Is War Worth Protesting Now That It's Obama's War?
Yesterday was the sixth anniversary of the beginning of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, one of the most unnecessary, dishonest, corrupt and wasteful military operations in the history of the United States of America. In that long six years, things have come around full circle.
At the beginning of the Iraq War, many powerful Democrats were supporting the Republican position, using Republican rhetoric. Those Democratic politicians who opposed the invasion of Iraq were put down as out-of-touch political radicals. Now, six years later, many powerful Democrats are supporting the Republican position, using Republican rhetoric. Those Democratic politicians who support a full withdrawal from Iraq within a year are put down as out-of-touch political radicals.
I flipped across an Air America station on the radio the other day, and I cringed when I heard the host chastise peace activists. “We have to be as careful getting out as we were careless going in,” the host sneered, using a favorite GOP justification for prolonging the occupation.
In my small town, there’s an activist organization that has been putting together peace protests in commemoration of the anniversary of Iraq. They’ve been doing that for five years, but this year, there won’t be any such protest. Why? Because Barack Obama has been elected President.
There are other towns that are protesting on the event of the the six year anniversary of the Iraq War. Why shouldn’t mine?
Is peace not as important, nonviolence not as relevant, when a Democrat is President?