Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!rodney
From: rodney@sun.ipl.rpi.edu (Rodney Peck II)
Newsgroups: trial.talk.politics.peace
Subject: change in meaning of peace
Summary: A message to talk about something other than nuclear weapons here
Message-ID: <K*+&W6^@rpi.edu>
Date: 12 Feb 91 20:59:32 GMT
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 22
Nntp-Posting-Host: ipl.rpi.edu

I was wondering if other people have noticed that the idea of peace has
started to shift from the anti-war people towards the slogans of the
rest of the people (for lack of a better name).

In January, "Peace Now" was a radical style thing to say.  It
meant that the war should be stopped now and we should figure out something
else.  Now, it seems that it means we should invade now or use nuclear
weapons to make peace by beating Iraq into submission with so much force 
that he can't fight back.  This is a tremendously different idea.

When President Bush said "This will not be another Vietnam."  Many
people thought he meant that we wouldn't be fighting a war that we didn't
really understand.  Instead, he (and many of the people listening) meant
that we would go in with large force and win, not letting the army sit there
and be forgotten.

So, now when people are saying "we want peace," different people are hearing
different things.

What do you trial.talk.politics.peace people think about this?
-- 
Rodney