"I’m pro-military, anti-war"

Does this mean you want to increase defense spending? Or you just fond of the military?

Saddam is referring to words I deleted from this post, because I didn't think they added anything to it. Like Manish, I'm a compulsive re-writer. ;)

I'm pro-military for understandable and unbreakable reasons; my little sister is active duty Air Force, has been for almost a decade.

I will definitely be there with my Bush Cheney 04 shirt and my support for the war and the military.

Wondering if I could still get a ride if I want to make signs supporting the war. On second thought, I will probably drive.

Being a native Bay Area girl that's always bothered me too, but I think it's because things are too easy for us here. We live in an oasis of liberalism so we get lazy. You develop the illusion that there is nothing or noone to rebel against since everyone in your immediate environment agrees with you. I remember being wayyyy more politically active when I lived in Eastern Pennsylvania or even Southern California, simply because there were far fewer open-minded people around me and a lot more intolerance.

Other story that seems to be left you from SM is of the Indians/South Asians helping Katrina affected.

September 18, more than 700 volunteers from the Indian-American community will take charge of serving food, says Kannappan.

http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/sep/16desis.htm?q=np&file=.htm

The a$$hole Christopher Hitchens debating George Galloway can be heared here Democracy Now

Christopher Hitchens stooped to another low by calling Prof. Juan Cole to "not to have set foot in the region ..and claiming to speak Farsi and Arabic"

What a miserable loser Hitchens is !!!

Amtrak's Northeast corridor? What's more Northeast than Boston? Ok, ok, Maine, but haven't seen a single Sepia event here. Come on, people! Represent!!!

Christopher Hitchens stooped to another low by calling Prof. Juan Cole to "not to have set foot in the region ..and claiming to speak Farsi and Arabic"

What a miserable loser Hitchens is !!!

I think you should read this to see what the other side thinks.

wish i could be there in ny. all the best.

i am pro-war only because there has been no viable alternative presented. doesn't mean i like it, or that i think it is run well.

will always be indebted to your sister and the rest of the military.

that was me, bitching about the lack of left coast events. thanks for picking up the slack anna =) dhamaal's worldly IV last night was AWESOME.

I think a lot of us can remember back in '03 when it was clear the War was a huge lie, fought for all the wrong reasons.

The common retort back then was - "well, the majority of America supports the WAR..."

So what about now? If you support this war, you're in the minority.

I would be curious to read a position supporting the war (nukehead?), considering Time magazine has an article out this week with various intelligence officers within the military saying the war is unwinnable and we need to get out as soon as possible.

The common retort back then was - "well, the majority of America supports the WAR..."

well that is intellectualy lazy, isn't it. The majority support it and hence it must be moral. Anybody using this argument should read Hitler's willing executioners.

I will lay out my case for the war.

1. Saddam was a menace to the world and his own people. (I am sure we don't need to be reminded of his annexation of Kuwait and his gasing of Kurds). Uday and Qusay were notorious thugs who used al

2. Let us say there was a 20% chance that he had weapons of mass destruction. I think the President had good reason to believe that. Even UN inspectors did not believe Tariq Aziz when he said there were no weapons. He also had the history of using whatever means to achieve his objectives. The low probability combined with the high level of the threat (weapons of mass destruction) still makes leaving him alone a high risk proposition.

3. The ineffectiveness of any world body (read UN) to workout a diplomatic solution. I believe that UN should be dismantled and so probably a little bit biased.

4. The nations urging a diplomatic solution (France, Russia and China) had ulterior motives and did not convince me that they would eventually seek the removal of Saddam.

I think given all the above factors I was in favor of a military solution.

Having said that, I was apprhensive about the way the war was sold to the Americans and the way post-war planning was done. They ddi not use any of the State department's prior work in this area.

But I am firmly behind the idea for war and also think that we should support the Commander-in-Chief. I also get a great kick out of ruining a pacifist's day.