" I love the last comment!! So true!! But wait the lefties will say "well Obama didn't start the war, so..uh.. there is no reason to protest it." "

" Figure it out genius! People were against the unjust war in Iraq but in support of the war in Afghanistan. Therefore, Obamas plan to bring home the troops in Iraq and increase the war in the afghan makes perfect sense. Much ado about nothing!!!! "

" Afghanistan is going to be Obama's war and the media and public won't care. Innocent lives will be lost and sadly servicemen and women will die. Since Obama is the darling of the media, he won't be tried in news as the scourge of the world. Now that's what I call fair and balanced.' "

" ............well put David..........and where is the hew and cry on the quadrupling of the deficit?? No where........this is the Liberal's rock star............and hear ye.........we are still in Iraq......... "

" Although Obama has expanded the war efforts in Iraq and Afgahnistan, and is waiting for any excuse to go to war with Iran, the war protesters remain silent because their is no "incentive" to protest. Their "Savior" continues to redistribute our wealth to all of them, cave in on the false science of global warming by supporting cap and trade tax legislation, and, finally, by offering "free" government health care just like the socialist countries of the world have. Who would want to go out and risk a sunburn when you have all this. War protesters conveniently forget that without our military, terrorism would remain unchecked. Support our troops! "

" Thanks for the laugh today, David!

The hypocrits on the Left are so predictable... "

" The "Support our Troops" signs are still there, regardless of who's in Washington DC. "

" The war objectors can still be found on Third Street, once a month quietly protesting as they have been for many years. One woman in particular, has been protesting taking life in the name of wars, consistently, since the 1960's. "

" maybe the lack of the war protests are because many of those who protested the needless war oin Iraq support the war in Afghanistan...seems rather simple to me.... "

" Dear Dave,

I notice a booth at the Farmer's Market promoting 'Peace' by the Quakers.

And I saw a few people demonstrating for 'Peace' downtown on Soscol two or three weeks ago.

Barack Obama is winding down the war in Iraq (not as fast as I would like) and I expect that the military operations Afghanistan will be winding down by the time Barack Obama will be running for re-election in 2012.

The reason there are fewer protests is because they WON!

As a veteran, and with a stepson overseas, I'm glad the war enthusiasts LOST the 2008 election.

Pardon me if I view posts like this as sour grapes because a large majority of American voters kicked Dark Cheney and his acolytes to the curb.

~Ruff "

" Nice letter David. Don't worry, the numb-skulls who brought us America's first socialist President probably won't understand the irony....I think the multi-trillion dollar deficit this president has wrought may have muddled their thinking. "

" Some…not all….people were fooled into believing liberal distortions fabricated by the Pelosi crowd to undermine this war….. The intelligent voter remembers liberal Democrat policies gutting our intelligence agencies, adding ’feel good’ obstacles between agencies, doing nothing effective to hinder al Qaeda as it publicly organized and grew into the most complex threat this nation has ever dealt with. Like so many liberal consequences, by the time liberals realized what they’d done it was already beyond their comprehension…..if it was ever within! "

" So now Afghanistan is a just war? You lefties just amaze me. You claim to be against any war, but now the exception is if Obama says its OK. Doesn't the rather obvious double standard bother you? No, of course not, it never has before.

Then we have ruff talking about kicking Cheney to the curb - umm, ruff? Cheney and his acolytes weren't running for any office in 2008, or hadn't you heard? Gotta keep up better than that. "

" Where have all the war protesters gone?

I know-I know...They’ve been hiding in their garages and in their dens and back yards preparing signs and propaganda for the Palin-2012 run.
What I want to know is where all the Obama bumper stickers have gone? Very few out there now, is it perhaps those that once placed them prominently on the rear of the hybrid are now embarrassed to let others know that they once supported the boy king? "

" As an international socialist, I am against all imperialist wars, but I am not against all wars. It depends. I think the American Revolution may have been a relatively just and progressive war, for the time (though the "democracy" it sought to establish was severely limited in scope); and I think all the anti-colonial wars that liberated countries from European powers were just wars (no matter how mixed the results might have been).

To me, both Democrats and Republicans are essentially capitalist and imperialist parties (with significant differences, too, of course), though I had hope for more from Obama. Some people just want to give Obama a chance....though I fear their hopes may be in vain.

Iraq was an absurd war based on lies and imperialist motives. Afghanistan, well, that was (I think) the base of operations for the people who masterminded 9/11, so it makes sense from a narrowly nationalist point of view to see it as "self-defense", which is the way many liberals and conservatives see it.

It's a bad war from a socialist point of view, however: it's just one ruling class bombing another ruling class (without necessarily equating the two), and wrecking the lives of regular folk caught in the power struggle. Also, it fails to fundamentally address the role the US played (and continues to play) in bringing 9/11 upon itself--its imperialist interference in the region. "

" Because some don't comprehend the Iraq war means nothing with regard to the facts of the matter: Saddam started the first Gulf War in 1990, FACT. President Bush 41 brought together the greatest coalition of nations ever, to free the Kuwaiti people, FACT. The war was quick and decisive. Saddam was defeated, surrendered and various sanctions were established through the UN to authorize the use of force against Saddam if he didn't comply with them, FACTS. For more than a dozen years Saddam thwarted the UN sanctioned arms monitoring programs and comitted a variety of other offenses in violation of the surrender terms from 1991. During that period, Saddam publically announced his funding for various terrorist organizations. Since he'd used WMD against the Iranians in the 80's and also used them against his own people, it was proper to refer to him if not as a terrorist, certainly as a dangerous terrorist enabler, FACTS. After 9-11, the entire scope of our national security efforts changed dramatically, FACT. And for 18 months (18 months...saying there was a "rush to war" in Iraq in 2003 is a LIE) President Bush 43 tried everything possible to bring Saddam in to compliance in case he might actually be producing WMD. Saddam was as defiant as ever. The U.S. Senate and the UN (yes, liberals, the UN!) gave their overwhelming support to take out Saddam. All the leading intelligence agencies in the world agreed that Saddam was up to something, more FACTS. The American Revolution, the Civil War, obviously Vietnam, were all VERY UNPOPULAR WARS in their time, FACTS. Presidents and military leaders were heavily maligned in their fights for freedom. Wars are complex matters. "

" The hypocrits on the Left are so predictable... "

Being a hypocrite has nothing to do with party - they are the same everywhere.
So far I am pleased with most of Obama's choices. "

" kdbk-ppf....well said... "

" "...it fails to fundamentally address the role the US played (and continues to play) in bringing 9/11 upon itself--its imperialist interference in the region. "


Ah, yes ampsthelena; the creation of a Jewish homeland. I'm sure there are some who would disagree that that was a "bad" thing... "

" Why be for the war in Afghanistan but against Iraq? How are the goals of each war different? You want to fight against Islamic terrorism in one area, Afghanistan, but not in Iraq? It's nonsensical. It's inconsistent. It's morally bankrupt.
Where is UNCOIL now? It seems they aren't anti war at all. Just anti Bush.
Perhaps they just should change their name to UNCOOL. "

" The question was where are all the protestors, not whether Afghanistan was/is a just or unjust war.

Afghanistan could at least be said to have been harboring Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden, but Iraq had no connection whatsoever with 9-11 or Al Qaeda before we invaded their country and then killed and tortured all those people.

In fact, Al Qaeda tried to kill Saddam, and the US prevented Saddam from taking out the only known Al Qaeda base in Iraq's Northern No-Fly Zone.

Yet we still have Republicans pretending that anybody who disagreed with George W. Bush is somehow disloyal to the nation.

What bullcorn and self-sanctimony! Republicans fought against the New GI Bill and let the returning wounded rot in roach-infested holes awaiting treatment. That is Republican 'patriotism' for ya!

Well, fellas, this story is old news. The Iraq Occupation is winding down. 'More War' did not sell during the 2008 election and it's not going to sell in 2010 or 2012.

My stepson is over in the Middle East. I'd rather have him back in one piece than all the oil in Iraq.

Thank God! Barack Obama is bringing Mr. Bungle's Folly to an end even if he's taking much longer than I'd like.

~Ruff "

" It may well be that some letters to the editor are written in such a way as to stir up feelings of bitterness and resentment between people.

Rather then learning and thinking about the truth, we often respond with emotions (we also need to be aware that just because someone repeats misinformation, over and over and over again, does not make it the truth).

If we are going to question the motivation of protesters, we might want to question the motivation of those who got us into the wars as well.

"WASHINGTON – Former Vice President [*see below] Cheney directed the CIA eight years ago not to inform Congress about a nascent counterterrorism program that CIA Director Leon Panetta terminated in June, officials with direct knowledge of the matter said Saturday."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090712/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_cheney_counterterrorism

[note * fyi; this first name was edited out due to the NVR automatic censorship! "...name and/or comment contains inappropriate words, such as "....".
Please edit your message and then resubmit"] "

" Amps,

Your views are different and interesting.

e.g., "I think the American Revolution may have been a relatively just "

Which countries of the world and which leaders do you admire? Just trying to get a measure of where you fall in the international socialist realm.

thanks, "

" kdbk, You forgot two important facts: 1) Iraq did not possess WMD and 2) Iraq had no significant ties to Al Queda. This was well known outside the US and is the reason why there is such strong feelings against the invasion of a country that was not a threat to our security.

Moderate liberals and conservatives are more likely to agree with our role in Afghanstan due to it's role in sheltering the terrorists who planned and implemented 911. Osama and the Talaban are currently in Pakistan and our troops in Afghanistan are trying to keep them from destabalizing the region. The question that we must ask is whether our actions there are doing more harm than good. It's interesting that those on the far right and far left tend to be in agreement that we are doing more harm than good. I guess that we will have to wait and see, but this is clearly Obama's war now. "

" Russ,
Well, the views of the ISO (International Socialist Organization) is the brand of "socialism" that makes the most sense to me. They have a website, SocialistWorker.org. But it has been at conferences that I have been most impressed with the quality of debate and the dedication to democratic practices. They usually have very good answers to my questions, and, believe me, I have QUESTIONED and PROBED them.

Leaders I admire? Martin Luther King. Thomas Paine, perhaps; and one or two of the "founding fathers". Ghandi. Some of the Indian chiefs who fought American imperialism. I now intellectually admire Lenin and Trotsky, although my American capitalist brainwashed ingrained prejudices still color my EMOTIONS regarding them (heck, I still have negative emotions about the word "socialist", even though I AM socialist!--but, then again, I have negative emotions about the word "gay" too--and for more or less the same reasons--even though I AM gay... Brainwashing is not erased overnight.....).

I do admire Obama, and think him both intelligent and good-willed...but essentially "top-down" authoritarian capitalist (and even, perhaps, imperialist--though definitely MANY grades better than McCain and his fascist ilk...). No one else comes to mind. I'm not really into "leaders" anyway.

Countries I admire? There are no socialist countries in the world today that I am aware of; there were some attempts that I admire (Russian revolution, Paris Commune, one of the Iranian revolutions, et al), which were mostly destroyed by the great capitalist powers sending in the troops....

But, still, the "mixed-economies" Scandavian countries are not bad. Canada's nice......

Hmm... There's not a lot I really "admire" on the world stage today, I'm afraid..... "

" Russ,
You didn't ask, but here's the leader I probably despise the most (though he was very handsome, IMHO):

Stalin.

Well, Hitler, too, obviously. (Not even handsome.)

And the leaders of the Inquisition. (Very ugly, most of them, I imagine).

And Mao. (Well, not my type.)

Anita Bryant. (Pretty...but, well, obviously not my type.)

Some of the Western leaders I "intellectually" despise too (that is, I "realize" they were "bad")--including most American Presidents--but, being American, and not having been on the receiving end of their brutality (not Indian, not Latin American, not Vietnamese, etc.), and frankly having grown up with the deluge of positive propagandistic images about our own "leaders", I just don't have the same "emotional" antipathy for them that I do for the "bad guys" who were also traditional enemies of the US of A.

Kindergarten patriotism lingers on, even when the adult mind knows better..... "

" Russ,
In case you wanted to know what I meant by the American Revolution being "relatively just"....

It was a step towards freedom. It was the first revolution to challenge European colonialism, and it challenged the Monarchy. It declared independence from the power of institutional religion over secular government. It established (at least on paper) some fine principles ("we the people", "life, liberty, pursuit of happiness" etc) that have served as expressions of hope for other revolutions.

On the other hand, it was essentially a revolution of the landed classes by the landed classes for the landed classes. Indentured servitude and slavery went untouched. Class structures remained in place (Washington even used the army to put down one class revolt). And only the real "demos" of the new-born capitalist democracy--that is, the capitalist class--could even vote. "We the people" did NOT mean what we mean today. But, still, the expression had certain inherent power, and those left out of the "demos" could use those words to gain inroads and gain political power (like the right to vote).

And, of course, even though it did challenge European colonialism, it did then go on to colonize the rest of the continent and achieve imperialist dominance over the rest of the globe.

So...in a nutshell, it was a mixed bag. Some good. Some bad. Some so-so.

The Russian revolution was the first truly democratic revolution by the people--as we mean "the people" today. i.e. all the people. Not much on the downside either (even homosexuality was decriminalized--in 1917!). Until the US and the other imperialist powers invaded, backed the counter-revolution, and effectively ended any hope of socialism in that country. "

" Napa is unique among US cities. Napa has had an ongoing demonstration against the war for years. Have you seen the white grave markers in front of peoples home? That is a protest to all the death and dying in the Iraq (and now Afghanistan war) regardless of nationality or religion. It is meant not to be religious symbol but a reminder what war is all about; killing. Mostly civilians die and in this war it is mostly Moslems. We protest these deaths silently, respectfully, and personally with our crosses in front of our houses. We have given about 82 crosses to Napans and almost every neighborhood has at least one or two throughout the city, downtown especially. They are beautiful and yet quiet powerful. Of that I estimate about 15 have come down since Obama won the election because, I believe supporters don’t want to criticize him, but I think that is the very person who should be protesting his continuation of the Bush war policies. When my friends come to town I always give them a tour of “Cross City.” You can see more if you click Gallery at http://www.crosses4peace.org. "

" Nothing is so short sighted as concerned ignorance…

The reality of man is that there will always be criminals, political and religious dictators and extremists….and those who do not react to these threats become victims, as we became on 9/11. "

" I was the one who instigated those demonstrations on the hill with white crosses and large signs. I'm pleased to learn it made an impression on you. I also attended MANY other demos, printed and distributed postcards, held a bake sale, made phone calls, traveled to New Mexico, wrote letters and blogs, met with our Congressman, etc. 100 different people would give 100 differnent reasons why they don't demonstrate like they used to. I'm tired and I really need to get my laundry done.

But you've reignited my spark, Mr. Coulombe. I'm investing my remaining energy in pursuit of justice -- they say without it, there's no peace. I want to see war criminals held accountable. If pre-emptive war and torture are wrong when Germans and Japanese do it, it's wrong when Americans do it.

So far, it looks like Obama wants to hide, rather than investigate possible war crimes. It was wrong when Bush did it, it's still wrong when Obama does it. "

" glenroy,
And the United States has proven itself to be quite criminal, and dictatorial in the projection of its power throughout the world. What do you do when the enemy is your own government? "

" gomommygo,
Good for you!!!! "

" ampsthelena:

Your philosophies never cease to amaze me!! It is the capitalist and freedom of this country that has given you the opportunity to share your thoughts, and yet you would trade all of it for your socialist view points that would destroy individual liberties, even the freedom of demonstration. "

" Yep, ampsthelena this is you alright!

socialism:

–noun

1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. "

" i like the tone of most of these comments and some are on the educational side too.
even though i may agree with a point of view, i disregard all that go into pejoratives including those, and concentrate on those which seek to create a civil dialogue. some love obama so much that they now disregard their former concern for things like 50,000 troops he proposes to leave in iraq by changing the word "soldiers" to "embassy personell". not to mention all those air force bombers and fighters we may not fly out soon. will they be turned over to iraqi control ?
i try not to fall for any "isms".i use both the socialst post office and capitalist u.p.s. i prefer our socialist army to private ones like blackwater. they even changed their name to something else because of bad publicity due to you tube videos of them shooting civilians including kids ,for kicks ,to the background rock music of their choice.
on the other hand i think capitalist theories work out better for producing automobiles.
our short memories have forgotten that we supported both saddam and his opponents. we started the radical islamist movement in afghanistan to draw radicals from all over the world to fight the soviets. we built the "terror training camps" that we now bomb. money both ways . the cia used the pakistan isi to wire $100,000 to atta, one of the 9-11 participants.
we did not deserve this at all but our cia was behind the creation of al quaeda in it's current iteration. the mi-5 and 6 started the first one at the turn of the century to pit moslems against each other to divide and conquer. "

" anticommie,
Yes, I have no real problem with that definition of socialism, except that I would say that socialism is, essentially, working-class democracy, as opposed to the kind of democracy we have now, where the capitalist class wields the real power in society (the economic power) and therefore essentially controls political power as well. "Collectivist" is partly true, but it would be equally true to associate socialism with individual liberty. It's both: individuals, together. I still think you take Stalinism as your model of "socialism". Stalin went around shooting socialists..... "

" ampsthelena:

Do you support Cuba's Fidel Castro? Or ideals set forth by Che Gueverra? Or you like the ideals of Hugo Chavez? I bet you believe that Che was a "freedom fighter."

Socialism is a terrible form of government and the socialist programs in THIS country show that, as do current socialist states in the world. Socialism does not only take freedoms away from a productive society, it bankrupts it as well. "