RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


meatcleaver -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 1:24:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

Expecting people to understand and accept your position, when you say things that are not true, is not realistic. Even less realistic is to expect people to understand and accept your position, when you attempt to spin and deflect, when you say something that isn't true.


The support wasn't there, the fact that a few politicians for whatever reason pissed in the face of their voters does not add up to support and no doubt American ambassadors in every European capital were relaying that back to Washington. The fact that Washington didn't listen is nothing new. Who knows what hold the US has over European politicians is beyond me but it must be something for them to prefer to kiss Bush's arse and risk their own careers but I can only assume the US has some hold. The fact remains, Bush knew he had no support or at most, support under duress.




caitlyn -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 1:27:45 PM)

So what ... that isn't even the point.
 
Meatcleaver said "NOT ONE" ... as in none ... as in less than one ... exclusive of all ... when you look around, the room is fucking empty. [;)]
 
The statement is wrong, period.




FirmhandKY -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 1:39:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

Oh Sanity.. read my post again.  I never said that the majority of the country came out to protest.  I said the protesters numbers, for and against, are pretty representative of how our nation breaks down on the issue (in terms of numbers for and against).  Statistically speaking there are a far greater amount of our citizens against the current occupation than are for it, that also was representative in the protests this weekend in the US.


AMERICANS WANT TO WIN IN IRAQ NATIONAL SURVEY SAYS:

"The survey shows Americans want to win in Iraq, and that they understand Iraq is the central point in the war against terrorism and they can support a U.S. strategy aimed at achieving victory," said Neil Newhouse, a partner in POS. "The idea of pulling back from Iraq is not where the majority of Americans are."

    * By a 53 percent - 46 percent margin, respondents surveyed said that "Democrats are going too far, too fast in pressing the President to withdraw troops from Iraq."

    * By identical 57 percent - 41 percent margins, voters agreed with these statements: "I support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security" and "the Iraqi war is a key part of the global war on terrorism."

    * Also, by a 56 percent - 43 percent margin, voters agreed that "even if they have concerns about his war policies, Americans should stand behind the President in Iraq because we are at war."

    * While the survey shows voters believe (60 percent- 34 percent) that Iraq will never become a stable democracy, they still disagree that victory in Iraq ("creating a young, but stable democracy and reducing the threat of terrorism at home") is no longer possible. Fifty-three percent say it's still possible, while 43 percent disagree.

    * By a wide 74 percent - 25 percent margin, voters disagree with the notion that "I don't really care what happens in Iraq after the U.S. leaves, I just want the troops brought home."

"How Americans view the war does not line up with the partisan messages or actions coming out of Washington," said Davis Lundy, president of The Moriah Group. "There are still a majority of Americans out there who want to support the President and a focused effort to define and achieve victory."

Read the raw data in pdf format.

To reinforce my point:

"How Americans view the war does not line up with the partisan messages or actions coming out of Washington,"

FirmKY




FirmhandKY -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 1:42:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

So what ... that isn't even the point.
 
Meatcleaver said "NOT ONE" ... as in none ... as in less than one ... exclusive of all ... when you look around, the room is fucking empty. [;)]
 
The statement is wrong, period.


caitlyn,

You'll never get them to acknowledge the trees in their eyes, and they'll never let you forget the splinter in yours.

Let me know when you finally decide to come over to the "dark side".  It's much calmer and rational over here.  [:D]

FirmKY




puella -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 1:48:13 PM)

Okay  here is some of what I remember.

The church denounced Blair for his actions (that means quite a bit more in the UK than we can fully understand here in the States).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,1113803,00.html

He lost several crucial members of parliament resigned because of his decision (Clair Short and Robin Cook are the two I remember immediately, but I think there may have been more)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2859431.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2857637.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6069710.stm


When Bush came to the UK for a visit, he could not visit Parliament because the dissent there was so great, it was worried what would be said to him.  Also, there was unprecidented lock down on the people prostesting, the vitriol was so great.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,1086664,00.html


The debates in the House of Commons were fascinating, but so passionate that it was a constant lambast against Blair and his 'submission' to Bush ... he was not so kindly referred to as 'the poodle"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2721513.stm
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/northernireland/tm_method=full%26objectid=18012996%26siteid=89520-name_page.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/catchall/tm_method=full%26objectid=13470061%26siteid=89520-name_page.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/catchall/tm_method=full%26objectid=12971679%26siteid=89520-name_page.html


The protests by the people were unprecidented in British history:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/catchall/tm_method=full%26objectid=12648415%26siteid=89520-name_page.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/manchester/get_involved/2003/03/08/war_demo.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2751471.stm
 







NorthernGent -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 1:50:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

Where is NortherGent? 

It is true caitlyn.  I was also at the million man march in London before the war...  There are a lot of really great programs on BBC, one of them is QuestionTime.  The audience members, not screened, get to ask question of a panel of guests (There is is usually one major player from each of the three political parties, a comedian, and an academic or two).  Watching Question Time for the year before and after the initial invading, coupled with some shows Tony Blair voluntarily did himself where citizens could question him and engage in something of a debate... it was brutal.  The majority of the people in the UK were not for the invasion of Iraq.  Tony Blair went against the will of the people, and even many of his own party.  I will do a bit of a search for some of the more pertient events I can remember off the top of my head and post them to you.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/11/14/bush.britain.reut/index.html


Hi Puella,

Cutting a long story short, something like 75% of Britons (assuming polls are a fair representation of a nation's mood) supported an invasion providing two key conditions were in place a) there was evidence that WMDs existed b) it was backed by the United Nations.

The public were then deliberately misled by the government who included a known forged document in the dossier put before parliament (the document being details of Iraq acquiring materials for nuclear development from Nigeria). Some politicians left the Labour Party on the grounds that it no longer reflected the ideals of the left. Mothers of dead soldiers have attempted to sue the government on the grounds that the invasion of Iraq was illegal and built on known lies.

In this country, the spread of democracy was not mentioned until months after the invasion, nor was any other reason with the exception of one. The sole reason given by the government was that Iraq's WMDs represented a threat to Britain.




puella -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 1:55:36 PM)

Hi NorthernGent...

Thank you!

And when the invasion took place without those two conditions being met, I seem to remember that the climate was decidedly anti Blair.  Correct?  And that it got worse and worse as everything progressed?




puella -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 2:08:28 PM)

How many polls from how many legitimate sites do you want?

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/10/opinion/polls/main930772.shtml

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-12-poll_x.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2905762&page=1

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12805

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/02/us/politics/02poll.html?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/02/us/politics/02poll.html?ex=1320123600&en=307df650f49e0f87&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

I could post about 50 more, but why bother. 

I have stated my point of view on the protests.  Everyone should be allowed to protest, for or against.




meatcleaver -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 2:16:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Cutting a long story short, something like 75% of Britons (assuming polls are a fair representation of a nation's mood) supported an invasion providing two key conditions were in place a) there was evidence that WMDs existed b) it was backed by the United Nations.



The opposite to what I remember though support by the UN and evidence of WMD would have made a big difference. Must look for the polls.




caitlyn -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 2:17:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
Let me know when you finally decide to come over to the "dark side".  It's much calmer and rational over here.  [:D]


Oh no ... that isn't going to happen.
 
I still have that problem with believing that war should be an absolute last resort, rather than a "Them Aaaaaarabs made a monkey out of my Daddy, so lets get 'em. (and their oil too, while we're at it)" [;)]




Sanity -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 2:23:43 PM)

When did the President say that, caitlyn?

Statements like that one are as bad as meat over there saying "not one"

The people of Iraq are getting Iraqi oil revenues, our soldiers aren't smuggling oil out in canteens or anything. And everyone was saying that Saddam was a serious threat, even before Bush was elected. Hillary, Bubba, John Heinz-Kerry, Al Gore - you name it. So why believe in a lie, why spread a lie...

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

I still have that problem with believing that war should be an absolute last resort, rather than a "Them Aaaaaarabs made a monkey out of my Daddy, so lets get 'em. (and their oil too, while we're at it)" [;)]




meatcleaver -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 2:26:10 PM)

Caitlyn just because Monkeyboy has the cock of some European politicians up his arse doesn't mean to say Monkeyboy has a finger on their pulse.

So what you are saying that a few politicians with investments in America ( I assume) send a token number of troops to Iraq against the will of their electrate, it amounts to support? With support like that, you'll do well in Iran.

bottom of the page for poll on Iraq.

http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2003/guardian-february-2003.htm




caitlyn -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 2:42:16 PM)

I think that may have been a joke ... following up on FirmKY's joke. Probably why we both had winks [;)] at the end of our posts.
 
I'm inclined to take President Bush at his word as to why we went to war. I don't think he was right, but do except his position/positions.




dcnovice -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 2:57:36 PM)

quote:

Read the raw data in pdf format.


The PDF is fascinating, 'cause it includes a variety of results that didn't make it into the press release.

"Now generally speaking, would you say that things in the country [doesn't specify Iraq or U.S., alas] are going in the right direction, or have they pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track."

28% RIGHT DIRECTION
67 % WRONG TRACK
3% DON'T KNOW
1% REFUSED

"Do you approve or disapprove of the job that George W. Bush is doing as President?"

21% STRONGLY APPROVE
18% SOMEWHAT APPROVE
13 % SOMEWHAT DISAPPROVE
47 % STRONGLY DISAPPROVE

[Congress, to be fair, didn't do appreciably better than the President, but I'm too lazy to type another whole set of stats.]

Sixty percent of respondents agreed somewhat or strongly that "Iraq will never become a stable democracy," and 49 percent felt strongly that the U.S. should hold direct talks with Iran.

Would love to know more about the poll-takers and their client.




Vendaval -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 3:31:38 PM)

Interesting statistics in that pdf format,
 
 
NATIONAL POLL
February 5-7, 2007 N=800 Likely Voters
Project: #07066 Margin of Error = + 3.5%

1. Now, generally speaking, would you say that things in the country are going in the right
direction, or have they pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?
28% RIGHT DIRECTION
67% WRONG TRACK
3% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED

2. Do you approve or disapprove of the job that George W. Bush is doing as President?
21% STRONGLY APPROVE
18% SOMEWHAT APPROVE
13% SOMEWHAT DISAPPROVE
47% STRONG DISAPPROVE
1% DON’T KNOW
* REFUSED
38% TOTAL APPROVE
60% TOTAL DISAPPROVE
 
3. And, do you approve or disapprove of the job that the United States Congress is doing?
6% STRONGLY APPROVE
33% SOMEWHAT APPROVE
22% SOMEWHAT DISAPPROVE
30% STRONG DISAPPROVE
9% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED
39% TOTAL APPROVE
51% TOTAL DISAPPROVE
 
4. Which one of the following statements regarding the US involvement in Iraq do you MOST
agree with...

17% The US should immediately withdraw its troops from Iraq.
32% Whether Iraq is stable or not, the US should set and hold to set a strict timetable for
withdrawing troops
23% While I don’t agree that the US should be in the war, our troops should stay there and do
whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their
country.
27% The Iraq War is the front line in the battle against terrorism and our troops should stay
there and do whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide
security to their country.
1% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED

5. And, which one of the following would do most to hurt America’s reputation as a world power...

59% To pull our troops out of Iraq immediately
...or...
35% To leave our troops in Iraq for as long as it takes to restore order
5% DON’T KNOW
2% REFUSED

And, do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding the Iraq War.

Ranked by % Strongly Agree
TOTAL   TOTAL   STR        SMWT    SMWT    STR
AGREE   DISAG  AGREE  AGREE    DISAG    DISAG  DK  REF
 
6. Even if they have concerns about his war policies, Americans should stand behind the President in
Iraq because we are at war.
56% 43% 39% 17% 12% 31% 1% *

7. The Democrats are going too far, too fast in pressing the President to withdraw the troops from Iraq.
53% 46% 38% 15% 15% 31% 2% *

8. Iraq will never become a stable democracy.
60% 34% 34% 27% 20% 14% 5% *

9. I support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can
maintain control and provide security for its people.
57% 41% 34% 23% 13% 28% 1% 1%

10. The Iraq War is a key part of the global war on terrorism.
57% 41% 31% 26% 15% 26% 1% *

11. A stable Iraq is the best way to protect America from the nuclear threat of Iran.
47% 49% 25% 22% 21% 27% 4% *

12. Victory in Iraq, that is creating a young but stable democracy and reducing the threat of terrorism at
home, is no longer possible for the US.
43% 53% 22% 21% 23% 30% 3% *

13. Republicans in Congress have gone too far in their criticism of the war and the President.
42% 55% 22% 20% 23% 32% 2% *

14. Losing the war in Iraq would mean that the United States is no longer a superpower, but just another
power.
31% 66% 17% 14% 21% 45% 2% 1%

15. I don’t really care about what happens in Iraq after the US leaves, I just want the troops brought
home.
25% 74% 14% 10% 20% 54% 1% *


http://www.moriahgroup.com/downloads/IRAQNATIONALPOLLDATA.pdf


(Format edit)




Real0ne -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 3:39:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

Oh Sanity.. read my post again.  I never said that the majority of the country came out to protest.  I said the protesters numbers, for and against, are pretty representative of how our nation breaks down on the issue (in terms of numbers for and against).  Statistically speaking there are a far greater amount of our citizens against the current occupation than are for it, that also was representative in the protests this weekend in the US.


AMERICANS WANT TO WIN IN IRAQ NATIONAL SURVEY SAYS:

"The survey shows Americans want to win in Iraq, and that they understand Iraq is the central point in the war against terrorism and they can support a U.S. strategy aimed at achieving victory," said Neil Newhouse, a partner in POS. "The idea of pulling back from Iraq is not where the majority of Americans are."

FirmKY

yep thats cuz you cannot win an illegal imperialistic war and they just have not figured that out yet.  preventing the gov from going in their in the first place that was the only way to win.




Vendaval -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 3:43:25 PM)

Hi dc, looks like we were doing the same thing at the same time!  lol
 
If you look at questions #8 and #9 together -
 
8. Iraq will never become a stable democracy.
60% agree  34% disagree
 
9. I support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people.
57% agree 41% disagree
 

and questions #14 and #15 together
 
14. Losing the war in Iraq would mean that the United States is no longer a superpower, but just another power.
31% agree  66% disagree

15. I don’t really care about what happens in Iraq after the US leaves, I just want the troops brought home.
25% agree 74% disagree


What conclusions do you reach?
 
My own are that #8 and #9 together indicate strong feelings of conflict about the war, wanting Iraq to become stable but feeling that will never happen.  And # 14 and #15 together indicate that loosing the war does not dimish the US as a superpower, but that trying to achieve stability in the region is a priority.
 
 




FirmhandKY -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 4:14:25 PM)

Ven,

That's pretty much my conclusions as well.

FirmKY




NorthernGent -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 4:26:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

Hi NorthernGent...

Thank you!

And when the invasion took place without those two conditions being met, I seem to remember that the climate was decidedly anti Blair.  Correct?  And that it got worse and worse as everything progressed?


Spot on. The economy is in the healthiest state since WW2 yet his reputation is non-existent - largely because of Iraq.




puella -> RE: Report on the Anti-War Protest this weekend ... (3/18/2007 4:34:24 PM)

It's a shame that.  He was such an amazing force before all this.  Robin Cook too was a huge blow.  Did you know he was thinking about re entering political life before he died?




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625