rodney@sun.ipl.rpi.edu (Rodney Peck II) (02/13/91)
I was wondering if other people have noticed that the idea of peace has started to shift from the anti-war people towards the slogans of the rest of the people (for lack of a better name). In January, "Peace Now" was a radical style thing to say. It meant that the war should be stopped now and we should figure out something else. Now, it seems that it means we should invade now or use nuclear weapons to make peace by beating Iraq into submission with so much force that he can't fight back. This is a tremendously different idea. When President Bush said "This will not be another Vietnam." Many people thought he meant that we wouldn't be fighting a war that we didn't really understand. Instead, he (and many of the people listening) meant that we would go in with large force and win, not letting the army sit there and be forgotten. So, now when people are saying "we want peace," different people are hearing different things. What do you trial.talk.politics.peace people think about this? -- Rodney
sadun@acf9.nyu.edu (Lorenzo Sadun) (02/20/91)
rodney@sun.ipl.rpi.edu (Rodney Peck II) writes: >I was wondering if other people have noticed that the idea of peace has >started to shift from the anti-war people towards the slogans of the >rest of the people (for lack of a better name). (description of "peace" used in favor of fighting on deleted) >What do you trial.talk.politics.peace people think about this? It only goes to show that just about EVERYBODY wants peace! The only questions are how and at what price? Some of us believe that a real peace can only be achieved by defeating Saddam Hussein, and that anything else is inviting an even more destructive war down the line. This doesn't mean that we love peace any less than you do, only that we've analyzed the situation differently from you. Peace and freedom (both for ourselves and for others, e.g. Kuwaitis) are two things that just about everybody claims to support, and which IMHO almost everybody DOES support. Unfortunately, sometimes you have to give up one to get the other. If you say that supporters of the war don't want peace, then you might as well also say that opponents of the war don't want freedom. Both statements are absurd. >-- >Rodney -- Lorenzo Sadun It's a terrible thing to fight a war, but sadun@acf9.nyu.edu It's far worse to let evil triumph unopposed.