From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sat Apr 19 2003 - 15:41:12 MDT
Artillo5@cs.com wrote:
> In a message dated 04/17/2003 3:38:17 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> samantha@objectent.com writes:
>
> << What was it that could have been done that
> would have been heard and would have stayed the hand of the
> administration. I really would very much like to know. >>
>
> With something as serious and important as waging war on another country, I
> think that something as simple as a popular vote on whether or not we go to
> war could be effective, IF we were presented with all sides of the issue, and
> IF people cared enough to be that well informed. That way, we couldn't really
> say that the war wasn't decided by the people rather than by the
> administration.
I meant what in the current setup could have been done that was
not done by the people obviously against this "war"? We marched
and wrote congress critters by the hundreds of thousands and
millions and the war still went on. It would be very nice if a
war was put to the vote of all the people but this is not the
case. Even what the Constitution says is needed for declaring a
war was circumvented. So what could we have done differently
and what can be done differently the next time around?
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 19 2003 - 15:44:20 MDT