Revolution inevitable

musicismylife78

Been awhile since my last rant...

We are moving in the same direction our parents did in the waning years of the 1960's. You can track activism during that time period this way:

1964-66/ is the time of making those aware of the problem of vietnam

1966-68-was the protest period.

1968-72 or so was the resistance period

I see our current war and activism around it encompassing the same sort of pattern.

In my mind, the 12,000 or whatever suicide attempts by returning soldiers, the 4,000 dead soldiers, etc...

its all there. Revolution is inevitable.

The funny thing is how naive people are. They thought they could start wars or raise kids in a violent world and nothing would happen. No side effects.

School shootings, returning soldiers unable to cope with life outside war etc... those are all consequences we caused.

The revolution is coming. Whites should choose sides. Either we are on the side of the oppressed or the oppressor.

Its coming. And I will be the first ripping up concrete.

Byrnzie

The revolution will not be televised.

slightofjeff

Not. Gonna. Happen.

spiral out

slightofjeff wrote:

Not. Gonna. Happen.

Killjoy.

Thecure

radiohead33 wrote:

Been awhile since my last rant...

We are moving in the same direction our parents did in the waning years of the 1960's. You can track activism during that time period this way:

1964-66/ is the time of making those aware of the problem of vietnam

1966-68-was the protest period.

1968-72 or so was the resistance period

I see our current war and activism around it encompassing the same sort of pattern.

In my mind, the 12,000 or whatever suicide attempts by returning soldiers, the 4,000 dead soldiers, etc...

its all there. Revolution is inevitable.

The funny thing is how naive people are. They thought they could start wars or raise kids in a violent world and nothing would happen. No side effects.

School shootings, returning soldiers unable to cope with life outside war etc... those are all consequences we caused.

The revolution is coming. Whites should choose sides. Either we are on the side of the oppressed or the oppressor.

Its coming. And I will be the first ripping up concrete.

what do you mean "Whites should choose sides"? why not say people should choose sides.

mammasan

The difference between Vietnam and Iraq is the draft. Many Americans are not feeling the personal loss or any effect of the war. During the Vietnam era almost every American family had the potential of being effected, so more people where interested. Now people are more concerned about the economy and oil prices because they have a far greater affect on the public as a whole. If the American people are going to rise up and revolt it will not be because of the war.

Thecure

radiohead33 wrote:

Been awhile since my last rant...

We are moving in the same direction our parents did in the waning years of the 1960's. You can track activism during that time period this way:

1964-66/ is the time of making those aware of the problem of vietnam

1966-68-was the protest period.

1968-72 or so was the resistance period

I see our current war and activism around it encompassing the same sort of pattern.

In my mind, the 12,000 or whatever suicide attempts by returning soldiers, the 4,000 dead soldiers, etc...

its all there. Revolution is inevitable.

The funny thing is how naive people are. They thought they could start wars or raise kids in a violent world and nothing would happen. No side effects.

School shootings, returning soldiers unable to cope with life outside war etc... those are all consequences we caused.

The revolution is coming. Whites should choose sides. Either we are on the side of the oppressed or the oppressor.

Its coming. And I will be the first ripping up concrete.

Also, do you think saying thing slike "Either we are on the side of teh oppressed or the oppressor" does sound liek GWB saying "you are either with us or against us"

Rhinocerous Surprise

Yikes.

Open

Thecure wrote:

what do you mean "Whites should choose sides"? why not say people should choose sides.

i know got to that part and was like wtf mate?

Kel Varnsen

radiohead33 wrote:

Been awhile since my last rant...

We are moving in the same direction our parents did in the waning years of the 1960's. You can track activism during that time period this way:

1964-66/ is the time of making those aware of the problem of vietnam

1966-68-was the protest period.

1968-72 or so was the resistance period

The thing is I think a large portion of those people in the 60's weren't actually there to be activists. I think a lot of them just went along for the good music, the drugs and the sex . I think that is why so many of them became 80's skinny tie (or perhaps piano tie) wearing, coke snortin, money obsessed yuppies.

Abuskedti

mammasan wrote:

The difference between Vietnam and Iraq is the draft. Many Americans are not feeling the personal loss or any effect of the war. During the Vietnam era almost every American family had the potential of being effected, so more people where interested. Now people are more concerned about the economy and oil prices because they have a far greater affect on the public as a whole. If the American people are going to rise up and revolt it will not be because of the war.

that is a fact, and that is why we need a draft

Thecure

Abuskedti wrote:

that is a fact, and that is why we need a draft

so let me understand we need more people to go to Iraq so that we can stop the war? Thank God i am not american.

RainDog

Thecure wrote:

so let me understand we need more people to go to Iraq so that we can stop the war? Thank God i am not american.

Actually, I believe the argument is that we as a nation would be far less likely to engage in unnecessary wars like Iraq if wars automatically resulted in a draft.

Plus, there'd be more "demographic variety" in the armed forces during wartime if everyone was eligible.

But instead of a draft (or even a push for increased recruitment) we use private contractors to, in Iraq's case, essentially double the number of armed "soldiers" in our occupying force. If we list the number of soldiers in Iraq at 150,000, then it's likely we have 300,000 armed people over there - with only the mentioned 150,000 falling under any kind of reasonable code of conduct.

Abuskedti

Thecure wrote:

so let me understand we need more people to go to Iraq so that we can stop the war? Thank God i am not american.

No, we need the whole country to participate if we go to war. This way the whole country is involved in the decision.

noodles_jefferson

mammasan wrote:

The difference between Vietnam and Iraq is the draft. Many Americans are not feeling the personal loss or any effect of the war. During the Vietnam era almost every American family had the potential of being effected, so more people where interested. Now people are more concerned about the economy and oil prices because they have a far greater affect on the public as a whole. If the American people are going to rise up and revolt it will not be because of the war.

good point about the draft. another thing is that the news doesn't report on the war like they did back then. you barely see any coverage of the war unless you watch BBC.

Thecure

Abuskedti wrote:

No, we need the whole country to participate if we go to war. This way the whole country is involved in the decision.

i am sorry to tell you this but your whole country was involved in the decision. you voted for the people who said yes. also, you elect people because you feel that they are going to make the best decision could you imagne how worse the government would work if every decison was brought to teh country for them to vote on. no work would be done. (OPPS i forgot no work is being done now anyway)

Abuskedti

Thecure wrote:

i am sorry to tell you this but your whole country was involved in the decision. you voted for the people who said yes. also, you elect people because you feel that they are going to make the best decision could you imagne how worse the government would work if every decison was brought to teh country for them to vote on. no work would be done. (OPPS i forgot no work is being done now anyway)

that is true, let me clarify.. of the hunreds of millions there are hoards of people of very little charactor. They are fine with a war if there is even a remote chance it will serve them personally somehow.

However, if the war effects them personally, because the draft includes everyone equally, then they would not be so willing to allow their faceless nameless countrymen to kill faceless nameless enemies

blackredyellow

slightofjeff wrote:

Not. Gonna. Happen.

Hate to be a killjoy too, but I totally agree. Outside of some college age students and some radical people, no one cares enough for a revolution. We all have enough problems in our daily lives that we'd rather spend our efforts on improving.

Thecure

Abuskedti wrote:

that is true, let me clarify.. of the hunreds of millions there are hoards of people of very little charactor. They are fine with a war if there is even a remote chance it will serve them personally somehow.

However, if the war effects them personally, because the draft includes everyone equally, then they would not be so willing to allow their faceless nameless countrymen to kill faceless nameless enemies

i understand what you mean but just remember one thing the vietnam war had a draft who a couple of presidents were drafted but did not go. there is always away around going to war.

Abuskedti

Thecure wrote:

i understand what you mean but just remember one thing the vietnam war had a draft who a couple of presidents were drafted but did not go. there is always away around going to war.

True, but I believe this war even more unnecessary than that...

Thecure

Abuskedti wrote:

True, but I believe this war even more unnecessary than that...

i don't know about that, i would say that both were fucked up.