Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
2012
unknownj
People seem to be protesting against the war in Brighton right now. By which I do not mean some sort of armed conflict on my streets, but rather there's a protest at the shopping centre about the Iraq situation.

I can't help but wonder what the point is at this late time. The thing is, the entire event has been organised for weeks, which was probably a big mistake. If it was up to me, I'd sacrifice some of the planning (and therefore numbers of people) in favour of a bit of spontaneity, just to keep the whole thing topical.

I've got a good mind to go there, pose as a reporter, and ask what people are actually protesting against at this point. What is it they want? What's the message?

Scenario 1: "Even now, we think the war was a mistake"
Big fucking deal. Protesting after the fact isn't going to change the past. If you want to send the government a message and let them know that you're still opposed to their decisions, then here's the solution - vote in a new government at the next election. The march in London where millions turned up was surely enough to let the government know that people aren't impressed - the next big thing you can do is kick them out, or at least relegate the Tories to third place behind the Lib Dems. That's the sort of thing that will have a real effect at this point.

Scenario 2: "Get the troops out of Iraq right now"
I can't help but think there'll be people there who are still saying this. It all comes back to what I've been saying all along - anti-war is a stupid sentiment, it's not constructive. What you ought to be is pro-peace. And right now, the best move towards peace would be for the armed forces to make their presence obvious at schools and hospitals, in order to keep them safe and secure, and to try to bring law and order back to Iraq. It's too late to leave without fixing everything the troops have broken.

Scenario 3: "Tony, make sure Bush hands Iraq over to the UN"
The PM has already tried this. The UK has a demonstrably less power in this Coalition of the Wankers than the government would like people to know. I think our government has done all it realistically can to keep the UN involved in this (except Jack Straw, f'ing right wing tosser). A few people telling them to do what they'd like to do anyway won't change it.

That's all I can really think of... I honestly don't get the mentality that makes people protest after the war has finished - it's not like I'm in favour of what happened, and I don't think the end justified the means, but there are more important things to put my energy into than complaining about the past. I'd much rather put my energy into stopping the US fucking with Jordan, Syria, N Korea, Iran, whatever...

There are bigger injustices looming in this world than the US and UK rebuilding Iraq into their personal little puppet-led oil field - the USA will most likely use their success as a model for future campaigns against similar countries they don't like. Big picture, people - this battle is over, the real war is quite another matter.

Ho diddle hum

  • 1
Okay, please be bearing in m,ind that i'm kinda pissed. :)

Scenario 1: "Even now, we think the war was a mistake"
Big fucking deal. Protesting after the fact isn't going to change the past. If you want to send the government a message and let them know that you're still opposed to their decisions, then here's the solution - vote in a new government at the next election. The march in London where millions turned up was surely enough to let the government know that people aren't impressed - the next big thing you can do is kick them out, or at least relegate the Tories to third place behind the Lib Dems. That's the sort of thing that will have a real effect at this point.


Considering how many people, after the start of the war, changed their stance to "now we should just support 'our boys'", do you not think it is important to show that a sizable amount of people still hold true to their opinions? Otherwise, the impression is that people will protest until eactively contested then submit. Not a good precedent.

I think it's very undemocratic to limit "disagreeing with the government" to voting against the present party in the next general election. One vote every four years is as much as involving yourself should be? I know you disagree with that, jamie!

Scenario 2: "Get the troops out of Iraq right now"
I can't help but think there'll be people there who are still saying this. It all comes back to what I've been saying all along - anti-war is a stupid sentiment, it's not constructive. What you ought to be is pro-peace. And right now, the best move towards peace would be for the armed forces to make their presence obvious at schools and hospitals, in order to keep them safe and secure, and to try to bring law and order back to Iraq. It's too late to leave without fixing everything the troops have broken.


it's now a case of making the best of a bad situation, really. i can't say more than that, i supppose. but it's impossible to just walk in, topple the head of a power structure, and expect things to reseovle themselves well. i mean, we've already seen examples of years of opression and steam being blown off all at once. people lootinbg fucking hosptials and shit.

Scenario 3: "Tony, make sure Bush hands Iraq over to the UN"
The PM has already tried this. The UK has a demonstrably less power in this Coalition of the Wankers than the government would like people to know. I think our government has done all it realistically can to keep the UN involved in this (except Jack Straw, f'ing right wing tosser). A few people telling them to do what they'd like to do anyway won't change it.


i'm sure our government has not done all that it could - but i'm sure that it has done all that, under the 'leadership' of blair and his 'old boys' (straw, blunkett, hoon, et al), it could *reasonably* do, bearing in mind the other influences (i.e. a junior pm is not gonna stick their career necck out with blair et al readsy to chop, sadly).

and i, personally, completely understand the mentality that makes people protest after was has *begun*... i know you said after the war has *finished*... but ionl;y by a narrow, biased definition has the war *finished*, as far as i'm concerned.

There are bigger injustices looming in this world than the US and UK rebuilding Iraq into their personal little puppet-led oil field - the USA will most likely use their success as a model for future campaigns against similar countries they don't like. Big picture, people - this battle is over, the real war is quite another matter.

there's the part i totally agree with, buddy. :)

Pro-peace.

Exactly.

umm... the war is far from over, sadly. there's a group of soldiers leaving from pennsylvania to iraq next week. they're plannning on being gone for eight to ten months.

but i can pretty much agree on everything else.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account