Quote:Thousands of union workers bearing American flags and homemade signs packed a rally at ground zero Thursday to show their support for U.S. military efforts in Iraq.

The rally stretched for several blocks north from the World Trade Center site. Carpenters, electricians and firefighters chanted "USA! USA!" as labor leaders and politicians addressed the crowd.

Many speakers and participants described the war as a natural outcome of the World Trade Center attack, drawing little distinction between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

"The war started right here on Sept. 11, 2001," Gov. George Pataki said.

"We were here!" shouted carpenter Jimmy Nolan, waving a pole bearing an American flag and a yellow flag with the image of a yellow ribbon.

Like many in the crowd, he said he saw the union-sponsored lunchtime rally as a counterpoint to anti-war demonstrations that have drawn hundreds of thousands to New York streets and parks.

"We got tired of those protesters always arguing against the war," he said.

A sea of hard hats and red-white-and-blue bandanas stretched along West Street from the trade center site, where workers building a temporary PATH train station at the site sat watching the rally from a fence overlooking the crowd.

"There's more people here than in my home state of Kansas," former Republican Sen. Bob Dole said.

Dozens of firefighters in bunker gear were scattered about the construction workers.

"This is where the war started," said fire Lt. Kenny O'Brien, whose Harlem firehouse lost two members in the terrorist attack. "This is the most appropriate spot in the world to make this statement.

Many in the crowd were veterans or relatives of service members on duty in Iraq. Some carried pictures of their family members in uniform. Others carried Marine Corps and other military banners.

"I was in Vietnam and we never had support like this," said sheetmetal worker Jim Pruitt.

RochesterFalcon Wrote:Half of them probably think Saddam had something to do with Ground Zero, too. :rolleyes:

RochesterFalcon Wrote:Half of them probably think Saddam had something to do with Ground Zero, too. :rolleyes:

RochesterFalcon Wrote:I've never said a word about this being for oil.

But I will say this: It will be interesting to see if those lease agreements (or whatever they were) that French and Russian companies had for Iraqi oil fields will be honored.

If they aren't and American companies end up getting those lease agreements, it could make this war look an awful lot like -- well, it was for oil.

I'm throwing that out there and really just speculating. I haven't followed the "war for oil" idea nearly as closely as many of my liberal friends. I seem to remember some U.S. government official on 60 Minutes assuring people that these old agreements would be honored. But my memory could be bad -- and late night comedians weren't cracking French jokes back then.

RochesterFalcon Wrote:Half of them probably think Saddam had something to do with Ground Zero, too. :rolleyes:

GDawgs88 Wrote:

RochesterFalcon Wrote:Half of them probably think Saddam had something to do with Ground Zero, too.  :rolleyes:

Even if he wasn't he's still got to go.

Quote:This war is not a war in revenge of 9/11. 9/11 was the wakeup call for Americans to take action against men like Saddam who supported this action of terror.

RochesterFalcon Wrote:

Quote:This war is not a war in revenge of 9/11. 9/11 was the wakeup call for Americans to take action against men like Saddam who supported this action of terror.

:stupid:

T-Monay820 Wrote:

RochesterFalcon Wrote:

Quote:This war is not a war in revenge of 9/11. 9/11 was the wakeup call for Americans to take action against men like Saddam who supported this action of terror.

:stupid:

Care to elaborate?

Quote:Our country has NEVER been attacked like 9/11. Pearl Harbor is the closest thing... but less lives were lost, it was from a country and it was a time of war... much different.

Quote:link?

RochesterFalcon Wrote:

Quote:Our country has NEVER been attacked like 9/11. Pearl Harbor is the closest thing... but less lives were lost, it was from a country and it was a time of war... much different.

Yep. And Iraq had nothing to do with the Sept. 11 massacre.

Nothing.

RochesterFalcon Wrote:

Quote:link?

Nope. No link. None.

Quote: He's saying that 9/11 was a wake up call

Quote:that we can't have brutal dictators

Quote:with a past history of terrorism

Quote:and oppression

Quote:Saddam has and would have continued to support terrorism.

RochesterFalcon Wrote:

Quote: He's saying that 9/11 was a wake up call

In other words, it pissed Americans off.

Quote:that we can't have brutal dictators

I fail to see the connection between the Sept. 11 massacre and dictatorship, brutal or otherwise.

Don't get me wrong. I would welcome a new era of foreign policy idealism in which America consistently stands for government with the consent of the governed. It would sure help atone for the past, a past which has seen our government cozy up to dictators (including Saddam) and even despose democratically elected leaders (e.g., <a href='http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/nsaebb8i.htm' target='_blank'>Salvador Allende</a>).

What I don't see is how Sept. 11, 2001 marks a break with the realpolitik of the past or even logically leads us there.

If Gulf War II is really about idealism, why would our government insist on breaking international law and incurring the wrath of most other world governments to pursue it?

No, Sept. 11, 2001 did not thurst America into a new era of foreign policy idealism. That was made clear last year, when George Bush instantly and unabashedly cheered a coup that briefly deposed Hugo Chavez, the democratically-elected president of Venezuela. Indeed, some suspect Bush had <a href='http://www.progressive.org/webex/wx041902.html' target='_blank'>advance warning of the coup.</a>

Bush is no idealist and this war isn't about idealism. It's about paranoia -- a new foreign policy of paranoia and pre-emption.

Quote:with a past history of terrorism

In Israel and Turkey. Not here. And, (sarcasm) with Turkey so supportive of this war (/sarcasm), the terrorist angle really comes down to this: We are at war defending right wing Israeli zealots who build settlements in territory they have no business being.

Sure, that sounds like a huge stretch. Fine. One might argue this war isn't about Israel. I won't dispute that. But make the argument that this war isn't about Israel, and the terrorism angle evaporates. The only other target of Iraqi-supported terror was Turkey, and Turkey didn't want this war.

Quote:and oppression

Again, I don't see the connection between Sept. 11, 2001 and oppression.

Quote:Saddam has and would have continued to support terrorism.

The Kurdish PKK movement that operated in Turkey was broken up years ago. That leaves terrorism in Israel. Is that what this is about? Does that justify this war? If so, wouldn't that make Al Jazeera well... right?