da leftists are da commies and da udder end are da natsies, and dem in da middle can't make up der mind...

Isn't it funny that we always refer the Natzies as the extreme right, although the name "Natzi" come from "National Socialist".
But I guess they really only had "socialist" in their name, not in the practice. A bit like East Germany used to be called "Democratic Republic".

If you live in the U.S. and you want to support the troops with a yellow ribbon, you can't do it here: http://www.trentonian.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=7524241&BRD=1697&PAG=461&dept_id=502176&rfi=6
This town bans yellow ribbons.

Xerraire: that just seems wrong.

There's something else too. It bugs me that some people say the Dixie Chicks have every right to express their opinions, but then try to punish them for it.

Wait, am I getting this wrong?
The town doesn't want people to put ribbons on public property places or anywhere at all including their own homes?

I personally don't think its a good idea to bad mouth a president, especially in a public forum, as a concert. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. In the spirit of our country, I think its good to at least "look" unified. However, that is just me, I don't think its a good idea, is all. Especially in a time like this.

But I am also of the mind that I don't care to be a hypocrite either. If they were out and out asked an opinion, they can not not be true to themselves and lie either, I suppose.

I personally had to go overseas during the whole Clinton - Monica thing. I didn't have many good things to say about that or him either. Those are my views, but I kept them to myself. I was also asked by reporters, and people everywhere my opinion. I kept silent. The views were mine...and just like this war, not all the information I believe was out. Why was I going to speak out publicly when I am not directly inside that oval office and knowledgeable about every little thing? The same with the war. We likely know only the tip if the iceberg of information. Perhaps they had views like I did, but, I am not sure what good it did for them to be so public.

I don't know. I have lots of opinions, I generally am not shy to say them. Hehe, I am not sure all want to hear them either, but I try to hold back, when all the information isn't available to me. Especially in public.

Yes, they have their right though. And the people of that town won't hurt a soul if they tie a few yellow ribbons around either.

paxx
perhaps it was just public places, but it makes one wonder, if they wanted to assemble a peace rally on public place, they would be shunned to do that too?

paxx: public property. Not a big deal, though in some places I have heard of snooty neighborhoods that have zoning that doesn't allow flags, etc. on private property. A lot of places limit the size of a display, as well; flags over a certain size and such

Xerraire: a gathering wouldn't imply that the local government shared in the sentiment, and they'd probably have to get a permit. Obviously they don't want anyone to think the local government supports the war there.

no, it "if those ribbons are placed on public property".
They sated in the article: " "We certainly recommend that people should exhibit their support, Just do it on your own property, not on borough property."

I'm not so sure that is completely out of line. It's public property. People can put ribbons all over their house and personal property, just not on public property. Where I live, you can't put "for sale" signs (like yard sale signs) on public property. It's their way to keep the public areas free of clutter and personal use.

Yes baker, I believe that is being made obvious.

I suppose a yellow ribbon is nothing more than a symbol of sentiment. If I read it right, flags were allowed after 9-11 on that exact place, but one yellow ribbon is now voted out on their 6 council members.

Just thought I would share. It was along the subject of war, but something different as well for this thread.

interesting story from radio this morning. The new movie "What a girl wants" with Amanda Bynes...the original movie poster had her in what was described as a "hippy" outfit and she was flashing the peace sign with her hands. That poster has been pulled from release because of supposed anti-war sentiment.

So, I wonder if they would be OK by somebody placing flags there instead of the ribbons to show support for the US, not just the troops in the Gulf?

The small town that I live in lines the main street with flags in support of the US when needed. They do it on Memorial day, Veterans day and the 4th of July. they also did it after 9/11 for a week, when the shuttle exploded, and they are currently there now. But, the flag is different. It shows support for the US in general, not just the war effort. The yellow ribbon is associated with gulf wars, so it is a totally different symbol.

I always took the yellow ribbon to mean you are waiting and hoping someone (not a war) will be coming back. Like the song.

OK, that's what I thought. Wasn't sure though cause I couldn't understand what the big deal was about. Where I live I'm not allowed to go hang a white flag in the public parcs or in front of City Hall either.
On the other hand, if the town authorities decide to do it themselves, then it's perfectly right. It's just that not anybody can go and hang whatever they want wherever they want. May just be me, but I find that normal.

Xerraire, during the first Gulf War the yellow ribbon was a symbol of support for our troops in the war. I can only assume that is what it means today, also. You never really saw the yellow ribbons until the Gulf War. So, in a way, even if you are saying that you just support the troops, you are also supporting the troops that are in that war. And, there are a lot of people who oppose the war in its entirety, so those ribbons look like war support to them.

I'm not saying that I agree with any of it, BTW. I'm just saying how I can see how it is being viewed.

Oh and Xerraire, about your idea of not bad mouthing a President, that is your right. If you wish to not bad mouth your political leader, good for you.
But nobody will nor can ever stop me from saying that Prime Ministre Chretien is a complete moron. I really think he is. But the sad part is that anybody else we have to chose from is just even worse. Ack!

jes!!!!

Now we are cooking with butter!

thanks @shu for responing to some of my questions. They were real questions that I asked people who say the war is just and to people who say the war is not and to be honest no one has a straight answer. I heard BS from both sides mostly but did answer the questions or generalized in thier responce.

Another person told me to read this book with the title Americas True history. I am sure it will enlighen me on many facts (som of which I already know with a 'spin' as bakerstreet would put it) but still leaves out answering what to do about this specific situation.


Anyway while you answered many questions @shu, I would have to disagree with some of them and look up others to see if your right.

For example, I know there are other countries under sanctions, even longer than 12 years, but not like Iraq at all who were under war specific santions of which moslty were ignored.

I would definitly agree that soldiers are soldiers and following orders and fighting for your country is paramount to who is yuor leader. I think part of the 'under estimation' the Pentagon made was about that point. Nevertheless, standerd of living places a role and while the Chinese solder might sell weapons due to loyalty, the Iraqi soldier would do it to make money. That there is a major difference. In one instance you have the leader selling arms and the other you have thousands of personal trading or selling.

It should be noted that, while I am not sure if I should tollally believe the stories, that most soldiers are fighting because of hidden Saddam executioners who will kill them or thier families if they do not fight... just like the people who wanted to flee were turned around by Saddams's soldiers.


It is totally within Saddam's known character to do that. I also wouldn't say that Iraq was more 'free' than other Arab states, but I would agree that the amount of difference would probably be small in some places.


I am not one to want war nor do I agree with how it was handled pre-war and nor do I like the fact that there is a war going on right now. In some ways I think most American support the effert because we need to believe that this is eing done for a good reason. I hear all the polls and wonder who is asking the quetsions and how come they don't ask real questions like 1000 troops dieing, or 10000 Iraqi civilians dieing... or are you supporting the president because you think he knows something and is acting on it.

Anyway just rammbling, I am supposed to be going shopping for groceries and setting up my resume online.

yes BTW, I think most of those polls supporting US action is because allot of people need to believe in the president and if he is saying we need to do this, most are not second guessing the idea and give him the benefit of a doubt that he has info most do not see.


This is a interesting situation... I have heard so many sides to this and most seem just so extreme to me. against or for the war. Maybe there are no straight answers. there is always a hidden agenda but what is attached to this agenda is Saddam and I am not sure if that is good or bad yet.

ooookayyyy what happend to the text?

hmmmm...
must of did something???

Joe: don't forget the rally effect.
It always happen. When your country is at war, most people who disapproved it before now rally and stand behind their troops. Normal and understandable. Happens in any country.
Except the rally effect usually isn't very long lived, especially when a lot of victims are involved.
This is a well documented. Google it.

I'm not german or french, I'm American. So the only of view I can give is that of an American likewise, those saying America is in it for Oil, World Domination, have been watching to much TV. American's want the same thing everyone else in the world wants (I hope) and that is peace. Many of you say we are out looking for a fight. well i'd have to say Damned straight. Good observation, after September 11th the US learned it's postion in the world. While we fight for everyone elses freedom, and maintain everyone elses peace, people kill our men, women, and children. As for me I welcome this, I am American, and I know what this is about. This is about truth, and justice. so those of you that aren't American, pipe down, speak from your point of view, not mine. We will win this war, and if the world wants to Alienate us that's fine, but where would they be without our aid. Financially, military, and in many other ways. When the other countries are attacked, th first thing said is America, come help. But when America is attacked we get made out to be the AntiChrist for defending ourselves... why did we save France in WW2, why??? why did we let germany, and Japan be their own free nations, why does the world want to take everything from us, and give nothing back???

Well I think I've read just about everything in this thread that there is to say about this war on Iraq. I can't for the life of me understand why/what the Nazi regime has to do with any of this. If you have reservations with the French Government or the position they have elected to pursue, then say what you want about those decisions and don't bring up the history of WW2. After all, what happened 60 years ago has nothing to do with what is taking place in Iraq today....

What is see is, a lot of you, NOT all of you, really have no idea what is going on in this world. "Saddam is not a nice man" or "Bush is a bully" or "this war is over the oil in Iraq".... If you just take a little time to read a newspaper or listen to the evening news, you just might find out WHY the USA and it's allies went to war against Iraq....

exactly

its funny you mention 60 years ago... most people I talk to who are against this war seem to always point out something that happened 20 or 30 years ago. seemingly always skirting the issue of Iraq and other countires. I can't say that America has a hidden agenda or not, I think that will be seen later or not and dealt with, but the issue of what to do about Saddam and other like him who control the population with terror tatics.

There might be some who do not like Bush (like me) ro many of his administration (like me) but the administration is nothing like Saddams or other free countries and I am not sure why some think so because of some questionable situations per citizen rate. I am sure Saddam has 'situations' daily with most of the population while other free countries might get 1-5 from questionalbale goverment officials...



I wanted the 1000 post..