That attitude is typical of the past few months; typical of the kind of treatment given to those who have opposed Mr. Bush's agenda in its current format.
I think there is a difference. There is a hard core group, that shows up at these demonstrations, and these are the ones I am talking about. This 1 or 2% of tha hardcore peaceniks have always been there and will always be there, and when these characters cheer, it doesn't really mean all that much.
You are badly misinformed. The leaders of the march are lawmakers from Parliament who belong to the same party as PM Blair. They are hardly hard core peaceniks. Once again you resort to names with a negative connotation to make your point.
As far as the size of the opposition, one only needs to consider the narrow margin Bush Sr. got for Iraq 1, the strong isolationist movement in the US during the WWII, the fact that Neville Chamberlain led the clear majority of Brits all the way to the brink.
Peace loving people, people who believe in democracy, people who are rational.......are slow to go to war. So what......those people usually win.....because they are smart, rational, and think from all sides.
Furthermore, we are not talking about a Hitler who has broken free from his boundary restraints, and is attacking your place of birth. We are talking about a two bit dictator who may or may not be developing WMD who probably can be contained but maybe not......we should know in the next few months. No one is saying that Saddam is not a menace. How to deal with him effectively with a minimal expenditure of resources is the goal.
BTW, compared to those, the opposition to Bush seems to still come from fringes, and if anything is questioned, it is not the goal, but the timing and tactics.
Sorry, but I am not fringe........and there are a lot of people like me out here who feel the same way. Washington and NYC have dictated the direction of the country for the past year. Maybe that was necessary due to 9/11 but it can't be that way going forward.
ted |
