After a series of legislative defeats in 2007 that saw the year end with more U.S. troops in Iraq than when it began, a coalition of anti-war groups is backing away from its multimillion-dollar drive to cut funding for the war and force Congress to pass timelines for bringing U.S. troops home.
In recognition of hard political reality, the groups instead will lower their sights and push for legislation to prevent President Bush from entering into a long-term agreement with the Iraqi government that could keep significant numbers of troops in Iraq for years to come.
The groups believe this switch in strategy can draw contrasts with Republicans that will help Democrats gain ground in November and bring the votes to pass more dramatic measures. But it is a long way from the early months of 2007, when Democrats were freshly in power and momentum for a dramatic shift in Iraq policy seemed overpowering.
“There was a consensus that last year was not productive,” John Isaacs, executive director of Council for a Livable World, said of a meeting attended by a coalition of anti-war groups last week. “Our expectations were dashed.”
The meeting, held at an office on K Street, was attended by around 20 representatives of influential anti-war groups, including MoveOn.org and Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, which spent $12 million last year opposing the war.
Isaacs said he thought the meeting would be a difficult one, with an adamant faction pressing for continued focus on timelines and funding. It wasn’t to be.
“We got our heads together and decided to go a different way,” Isaacs said. “The consensus was not to keep beating our heads against the wall trying to block every funding bill - not because we don’t agree with it, but because we don’t have the votes.”
Moira Mack, a spokeswoman for AAEI, was also at the meeting. “There was a lot of agreement that this is really the way that we can best get our message across about endless war versus end-the-war and draw clear distinctions between anti-war Democrats and pro-war Republicans. They really don’t want to end the war. This is the perfect legislative opportunity.”
An additional factor: The failure of last year’s end-of-the-session efforts to oppose the war convinced some in the movement that the numbers just weren’t there. “At the end of the year, Congress went out with a whole bunch more votes on Iraq with the same result. Some of the [news] stories were saying that members of Congress were getting tired of it,” Isaacs said.
The new strategy doesn’t mean that the groups won’t be active during budget battles. “The budget debates provide an enormously rich opportunity to engage the public,” said former Maine Rep. Tom Andrews of the group Win Without War. “We’re spending $8 [billion] to $10 billion a month.”
During Tuesday night’s presidential debate, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) referenced the kind of legislation that the anti-war crowd will be backing when she asked Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) if he would co-sponsor a bill to prevent the president from entering into any long-term agreements with the Iraqi government without consulting Congress.
Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said Obama will “support all common-sense efforts to ensure that President Bush does not tie the hands of future presidents through agreements with the Iraqi government.”
In December, Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) sent a strongly worded letter to Bush asking for information about what types of agreements the president planned to enter into and urging that he consult with Congress first. It was signed by Clinton and Democratic Sens. Robert P. Casey Jr. (Pa.), Robert C. Byrd (W.Va.), Carl Levin (Mich.) and Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.).
“The feeling is that Clinton’s too hot to handle for legislation right now, so we’re hoping somebody like Casey will carry it,” Isaacs said, expressing concern that Clinton’s presidential run could give the bill too much partisan edge to get through the Senate.
In the House on Tuesday, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) introduced a bill that would make clear that no federal money could be spent to implement an agreement Bush reaches with Iraq unless it’s in the form of a congressionally approved treaty.
Members of the anti-war coalition say they are working to gather co-sponsors for the bill but that they will also attempt to insert similar language in the upcoming supplemental spending bill. Late last year, Bush requested nearly $200 billion for the war effort; Democrats gave $70 billion and will be revisiting further funding soon.
For Mack, the logic of the argument seems straightforward. “Maliki is talking about getting congressional approval on the Iraq side,” Mack said, referring to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. “It’s absurd that Bush wouldn’t go to the U.S. Congress.”
The anti-war movement also thinks it has a winning argument when it comes to the length of time Americans are willing to see U.S. forces in Iraq. Roughly half of Americans recently surveyed by CBS News want most U.S. troops out within a year, and more than half think it was a mistake to invade in the first place. Every Democratic candidate for president has promised to withdraw almost all troops from Iraq within the first year of his or her presidency.
Earlier this week, Iraqi Defense Minister Abdul Qadir said U.S. troops might need to remain in Iraq until 2018, which could cost the United States $1 trillion or more between now and then, according to Congressional Budget Office projections. Bush said recently that it is “fine with me” if U.S. troop levels remain the same in Iraq, if Army Gen. David Petraeus recommends such a deployment.
Bush also said last week that U.S. troops “could easily” be in Iraq for a decade or more.
AAEI will have a budget roughly as large as it had last year, Mack said, and the new focus should be seen as an addition to its strategy, rather than as a retreat from a previous position. “Clearly, folks continue to oppose any more money for the war, and that was discussed as well. Our groups are still going to actively oppose any more funding,” she said.
© THE POLITICO & POLITICO.COM,
a division of Allbritton Communications Company
W.T.F.?
This shows us just how deep in collusion with the Bushies the Democrats are, and just how lame any anti-war strategy that depends on them is.
The most important thing anti-war people can do in 2008 is fill the Congress and White House with Democrats. This is the only long-term sensible approach there is for them (us.) As long as you’re fighting a razor-thin margin of control with Republicans, there is always to much compromise for fear of a 1% tilt of support changing the whole national agenda like a yo-yo. You need about 60/40 Dems vs. Republicans. Then you get de-escalation of wars, better domestic policy and future courts you can live with.
Front groups for the Democratic Party fail again. Or did they succeed?
What if their true function is to maintain the illusion that the dems are really trying to end the war.
Seen from this point of view, Move On could have played its role in preventing us from criticizing the Democrats.
When will we learn to aim our fire at the link most likely to give in. Want to end the war? Hit the dems. Enough with the PR campaigns and the politics of media psy ops.
Good. Hillary and Obama finally made it clear on Tues. that they will keep a permanent military occupation in Iraq - 100,000+ troops. So the war doesn’t matter anymore because congress, and now all the potential canidates have proven they will continue the imperial adventure.
Which is also why the economy is now taking center stage. But the trick is that those voting for Hillary and Obama think the two are on the side of the middle and lower class… they’re not. They’re both beholdent to corperations and their financiers, and they really only care what you think so the can continue to feed you what you want to hear. For instance, their health insurance “plan.” So whats their “plan” to deal with excessive for profit Health Insurance Corperations? Why none other than to force taxpayers into buying and paying the outragious Health Insurance Corperate premiums, with profits and overheads, and with the same awful coverage. And if you don’t pay the Health Insurance companies, the Government fines you. Mass tried this plan and guess what happened? only 6% of the uninsured could afford the mandate (forced) “plan”, and now the other 94% uninsured, the lower classes, are now being fined by the government and still have NO health insurance. Either way you cut it, it’s a giant handout to corperations. Pay health insurance profits, or pay the fines of the government for not paying the health insurance companies. And they have the nerve to call this “universal healthcare.” More like universal facism. Obama and Hillary both.
Saw the focus groups on Foxnews last night, talking about Hillary and Obama. Now that we know Iraq is an irrelevant issue since it won’t change, much of the discussion was “Bush only cares about the corperations, he doesn’t care about the middle class.” recurring theme. “I work hard, but now things are tougher.” Who really believes that any of these two are on the side of the middle class?
Let em’ spend every last penny on the military. We are a war-like nation and thrive on violent behavior.
As far as these “anti-war” groups go, the approaches used have been ineffective and the game-plan was never altered or changed.
It doesn’t take much money at all. Just “the will of the people” if they really want to end murder by government against other weaker nations.
Sometimes surrender is the only option. The anti-war movement is completely co-opted by the pro-war democratic party. The democrats have rechanneled, controlled, and ultimately sapped the vigor of the anti-war movement that we saw rise up just prior to the invasion.
See any anti-war protests lately? Me neither. The anti-war movement needs to realize that the democrats will not help them. They need to back a party that is truly anti-war, and that is the Green Party.
Before anyone whines “but they’re not electable.” I suggest you take responsbility for your own votes, because everytime you pulled the lever for a democratic president or member of congress, you voted pro-war.
To Daniel David:
“The most important thing anti-war people can do in 2008 is fill the Congress and White House with Democrats.”
*********
WAKE UP! The democrats are not anti-war. Have you been asleep for the past 8 years?
My first impression: this is an April Fools type joke.
What we have in Iraq is a shift in American strategy for domestic purposes.
–The U.S. paid Shiites to kill Sunnis. Then we paid Sunnis to kill Al-Qaeda, and of course everyone kills Christians.
–The U.S. has gone to an air war, and has roboticized the air war too. It means that we can’t see what we’re shooting at and kill more civilians.
–I read that 90% of all Iraqis want to leave the country. Many have. Many of those who remain are starving. If everyone leaves Iraq, the Americans win.
–Yes, 2007 was a banner year for killing American soldiers. Somehow this message became old hat in America. Shrug. Accepted. Even more acceptable and old hat are the tens of thousands of debilitating concussions, lost limbs, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Gulf War Syndrome cases. Only trouble is, all of their families are upset.
–The United States is bankrupt. In five years we will have two kinds of jobs, bad jobs and no job. We’ll have two kinds of retirement plans, badly inflated life savings and none. We’ll have two kinds of health care, wait, we’ve got that already.
Congratulations to the Bush folks for redefining winning in Iraq. Winning now means that we murder millions. The Christian Republican base bought this definition of winning.
Articles like this really anger me.
MoveOn and AAEI are the same organization and do NOT represent the anti-war movement. They are in deep collusion with the Dems and will do anything that they can to reinforce the Dem position which is to keep funding and supporting Bush’s war: which has always been their war, too.
The real anti-war movement will still work to hold the Dems and Repugs accountable to bring our troops home.
And they met on K street…does that tell anybody, anything!
Cindy
To Daniel David:
The two party structure has finally failed us misererably. To think that the Democratic party is going to restore any sanity to this runaway train that we are on is ludicrous. They are complicit in every way. Trying to give the Telecom industry retroactive immunity for spying on us is only the most recent glaring example. They will behave however the industries giving them the money ask them to.
Right on Cindy! Once again you have hit the nail on the head!
Daniel David January 17th, 2008 12:47 pm
And after you fill the halls with Demoslugs and they STILL DO NOTHING - will you finally fucking WAKE UP?
HUH? will you wake up then? Is that what it takes?
Master created this stable of political animals - TO SERVE HIM - and nobody else. NO DK ON THE TV. NO RALPH ON THE TV. Are you getting it? Dems forced DK and Ralph off the TV. Not Repugs. Repug judges side with their fascist behavior though.
Sorry. Smell the coffee.
Peace.
This de-emphasis, or “retreat”, of their singular anti-war efforts by the ’single issue’ anti-war movement is not so much a capitulation as it is plain stupidity — and failure to recognize the opportunity to integrate ‘their’ single-issue movement with many other different single-issue movements (like economic populism, environmentalism, social justice and equality, etc. etc. etc. ad issue-ism) — and the failure of vision to clearly see that all these entirely valid and emotive single-issue ‘movements’ could be holistically integrated into one and only one easily understood and valid mega-movement which addresses the cause and common enemy of all these issues; namely, the corporatist Empire behind the curtain.
While I strongly agree with the above criticism of this single-issue pathology
effecting, and even eviscerating, left, socialist, ‘public interest’ voting
movements, I also strongly believe that there is an equally cogent solution.
What may well be viewed as strident single-issue movements, like anti-war,
economic populism, human rights and justice, environmental consciousness,
etc. etc., can all be justifiably integrated into only one holistic
movement —- an anti-empire movement.
Based on Hannah Arendt’s timeless and prescient warning that, “Empire abroad
(always) entails tyranny at home”, any serious analysis of all the
’single-issue’ concerns affecting and afflicting our weakened democracy can
be rationally and convincingly blended into only one compelling motivation
for our average citizens and voters; namely, that the global corporatist
Empire hiding behind this facade of a veritable ‘Vichy’ American faux
government is at the core of all our sorrows.
I have written a number of articles, and letters to such focused
single-issue champions as Justin Raimondo (AntiWar.com), arguing and
pleading that only the currently ascendant corporatist Empire is causally
responsible for all the abuses, tyranny and pains that we variously see in
the form of all these disparate ’single-issue’ causes.
With respect to the 2008 campaign, I believe that it would be essential to
the success of any principled left, socialist, progressive/populist voter
education and motivational movement to integrate at least the top few voter
concerns, within this evolving disasters of increasing foreign wars and
rapidly expanding economic chaos, to combine ’single issues’ such as;
anti-war, economic populism, health care, environment, and social inequality,
showing them to be addressing common problems caused by a non-democratic
corporatist Empire — and thus common cause for a popular majoritarian
anti-Empire movement.
To do any less than this in 2008 would predictably allow the entrenched
ruling-elite corporatist Empire to be able to do what empires always do to
disable opponents —- divide and conquer (single-issue groups).
As even Al Gore correctly diagnoses in his very candid new book, “The
Assault on Reason”, a radical-right corporatist “faction” has gained control
of our government through lies, propaganda, fear-mongering, and hijacking
the democratic process — and this corporatist “faction”/Empire
contemptuously denies the very existence of the concept of any “pubic
interest. While I would have hoped that Gore would use the more
historically accurate term; Empire, rather than “faction”, his conclusion
that it is a singular corporatist power which Americans must vote to expunge
is valid.
Fighting the global corporatist Empire that has already taken over our
government, and is hiding behind the façade of this sham “Vichy America’, is
going to have to be done by non-conventional political means, and will have
to both integrate voters behind a coherent anti-Empire movement, as well as
avoid being drawn-in by either of the ‘Vichy’ Parties or the ‘Vichy’ media
which have already shown (and sold) their fealty to the corporatist Empire.
Time is short, but the awareness, motivation, and commitment are growing
quickly as the Empire’s sorrows, oppression, and pain mount, and are
recognized, equally quickly.
I used to write letters to the editor against the current wars and for the impeachment of Bush, but I’ve since given up on the war issue too. If the American Idol-viewing public wants endless war, then go right ahead. This country then deserves exactly what it gets.
Why try to save the Titanic? It’s time to build a new ship. A total and unequivocal repudiation of the Bush/Cheney policies is what’s required. Let that neo-con Titanic sink and let’s start over with sane, reality-based, “Carpathia” policies that can hopefully rescue what’s left of American credibility.
Unfortunately, I don’t see any of the leading Democrats doing this, especially Clinton with her Big-Pharma and weapons dealers support behind her. It’ll be “meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”
We are not in retreat. I’ve never experienced so many people taking part in democratic discussions on the internet. It will take a little while, but this type of online conversation and community is changing our country. The conservative message depends upon a lack of information and that is why conservatives will continue to lose future elections. The old monopoly media still has a lot of power to stir us up and make us feel patriotic while sending troops off to war, but the times they are a changing.
I think a lot depends on who you include in the peace movement. My group continues to vigil and press our representatives with the same demands we have had before. We have not made any agreement. Were united for peace and justice, troops out now, code pink and veterans for peace involved in this decision. They are the heart of the street based peace movement. The groups you mentioned have been very legislatively based and some of them Democratic Party connected since the beginning. I don’t hate the Democrats or Republicans (grassroots), but we must continue to build an INDEPENDENT NON POLITICALLY BASED, peace movement.
“The most important thing anti-war people can do in 2008 is fill the Congress and White House with Democrats.”
The most important thing Democrats can do to stop the war is curl up and die. They are enablers as is evident from the blatant capitulation these last few years, especially after promising to do the right thing. The only solution is to gut the Democratic party and rebuild a real Progressive party from the grassroots. It may take decades but thats the only true hope.
Sooner or later anti-war people may consider secession. On the map of the US, where are the pockets of anti-war votes in Congress? (The research is easy—spot an outline map with Xs and Os.) Maybe it would show Upper Midwest, Northwest, and New England. So can these regions offer fed-tax resistance, pass local and state antiwar laws, and focus state taxes on local and regional peaceful development? Can we go our own ways, reaching out to each other and to peaceful foreign nations, while bypassing the deep South, Central, and Texas?
Who cares what these groups what? They’ve been completely useless anyways. Most of them just suck up to the Evilcrats anyways. So no big surprise that they’ve decided to follow the Evilcrat party line on this one.
The very bit that says they want to draw distinctions between ‘anti-war Democrats’ and ‘pro-war Republicans’ says this loud and clear. No one who isn’t a complete Evilcrat suckup would think there are more that about 20 to 30 ‘anti-war Democrats’ even around. The Evilcrat party is pro-war and almost all the Evilcrats in office are pro-war and it looks like almost a lock that the Evilcrat Presidential nominee will be pro-war. So the very notion of drawing a distinction between anti-war Democrats and Republicans is a complete myth.
Notice the complete lack of any mention of trying to run anti-war challenges to the sitting pro-war Evilcrat congresscritters. That also tells you this is just BS from groups that are more Evilcrat suck-ups than any sort of anti-war movement that is worth paying any attention to.
Notice also that there’s no mention at all of supporting say Cindy Sheehan’s anti-war campaign in order to get the pro-war Pelosi out of the Congress. If these groups really gave a damn about getting an anti-war message out, that would be a wonderful way to do it. Defeating the sitting pro-war Speaker of the House with an anti-war campaign would be a way for the people to send an anti-war message to Washington so loudly and so clearly that the ground would shake under the existing pro-war politicians who are working hard to ignore that 75% of the American people who oppose this war. The fact that this doesn’t even mention that tells you all you need to know about how sucking up to the Evilcrats is more important to these groups than doing anything effective.
How the heck do we change the ‘leadership’ of the anti-war movement. These fools just appointed themselves to the job. And they’ve been so useless and ineffective that they deserve to be fired.
Notice how it’s phrased by AAEI: “We have to draw clear distinctions between anti-war Democrats and pro-war Republicans.”
That’s what they’re doing with our donations? How about drawing some clear distinctions between pro-war Democrats like Hillary, Obama and Edwards, and true anti-war Democrats like Kucinich and Gravel?
And yes, donating money to moveon.org is NOT the same as doing something.
In the head on the home page this article is referenced with SURRENDER–which, interestingly enough, is the meaning of the word ISLAM.
The Evilcrat positions on the war have always been basically these.
1) They are very happy to have the war continue because they think it will improve their chances of winning elections. Thus, they are very happy to murder thousands of Americans in the military and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis (who they clearly don’t give a damn about) in order to further their own narrow grabs for power.
2) They’ve constantly said for the last 5 years or so that they can be more effective managers of a world-spanning evil empire than the Republicans. That’s been their steady message. Not that what we are doing is morally wrong. Just that Bush has been incompetent and that they can do a better job of bringing death and destruction to the rest of the world for better corporate profits.
If you like the above, vote Evilcrat and stay a member of the Evilcrat party. If you find the above objectionable, don’t vote Evilcrat and get the heck out of that disgusting excuse of a party.
As a former field organizer for AAEI, I think it’s necessary to make some clarifications to this article and the resulting comments.
First, AAEI and Moveon.org are not the same organization. AAEI is a coalition of several anti-war groups throughout the country, the most important of which is probably USAction, not Moveon.org. Just about everyone I worked with this summer was, in some way, connected to USAction. Nobody I worked with had any relationship with Moveon.org. For a list of AAEI’s sponsoring organizations, go to www.noiraqescalation.org.
Second, I find it quite offensive for someone to claim that they, and nobody else, represents the anti-war movement. Close to 70% of the public is against the war in Iraq, and have been for years. Take 70% of any group of people and you’ll be sure to find a great deal of diversity, both in opinion and thought. AAEI attempted to bring those individuals together this summer under a common theme: end the war in Iraq.
We were quite successful as well, holding demonstrations, town hall meetings, rallies and press events on a weekly basis. We were also successful in bringing soldiers and military families into the spotlight to tell their stories. I’ll put that record up against any anti-war group, although I think it borders on insane for anti-war groups to be competing with each other about who “keeps it real” the most. If anyone has the courage to put themselves out there, and speak truth to power, they have my respect.
Finally, I’d just like to clarify a point I don’t believe the story made clear. AAEI is not abandoning its complete and unequivocal opposition to the war, it’s simply tweaking its message. With American casualities down, the argument that the war is spiraling out of control no longer carries much water. However, to pit the cost of the Iraq war (thus far, in excess of $600 billion) against our domestic priorities will speak volumes to all of those people in the middle who are persuaded when their President tells them things are going better in Iraq. Remember, LBJ wasn’t worried about public opposition to Vietnam until “he lost” Walter Cronkite. This strategy is obviously designed with this in mind.
There are two cherished American myths that no serious politician (i.e, not a Nader, or Paul, or Kucinich) will ever attempt to dispel. They are:
1. The United States is the world’s most indispensible nation, the bringer of enlightenment and democracy, and our meddling in the world, while sometimes ugly and unwanted, is ultimately benevolent and for the best; and
2. No American can be happy without filling their house to the point of bankruptcy with purchases from Big-box -o’-crap-mart and similar establishments.
The first myth is necessary to convince the American public to accept, if not enthusiastically support, intervention in other people’s countries and cultures for the benefit of financial elites and corporate interests. Sure, there’ll be arguments over timing and tactics, and should we have invaded here instead of there, but the basic premise will never be questioned by anyone who actually makes it far enough in our political system to be “electable.”
The second is necessary to keep our consumption-based economy afloat. No politician will ever state the obvious: that americans would have more money (and better, more enriching lives) if they just spent less of it. They’ll pay lip service to family values, but they’ll never tell anyone to pass up that big promotion, drive the old car for a few more years and use the time saved to get closer to their family. No, if people actually got smart with their time and money, the economy would implode tomorrow, so that’s off the table too.
So the real issues are never discussed, and every two or four years we jump through the hoops (the ones who haven’t become cynical and given up, that is). Taking to the street achieves nothing; Bush dismissed anti-war marches as “focus groups” before the war started and has paid no attention to the movement ever since, ensuring that the media would do likewise (Speaking as a journalist, there’s only so many times you can cover events that have no concrete effect on the larger political process without becoming repetitive). As long as those in power know that resistance will never go beyond a certain (controllable) point, there’s no incentive to change course, or even acknowledge the debate.
I agree that the political lobby groups cited in this article aren’t excatly like code Pink, UFPJ, or the antiwar protest comittees in cities around the country. But we are lying to ourselves if we don’t aknowlege the extreme demoralization, even in the streets.
How many times should we shout and throw ourselves against a brick wall before giving up? Never in US history, or in any other country on earth, have so many mass protests been met with such silence, disregard and contempt from all our so-called leaders and our so-called free press. At least, in places Burma, Kenya, or Oaxaca, or Haiti, protests are at least aknowleged, and legitimized, and baptized with government bullets. Here we are ignored.
So, their diabolical ignore-them tactics may be working for now, but someday, like Langston Hugh’s dream deferred, we will explode.
Well, the anti-war groups remain a relatively small activist minority.
Protest ordinarily would serve as useful early-warning alarms for those who would wish to govern/control/subvert/exploit or pacify a populace. Without protest or blogs like this, the corporate establishment can’t properly gauge the full nature of public resentment. The problem is compounded if they didn’t give a shit, but the upshot is clear.
They’ll continue along as usual and (this part I can see clearly) eventually set off some sort of social tinderbox that activates Middle America, people who aren’t ordinarily engaged. Their successes are built on inherently unsustainable bases, so such a scenario may either result from gross failure on their part — or even wild success. Though I’m betting on the former.
It’s the age old tactic of “divide and conquer”
The “ruling class” in our country are doing it in Iraq and they
are doing it here in the USA.
There is no national anti-war movement, but there is a lot of
activity in communities.
I tried to unite the national movement: Invited every national group to a coalition to have united, strategic and effective actions around the inconceivable 5th anniversary of the invasion and to have a peace summit starting this weekend.
There was a lot of interest in some of the national groups like ANSWER, World Can’t Wait, After Downing Street, CODEPINK, Progressive Dems of America, etc and tons of support and interest and support from grass roots groups all over the country who want a united national movement, but other groups were major stumbling blocks and I had to go to bed for 2 days with a migraine before we finally just decided to concentrate on my campaign.
I think concetrated actions at local congressional offices, demos, vigils, letter writing and petition signing campaigns must continue. The power of one is profound, I just wish we had the power of millions.
With profound love and respect for everyone who continues to strive for peace, accountability and justice in their own ways and own time.
Cindy
It never seems to occur to anyone that the more Democrats there are in government, the less Republicans there are for them to be “in collusion with.” It’s not that people who decide to be Dems are smarter or deserving of our admiration as incorruptible (they aren’t)—It’s that you control the national agenda from a different tone and mindset.
I really don’t mind being called “idiot” and more here, because I’m right about this. You had wall-to-wall Republicans on 9/11 and look what we got started for us to later mop up. You want it de-escalated? You’re going to need the other side (Dems) in a no-veto, no-filibuster majority. And you’ll have nothing but status quo until you get it that way.
I, too, liked Dennis Kucinich. But sometime or other, you have to realize his movement has stopped moving.
This is Grim.
Right on Cindy!
The middle east oil is necessary for the corporate military empire, and if that necessitates tyranny at home,the corporate government has already put that into action through its bully boy Bu$h.
Cindy,
It isn’t a question of divide and conquer, really.
It’s a question of PRIVATE PROPERTY: ownership of issues and movements.
Nobody wants to get on a bandwagon and cooperate–they want to OWN the bandwagon and be STARS,
And they will be flushed into the abyss of history before they will unite.
Gringos are taught from the cradle that competition is The Way.
It’s about the only lesson they have learned, unfortunately.
I’m sure the Bush administration will go down in history as the greatest republican administration of all-time. This phony war on terror and the freedoms that were stripped because of it will secure republican rule for decades to come. When modern republicans’ started stripping freedom on the so called, “War on Drugs” in the 1980’s during the first presidency of a Bush they could only go so far. Because even though they called it a war since their party were bringing most of the drugs into the country.
Now they have a real war a republican war. A war where they get to kill, torture and destroy millions of lives while making trillions of dollars. After all, the only profits from the war on drugs was imprisoning and disenfranchising American voters. Granted they laid the foundation for the tortures they now apply to foreign prisoner and started suspending constitutional rights but it just did not have the pizzazz they were looking for. They needed something to rob trillions from current and future Americans.
So they got a third generation war profiteer elected to the Whitehouse. They knew if anyone could bring them this glorious war they so crave this amoral elitist warmongering terrorist could. This is why bush is so popular with the WMD’s (formerly MSM now; war mongering dirtbags). Who profits more from glorious war stories than the media, OK the bush no-bid contractors, and the outsourcing of the military and his mercenary armies, and the military leaders, but the media reaps huge profits(as do there parent co’s).
It is easy to see why bush will go down in history as the greatest republican president of all-time. God can anyone imagine what the world would be like if another republican president tops his murdering, corrupt, vile reign of terror….
Daniel David (12:47 pm) writes, “You need about 60/40 Dems vs. Republicans. Then you get de-escalation of wars, better domestic policy and future courts you can live with.”
- Daniel, don’t you care whether what you say has the slightest bit of historical validity? Why don’t you read a book of real history — like William Blum’s “Killing Hope,” for example?
There are zero cases in US history of Democrats acting to oppose or halt unjust wars. On the contrary, without exception, the real pattern is that the two parties collaborate on all US “interventions” abroad. It’s simply never been the case that one party acts as a check on the other. This is because both support the use of US power to force other countries to submit to our will — imposing policies on other countries (or outright installing puppet governments) that are profitable for US multinational corporations.
In the 1980’s, Reagan waged unjust unofficial wars in Nicaragua & El Salvador. The Democrats supported Reagan in this. In 1973, the CIA overthrew the democratically-elected govt in Chile. The Democrats had no objection & never made an issue of it. Vietnam was largely the direct work of the Democrats, from Truman to LBJ. Under LBJ, the CIA assisted in mass killings in Indonesia, bringing Suharto to power. And the CIA assisted in a rightwing military coup in Greece, also under LBJ.
This list of these international crimes is very, very long. Do you really know nothing about these things? The idea that Democrats have ever acted to “de-escalate” US wars is as much a pile of BS as the story about George Washington & the cherry tree.
LBJ also invaded the Dominican Republic in 1965.
“Americans taxpayers are paying $300,000 for killing an Iraqi Civilian”
http://www.chycho.com/?q=Americans_taxpayers
I Think Both Cindy and Daniel have valid points.
They are both reality… We got 10 months to decide who all to vote for.
Lets keep our minds open and watch the changes in the Global Revolution,
and keep doing what we are doing. Please remember too that things change slowly like our American Indians understand… move like a snail, but keep movin’…. As Woody said “Take it easy but take it!”
The ship of state can take a long time to turn around. Only we can change in how we help it change sooner.
the democrats won’t end the occupation of the ME, because they believe that economic stability at home depends on it.
John Isaacs must be a cloaked neo-con. This trial baloon just got popped.
> “Hillary and Obama finally made it clear on Tues. that they will keep a permanent military occupation in Iraq - 100,000+ troops.”
[mastershake January 17th, 2008 12:53 pm]
THAT IS NOT TRUE.
Both Clinton and Obama have made it clear that they intend to withdraw nearly all US troops from Iraq, effectively ending the occupation.
However, the underlying assumption of both candidates, and John Edwards as well, is that the Iraqi government will not immediately collapse or at least will not be succeeded by a situation which forces all US government personnel out of Iraq a la Saigon 1975.
Therefore Clinton and Obama talk about the need to keep some soldiers in Iraq to protect the embassy, and probably to train and advise the Iraqi army; Obama also talks about the need for forces in Iraq or nearby which could be called on to fight “al Qaeda” in Iraq, which would by definition be combat troops.
It’s hard to say exactly how many US troops would remain in Iraq after the main force withdrawal took place within the first year or 18 months of a Clinton or Obama administration, according to their plans. But certainly not 100,000+. I would guess something more in the neighborhood of 10,000 or less, and as little as a few hundred.
The peace movement, like the generals, needs to stop refighting the last battle and get ready for the next one.
I think the groups mentioned in this article have drawn the correct conclusion. Defunding the war and forcing a withdrawal is not possible at this time. It’s more important to win the upcoming elections, get a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in Congress, and get ready for the real battles to come.
The real battle will be to force Obama, Edwards or Clinton to honor the pledge to withdraw nearly all forces from Iraq in a timely manner, IN SPITE OF WHATEVER HAPPENS IN IRAQ AND IN SPITE OF ANY NEW TERRORISM AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.
The real battle will be to keep the next president from halting or reversing the withdrawal as soon as chaos erupts and the Iraqi government and army crumbles.
Alternatively, it is possible that the situation in Iraq will dramatically deteriorate, or that there will be a general uprising demanding immediate US withdrawal, sometime this year. In that case, the real battle will be to stop Bush from escalating and force him to begin the withdrawal.
Short of the last contingency, however, there seems to be no possibility that Congress will cut off funding for the war during this election year when it remains possible for Bush to claim that “the surge” has worked and that the situation in Iraq is stable or improving.
Cindy,
I firmly believe in a root kindness in all people, but there times and conditions at which other things eclipse it. The organization may not come in the formal sense, but it’ll come in its own time. I hold it to be inevitable, but I hope it comes more or less peacefully.
Moonraven,
(Please don’t use that racist/divisive term.) There was a time when “gringos” lived as free native peoples, close to the land, worshipped their own gods and spirits, saw animals as brothers and sisters. It is not their race that changed. They were conquered by the psychotic among them, and this thrust has defined “civilization” (whether East or West) since about the Bronze Age.
To dial back to an era of the Commons, we may need a phased approach. Perhaps private property (whether a condo or townhome in the city, home in the suburbs or hobby farm in the country — whatever suits your fancy). Owned outright, no mortgages necessary. Do whatever you want on it, except pollute or infringe on your neighbor’s rights. The rest is Commons land, also available to settlement (for free).
This is also the delineation that many traditionals societies made, between hut and hearth. Huts hearths are generally private, central hearths are not.
How many of these organisations have been infiltrated and neutered by corporate empire operatives?
I think we have to act as individuals without reference to formal organizations that can be compromised. We could spread the word distributing old-fashioned “pamphlets” that we could print on our collective millions of printers.
Anyone with a good idea for a message could publish it here on CD and any of us who might think they could make good use of it could print and distribute it. (100 words, simple language and large print.)
For instance …
George Bush started an illegal war based on lies. It has killed 4000 American soldiers, wounded 30,000 more and killed and maimed countless innocent Iraqis. He has spent almost a trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000) dollars on this war, but won’t give kids healthcare. He has gutted the laws that are supposed to protect us from pollution, given your tax dollars to corporations to send jobs overseas and brought in cheap labor to take away our jobs in this country. Radio and television networks have been hiding the really bad things that have been going on for the past seven years and before.
Nader2000 January 17th, 2008 3:49 pm
Keep dreaming. I’ll be here in 2012 and 2017 again to say I told you so.
The republicans have since 1980 (the first bush presidency) been the party to rob the treasury. Their moronic base is never opposed to spending as long it the spending is only for war profiteering and over corruption in general. We now have a 9.2 trillion dollar deficit we had a 1.5 trillion dollar deficit when bush I mean Reagan become president (bushes first shot at running the government).
If there is any spending for the needy, or the infrastructural or the common good, then the wingnuts raise their ugly heads huffing, puffing, evoking violent rants that sound like the communist I mean the terrorist are at our door steps.
This fundamentally misunderstands our situation. It is not the role of the grassroots to elect anyone. It is not the purpose of the streets to elect anyone. It is our job to continue to advocate for what we know is right– the immediate end to this illegal occupation, and a quick end to this war of aggression and an total redirection of the misspent $$$billions to pressing domestic needs. Let the pols take care of themselves. If it weren’t for robust vocal demands from the street, no one but Kucinich would be paying the least attention to the war on the campaign trail. “if the people lead, the leaders will follow.” We need to continue to lead. Not surrender. Never surrender.
and on a realistic level, elect more faux Democrats like Harry Reid? gag me with a backhoe! I’ve got more important things to waste my time on.
a reluctant Democratic precinct chairperson
Jim Senter
RichM, your history is quite twisted.
> without exception, the real pattern is that the two parties collaborate on all US “interventions”
The Cold War period until the early 1970s was marked by a “bipartisan consensus” foreign policy which generally supported confrontation of the Soviet Union with overt nuclear military power and covert warfare to fight and rollback communism around the world. As we know, many antidemocratic regimes were supported, democratic regimes subverted, and crimes against humanity committed by the CIA and US client states. How do we know this? In large part thanks to the work of the Church Comittee chaired by Democratic Senator Frank Church in the 1970s, and the official Human Rights policies initiated under President Jimmy Carter.
> In the 1980’s, Reagan waged unjust unofficial wars in Nicaragua & El Salvador. The Democrats supported Reagan in this.
FALSE. Carter had cut off aid to the notorious Central American military dictatorships and did not intervene to prevent the 1979 revolution in Nicaragua. Unfortunately, he then backtracked and okayed intervention in El Salvador, sending $5M in military aid. Reagan increased this by a factor of 10 and also launched the contra war in Nicaragua. He would have gone further had it not been for fierce opposition from the Democrats in Congress, which passed a law (Boland amendment) cutting off US aid to “Reagan’s Dogs” (the Contras). When Col. Oliver North covertly circumvented the law, Congress launched an inquiry that came close to repeating the Watergate hearings but did not receive the same level of support from the mass media, which was generally pro-Reagan. In the final analysis, Democratic opposition to war in Central America severely limited what Reagan was able to do, so that the Sandinistas were finally overturned only by a vote of the Nicaraguan people (who have recently reinstated them) and a compromise truce had to be reached in El Salvador.
> In 1973, the CIA overthrew the democratically-elected govt in Chile. The Democrats had no objection & never made an issue of it.
The Chile intervention was a covert operation and the Democrats in Congress could not do anything to stop it. After the fact, however, the Church Committe publicly exposed what had been done, which was in itself quite unprecedented.
> Vietnam was largely the direct work of the Democrats, from Truman to LBJ.
You forgot about Eisenhower and Nixon. It was really Eisenhower who committed the US to take over from the French and who prevented the election that was supposed to unite Vietnam after 1954. It was Nixon who escalated the bombing and the scale of the war to genocidal proportions. It was LBJ who stepped down from the presidency in shame over what he had done in Vietnam. And it was the Democratic Party that nominated the strongly antiwar George McGovern and suffered a landslide defeat to Nixon in 1972. It was the Democratic Congress that brought down Nixon with the Watergate Hearings, cut off funding for the war and prevented Ford from starting it up again when South Vietnam collapsed in 1975.
> Under LBJ, the CIA assisted in mass killings in Indonesia, bringing Suharto to power.
The Indonesian meddling was a very small deception effort, a black propaganda campaign it had been running for some time which unexpectedly bore fruit, triggering a coup in 1965. The US had little to do with the scale of mass killings by the Indonesian military after the coup. Democrats in Congress had no clue what was going on and I doubt even LBJ was paying much attention.
> And the CIA assisted in a rightwing military coup in Greece, also under LBJ.
The CIA roles in Indonesia and Greece show how relatively minor US actions can have terrible consequences for people in affected countries, but they do not make the point that the Democratic Party is irredeemably a war party or demonstrate another way to change US policy in a more peaceful direction other than by working through the Democratic Party.
Nader2000 (3:49 pm) claims that “Both Clinton and Obama have made it clear that they intend to withdraw nearly all US troops from Iraq, effectively ending the occupation.”
This is laughable BS. Clinton & Obama are exactly in the mold of Nancy Pelosi, and every other Evilcrat (except Kucinich & Gravel, & maybe a few others in the House). The Evilcrat game on the war is to talk out of both sides of your mouth at the same time. When you’re pandering to the public, you pretend to be “against” the war. But when you’re voting in Congress, or talking to donors, or to the CFR, you’re always FOR the war. You vote for all the funding, again and again — and you never ever describe the war like a real opponent would describe it (ie, as a “crime against humanity”). Instead, you use mealy-mouth formulations such as, “The war was a great tragedy” or “I believe the president has managed the war incompetently.”
When Hillary or Obama promise to do some kind of withdrawal, you have to read the fine print. There’s always some catch, such as leaving troops for “counterterrorism” and “training” and so forth. Both of these Evilcrats are entirely in favor of the US making Iraq into a US protectorate, whose resources can be plundered by US corporations. If they weren’t in favor of such things, they wouldn’t be getting all those huge corporate donations.
Even Edwards, the least hawkish of the 3, is not any great shakes on the war. He’s better than Obama or Hillary, but not by much.
I challenge the US to move it’s Congress to the Green Zone for a year. Let’s see the successful surge backed with motivated organizers.
Dress code is strictly no flack-jackets
Cindy Sheehan is not the only antiwar activist that gets angry with reading commentaries like this on a site like commonDreams. Who is the author anyway? Go to politico.com, his blog site, and this is what you will find…
TM & © THE POLITICO & POLITICO.COM, a division of Allbritton Communications Company
Nader2000, it’s interesting that you mention the Ollie North terror network without mentioning John Kerry’s starring role in preventing the public discussion of North’s drugs-for-guns innovation.
Nader2000 (4:33) — As a historian & Dem Party apologist, you’re quite a comedian. // Are you seriously trying to claim that just because Church was a “Democrat,” that this in any way affects the long history of bipartisan collaboration in all these sordid interventions?
The only reason there was a Church Commission (& a Pike Commission) was because of Watergate & the unpopularity of the Vietnam War (which the Democrats never opposed, and in fact were more deeply responsible for than the Republicans). It was what the CIA calls a “limited hangout” — you start admitting bad stuff you did, when it’s already so obvious to everyone that it can’t be credibly denied anymore.
I’ll quickly run through your attempts to make excuses for the Evilcrats’ criminal complicity in US interventions –
On Nicaragua & El Salvador, you claim “In the final analysis, Democratic opposition to war in Central America severely limited what Reagan was able to do, so that the Sandinistas were finally overturned only by a vote of the Nicaraguan people…”
- Actually, Reagan was not limited at all. He fully succeeded in his objective, which was destroying the Sandinista government, its social reforms, & most of Nicaragua along with it. The only reason the Sandinistas were voted out in 1990 is because the US made it clear to the Nicaraguans that they would pay a terrible price, if they didn’t vote for the US-backed stooge candidate. Throughout the entire contra war, the Democrats never portrayed the war as a “crime.” Rather, their “opposition ” was just like their milquetoast “opposition” today in Iraq — pretending to be against something, while actually helping to ensure that it goes forward.
You mentioned the Iran Contra hearings. Here, the Democrats arranged backroom deals to let Reagan off the hook. He should have been impeached & jailed for what he did. This, too, is just like the Democrats of today — except today they don’t even have the guts to hold serious hearings.
On Chile - no, you’re wrong again. The CIA coup in Chile was officially said to be “covert,” but wasn’t really secret at all. Everyone knew about it. I personally knew about it within a very few months of its occurrence. I saw the Swedish Ambassador to Chile speaking publicly at my university, and he told the whole audience about what the CIA role was. So if I knew about it, we can be reasonably sure the Democrats in Washington knew about it too — and they never made an issue of it.
On Vietnam - No, I didn’t “forget” about Nixon & Eisenhower. I simply wasn’t trying to write an exhaustive history. // You claim LBJ “stepped down from the presidency in shame over what he had done in Vietnam.” Spoken like a typically dishonest Dem Party apologist!! Actually, LBJ stepped down right after the New Hampshire primary — only because he almost lost to McCarthy, despite being a sitting president. It was the humiliation of being rejected by the voters that bothered him — NOT “what he had done in Vietnam.”
Sounds like the DC lobbyists have been very busy, wonder how much they paid out?
Our government is sooooo corrupt. We are a Facist state, we just haven’t heard the other shoe drop yet. __ We will, we will.
If you really want to see any changes, you better support John Edwards, he’s our only hope who has a chance of being our next president.
Why does everyone assume that Democrats are going to end the war and bring the troops home? All I see from them is more bills to keep funding the war and bills to take more of our rights away. Have the Democrats accomplished ANYTHING the year they have been controlling congress?
Everyone HERE gets that MOVEON is a fake.
Perhaps the problem is that we are not posting truth enough on MSM websites like the sites of the major US daily newspapers. We thus enure moated consciousness, and that our point of view is never heard. Such is the price of surrendering the “Main Stream” The internet alone is not a true alternative.
Its, 5;58 pm. What have you done to openly attack the credibility of the Corporate Media today? And I dont mean on a left of center website.
Elect as many Repuks in the US government as humanly possible. Get the godzilla monster to run its rampage with the utmost bravado. It will over-extend itself, overheat, crash into the ground, and destroy itself. Stop trying to preserve the monster by backing off on its throttle. We want WIDE OPEN THROTTLE.
Nader2000 January 17th, 2008 4:33 pm: “The Cold War period until the early 1970s was marked by a ‘bipartisan consensus’ foreign policy which generally supported confrontation of the Soviet Union with overt nuclear military power and covert warfare to fight and rollback communism around the world.”
I’m not sure how to parse that… but if you believe any of that sentence, you’ve been suckered by Manufactured Consent and your history is twisted, too.
A) the U.S. military is closer to complete exhaustion (without a fresh-meat draft) every day. B) The longer we stay in Iraqistan the more dead bodies of our brothers and sisters will be coming home, the higher oil prices will go. C) Arab nations finding new confidence around Iran (thanks to the imbecile Bush) will be less and less likely to accept any more of this global colony sucking out their wealth. The West sank the feet of its modern empire into their countries; the colonial age is gone, nobody is gonna take it anymore; and it’s too fucking bad for The West this time. Unfortunately, D) empires don’t stop sucking blood until they are losing too much of their own. So unless “the war” creates a second American Civil War at home, or some kind of major governmental change comes about (Hello Dennis), it’s going to be every bit as bad as it needs to be. We are beyond the point where anything less than a machine-stopping movement for peace and change is going to work or (given media fascists) even be noticed. I’d like to suggest a world-wide planned walk-out on the very idea of profit itself. “The revolution” will be when you work 15-20 hours a week to pull your weight in the world (that’s what the average hunter/gatherer works), and on that basis you have the right to take what you need at the store. The revolution means going home to nap or read or play or go to school or whatever you want (cultivate yourself); so nobody has to march, kill, fight, or any of that. Sure people will go crazy with “having” for the first 2 weeks, and then wonder why they were so busy piling up shit to show the Joneses. Do this every May 1st for a few years to stagger the world economy through worker power, and watch it grow. No criminal can stay in business without help from the police. No colony can survive without help from corrupted locals. And no machine can oppress us if we STOP GIVING IT THE ONLY THING WE REALLY HAVE—our biological time on this blue bubble…OK, jump on my head!
I see many people here have noticed that local organizations are very effective UNTIL they try to “unite” and change things at a continent or global level.
Then they run into problems, mostly with the “national” organizations.
When folks examine this truth a little closer, then take what they see to a logical conclusion, we just might be ready to BEGIN the process of Needed Change.
Then, after the greatest project that any People has ever undertaken is completed -well after our deaths- there can be “peace”.
—————————-
I used to think that expecting Nation-States and Standing National Armies to accept “peace” was foolishly Idealistic, then I thought it was painfully Naive.
Now I just think its sadly Pathetic.
Blood does not come from Stones.
And Nation-States do not make “peace” or “justice”.
Nation-States make Truces and Law.
—————————————
On the other hand it is fascinating to see how long people stick at this sort of thing, while never admiting their true motivation is simply to make themselves feel less guilty.
I mean, just how many silent, black-clad, candle-bearing, Weekly Peace Vigils DOES it take to stop the War? 10? 20? 50? 100? 500? 13,247?
I guess we’ll find out when the war and occupation ends, won’t we?
“Shit! Turns out it was Three Hundred and TWELVE! And we stopped at Three Ten! Boy is there egg on our faces!”
I just wish I cared enough to spend so much of my life making sure total strangers knew how much I cared, then I’d be against the war, right?
Then my tax payments wouldn’t make me culpable for it, right?
Then my work wouldn’t contribute to the system that started it, right?
Then my consumer dollars wouldn’t feed the machine that runs it, right?
Then my lack of USEFUL action wouldn’t make me just as complicit as those who don’t act, right?
right?
-matti.
mastershake: So whats their “plan” to deal with excessive for profit Health Insurance Corperations? Why none other than to force taxpayers into buying and paying the outragious Health Insurance Corperate premiums, with profits and overheads, and with the same awful coverage. And if you don’t pay the Health Insurance companies, the Government fines you.
mastershake, thanks for informing us about the MA healthcare “fix”. The Demoks’ national plan is going to be modeled after MA’s unless the people find a way to whack it.
Daniel David: The most important thing anti-war people can do in 2008 is fill the Congress and White House with Democrats.
Will Daniel David rethink his blind faith in the Demoks after they jam through a FORCED private health insurance at today’s cost that is DOUBLE what healthcare costs in other industrialized countries? If we let them jam through this FORCED health insurance, the costs will then go from double to triple the costs in other countries. AND when we do a proper comparison with Cuba’s system we’re going to find something like a factor TEN difference in value of healthcare services.
At the start of last year we saw a healthcare reform debate rise up out of nothing. At that point we knew that we’re paying twice what we should. But over the course of the year we saw the key issue, the unaffordability of the healthcare, BURIED, and replaced with proposals for MANDATORY private health insurance. America, you’re truly SICKO. Please see a shrink.
While we snivel and whine on the internet, victims of our illegal actions are dying.
I guess we do not have to take any drastic action while it is only ‘others’, ‘them’. ‘Iraqis’, Afghans, Palestinians’….. that are dying as I write this.
I’m sure glad we bring them all ‘Democracy’ - they just want to live their lives in peace.
I’ll bet that if our fellow citizens were dying, we’d do something! You Betcha!
Maybe if more of verbalizers realized those ‘others’ ARE fellow citizens - of the world, we’d do more……But I am not holding my breath.
Getting back to the article. I initially had the same reaction as Cindy, when I started reading this, my jaw dropped. Then I continued to read, I started to smirk, and then by the end of the article I was laughing.
What a joke. A theatre of the absurd. A giant scam. My poor people. Never have so many, been robbed by so few, without ever noticing. It’s as though someone entered your house, in the middle of the night, cleaned it all out, except for the bed you were sleeping in, and upon waking in the morning, you took a look around and said “What a beautiful morning in America!”
Yeah go ahead, vote Democrat, but first you may want to fix yourself a cup of coffee. “Uh,where’s the coffee?”
Thank you to all the progressives on this site,who tirelessly beat back, the brain-washed arguments of the Democrats. It’s no fun fighting stupid people. Yeah stupid, because the definition of stupid is, banging your head against the same wall and expecting a different result.
Paul: Moonraven is a self-hating Gringa, who is very angry with her people and her country, but she has a big heart filled with love. She is embarrased, pretends to herself to be latin, but deep inside loves America. Even Gringos. Excuse her.
Yo soy Gringo!
Ramsay
Will someone please hit Daniel David upside the head with a 2 x 4? He’s useless and seems only to want to clog up the works with his moronic subserviance to the Corporate Party.
To Daniel David,
As the saying goes: Old paradigms don’t change - old paradigms die with old men. Please, do your part so that this world can move on.
“I, too, liked Dennis Kucinich. But sometime or other, you have to realize his movement has stopped moving.”
And defeatist attitudes like yours helped stop his movement, fucker!
Your “realpolitik” attitude is responsible for always getting the status quo. YOU, are responsible, you miserable quisling!
“Bush also said last week that U.S. troops “could easily” be in Iraq for a decade or more.”
And after the taxpayers are burdened with $$Trillions more with the U.S. determined to stay there forever, Bush and all his oil buddies will be multi-billionaires instead of just multi-millionaires.
Does anyone really believe that the U.S. will completely pull out of Iraq? Dream on…. We have troops all over the world, including Bosnia. The members of the U.S. Government, Republicans and Democtrats alike, are perpetutating the construction of the “elitist” empire before our eyes.
If you don’t think so, read this link and see if it doesn’t make sense to you; never-ending war and occupation is only part of the scheme.
Here’s the link: http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/engdahl/2008/0116.html
I’m getting really sick of the Kucinich-nicks. The guy is a political incompetent. And he’s proven he’s not a leader who can build a movement. He’s been trying for six years, and he’s gotten nowhere. At what point do you realize he’s not the answer?
Then of course, the Kucinich-nicks are Democrats, so you get the truly obnoxious Democrat attitude coming through like in the post two above mine. They spend six years backing a political moron, then they lash out at everyone else. Because to true-believer idiot types like this, its obviously everyone else’s fault that when a political incompetent takes on a Don Quixote-like task and then fails, its everyone else’s fault he failed.
And this from someone who generally likes Kucinich’s stands on the issues and who caucused for him in 2004. But by 2007 it was plain and obvious that a) he’d failed to build a movement or force in the Democratic Party that could do what he said he wanted to do, and b) that the Democratic Party was a rigged game and that trying to work from within that party was a waste of time and effort, and that c) when push comes to shove, Kucinich was willing to sell out all the values he said he stood for and place his loyalty to the Democratic Party above all of that.
Even when you listen to Kucinich, sometimes he’s honest and reveals that he never really expects to win or to really change things by doing this. He’ll say he’s just doing it so issues are raised in debates.
Sorry, but we are facing a crisis, we are facing a powerful enemy that will be hard to beat, and we don’t have the time or the resources to spend on a fool who doesn’t plan to succeed and who just wants to raise issues. If all we keep doing is just raising issues, we’ve lost.
Now, my comment above that he’s a political incompentent and a political moron is based on the idea that he actually wants to accomplish something. If that’s not true, then maybe he’s not the idiot he comes across as. But if that’s not true there’s no reason at all to waste our time on his meaningless stunts.
If he really wants to win and change things, then when you look at his decisions he’s a fool. Examples? How about endorsing Kerry in 2004? How about taking his limited debate time and talking about UFO’s? How about standing up before the nation a month ago and telling his supporters he can’t win and that they should support Obama of all friggin people? Heck, he spent half of this year yammering on about that stupid Dept of Peace idea he won’t shut up about.
If he’s serious, where’s the movement he’s built in the Democratic Party in six years of effort? Where are the hundreds of progressives, anti-war challengers to sitting pro-corporate Democrats in races across the country this year?
The problem isn’t with the rest of us. Its that you’ve decided to back a lame horse in a rigged race. But being a Democrat, you decide instead to lash out at everyone else when he comes in last.
COMarc,
If not Kucinich, then whom? Why hasn’t this person made him/herself known? I don’t mean just anyone, I mean the person who can galvanize maybe 75+ million Americans ASAP, and run as an independent along with like 99+ others in various Congressional/Senatorial races.
The problem may have little to do with the lack of leaders. . I’ve seen this before, in smaller contexts. It may be what many thinkers of past civilizations have also noted. Hindus, for instance, called it the age of Kali Yuga. One of the characteristics is that the people no longer seek the “wisdom of the sages.”
So indeed it may not be strictly a leadership problem. It is a deeply-rooted cultural problem. And it isn’t sheepish following that is for want — it is good judgement and assertive curiousity among other things.
It boggles my mind that people carry on discussions as if we actually have a two party system, we don’t. But “they” like us to continue to think that way. Thinking in terms of the lesser of two evils is no longer viable, the system is one giant evil consisting of most members of congress, the entire executive branch, most of the judiciary, and of course the MSM, all owned and operated by Demon Inc.
Who cares if Nader, or Kucinich, or Paul takes votes from the DemoRepo corporate slugs. Either don’t vote out of protest or vote your alternative person of choice.
Seeds of revolution look small and insignificant at first but if they don’t get planted then nothing changes and the noxious weeds just get more abundant.
“Taking to the street achieves nothing; Bush dismissed anti-war marches as ‘focus groups’ before the war started and has paid no attention to the movement ever since, ensuring that the media would do likewise (Speaking as a journalist, there’s only so many times you can cover events that have no concrete effect on the larger political process without becoming repetitive).”
Lord Trigo? You’re WRONG. That’s exactly the attitude the powerful WANT people to have! Who needs martial law when all you’ve gotta do is spread cynicism and make it seem cool and clever ..?
And I am a journalist and who gives a damn how “repetitive” covering marches are? When I wrote for the Las Vegas CityLife (before I was censored), that’s all I did was cover them, and you know what? That’s a good thing! Does anyone complain about how repetitive it is for journalists to be embedded with the troops?
Go back and review Nixon’s memoirs — he claimed to have been watching football while people marched in the 60s, but guess what? He was concerned! And if you give up just because dumb-ass Dubya dismissed you as a focus group, then you weren’t much of an activist to begin with, were you? There’s no time or space for spoiled suburbanites slumming and then running when the going gets rough …
Let me put it this way: If an outlaw on the run is never caught, does that mean we give up the search? All too many gave up after 2003 because Bush invaded Iraq anyway, but so what? What do you expect from a criminal but an escape attempt? And in this case, he was running from the rest of the world (still is) …
This is NOT a Charles Atlas ad in the back of a comic book! Quit judging activists by how many victories over bullies they score. Judge them by whether they give up or stick with it (sorry Cindy).
Two things: One, America has YET to invade Iran — thank the peace movement for that. Two, the peace movement was key in preventing a nuclear holocaust throughout the decades-long Cold War, so start appreciating the victories you DO have before you start clamoring for more!
During the Clinton Presidency, no war. Bush Presidency, war the entire time. Who is the warmonger? I’d rather have the no war party. Its so simple. Can’t you see? One party, no war. The other party, all war.
The greatness of the peace movement needs to be measured by its successes AND the strength of it’s enemies. Considering the enemies’ wealth, power, and ruthlessness, the peace movement is doing ok. The dead ass public doesn’t deserve the efforts of the peace movement.
Daily new disasters occur and old ones come to light. At a point, a triggering event will occur leading to WW3, dictatorship, or economic collapse. The choices made at that point will be limited. The peace movement that looks weak now may gain a lot of support as we approach the cliff.
Secession?
“But being a Democrat, you decide instead to lash out at everyone else when he comes in last.”
COMarc, you ignorant fool! I haven’t been a Democrat since 2000. I couldn’t give a weasel’s shit whether Kucinich wins or not. What I care about is that the system changes. As long as people play the “realpolitik” game, the system will grind on and it will grind you and me and our children. People who don’t see this or who don’t care should do the rest of us a favor and get the hell out of the way. Go away, shut your mouths, or just die. But for gods’ sake, allow change to happen!
“Who cares if Nader, or Kucinich, or Paul takes votes from the DemoRepo corporate slugs. Either don’t vote out of protest or vote your alternative person of choice.”
Yup!
“Secession?”
Civil war?
Maybe it’s time.
iammyself:
Wrong. We need more “realpolitik”.
Realpolitik:
You’re being screwed by the Democrats.
Realpolitik:
The corporations own the politics not the people.
Realpolitik:
Unless, and until, you take back your “democracy”, you will continue to be robbed. And your children will be used to murder, and be murdered, in foreign countries.
Realpolitik:
Your economic ways are destroying the planet, and with it, your children’s future.
I could go on. But you get the drift. The problem is that the American people don’t practice “realpolitik” instead opting for wishful thinking and self denial.
Cheers,
Ramsay
“iammyself:
Wrong. We need more “realpolitik”.”
I’m not sure what you mean by that, Ramsay. Do tell what your version of realpolitik is. Or are we just playing at semantics while our bed burns? Wheee…isn’t this fun my little friends?
People are dying and our nation is crashing and burning. What corners should we nibble at?
Right now, as we all sit on our butts, the government is seizing people’s property on our border. There were no public hearings, I do not believe these people will be compensated (so much for private property rights…guess it only matters with the Endangered Species Act and no one has ever had their land taken from this by the way—another load of right wing horse___t) and no serious environmental review. This fence will devastate the area on many levels with little guarentee it will do anything to stop immigration. My point is NOT to start a discussion on immigration which is and was totally manufactured by the right wing for this upcoming election, but to point out how far it has gone. It has gone so far beyond the petty politics of the election, we seem to have no idea. We are now in a time of nearly and totally NONRESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT. We should be appalled and enraged that 70% of the American people oppose Bush/Cheney but fact is going COMPLETELY IGNORED BY OUR CONGRESS AND THE MEDIA. We have collusion between the two most powerful entities in the nation: the government and the media. The mutual decision to ignore the incredible law breaking of the Bush Administration. We are living in a time of nonresponsive government. Let this sink in. There is an essential bargain with a democracy: the people speak and there is a response to the people. There is NO response now and if there is a response, it is the system simply protecting ITSELF or the people in it protecting themselves. CYA baby. CYA and nothing else.
The greatest affront to the American people and our Constitution is the Democrats decision to wait this out. 911. A war based on lies. Thousands of people dead. The most serious deficit in the history of the country. The greed (mortgage crisis), corruption and incompetence in nearly every branch of gov’t, environmental destruction of incredible magnitudes like blowing off the tops of MOUNTAINS (MOUNTAINS) and dumping it in riverbeds…environmental laws being changed with a stroke of a lobbyist pen and we can LIST SO MUCH MORE…and the Democrats decide to wait them out. Let them self-destruct. What kind of “plan” is this? And what if the Republicans win in the fall? They might because so many people are disgusted with the Democrats right now they MAY VOTE REPUBLICAN. SO WHAT DID YOU WAIT OUT HOWARD DEAN?
It is truly the most disgusting time in our history.
No one with courage. No one with fortitude. The great decay.
We are living in a time of nonresponsive government but it is the most unresponsive on THE DEMOCRAT SIDE.
Let this sink in and it will put the petty crap that is 90% of our blogs, radio and televion into some perspective.
Things are tanking and they are tanking fast. Thank a Democrat for this. You just wait when they lose in November and don’t be surprised when they do. I hope to God I am wrong on this one.
Anti War Groups ( “Democrats” ) Retreat, capitulate, curtail, withdraw, recant, repudiate, fall back, retire, submit, renounce, relinquish, yield, quit, fail, expire, abandan, resign, abdicate, accommodate, acquiesce, appease, come to terms, concede, cop out, crumble, deliver, demise, drop, dump, forgo, fork over, forswear, forsake, get rid of, give away, give in give over, go down, grant, hand-over, hand in, lay down, part with, quitclaim, release, renunciate, settle, sign over, split the difference, strike a bargain, succumb, throw up, transfer, vacate, waive, white flag, yield, get screwed, hosed, shagged…….
Or more succintly, just bend over.
At the rate this is going we’re left with the default strategy: Fewer enlistments prompting, eventually, a draft, prompting, people to get up off their asses to protest. It will take a while.
iammyself:
Once again we are on the same page, but unable to communicate, using the same language.
realpolitik: The politics of reality versus the politics of ideology.
The Democrats are a party based on an ideology, once very attractive to progressives, but has become corrupted.
There are those progressives who believe that the Democratic party is still the solution, others who believe that it can be reformed, others who believe that it must be abandoned.
I am not interested in ideology, but instead in realpoltik, the politics of making this a better world. The Democrats offer an empty ideology, one based on rhetoric, devoid of action. Platitudes and promises.
That people are dying and our nation is crashing and burning, is something I saw coming several years ago, it’s almost scary how the timing is so accurate. If I thought it was hopeless I wouldn’t be here posting. My only point is that that the Democrats offer no hope.
When the American people, realize that they are one people, then there will be hope for the nation. And when the American people realize, that all the people of this planet are equal, then there will be hope for the planet. That is realpolitik. When global interest, becomes self-interest, the change will come. It’s coming.
Now back to dinner,
Ramsay
OK, So Many here keep telling us the obvious with hate, anger and outrage…
Is that all you have to offer?
If Folks need a break from the anger to figure out what they can do to help, that is not surrender or giving up. No, not at all, it is what will get us to a better future.
Calling other posters who don’t agree with you names just shows that you are not ready to handle the truth, even your own truth in a constuctive way.
I would like to hear something creative or positive that the name callers are doing now to better their lives or help others…
This fight will go on long after we are all gone, So why not respect and enjoy the struggle… If you want your Maypo now, You will not get it.
I am sick and tired of hearing how there is no anti-war movement left. Hogwash. I live in a very small conservative community and we have had a weekly vigil for Peace since August 2005. Our numbers are growing. This same sort of thing is going on all over this nation. It does not rate mention in the newspapers, nevertheless we are out there. The members of IVAW will be holding hearings in DC in March and gatherings are planned all across the country following them in recognition of the US entering its SIXTH year in its war/occupation of Iraq. This article focussed on a bunch of groups obviously closely tied to the Democrats, a party which I like to consider Republican-Lite. The real anti-war/proPEACE groups have not stopped working.
As for the elections this Fall, electing any of the so-called Democratic candidates for President will change nothing. Electing a bunch more DLC types to Congress will change nothing. We need more people like Cindy Sheehan. By Fall the economy will have tanked so badly we are going to be really hurting….Doesn’t anyone see the relationship to wasting all that money, not to mention all that fuel, on war to the disgusting shape our economy is in?!
These groups are relatively conservative and certainly do not represent all anti-war groups.
While the article is of interest as to what some groups are doing, it misdirects the reader by lumping all anti-war groups together and making it sound like we’ve all given up on cutting funding for the war. In that sense, it is either 1) propaganda or 2) very poorly written by someone who does not understand the length and breadth of the anti-war movement and that not all wear the same stripes. A group of 20 people does not make decisions for the anti-war movement. They speak only for the groups in their coalition.
Sue Ann Martinson
Yes, our Peace movement is maturing and growing and it is storing up new energy we will need when things get much worse.
I am more interested in what you all think, then the above article.
The article is just one opinion, and we have gone way beyond that as we usually do here on Common Dreams.
Jim Glover January 18th, 2008 1:37 am
Is that all you have to offer?
Got a point, but we collectively put our hopes in the Democrats and get nothing. The war goes on. I understand a rant achieves nothing but it is a vent and reflects how we feel.
I agree that the outrage needs to be turned into something positive. That is what inspired MLK to greatness. I believe that instead of raging against the machine I should be putting my energies into an alternative third party. I just don’t think the Democrats are going anywhere. Thanks for causing me to reflect on my rage.
This is a case of people who have rocketed to notoriety by having harnessed new media with good thoughts and fundraising success, but have little or nothing in the way of political knowledge, much less analytical ability.
They can help put people together but should not be in the position of sitting around on K Street or anywhere else determining where the “movement” should be going.
This replicates exactly what is WRONG with our decaying democracy. It is just more folks with MONEY who think THEY get to decide what happens.
They are just moving us down a more friendly version of the same paradigm. Sooooo lost….
Antiwar Movement: Forget those folks. They bet the farm on the Dems, and can’t even figure out when to give it up. Instead, they suck you in deeper. To those who say progressives should “take over” the Democratic Party, just one more reminder: It’s already been taken over, and those who did it, strongarm you to bring you down to their level. They know whom they serve. Putting energy there is investing in disaster.
It’s Back to the drawing boards. Time to look at the Greens I believe.
I’ve just read on Huffpo that the Portico report is wrong.
A republican victory by even another negative margin will be considered by the neocons as a mandate to continue the war in Iraq, neocolonialism, intimidate Iran, mess with Latin America, arm the middle east to the teeth, accomodate an Israeli lobby that is much more extreme than Israel itself, push for more surveillance of citizens, more tax cuts for the very rich, globalization of big business, more fossil fuel use in the face of global warming, loss of local and state’s rights in education… That’s the short list!
These guys have to be sent packing from Washington. There is no dealing with them. Edwards and Obama have the cleanest slates regarding MIC involvement. At least they will listen to what people like Cindy Sheehan and James Hansen (global warming) are saying.
I am confused by Cindy Sheehan’s slagging off of Moveon.org - she wasn’t slagging them off when many of us had our reservations about them and many other mega funded ‘peace organisations’ (as oppose to grass roots networking ones) When Moveon called for a countrywide vigil in her support (17th August 2005) and even helped fund an ad for her in the Waco Tribune, she certainly did not distance herself, as far as google can come up with, unless I have asked it the wrong questions.
Best, j.
MoveOn for too long was backing Pelosi’s “go it slow” approach.
Right! So slow, in fact, that we went into reverse before we realized it. They have no business being in this business of giving their own political advice.
They should stick to what they do well: compiling and facilitating political communication and opinion at a time when there is no major media reflecting or presenting a progressive visions of the world, and our “elections” are more fraud than a record reflecting public wants or opinions.
I was getting used to the fact that Democrats had given up the fight (if they were even fighting to begin with), but now anti-war groups aren’t even anti-war anymore?
http://www.ryanhartman.wordpress.com
Thrashing around and around getting nowhere. PROFIT is the linch-pin, the one central point where we have the nonviolent control of what this murder machine is, does, produces. (Nothing happens if people don’t cooperate, work, obey.) If you can’t imagine a different (and better) reason for being alive than having more and getting advantages over other people, you will always be in the palm of the master’s hand. Why do you think this is “reality” when for the majority of human time it was not? When it took unspeakable violence to create what we are today? Do you get out of bed to get ahead of your neighbors or to live a life of your own excellence? Capitalism will NEVER “get there” because it isn’t designed to, any more than JudeoCrassinanity can ever satisfy the human soul. Learn something about the past! Smash your thoughts wide open! Or slave, stagnate and die before you ever know what it is to be ALIVE
thedeed January 17th, 2008 9:20 pm ….. War comes in MANY FACES…Clinton probably killed as many Iraqi, if not more, with the embargo. Don’t let the Dems fool you..they thrive on war as much as the Repubs.
This coalition of anti-war groups should have spent time discussing how better to force Democratic Congressional leaders to stand and fight, cutting funds even if Bush vetoes. Giving in to Bush and his Republican allies is cowardly.
bbr-001 (six posts up) “Gets it”. Gets reality.
Most posters here (a few excepted) do not “get it”.
Great, now we on the “left” are wishing violence and death on each other.
I guess the neocons and neoliberals are right. Might makes right, and humans cannot live in peace.
“The groups believe this switch in strategy can draw contrasts with Republicans that will help Democrats gain ground in November and bring the votes to pass more dramatic measures.”
I don’t give a damn about the Democrats in all of this. This is why we need another party!!!!!
“There was a consensus that last year was not productive,”
You wanna know why? Because there is no direct action. All that people do is walk down the street with sings. If everyone at those Washington marches, or the resent marches in various cities around the country, just sat down around the capital, or center of the city and didn’t move till something was done that would start to make an impact. Walking down the street holding signs is not going to change much. It makes you feel better and that’s it.
thedeed wrote:
During the Clinton Presidency, no war. Bush Presidency, war the entire time…
Really?
As a Serbian (thousands killed) a Somalian (more thousands), and especially, an Iraqi, (as many as a million killed0, if the Clinton presidency was a time of “no war”. And ther are the countless victims of his neoliberal goobal-cpitalist projects…
Please, learn something more about the world around you.
Anyone ever see the movie 1941? In it, there’s a scene when a bunch of soldiers and sailors get into this huge brawl — then Dan Aykroyd’s character fires a few rounds into the air to get everyone’s attention and says to acknowledge your differences (one fights on LAND, the other at SEA) while realizing you have a common enemy.
I may be stating the obvious here, but there are Kucinich Democrats as I call them (’cause the D.L.C. don’t count — they ARE part of that common enemy) trying to reform from within. THEN there are the all-essential protesters on the street, who have been responsible for everythin