Why “Vote Us Out of Iraq” on the California Ballot Makes Sense to Me

Thanks for posting Pat's essay; we've been opposed to this war even before it began. There are many folks nationwide - worldwide - who put two and two together prior to the invasion. Still, we kept thinking, "people will get it, they will get it." Well, we also thought as much after torture, spying, the outing of a CIA operative and the loss of habeus corpus occurred.... not so much it turns out. At this point, I am not so focused on changing minds, but keeping this very real tragedy in front of my nieghbors, many of whom don't seem to care if there's another unit ambushed or another dozen Iraqi's dying in a car bomb. SB924 is one way of doing this. Heck, I don't care about sending a message to the politicians; they are not inclined to change things. But people, they... we, still can.

Well written essay, but the problem is that the same energy that is used towards protesting could be used to change who the people are that are voting in Congress. JMO!

Tom,

Thanks. I agree. There is a certain frustration I have with merely protesting, particularly when a possible attack of Iran looms. At a point like that, nothing short of immediate civil disobedience seems required.

I also agree that if we could get these same people to participate in organizations that are changing their communities for the better, instead of these short bursts of demonstrating, we would have a much more lasting impact as citizens.

Somewhere there is a balance between attracting people into some kind of process, i.e. protesting, that then could lead to other possible areas of involvement and longer term processes like helping a candidate run for office. There's not set formula because all of us are on different journeys in life that demand more/less time than others.

Many of these people who show up might already be involved in their own progressive activities (I don't know). I guess, in sum protesting is a great outlet for progressive action but it shouldn't be overemphasized by leaders in the activist community.

Regards,

Patrick

GOL-O-L-LY Sargent Carter! I didn't know Gomer Pyle USMC was still around let alone a democrat! But I digress. (Note: sense of humour check in progress).

On a serious note, I have only seen a possible "rush to war" with Iran scenario put out there by both democrats and the liberal side of the media. Ok, regardless I pose the following ""Yes or "No" questions to the readers on Iran and nukes:

1. Do you think Iran should have nuclear weapons at all?

2. How about when they ("they" is always their government/political leadership, not their general public) demand the destruction of another state such as Israel?

3. How about when they develop them in violation of UN mandates? (Remember, that never phased Saddam as he knew the UN was a paper tiger. You may assume any and every diplomatic tactic/negotiation imaginable outside of allowing Iran nukes will be attempted by this point).

4. How about when they give weapons and money to terrorists to kill US servicemen/women, our brothers & sisters, in Iraq & Afghanistan? (This is in fact happening now and has been for some time). To kill civilians in Israel?

5. How about with their terrorist ties to Syria, Hezbollah, etc., they would in all likely share similar sentiments with terrorist organizations such as Al Queda who don't like us. Hence, they could supply nukes to terrorist organizations to nuke Israel or the US or the allies of the US. Should Iran be allowed to get nukes?

6. If a terrorist or other entity (like Iran) actually nuke Israel, should we go to war then? How about if they nuke one of our US allies? How about if they nuke the United States? Remenber, radical Islam DID DECLARE WAR ON US-YOU & ME, THE US, THE WEST, and didn't argue about the constitutionality of anything when pulling any terrorist trigger seen thus far.

If you answered "Yes" to questions 1-5, congradulations! You can agitate at will; You have been sucessfully protected by the US military thus far without any consideration to THEIR well being, such as this ballot measure will weaken their efforts in the field and embolden their (and OUR) enemies.

If you answered "No" to question 6, you may dress up as Nevile Chamberlain, circa September, 1939 at Halloween. You may not need a flashlight when trick or treating as the soft radioactive glow from your body could potentially light your way...

Today's Iran with nukes is a whole new ball game. When would you actually fight for your own survival or the survival of your countrymen/women? Seriously now, all political games aside.

Jay,

We made it through the entire Cold War without having to give up our civil liberties, implement a preemptive war foreign policy, or live in response to the kind of fear-mongering, which people like you peddle.

It is also typical that trolls like you boil things down into simple black and white paradigms which are nothing more than straw man arguments forcing the questioner to answer the way you want them to.

Our greatest enemy in this country is the ignorant, thoroughly unpatriotic folk such as yourself who cling to autocratic leaders because they make you feel safe. You, who also misinterpret your religious beliefs into something not unlike the Islamic fanatics you constantly call us soft on.

Let me remind you that, whatever your religious faith, God does not bless war. From a Christian perspective, I suggest people of faith read the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7 -- where what is required to be a Christian is clearly laid out. One cannot be acting according to the principles of Christianity and advocate the kind of preemptive war doctrine your Dear Leader and his neocon pals have implemented.

By the way, our soldiers are not being mistreated by progressives. They are, however, by you and your ilk because you treat them like GI Joe dolls. They are flesh and blood human beings who have families, friends, lives, and minds of their own. Their trust in the civilian leadership of our government has been completely betrayed and the sooner we pull them out of harms way AND prosecute people like Bush and Cheney for war crimes, the sooner we will all be made safe in America.

Hello Patrick,

Points of note:

Re-read our two latest blog posts. Who started the "name calling"? You did. If someone doesn't agree with you, you lash out at a shallow level. Myself just pointed out the shortcomings (my opinion) of your position and did not try to marginalize you with name calling as well as false assumptions on your part.

Apples and watermelons buddy: The Cold War was against a nation state (USSR) and it's satellites with strong US allies in Europe alongside the US. Terrorism has no "open" nation state for us to go after and hold accountable via the UN, direct negotiations or by threats. Where is Al Queda's embassy? Their UN representative? They don't have any BUT they probably have an office in Teheran, Bagdad, Damascus...

You brought up religon, I did not. Interesting. Is that a factor for you? How do YOU know what God wants? I thought secular-progressives were basically rejecting religion, especially in church & state relationships. Using religion to justfy a position on foreign policy? Isn't that using it to justify state business?

By the way, Christians DO fight wars, it is in their history, especially when their survival is at stake. I could find religeous quotes too...

Don't assume I have no clue on our servicemenbers: Been active duty and the reserves for 28 years and counting. Your version of todays status quo vis-a-vis the military above is BOGUS. What experience do you base it on besides perhaps democratic talking points?

My earlier blog, I am not, "clinging to any autocratic leaders", I am supporting our troops based on my background knowing my support is well placed. You are NOT supporting our troops in combat when you support a ballot measure such as this one.

Sure it is typical that I asked simple "Yes" or "No" questions above just as it is typical you did not answer them, because you cannot without abandoning your apparent blind emotion and infuse a little deductive analysis? Don't you think it is possible that President Hillary Clinton may have to face a similar scenario and have to decide on what to do and base her decisions on analysis/logic and not emotion alone? (Harry Truman: The buck stops here (at the presidents desk. A leader with responsabilities and no longer just a posturing politician).

Enjoyed your website. Gonna "Drink Liberally" on 9-11. Gonna do anything else that day? Like remember?

I support your drive to eliminate "Special Interest" influence in our government. Did you happen to notice who many of the campaign contributors were to democratic politicians running for state office last time? They have to post it by law so it was no secret. Nunez even got contributions last time while running UNAPPOSED! If that isn't special interests currying favors...

Patrick, enjoyed the banter. I'm sure I haven't changed your mind on anything. I find it easier to TRY and get things black and white, close as possible, rather than constantly contradict myself through my parties/general belief platform (liberal Vs conservative for example) just to score a minor political point today and "feel good". I'm in it for the long haul...

Progressives like me are in it for the long haul too. I guess we'll see whether your version of America wins out in 2008 or not. I doubt it however.

Hello Patrick,

Funny, I don't recall putting forth "my version" of America above.

I am for sure critical of the way you see things especially as they do tend to contradict themselves or perhaps are flimsy in their development of positions. An example would be the list of things to consider vis-a-vis Iran above (which you did bring up) and specifically whether this ballot initiative would hurt our troops in combat or not.

Consider: Is it you CAN'T answer them or that you WON'T answer them?

No, you don't really have to answer, not for me anyway. But for yourself. You see in today's "gotcha" political bantering somebody has to think they are a "winner" and not a "loser" in discussions such as our blog chatter here.

I would just like you and other readers to really think about our brothers & sisters in harms way and NOT for some politcal posturing done literally at their expense which this ballot measure will cost. This issue rises well ABOVE any 2008 political outcome especially as it is going down NOW.

Post a comment

Commenters: You must preview your comment before posting. And please only hit "Post" once; it may take a while, but your comment is being processed. Thanks.