Should Speech Critical of the War Policy in Iraq Be Outlawed?

Question

I keep hearing from conservatives that comments critical of Bush and the war are what's causing us to fail over there.

If we had just made such speech illegal from the beginning, would the sectarian violence never have started, and would the insurgents have handed in their weapons by now?

Answer 1

No, speech critical of the war policy in Iraq is welcome.. at least to me. Countless of American troops have given their all for your right to do that. My personal problem is when America gets drug through the mud because someone doesn't like President Bush. Calling our President a "chimp" or such hurts AMERICA, not President Bush. Say what you want about policy, but respect our country. Treasure our freedom to speak our opinions, protect it. Never be casual with our freedoms or they will be taken from us.

Answer 2

No political speech should be outlawed, period. See the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The insurgents are fighting because they don't like us occupying their country, and because they are getting aid and support from Iran - a country at war with the United States.

The fact that they are now a minority after 30 years as the party in power tends to fuel their discontent.

What American politicians say has nothing to do with whether they would have started or not.

However, certain speech does seem to give them comfort. But I don't consider such comfort to be "aid," therefore it is not illegal, nor should it be.

Answer 3

Of course not. It's protected, even though most of it is ill-informed ranting by intellectual midgets.
The peacekeeping mission in Iraq certainly needs some overhaul. Big surprise. As the political situation among the Iraqis changes, we'll need to adjust all the time.
Insofar as the other part is concerned, as regards the War on Terror, that sort of thing is always going to be long and messy. Weapons from Syria and Iran are going to go someplace. Next door seems a better choice than New York.
Criticism isn't the gripe. But you have to realize these guys are of a Vietnam-era age. They remember the 1968 Tet battle, in which the Viet Cong were destroyed as an effective force, and the North Vietnamese Army got thrashed. It was a huge tactical victory for the U.S., but when Walter Cronkite pronounced it a U.S. failure, it became one on a strategic level. The communists lost in every way except that they convinced the American people that we'd lost, and that perception became the reality. If a reasonable portion, say a quarter, of the anti-war sentiment we hear now were backed by any cogent thought processes, this memory wouldn't be a worry to the administration, but they owe it to us to point out that we need to think about this. Losing because of shallow thinking (much more shallow on the left than by Bush--insert your own joke here) is just a difficult possibility to digest.

Answer 4

If we lose free speech the terrorists win.

Using opposition to the war in this country as the reason we are failing is a scapegoat. And a rather inaccurate one at that.

Banning comments critical of this war will accomplish nothing other than making our country mirror the countries of the Radical Islamics that conservatives supposedly "loathe" so much.

It will not quell the insurgency. All it would do is harm the fabric of freedom this country was based on.

Answer 5

Apart from the foolishness of your idea, it should be pointed out that such speech can not be outlawed, as such laws would be contrary to the First Amendment, would be enjoined from taking effect, and would be nullified by a federal court.

It should make a thoughtful person wonder what exactly those so-called "conservatives" actually seek to "conserve" -- as it is apparently not the basic liberties on which this country was founded.

Answer 6

That is the most ridiculous claim that the conservatives have evere come up with. Why not just face the truth that we screwed up and lets figure out how to change it for the better. If that is not possible, then bring our boys home. I am tired of the government digging in my pockets for a war that is accomplishing nothing and for the 34 million dollar fence that will put not even a dent into illegal immigration.
My thought is that dishonest politicians should be outlawed, whoops, then there would be none.

Answer 7

No, this is totalitarian thinking. If the USA had greater freedom of expression and better media sources they would not have elected Bush a second time, probably not the first time.
This is the wrong place for such a question, as YA has no regard for freedom of expression; I've had the following questions zapped for alleged violations:

If the Muslims have changed the Quran before, why can't they do it again to cut out the bad stuff?
Why should Christians trust no one?

Answer 8

No, and I'm conservative. If we weren't able to express our opinions freely in this country, we'd be no better than a lot of other places in the world.

I believe the sectarian violence in Iraq was inevitable. Getting it under control has proven harder than expected. I think Iran wants a little payback for that little war they had with Iraq under Saddam. So, they are surely helping insurgents.

Answer 9

To make that illegal would be unconstitutional in the United States, we only have freedom with freedom of speech. So to outlaw freedom of speech is to outlaw freedom. It would help for the critics to think first, and not just complain, but any way you look at it everyone has a right to their opinion whether it's educated or not. Just like the right to vote, you can go vote for anyone you want whether you know anything about them or not.

Answer 10

They just need to blame their stupid concepts of how to do things on someone other than themselves, so...let's blame it on what people say, not on what is really happening.

Let's say it was "outlawed":
1) 60% of the people would now be in jail
2) The US would be a dictatorship
3) The blame would shift to improperly trained forces and not enough of 'em so they would draft EVERYONE not in jail from 17-64 and have all them killed over there as well.
4) Iraq prevails anyway because all but the US leaders are dead or in jail.
5) The US is taken over and anyone not critical of the now removed leaders is thrown in jail as well.