Nonviolent protests are twice as likely to succeed as armed conflicts – and those engaging a threshold of 3.5% of the population have never failed to bring about change.
Politicians making decisions based on public opinion has a lot of cause and effect relation. By all accounts it would have been easier to maintain a 40k to 100k presence in Iraq than it was to pack everything up and leave.
The USA actually still had troops in Iraq, Syria, Jordan, etc. And the protests were to prevent an invasion from happening in the first place, not to go in, kill a million people and then 2 decades down the line throw up your hands and say ‘that was a mistake’ with no consequences for anyone that pushed for it.
And the number there should be is 0, I’m really not sure what point you’re trying to make here. People didn’t want a war in Iraq in 2003, there were mass peaceful protests, and yet it still happened.
The number absolutely should not be 0. It’s a nation which actively funds and mobilizes religious extremists who imprison or execute homosexuals and treat women as cattle.
EDIT: in this context Iraq/nation meant the local populace, not the government
Which wasn’t the case before the invasion, when there were 0 US troops. Why the fuck do you bring up current day when I’m talking about protests that happened over 20 years ago (by people who knew the current outcome was likely)?
Are you confused about which comment thread you’re in? You said initially that the protests 20 years ago of the Iraq War were impotent and I pointed out that the US Involvment in Iraq sharply declined as a result of those protests, despite anti-NATO religious extremism presence growing in the region for many of the following years.
Jesus fucking Christ this post alone should be considered an act of violence for it’s sheer depravity and mockery of millions of deaths. The US did it’s thing in Iraq for 15 years, utterly failed, made lots of people rich and then they left. How dare you claim that was success for the anti-war movement. What is wrong with you? What the fuck is “Anti-NATO religious extremism?” This is a suspiciously nonsensical statement, especially when NATO wasn’t even in Iraq. Is a chat bot writing your responses for you?
I find it hard to believe 9 other people as misinformed as you scrolled this far into this thread to upvote your theory that US troops never left Iraq they just died.
I personally feel like a lot came out of it, though. The USA left Iraq for example.
post hoc ergo propter hoc. the invention of Facebook was just as much a cause of leaving Iraq. or flat screen TVs. or Blu-ray disks.
which is to say the protests didn’t change anything.
Politicians making decisions based on public opinion has a lot of cause and effect relation. By all accounts it would have been easier to maintain a 40k to 100k presence in Iraq than it was to pack everything up and leave.
please prove a casual link between protests and the ending of the war
People opposed the pointless war whose only winners were Exxo n Mobil.
People voted the party who started the war out of power.
The opposition party withdrew from the region.
doesn’t sound like the protest had any impact. sounds like the votes were the only thing that mattered.
By that logic no protest has ever had any impact. You sound like a real bootlicker rn.
nonviolence protects the state
So does being anti-protest, bootlicker.
The USA actually still had troops in Iraq, Syria, Jordan, etc. And the protests were to prevent an invasion from happening in the first place, not to go in, kill a million people and then 2 decades down the line throw up your hands and say ‘that was a mistake’ with no consequences for anyone that pushed for it.
In 2007 there were 170,000 troops in Iraq
In 2010 there were 88,000
In 2024 there were 2,500
And the number there should be is 0, I’m really not sure what point you’re trying to make here. People didn’t want a war in Iraq in 2003, there were mass peaceful protests, and yet it still happened.
The number absolutely should not be 0. It’s a nation which actively funds and mobilizes religious extremists who imprison or execute homosexuals and treat women as cattle.
EDIT: in this context Iraq/nation meant the local populace, not the government
Which wasn’t the case before the invasion, when there were 0 US troops. Why the fuck do you bring up current day when I’m talking about protests that happened over 20 years ago (by people who knew the current outcome was likely)?
Are you confused about which comment thread you’re in? You said initially that the protests 20 years ago of the Iraq War were impotent and I pointed out that the US Involvment in Iraq sharply declined as a result of those protests, despite anti-NATO religious extremism presence growing in the region for many of the following years.
Jesus fucking Christ this post alone should be considered an act of violence for it’s sheer depravity and mockery of millions of deaths. The US did it’s thing in Iraq for 15 years, utterly failed, made lots of people rich and then they left. How dare you claim that was success for the anti-war movement. What is wrong with you? What the fuck is “Anti-NATO religious extremism?” This is a suspiciously nonsensical statement, especially when NATO wasn’t even in Iraq. Is a chat bot writing your responses for you?
NATO is still currently in Iraq, the US 2,500 troops are only a part of the effort to hamper ISIS.
The protests didn’t do anything to that, it was the insurgency causing a steady supply of body bags to come back.
I find it hard to believe 9 other people as misinformed as you scrolled this far into this thread to upvote your theory that US troops never left Iraq they just died.
deleted by creator