Talk:Gold Star Families for Peace

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Politics Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject Anti-war, a collective approach to organizing and unifying articles related to the anti-war movement. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] New article

This is a new article, still a stub, but I think it can develop into an intersting, informative piece. The history of "gold star" organizations goes back to World War I (if not before). I'm still researching on it and collecting information about the group and the background on the name, etc., but I like to start with a stub and some links and build from there. Calicocat 09:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC)


[edit] POV

Calicocat commented that my edit of 8 August 2005 "didn't make it NPOV, [it] made it inaccurate." I disagree. While GSFP are, in fact, involved in protests in an attempt to influence the policies of the Bush Administration, it is not the administration itself they are protesting.

I offer as evidence the mission statement of the GSFP as published on their website[1], which says nothing about "protesting the Bush Administration." They say their purpose is to "To bring an end to the occupation of Iraq." and "To be a support group for Gold Star Families." They also say the way to achieve that purpose is to "Provide support and to empower those who have been victimized by the invasion/occupation of Iraq.", "Raise awareness in the United States about the true human costs of the invasion/occupation of Iraq." and "Reach out to families who have lost a loved one as a result of war." Xlation 9 August 2005

The language from the "mission statment" does say that, but have a look at what the group is actually doing Check recent news and tell me they are not protesting the Bush Administration? Adding the POV tag to this article is inaccurate. I have removed your erroneous tag. If you wish to contribute to the article with expansion to make it clear what they are actually doing, that would be helpful, to engage in a petty discussion over their mission statment is disingenous. Calicocat 17:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Calicocat, please assume good faith on my part. I agree that the GSFP directs some its activities towards the Bush Administration, but I think you are missing my point. The unifying theme of this organization is one of an anti-war message not an anti-Bush message. The organization's mission statement is one piece of evidence supporting this position, but there is more evidence available. Note that the March 1st Rally in Salem Oregon, which sought to influence the Governor of that state, or look at the the March 27th forum in Berkeley, which targeted military service and recruiting issues—I think characterizing either of these, or the organization as a whole, as 'protesting GWB' dilutes their message.

A hypothetical might illustrate this point more clearly. Assume GWB could stand for re-election and he was opposed by a pro-war Democrat who declared he intends to continue to pursue the same policy (unlikely, yes, but it's just a hypo), would GSFP endorse the Democrat over Bush? Xlation - 7:17, 9 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Just my $.02 - In my opinion, they would not, but of course, no one can speak for them but their spokesperson. I agree with Xlation's point, in that their goal is to stop the war, not bring down Bush - but their bus read 'Impeachment Tour', and they have essentially taken the position that they oppose the Bush administration, the prime driver for the Iraq war. -- RyanFreisling @ 19:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Xlation, rather than debate this here with me, why not contribute to the expansion of the article? With respect, so far all you've done is tag the article without justification. Based on your previous comment, I modified the lead and I'm sure it will be further expanded. The overwhelming body of sources pointedly address the group's focus on the Bush administration. Mission statements are often drafted in very generalized language, but the actions of this group (or any group) really demonstrate the focus of activity of the group. I note also, as yet, you've not contributed one word of editing to the article. I always assume good faith, but when I see something like what you are doing -- criticism with no contributions -- it calls good faith into question. I've experienced this before with other editors who tag articles yet make no contributions and almost without exception, those tags are put on articles as a way of undermining the credibility of the article, especially to new readers who see that stop sign symbol and assume "something is wrong" with the article. Even the inclusion of a topic of discussion as "POV" rather than something more neutral makes me wonder... My best, Calicocat 20:00, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sources and Headings

Hi there. See some duplication between the sections, so my sources may need to shuffle around. Good article so far! -- RyanFreisling @ 18:56, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I was doing just that when there was an 'edit conflict' so I just cancelled my reorganization out and will get back to it. Thanks for makeing some positive contributions to the article and I hope you will continue to do so. Calicocat 20:04, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] family support and "Gold Star"

I cut the two words "family support" from the intro sentence.

Do they describe themselves as supporting families? Do they mean this in an indirect sense? That is, if Bush withdraws US troops, that outcome will "support" the families who are desperately worried about their sons getting killed in action.

I'm guessing the organization is primarily geared toward political activism rather than doing things like:

  • counseling grieving families
  • sending care packages to soldiers

What is the main purpose or function of this group? And did they choose Gold Star as an ironic reference to the practice in World War I and World War II of families who supported the US involvement honoring their sons' participation in the world wars? Uncle Ed 22:29, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Yes this is very much a political activist group with no real intentions of supporting pro-war grieving families or supporting the troops overseas.