Thomas Thai, speaking of anti-war demonstrations, says: > Anyone know of a pro-war demonstration? I've not heard of such a > gathering.
For one reason or another, in Mpls. and elsewhere, demonstrations in favor of going to war, or even in support of the US Administration's policy on Iraq, don't seem to be in vogue. Is that because there is no such support? I think not. The current 'UN/Iraq/US and allies' debate seems to be over continuing an indefinite search for needles in haystacks; rather than demanding all needles be put on the table by noon tomorrow-- and if the needles aren't on the table by noon, there will be major consequences to be paid immediately, not to exclude military action; at which point a final hearing is held. If the US initiates war absent UN support, and no Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) are found/used, there will be much unnecessary loss of life and war crimes should be held in the world court. If the UN supports military action in the above scenario, we must hope for quick resolution of the conflict. If the US initiates war, absent UN support, and Iraqi WMD are found/used, the world community will unite behind the US position and our leaders will have triumphed. Given the uncertainties associated with military intelligence and ethical leadership, we as ordinary citizens are faced with a major dilemma! This is not Vietnam, however, and references to history are of limited value in the post 9-11 environment. WMD in the hands of rogue nations/nation states and terrorist organizations is very serious stuff. Domestic security is of paramount concern, as is worldwide security against terrorism. If someone points a gun at you, will you shoot first or wait and see what they are going to do? A crude, yet realistic analogy given the situation. And N. Korea is queued. As to the Mpls. connection, I think it's weak at the local government level, yet the current Iraqi situation affects us all individually as world citizens. All world citizens will pay the cost (maybe to varying degree) of upcoming decisions regarding Iraq, w/ or w/o war. The question is whether, ten years from now, the cost will represent a net gain or loss for world citizens in terms of global security-- here in Mpls., in Lyon, Bonn, London, Madras, Osaka, Bukhara, Sao Paulo, Basra, Riyadh, Beirut, Haifa and elsewhere. Consider too, that the MOA represents a world-class candidate for terrorism-- and that's close enough for me to make this issue Mpls.-specific. >From my position, there is no a-priori 'right answer' to the current dilemma. Our elected leaders have access to information we, as everyday citizens, do not. We have been lied to by previous leaders, and led into war. It is a morally perplexing situation each of us must deal with individually. It is my hope that long-term peace and security against terrorism and the use of WMD prevails worldwide, a goal worth achieving by any means necessary in my book. See http://www.startribune.com/stories/1762/3656996.html for added perspective on the matter. Michael Hohmann Linden Hills [ note- I find it interesting that today's anti-war marchers (and to a lesser extent those of 30 years ago) are by and large, middle-class white folks. Therein lies a message, but that's a topic unto itself. And, yeah, though I walk through the valley of death... I shall fear no evil... For all parties to conflict have God, by one name or another, on their side.] Peace! TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
