there. In every way so...
.

For most, I don't think so. They signed up pre-Iraq. Meaning they went in for honour, defend the nation, all that good stuff. That they're stuck in Iraq right now shows more the idiocy of the war-plan then their own failures

[Xanadu Moo]

If there are no people to fight...there is no war. Pretty simple. Lol.

[Enigma]

For most, I don't think so. They signed up pre-Iraq. Meaning they went in for honour, defend the nation, all that good stuff. That they're stuck in Iraq right now shows more the idiocy of the war-plan then their own failures

Oh, they signed up KNOWING there would be a chance that they would be sent there. Maybe they don't want to be there, but that does not mean that they did not choose to be. (If they did not want the risk they should not of signed up.)

But that being said I really don't care to blame the soldier. I just don't care for em much, tis all.

[chadn737]

I said it's their fault that they are THERE. I'm just saying, I don't have much sympathy for them. They are only there because they wanted to be. If they die, well they knew about that risk in the first place.

I don't want to kill or even injur a soldier. I don't hate them at all, though I dislike a few, especially those who join in now. They'd either have to support the war to willingly join or have been living under a rock or something for the past few years.

In some senses, it's the soldiers fault, because if there were no soldiers there would be no war. At least that makes a tad bit of sense, but I don't place much blame on em in such regards because knowing bush a draft would of been instated if he did not have enough people. I wonder how that would of turned out...

That is damned ignorant.

Realize, that most of those that have served in Iraq, and who continue to serve in Iraq where in the military before the War started. If you were part of the service prior to the War you didnt have a frickin choice.

Furthermore, having invaded Iraq and engaged ourselves in this war it is not a simple matter of whether you agree with the war or not. What happens in Iraq is of critical importance and success is vital, regardless of your opinion. This is not a problem for children, where you can simply say "well we tried, lets give up now and go home." We are there now, thats a simple fact and regardless of right or wrong failure is something that must not happen. Success is dependent on individuals willing to do the job and many people recognize that we are in this for the long haul, regardless of whether it was justified in the beginning and those are the individuals who are willing to sacrifice to see that success is achieved.

I joined the National Guard prior to the War, at the time I was told that we would probably never be deployed. That was wrong. My unit got deployed with in a year, but I was still in training and so my slot was filled by someone else. Now our from the outlook of things, a new deployment for my unit is likely within a year. Do I want to go? Hell no, especially when I will be starting graduate school for my PhD this next fall, but should it happen I'll go without complaint, realizing that my country needs me and that service is a worthy sacrifice. I stopped agreeing with the war a long time ago, but comments like yours really piss me off. Ever since my unit returned I have had to witness and deal first hand with the crap that the vets are dealing with and then listen to ignorant and disrespectful comments about them sends me over the edge.

Understand that what you know and hear about Iraq in the news is not accurate. You think you know what is going on over there...you dont.

Outside of the Sunni Triangle, Iraq is doing incredibly well. My unit was stationed in Ramadi, Combat Engineers assigned to the 2nd Marine Division. They were right in the mess of things. Outside of that, stuff was peachy. They had to deal with mortars inside the wire everyday. When they went to the other bases outside the Triangle people were surprised if anything went off within 4 miles of the base.

Thats how isolated your view and knowledge is. All that you hear of Iraq is concentrated in one little area, while outside the people are experiencing a life finally free of the fear they had under Saddam.

[Apokalupsis]

I said it's their fault that they are THERE. I'm just saying, I don't have much sympathy for them. They are only there because they wanted to be. If they die, well they knew about that risk in the first place.

IMO, this exposes a lack of knowledge of the military. As a former serviceman, I always find it interesting how civies believe they understand how the military works, yet are so far removed from the truth.

As a serviceman, one takes an oath. There is a sense of honor and duty, not only to that oath, but to one's nation that is being served, and more importantly, to the brothers and sisters-in-arms one serves with.

Most military personnel do not want to go to war. Most do not join to go to war. People join for a variety of reasons (education, training, money, sense of duty, patriotism, etc...).

But the fact that one does not want to go to war, doesn't mean that one isn't obligated to do so. And perhaps this is just another one of those differences between the general liberal and general conservative, I don't know. But most conservatives (and moderates I'd argue) don't do just want they want...heck, what a wonderful life it would be if we only did what we wanted. Much of the time, we must do what is right despite us not wanting to do it.

Was the war justified? I don't think so. Are soldiers justified in not serving? No, absolutely not. There is an obligation to fulfill.

I don't want to kill or even injur a soldier.

If it is the soldier's fault for the war...then why not protest the soldier? If it is the soldier's fault (US, British, Australian, Canadian, etc...), then it is not the fault of those who they fight. Thus, it is only reasonable, to follow your argument here, that the servicemen and women serving in Iraq, ought to be protested and hoped to lose...after all, they are the oppressors, right?

In some senses, it's the soldiers fault, because if there were no soldiers there would be no war.

You mean, there would be no "you". There will always be wars. Without a military to defend against oppressors, there wouldn't be people in existence to make such statements as the one you made.

Essentially it's saying "It's the fault of the military for allowing me to live". Rather silly isn't it?

At least that makes a tad bit of sense, but I don't place much blame on em in such regards because knowing bush a draft would of been instated if he did not have enough people. I wonder how that would of turned out...

Actually, this is false. It is liberal Democrats who created the proposed Draft bill and pushed for the military draft. Republicans (conservatives), opposed it. We documented that here at ODN in an older thread...I'd have to search for it.

[Enigma]

[QUOTE]

IMO, this exposes a lack of knowledge of the military. As a former serviceman, I always find it interesting how civies believe they understand how the military works, yet are so far removed from the truth.

I never claimed to know how the military works. I'd never join anyways.

As a serviceman, one takes an oath. There is a sense of honor and duty, not only to that oath, but to one's nation that is being served, and more importantly, to the brothers and sisters-in-arms one serves with.

An oath? I see. So you give up your right to freedom by joining. Hurra! for that, eh?

Most military personnel do not want to go to war. Most do not join to go to war. People join for a variety of reasons (education, training, money, sense of duty, patriotism, etc...).

And I've said this before, wether they want to go or not is irrevelant. What is revelant is that they joinined of their own volition, knowing FULL WELL that there was a chance they could get deployed to war. If they don't want to risk it, they don't have to join. Simple enough.

But the fact that one does not want to go to war, doesn't mean that one isn't obligated to do so. And perhaps this is just another one of those differences between the general liberal and general conservative, I don't know. But most conservatives (and moderates I'd argue) don't do just want they want...heck, what a wonderful life it would be if we only did what we wanted. Much of the time, we must do what is right despite us not wanting to do it.

Eh, I do what I believe to be right everyday. I've never once wanted to do anything besides that. I don't really know what you're trying to get at. Besides, this war is far from "right".

Was the war justified? I don't think so. Are soldiers justified in not serving? No, absolutely not. There is an obligation to fulfill.

I'd be HONORED to see a soldier stand up for what HE believes in, and not just do as he is told. Seeing a soldier refuse to follow an action he thought to be wrong or immoral is truly something to commemorate.

If it is the soldier's fault for the war...then why not protest the soldier? If it is the soldier's fault (US, British, Australian, Canadian, etc...), then it is not the fault of those who they fight. Thus, it is only reasonable, to follow your argument here, that the servicemen and women serving in Iraq, ought to be protested and hoped to lose...after all, they are the oppressors, right?

They are not oppressors. Most of them as you've said don't WANT to be there, but obviously choose to stick around instead of being court marshalled. I can understand that. Which is why I don't fully blame them. (The little blame I place though, is as I said before hand, they joined knowing there was a chance that they would be called into duty.)

You mean, there would be no "you". There will always be wars. Without a military to defend against oppressors, there wouldn't be people in existence to make such statements as the one you made.

Eh, so you're saying citizens can't defend themselves? That without a military we're doomed or something? Rubbish. People aren't stupid. We can fend for ourselves if we must. Obviously that's not what the government or military wants the people to believe though.

Essentially it's saying "It's the fault of the military for allowing me to live". Rather silly isn't it?

Allowing me to live? Rofl. I never ASKED for their help. But yet I'm still forced to pay for them through all sorts of taxes (and a bunch of other crap I don't use, go figure.)

Actually, this is false. It is liberal Democrats who created the proposed Draft bill and pushed for the military draft. Republicans (conservatives), opposed it. We documented that here at ODN in an older thread...I'd have to search for it.

I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian. Make that what you will. I stick away from political groups because we just get slapped with their past. It's funny though how much each grouped has changed over the years.