End the Sufferings of Arabs by Making a visibility action for peace!
Election Day is just over a week away and now is the time to take last minute actions for peace!
We need candidates to see the strength of the peace vote in this last week so we are asking you to organize a peace visibility event in your communit y anytime between today and Election Day. Gather a few peace-voting friends outside the campaign headquarters of a candidate in your area, at a busy intersection, or at a community event. Hand out Vote For Peace flyers or make large signs that say you are a Voter For Peace! Be sure to post your event on the VotersForPeace event listing so that other peace voters in your area can attend. Then send a picture of your event to Action@VotersForPeace.US so we can feature you on our website!
If you cannot organize or attend a visibility event, please call the campaign offices of your candidates for federal office and tell them how many people have signed the VotersForPeace Pledge in their district. Remind them that they can win the votes of peace voters if they change their position on Iraq and future wars of aggression!
Most importantly, remember to vote on Tuesday, Nov 7th! You can use this link to remind your friends to vote, too! Visit the Peace Majority Report for peace ratings of all federal candidates, and go to Vote-USA.org to find state-by-state information on voting poll locations and ballot candidates.
We need to put pressure on candidates who have yet to support withdrawal from Iraq. We need to impress upon our candidates that we do not want a pre-emptive strike against Iran or North Korea. We need to let the press know that we are united as peace voters and committed to making our voices heard! We can only do this with the energy and commitment of our pledge signers. Please consider taking one of these actions today!
Be a peace maker
Go to: http://votersforpeace.us
Join the Conversation
I voted about 3 weeks ago. Yes, the important thing is to vote, participate in the community.
I don’t understand how this is about “peace”?
If you, like some Democrats, prefer the tyrant Saddam over an invasion, you are NOT more for “peace” than, say, Republicans, you have merely chosen to inflict a different suffering on other people, or to allow it to happen.
If you, like some on the left, prefer Hizbullah attacking Israel with no response coming from Israel, you are NOT more pacifist than, say, those on the right who wanted Israel to strike back, you have merely chosen a different victim.
To deny the negative consequences of your vote by telling yourself that you are “for peace”, while the other side is “for war”, is merely escaping responsibility.
I prefer the invasion over Saddam. I have many reasons for it. I believe that it and its consequences were, even if the negative effects are over-reported, less bloody than Saddam’s rule. THAT is why I would vote for “war” rather than “peace”. The “peace” option here is too bloody. But do I feel the need to refer to my side as “peacce” and the other as “war”? I don’t. I believe my position has its own merit, I don’t have to claim the merit of “peace”.
If you put pressure on candidates to withdraw troops from Iraq, Iraq will simply become what it was before the invasion. And ten years from now we will find mass graves again. Why do you want that? Or dou you reject responsibility for what happens in Iraq when America is not involved? Even if it is very bad and could have been avoided?
You can vote for tyranny in the middle east, if you like. You can argue that tyranny is better than an American-imposed democracy (even if most Iraqis voted and seem, in contrast to other Arabs, to want the coalition troops in their country). But what you cannot do and remain honest is to refer to that position as “peace”.
Saddam’s attacks against Iran, against the Kurds, against Shi’ites were not “peace”. And the fights between Sunni and Shia extremists in Iraq is not “peace” either.
But the second won’t stop just because the non-Sunni and non-Shia Americans withdraw, and the first is what happens in countries like Iraq once the internal fighting is over and some tyrant is in control.
Your “peace” is toom much like war. In fact it is more war-like than our “war”.
“Peace” is when Hizbullah fires rockets at Israel. “War” is when Israel fires rockets at Hizbullah. That’s all the terms mean these days.
Hm, is that a complaint? Would you rather that the facts go underreported (or not reported at all?) Or are you saying that there should be a balance between reporting American and Iraqi achievements vs. death tolls and militant attacks?
The pressure should be on the kind of troops that are being sent to Iraq.
No one is arguing that. You can be against America’s services AND tyranny. It’s called being human, and wanting to see a morning in Iraq where you can actually see the sun instead of the aftermath of the missiles that are being fired back and forth for years now. And America is not the only one to blame, surely. It did its good, but you can’t ignore the horrid things that happened in their name.
You also can’t dismiss their crimes and offer your unconditional support yet claim to actually care for the Iraqi people. In a way I am for the invasion, because like Mohammed from Iraq the Model said, they made yesterday possible. But I also think America should have its limits for its operations in Iraq. They can’t be given the opportunity to do what they want, whenever they want, and have horrible crimes being excused as the “nature of war” or “the road to democracy.” Do you really think introducing “democracy” to a nation unfamilar with its basic concept is going to work? Do you really think introducing “democracy” to a nation through guns and tanks is healthy? Do you really think this is a peace-keeping mission, and not a new occupation of its own?
Sure, it may be better than being under Saddam’s rule. But it’s a new occupation nonetheless, and better doesn’t necessarily make things right.
In a way American forces are both appeasing and contributing to the problem, it’s more complex than what you make it out to be.
This depends on who you ask. Sane people will tell you that the word “peace” doesn’t exist when you bring up those two forces. It’s war, it’s always been war, whether it’s in the name of self-defense or not.