Jane Fonda, War Protestor

| | Comments (9) | TrackBacks (0)

I have to admit it kind of makes me glad to see Jane Fonda exercising her free speech on the war issue again, only because I believe it will hurt the anti-war cause. If that treasonous waste of oxygen wants to go out there and tell everyone how bad war is...more power to those of us who disagree with her.

The recent protest circuses have me laughing because no one there can really explain why they oppose the war. We're just hearing the same old "no war for oil, Bush lied, kids died" rhetoric. It makes me think these protestors are just opposed to wars in general and have no sense of why they are opposed to this one...

Just to be clear, let me explain why I support this one...

Saddam Hussein was a terrible, evil dictator and he deserved what he got. His support of terrorism and his crimes against humanity are well documented. His WMD ambitions were also well documented. True, we didn't find any in Iraq, but no one disputes that he had them at one point, and no one knows what happened to them.

As far as Iraq being an "illegal war", I've yet to hear a logical explanation of that one. The 1991 Gulf War was ended with a cease-fire. For those of you who don't know what that means, it's not the same as a peace treaty. Peace treaties end wars, cease-fires end fighting under enumerated conditions. A lot of people don't realize it, but we were technically still at war with Iraq after the cease-fire, as we have technically been at war with North Korea since the 50s. See, Saddam's government agreed to the cease-fire, and failed to meet the conditions. That means the fighting can resume, perfectly legal. Maybe we'll never know what happened to his WMD, but for 12 years he failed to comply with UN inspections (remember when Bill Clinton bombed Iraq?). We also found numerous conventional weapons in Iraq that were in violation of the cease-fire agreement.

I've got my disagreements with HOW this war is being fought, but I've yet to hear a good argument against WHY we're fighting it.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Jane Fonda, War Protestor.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://novatownhall.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/904

9 Comments

Kevin said:

"cease fire" Brilliant! Only, I mean it.

Nicely stated NR, thanks.

Kevin said:

No seriously, I'm all for war when applied correctly.

youdunno said:

I recommend this short movie which mocks Kim Jong Il and his special agents for buying Hennessy XO abroad :=)

The full 30-minute movie can be watched and downloaded (in WMV or Flash format) at:

http://nk007movie.googlepages.com/

Ron said:

Look, I realize that there are certain genuine pacifists out there, and that a lot of people are war weary (and good thing they weren't around during WWII!), but the leaders of the modern anti-war movement fall into three main, non-mutually-exclusive categories:

1) "Say no to war unless a Democrat is President." This includes a lot of the BDS crowd and Hollywood left. Remember that they were pretty silent during Clinton's bombing raids of Serbia, Sudan, Iraq, etc.

2) "Say no to war unless the Islamofascists attack North Korea." These are the leftover left commies. Their intellectual (and I use that term loosely) ancestors opposed U.S. involvement in WWII -- at least until the Germans invaded the Soviet Union. Someone like Pete Seeger is a good prototype character.

3) "Say no to the Zionist neocon war!" This categoriy includes not only the bigoted left but also the paleocon right. These people are very isolationist mixed with latent anti-Semitism (or Jew hatred, whatever you want to call it). You find a lot of conspiracy theorists (like the "Truthers") in this crowd.

Now a lot of the "antiwar" crowd are the willing dupes of those leaders. They are in quite a state of denial, but there you have it.

Dean Settle said:

"The recent protest circuses have me laughing because no one there can really explain why they oppose the war"

Have you seen the expanded footage of the interviews by Fox from a couple of years ago? It's too funny.
After all the lies are laid bare and the indisputable facts were presented, these cats still pulled out that the war was for the oil (totally ignoring the fact that there wasn't any oil in Iraq from the end of the Gulf War till a couple of years before the Saddam takedown.
Even before the Gulf War, Iraq's pathetic contribution never exceeded 2% of our total import.)

Turns out that there are two truths that have been totally ignored. It WAS about oil ....just that the UN, it's head man, the French, the Germans, and the Russians were dragging their feet because Saddam had primed them WITH OIL profits....
And that if we really wanted to invade and take over a maximum production of oil giant, Canada was much closer. (with 40% of our imports.)

No Relation said:

Good point, Dean. Ironic thing is we IMPORT oil into Iraq for our own military machines.

Dr. No said:

Interesting comments on Fonda.
Would like to see factual sources so I don't pass on rumour.
Can you provide?
Dr. No

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

ECOSYSTEM