Reply #153: Good points, but there's a BIG difference between me & a public official

[no name no slogan]

You make some valid points; however, what you are saying is that, because I as a private citizen failed to change the course of the war, I have no right criticizing a public official who supported the war.

Maybe my efforts and those of other anti-war folk did not work to prevent the invasion-- maybe there was no way for us, as private citizens, to prevent it. We don't know for sure. However, our elected officials DO have some control (no matter how little) to stand up to GeeDubya and his neoCon lackeys.

And even if their votes would not have prevented invasion, there's still some merit and value to making a SYMBOLIC stand against pre-emptive war and unjustified military action. I'm sure that many of those who voted against the IWR did so on these grounds, because they KNEW that BushCo would somehow devise a way to have their war. Maybe if more elected officials would have raised their hands and simply said "I will not support this war", they may have made some folk at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave think twice about what they were doing.

And even though the US invaded Iraq, the war is not over by any stretch of the imagination. The Peace Movement is STILL working for peace in the region and is still affecting public opinion-- which is often the first step in stopping the war for us "common folk".

This is not a zero-sum game that simply ends once the Saddam statue falls to the ground. The peace movement has changed its tactics, and is working to end the US-controlled occupation of Iraq-- which is the cause for most of the problems on the ground today. As long as the US is seen as a foreign invader and occupier, the situation will not get better.

As long as the war continues, the peace movement will continue, too-- whether its a Republican War or a Democratic War.