Why do people waste time on anti-war protests?
 

What do you think are the main reasons and the main groups of anti-war protestors?

hippies are hippies no matter what generation.

no real explanation.

might be genetic.

It makes them feel "special"....:1orglaugh

I like hippie music

Maybe an odd, thought, but could it be that they're against the war?

:2 cents:

How about the ones that go to Iraq in attempt to act as a human shield. That is a damn good idea..

Americans who are anti-war need to join the human shield movement.

Ockham's Razor

So you think there's nothing wrong with some war at all?

War is always wrong and should not be needed (in a perfect world)

Waste time? Tony Blair is scared to death that his position is so unpopular in his country that he may lose his power. Bush has been forced to go to the U.N. several times already because of the unpopularity of his war inside the U.S. The protesters are being heard loud and clear.

It's called Democracy.

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0691019568/104-7502233-3559944" target="_blank">Read.</a>

its not the hippies. its everyone.

100,000 people went to the protest in melbourne yesterday.

there arent 100,000 hippies in melbourne :winkwink:

Does it occure to any of you that voicing opinions is the very right a democracy has?

Don't you think there are many people out there who have seen war and know that it sucks big time?

Those ppl have TOO much fuckin time on their hands! Someone should show them how to open a porn site and make money.

The ENTIRE UN did not change Bush's and Powell's decisions, yet a few NOBODIES will? :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Bush's goal may not have changed, but his plans were already changed drastically. He's fighting with the U.N. and NATO right now, not Iraq. That means that the protests are working.

I'd be curious to see how many protesters have actually seen war.

Maybe we could stop pretending this is going to be a "war"? If the US attacks Iraq, it will be a massacre. Baghdad is a virtually defenseless city and almost half of the population are children under 14.

When one has cancer, you fight that cancer with all your might.
The cancer of the world today is called Militant Islam, its most widely known form is "International Terrorism". Unless you are profoundly naive you understand that countries such as: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, Sudan, North Korea, Lebanon encourage, fund and help world wide terrorism.
Fighting world wide terrorism will necessitate the eradication of those who help, encourage or fund it. This msut start with Iraq and will probably continue with North Korea. This is not a question of oil, or of controlling the world, this is a question of survival for the world as you know it.
Do not kid yourselves with your world peace views and hope.
There is no such thing as world peace, there is no such thing as "love your neighbor".
Unless something is done to stop Militant Islam, we will fall into an age of darkness and doom. Their goal is to kill all the infidels, if you are not a devout Muslim, you are an infidel, that's about 4.9 billions infidels on the planet.
The only reason France, Germany and Russia are stalling an attack on Iraq is an economical reason; they want to be the one to sell Iraq all that it will needs once saddam is gone.
All those peace lovers people makes me want to laugh, how can you be so naive and stupid????
If you thought 9/11 was terrible, then wait and see what will happen if you let Islamic terrorist launch a biological or chemical attack in a major city!
And one more point, you may think that you're safe because you're not American and you're not Jewish, well, wake up and smell the roses; you may be a pro palestinian French Christian, but guess what, for them you're still an infidel and they will come after you just as hard as they will come after Israel and the United States. Remember that your cities in Europe are literally overwhelmed by Arabs where it is very easy for Islamic terrorits to hide.
So, Peace and Out

The Naive is Falling Asleep.....

lol

will you feel safer after the war in Iraq?

fucking faggot hippies

So, instead of starting a flamming war with you; let me ask you a question; What is your solution to solve this problem?
It seems like all anti war protesters onyl know a few words: "fuck the war, fuck b..., fuck the u..." but do you have a solution or are you just going to wait until you suffocate to death on sarin?

How about you answer the fucking question. Will you feel safer after Saddam is gone and a western puppet government is installed?

Will that make your "cancer of the world" go away? Are the fringe of your "militant Islam" going to magically disappear? Or will this just piss them off even more?

Answer me Maury.

No, I will not feel safe until all Islamic militant are eradicated, and yes I think that a western puppet government for Iraq will be a lot better for them, after all the country you live in, the USA is such a "bad place to live" compared to lovely place such as Yemen, Syria, Somalia...
Now, why don't you shut the fuck up and bend over to be fucked by a big arab cock

"So, instead of starting a flamming war with you; let me ask you a question; "

You didn't answer mine though. I'm not here to start flame wars as well. Just chatting.


"What is your solution to solve this problem?"

The problem or "the problem"? Obviously we have a different approach on who and what the problem is.


"It seems like all anti war protesters onyl know a few words: "fuck the war, fuck b..., fuck the u..." but do you have a solution or are you just going to wait until you suffocate to death on sarin?"

First of all, equating anti war protesters with hippies is big mistake. A large part of the ones that protest against a war have been in one and fought. Did you ever fight? How many of you here served on army? Did you ever throw or even hear a hand grenade? I bet you haven't and if you did, 99.9% of the webmasters here haven't. The average guy here is not even capable for carrying on his shoulders the ammunition of a machine gun for 10miles, but he yells for war whenever he logs on.

You, me and the rest here will experience this war from a TV or through a website. Isn't it great?

And just how do you plan on eradicating an entire faith? Kill them? Give them a theological quiz to sort out the "bad Muslims"? Everyone knows it works real well when you start attacking religious groups. Worked on those pesky Roman Christians, Those cocksucker Mormons, those damn Dutch heathen Christians that came to America, and those dirty fucking Protestants. Persecution of religious groups has a tendency to make them stronger, in case you never cracked a history book.




Ahh yes. Imperialism, that never comes back to bite you in the ass.



I suggest you look up a little concept called cultural relativism. It is pretty much the foundation of all accepted social theory. It makes me laugh that people think like you. I hope you havent figured out how to breed yet.

makes sense.

Like a few people here (I think 3 or 4) I have been in the military, I have killed, I was trained on how to cut someone's head with a credit card, I am not affraid of going back and to kill more of these motherfuckers.
I am not equating hippies and anti war protesters, hippies are mostly harmless air heads who so drugged up that they don't even know who they are.
The solution to solve this problem is simple yet complicated, all countries who support terrorism must be taken over, these government must be replaced by government who will worry for their citizens not for osama, it will take time and will be costly both in lives and money. Inaction will be more costly. not for them but for us.

hahaha

Actually, cultural relativism is pretty much dead. Some elements have survived, but the theory as a whole has been rejected. Personally, I think it's for the most part true, but most of the scientific world disagrees. (except for the radical postmodernists ofcourse)

Well then I just wasted 8 years of my life and have two worthless degrees based upon its very foundations.

http://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/gensler/et/et-01-00.htm

I think you need to re-read. Its common fucking sense.

As a theory, rejected? Absurd, utterly fucking absurd.

What the hell possible arguments can you give me to prove the following statement either false and or show how it has been rejected in any way shape or form. Aside from religious kooks who have a tendency to disagree.

"Cultural relativists see morality as a product of culture".

Enlighten me. Please.

It's a good thing that people like you who are trained to get sent out to get killed have so much faith in the ones who are trained to send people like you out to get killed.

No, that's not me
this is more like me
http://www.movie-guru.com/movieguru/...es/spygame.jpg
cappish

So what could happen that could be so horrible as to turn uberleet assassin ultra secret CIA shadow warrior into gallery maker?

the religious always try to debate theories.

proof.

http://www.cultural-relativism.com/

The theory as a whole has been rejected by 90% of the scientific community.
The strongest modern defenses of it date from the first half of the 20th century (Sumner, 1906 and Benedict, 1946), but later publications give a more recent image of it's current status (Nielsen, 1966, Nagel, 1997, Harman & Jarvis, 1996, for example. Other things worth reading are Ethical Relativism, 1973 and Relativism: Cognitive and Moral, 1982).

Admittedly, cultural relativism has made a huge impact and has had major influence, but as a whole, it's unfortunately not exactly widely accepted.

Weak.

I want you, to tell me, how morality is not dictated by your culture. Where does it come from then? Are we just born with it?

Well, I could also give an overview of the main reasons why it has been rejected, but that would take a lot longer to write.

(please note, being what would probably be called a postmodernist by most people, I absolutely think cultural relativism is right, and I really wish more scientists would see that. however, at the moment that simply isn't the case)

Reply to your edit: Ok, I'll try and make it even more clear. Cultural relativism has *not* been rejected by *me*, and I do think morality is for the most part dictated by culture. Kant was wrong, there is no objective standard. I myself tend toward socially evolutionary intuitionism, which is one of the more radical forms of cultural relativism.

However, most scientists/philosophers disagree with cultural relativism. I'll be glad to show you their arguments (which imo are fairly weak), but that would require quite a bit of writing.

A wife and 2 kids...

Riiiiight

Im sorry fallen warrior. You should get out your atm card and go to work on them. Surely you know how to get rid of bodies.

You know buddy, it's very easy to find someone, you can call me names or whatever you want but you say shit like that and I'll use my Black Amex on you, so you'll know what it feels like to be a tranny.
Cappish motherfucker?

don't fuck with us,we'll cut your head

http://www.stlouischildrens.org/SITE...MasterCard.JPG

Not proof at all. Very unsound logic. Using the universal modernist notion of rationality on relativism is like saying "I am right, and if we all assume that I'm right, I'll be able to prove that I'm right. Please keep in mind that in order for this to work, I have to be right.". It's like Anselm's ontological proof of the existence of God - which only works if you already believe God exists.

You must be retarded.

You will pay for Labret's boob job? :winkwink: