General Strike: 9/11/07



anyone going to participate ?

No, I'm sure you and the other 14 people who are going to participate in staying home from school to hate Bush some more will be enough.

No.

i dont think bush would be smart enough to get the point of us 14 people staying home...

ill see what school says...

This is a pretty good opertunity to take action. If you believe action must be undertaken (and i can not imagine how you can fail to see that there must) convince your workmates to strike with you!

Do not be bothered with what this strike is for! Reform is needed, that does not mean we need to know details yet. 9/11 is too near!

I hereby petition this forum to get a General Strike: 9/11/07 banner, and also to shut down at the day itself.(with full page banner) (Who will petition with me?) I will probably ask other websites to consider getting the banner. It is a first step to a better America.

PS as you know, i am from the Netherlands.

Edit: I also send the makers of the website a mail with kudos, and asking about whether they would not need more "advertisement".

Jasperr I can't tell if you're serious or not.

Er... no. How 'bout you just go sit on a highway instead? You can take a hippie van, a CND banner and a stash of pot too.

Besides, I can't have the day off work. Passengers would get pissed that they can't go on holiday. Sorry.

I attend an independent school. Skipping would just piss off my teachers and lose me a day of study. Not worth it for the returns I can envision.

I would be glad to participate, but I don't think it would do much good though.

meh, whilst i agree bush is a retard and we shouldnt have gone to war on iraq, shutting down an internet forum wont do any good, besides no we fucked their country, we should sorta take some responsibility for it, to use a crude metaphor it'd be like raping someone then pulling out before your done :P besides, iraq isnt valueing its oil in euros anymore so GWB wont care anymore.

Why do you say it is all lies? I am a young Marine Corps vet, and from everything I have been told, everything I have seen, and everyone the my buddies and I have talked to... America was right in her actions. The United States was attacked by a terrorist group. Bush said openly that if you do not help us you are against us. If you harbor terrorists, you are against us. While we had many reasons for attacking Iraq, one of them is along his initial statements, Saddam was allowing terrorists free passage through his country and allowed them to stay there as well. As for people who say that is well and good but we should get out, people say that Iraq is in the midst of civil war. How is it a civil war if most of the fighting is not done by Iraqis but Iranians? Most of the insurgents we are now fighting are all Iranian. Odd huh? You know what's weirder? Iranians are not muslims. They are not even really arabic. They are bahai. But its holy war? Its civil war? Nah. Then people want to say that Iraqis do not want us in Iraq. HAVE YOU BEEN THERE? HAVE YOU SEEN THE GRATEFUL TRYING TO THANK THE US TROOPS? HOW THEY RUN TOWARD OUR TROOPS WITH TEARS IN THEIR EYES AND DROP TO THEIR KNEES IN GRATITUDE?

Finally somebody with some common sense posts. Thank you for your service to your country.

I'm always so conflicted when I see testimonies or stories from young servicemen (service-people?) who are in the armed forces now or who have been in the recent past. On the one hand, I truly am grateful to those of you who are willing and able to defend our country and our ideals, who believe in democracy and freedom and care about it enough to put your lives on the line. Thank you.

On the other, I don't believe that our Commander-In-Chief has any legitimate reason to ask, require or order any of our troops to fight or die for this particular cause. This war has been a long time in coming and there's a very rich history of US and European nations involved in that whole region that has led up to this. The middle east has been an area of interest and conflict for about 100 years now; since about the time of the industrial revolution.

fistfullofroses, I acknowledge that you've experienced things over there that I've only been given small glimpses of from the media and I have no doubt that there are many people still left in Iraq who are glad to see Saddam deposed. After all, he was bent on the genocide of the Kurds and the Shiites. It is very gratifying to know that even amidst all the chaos and destruction there are a few lives that have been favorably impacted.

By the way, did you know we put Saddam in power? Yeah, they might not have know that either. We've also sort of had this plan to get rid of him since at least 1998 because he no longer served our needs but for one reason or another it's just never been feasible. Until now. Did you know we sold him biological and chemical weapons? I'm pretty sure that's something they weren't aware of either.

But this all begs the question that I think many people have lost sight of... what happened to Osama Bin Ladin and his Al-Queda terrorists? Remember... those guys hiding out in the hills, in caves... those guys who are now supposedly holing up just inside the border of Packistan? They were the ones that flew the planes into the World Trade Center. Not Iraq. Not Saddam. Saddam actually, for all his many, many flaws, wanted no part of Al-Queda. Or the Taliban. (Incidentally, we've aided both of them as well, in the past.) While we're on the subject of who we've aided, did you also know that we sold a nuclear reactor to Iran? Yeah, granted that was quite a few years ago. Back in the 70's I think. And NOW we're upset that they have nuclear capabilities? It just NOW occurs to us that they might aim it right at Israel. Or us. But most likely Israel. That's pretty much verbatim what they said, anyway. Whatever. We give Israel arms and aid too. I'm not even going to get into that can of worms.

fistfullofroses, I applaud your conviction and your purity of intentions. At the same time it saddens me that it's been spent on this stupid war of corruption and control. I urge you to do some research on Brittan, the former USSR and America's history in the middle east over the past century. Please look at the history of Russia, the US and Afghanistan; of the proposed oil pipeline, our role in the Shaw, Saddam and Iraq, Kuwait, Iran and Israel. Our country, it's leaders and it's past actions are certainly not the innocent party here. What we experienced when the World Trade Center's towers went down was a small fraction of what these people live with ever day. Well, I'm sure I don't have to tell you that... you've seen it firsthand. This has nothing to do with harboring terrorists or being for or against the United States. It has everything to do with wanting to control a resource and thereby controlling other sovereign nations and their people.

This war is in now way representative of American ideals of freedom and democracy but everything to do with greed and power-brokering. I support our troops and I think the best way to support them is to bring them home safely and soon.

I am well aware of how Iraq came to be what it is. However, Saddam was well on his way to power before the United States stepped in. He was a military leader who slowly but surely having his opponents knocked off, gaining power by filling the vaccum.

I know that the United States and the United Kingdom set up the nation of Isreal by taking lands from the arab people. The ashkenazim then opress the sephardim, mizrahim, muslims, and christians that live in Isreal. In result much of the Middle-East hates the United States and Isreal.

As for the United States aiding foreigners... yeah. One thing you forgot is that we have sold top secret jets and other things to Pakistan as well. We now know that they are harboring terrorists (whom we still fight in Afg). This puts us in a bit of a spot. I do not believe in any type of foreign aid anyway.

As for the war not being justified because it is faught primarily over economic concerns: if America does not have oil, she quits running. All western societies depend on oil. Even tree huggers who want us on alternative fuels need oil (your plastic cars are made from oil). I have no problem with fighting for oil. The nation, and world, needs it.

I do not think that leaving all of these conflicts unresolved will help anyone support troops. You would be failing to honor all those who have died. Though, I doubt that most of the United States populace has an ounce of Honor anyway.

I am a tree-hugger. At heart, I really am granola-eating, bleeding-heart, why-can't-we-all-just-get-along, wannabe-hippie, liberal... errm... liberterian, hmmm... sort of fiscally conservative, socially liberal, occasionally populist but also sometimes also socialist, idealistic realist. But it's not really that simple here, is it?

Wait, maybe it is. Iraq is producing less oil now than it was prior to the war. We've lost more American lives over there than we did from the initial attack. We've killed countless numbers of them (and reports vary wildly on what that number really is so I won't even speculate here)... is any of this really productive as far as securing oil for the US? So we can have our cars and our bottled water and our wrinkle-free polyester clothing and the ten million other products that are made out of petroleum? God, how sick is that? If I thought it would help in any way I would love to see that whole type of culture trashed and burned. But, as I heard once from a wise man, "I did not make this world, I only try to live in it." Unfortunately, this is how we live now.

I don't think there's an easy or painless solution to these conflicts now. We will either end up staying there indefinitely, with "acceptable casualties" on each side or we will completely withdraw and (at best) watch the whole region implode. On those grounds alone, I would love to see the troops come home, we've done the best... or the worst... that we can, it's time for that whole region to step up and take over the governance there. I honestly don't see the former happening anytime soon nor will we allow the latter to happen. Either way, I fail to see the honor in throwing away more lives to avenge those who have already been sacrificed on the alter of consumerism. We don't NEED oil. We want it. Humans have lived for centuries without it and I doubt we'd perish if it suddenly dried up and went away. It is a luxury. As is most of what we've grown accustomed to in our daily lives. We need food, shelter and water. Everything else is just a bonus. And it's certainly not worth the cost of human lives.

Do we really need Iraq for oil, anyway? Would it surprise you to learn that the U.S. gets most of its oil from Canada? U.S. Total Crude Oil and Products Imports

Unfortunately, like seemingly every other useful resource on this planet, the Alberta oil sands are finite.

Extracting crude oil from the sands is, compared with drilling (ignoring fractional distillation), a fairly complex procedure. Albertan sand oil is also not as rich in the heavier hydrocarbons as Middle Eastern crude is - kerosene and tar are not as concentrated, for example.

Factor all of that in, and it's apparent we are still dependent on the Middle East for oil.

Big Dave, you're quite right in your assessment of the oil sands, and I don't think that Canada could possibly provide the US with their oil exclusively. I guess I was trying to point out the flaw in the idea that we need Iraq in particular for oil, as they make up less than 4% of the US' oil supply. Here's a thought - maybe instead of war, Americans could band together, turn their air conditioners up half a degree, and cut their energy costs by 4%?

It's kind of funny to think that this will all be a moot point in the next century or so when all the oil runs out anyway.

Wow.

Those small figures remind me of the morons who are currently protesting at London Heathrow airport at the proposal to build a third runway - something desperately needed at LHR. I guess nobody told them that aviation only accounts for 1.8% of the total CO2 emissions in the UK. Not to mention the fact a third runway will reduce CO2 emissions as aircraft will not have to sit around on the tarmac with engines at idle (which squirts out a butt-load of CO2) waiting for a take-off clearance slot. (Heathrow is a real pain in the ass these days.)

What do you suggest our future alternative to oil will be?

I personally think nuclear electricity generation is best. I believe France already generates the majority of its electricity from nuclear power. Similar schemes are in place in the UK, but many of our nuclear power plants are aging, and we need some new ones commissioned very rapidly.

It seems as though when people become convinced that something is "bad", they will not listen to that kind of logic. Kind of reminds me of all the people who pour money, time, and energy into putting a stop to seal hunting in Canada.

As it stands now, nuclear is not really sustainable, as we will run out of uranium just as we are running out of oil, although perhaps advancements of breeder technology will improve the efficiency. I'd also be concerned with the safe long-term storage of decommissioned nuclear plants and waste - the concrete bunker concept really seems like a band-aid solution to me.

I think that, ultimately, it has to move to sustainable energy, namely solar and wind. The main complaints are that they do not provide enough, and that they are not consistent. To the first, I agree - but that is only because we consume far more energy than we need to. We could do a whole lot more energy conservation and recycling, and I think we're going to have to do so if we want to maintain our standard of living.

To the second, I think that further developments into energy storage will have to be made. Hydrogen fuel cells are in their infancy, but that is one example of a storage medium that is both renewable and clean. I'm not sure what the battery of next century will be, but I think that that is an area that needs work.

Hmm... that was pretty off topic. Maybe I should open a new thread?