No war protests now?

[fire_mat99]

Why is there no war protest now like before?And why are they still there when it is so out of control?

Like why stay there when it is so out of control? And where are the protesters?

[isolatedmonkey]

I think the reasons are; Publicity - the last thing America and the rest of the West want is another Vietnam situation (in public relations terms - they couldn't give a crap about the well being of the people) and the other reason being  generating money, "cashing in" on the war by multinational groups (e.g the carlye group) is why the war started and has lasted this long.

And I'm not really sure about the lack of anti-war protests.

[eco-socialist]

Yo comrades;
there are a number of points which i would like to make here.

Firstly I agree with 'isolatedmonkey's comments on the capitalisation element of his post. The middle east conflict is nothing more than capitalist imperialism on the part of the U.S.-and is a clear example of the abuse capitalism inflicts on humanity and social progression.

But I don't understand your comment on Vietnam. Wasn't the problem that the US stayed in for so long and killed so many? unless your simply talking about losing face.

With regards to comrade 'fire_mat99 ', I don't think that the situation being "out of control" is any reason for the occupation to end from the viewpoint of the occupiers. This is because, as I see it, the lack of stability and infighting in the Middle east works to increase the suffering and poverty of the masses and will make them more open, or at least less aware, of capitalist imperialism in relation to privatisation etc. An example of this could be the view that the unclear job titles among the Nazi elite caused them to fight among themselves rather than with Hitler. (even if this was not intentional, but rather the result of poor planing and incompetence.) So the masses in the middle east fight amongst themselves rather than against their true oppressor- namely capitalism.

Whats your opinion on it comrade (fire_mat99)?

[isolatedmonkey]

But I don't understand your comment on Vietnam. Wasn't the problem that the US stayed in for so long and killed so many? unless your simply talking about losing face.

pretty much yes, the loss of face was because of them killing so many, them staying there I dont know about.

[fire_mat99]

I think the reasons are; Publicity - the last thing America and the rest of the West want is another Vietnam situation (in public relations terms - they couldn't give a crap about the well being of the people) and the other reason being  generating money, "cashing in" on the war by multinational groups (e.g the carlye group) is why the war started and has lasted this long.

And I'm not really sure about the lack of anti-war protests.

Sure the government is not doing the fighting so they don't care .But what multinational groups are getting money and how do they get the money?

Are they not paying to put a pipe line in Iraq  ? And if so how do they profit or get money?And what is the carlye group?

Firstly I agree with 'isolatedmonkey's comments on the capitalisation element of his post. The middle east conflict is nothing more than capitalist imperialism on the part of the U.S.-and is a clear example of the abuse capitalism inflicts on humanity and social progression.

But who is profiting and who is controling who?Its not like they are offshoring to Iraq and US businesses profiting by the offshoring .