Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Anti-War Activists Plan 'Emergency' Rally In DC To Protest Afghanistan Escalation
A new coalition led by more than 100 anti-war activists has announced an "Emergency Anti-Escalation Rally" to protest President Obama's new strategy for Afghanistan. The rally, scheduled for Dec. 12 in front of the White House, will include speeches by former U.S. Senator Mike Gravel and 2008 Green Party presidential nominee Cynthia McKinney.
Activists of the anti-war CodePink group march the short distance from the US Treasury Department to the White House in Washington ahead of President Barack Obama announcing his new strategy for Afghanistan.
(AFP/Nicholas Kamm) The new coalition, called EndUSWars.org, has posted an "open letter" to Obama on its website,
where it calls for an end to all U.S. military action in the
Afghanistan region, including Predator drone airstrikes and covert
intelligence operations.
Though the coalition's demands are to the extreme left-wing side of the progressive furor over Obama's plan add troops to the Afghanistan conflict, the organizer of the Dec. 12 rally says the coalition's anger at Obama is becoming more mainstream among the left.
"This is a movement, and it's growing," Laurie Dobson told TPMDC. "A lot of people said any change was better [than President Bush], but it's not better if we're still peddling perpetual war across the planet."
Dobson founded the coalition of anti-war progressives earlier this month, when she said it became clear to her that Obama was not going to cease military operations in Afghanistan. Dobson said the Dec. 12 rally is the first step in a series of protests moves she said might end with anti-war progressives running their own candidate for the 2012 Democratic presidential nomination.
Though Dobson said the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan began as "neo-con wars" under Bush, she claimed Obama's speech last night put made the wars his refocused the full force of the anti-war protests Bush faced onto the Obama administration.
"It's about Obama," she said of the Dec. 12 rally. "And refusing to support his presidency any longer."



10 Comments so far
Show AllPerhaps Obama believes he can control his generals and Wall Street advisors but they may control him. Let's instead wage a war on unemployment,foreclosures and poverty.
shach, well said.
Hit the streets and hit the phones of your reps to let them know that doing the same thing over and over and getting the same bad result means your crazy or a pawn of the MIC.
What remains of US social cohesiveness is seriously jeopardized by the renewal and escalation of warring in Afghanistan. We are already on the verge of attacking one another because nothing we are told by those we have entrusted makes any sense; hence we are confused, outraged and divided.
All of the information we are supposed to rely on to guide us in our decision making and to form the basis of consensus and unity consists in one contradiction piled on top of another. That is the natural outcome of endless warring, since warfare depends upon the use of force and fraud for its 'success.'
Neither the Taliban nor al Qaeda are being defeated by reliance upon more force and upon more fraud; but we are.
Oh the generals who I appointed and kept from mad king georges reign, those I can fire in a heart beat, are making me do it, yeah right.
Duh, Obomber said he would escalate during his campaign.
Dear Evan McMorris-Santoro - The country is pretty evenly divided on the wisdom of escalating the war. The coalition's demands are hardly "to the extreme left-wing side." Have you even read them? Ending torture? Closing black site prisons? Stopping renditions? Closing Guantanamo?
Yesterday the NY Times reported:
"While officials say the president plans to announce sending an additional 30,000 or so troops to Afghanistan, most Americans in the poll do not support a troop increase. About one-third (32 percent) do, while about 4 in 10 (39 percent) say the number of troops should be decreased. Just 20 percent or 2 in 10 say troop levels should be kept the same.
"Democrats are the least likely to support an increase – just 17 percent do, compared with 34 percent of independents and about half of Republicans."
Yep, those mainstream Democrats, independents, and half of Republicans equalling a plurality of Americans - crazy left-wingers for sure, all of them.
BeRad
Very well said as your comments also echo my thoughts. It should also be pointed out that the liberal web site TPM, whom the writer of the article is associated, is an ardent supporter of Obama's murderous foreign policy in the Middle East.
Where to begin. Would venture a bet that most Americans would buy a charismatic candidate who speaks for the workers. We need a Labor Party or a Democratic Party transformed into a labor party. The platform would be easy to create, just make it the opposite of most of the things we are doing now. The choice, to challenge Obama and sitting Congressmen in the primaries, or start a new party. The former is easier. Make the centerpiece election reform, publicly financed elections and the rest built on the rational dissatisfaction of most Americans. Examples, a nation of laws and respect for international law, changing the Defense Department to really concern itself with defense and not propping up an empire, a strong dollar, good paying jobs providing goods and services we need and the rest of the world might buy, a real change in energy policies.
The pot is boiling.
Herman Schmidt
This is the one! This is a must attend party! They can't fit millions of us in "Free Speech" corrals. They can't taser and arrest us all. Please on Dec 12, go to to the White House and show your massive support for all progressive causes. It will be lots of fun.
http://www.gp.org/index.php
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/48015
http://polizeros.com/2009/11/30/afghanistan-war-emergency-anti-escalation-rally/
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?calid=25044
http://tweetmeme.com/story/310887928/dc-emergency-anti-escalation-rally-lafayette-park-saturday-december-12th-11-am-4-pm-great-lineup-of-speakers-music-afterdowningstreetorg
http://www.peaceactionme.org/blog/dec-2nd-12th-emergency-anti-escalation-vigils-and-rallies-info-maine-boston-and-dc
http://mathaba.net/news/?x=622251
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/115918
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=158x11598
http://www.rense.com/general88/noyoucant.htm
The subject of this article is the planned rally of December 12. Comments should be stay on topic - specifically planning and organizing to get there, and not more unproductive bellaching to the choir.
Once again we see the attempt to hold back the ocean with a chain link fence.
Protests used to work when the government was actually concerned with the interests of it's citizens.
That is no longer the case.
Modern government is driven by corporate interests alone. (i.e. The Wal-Mart the protesters bought their materials at to make the signs)
The end result of this protest is that it will allow a lot of people to vent their frustration about things they can never change, and it will allow them to expand their social group. It'll also make for some nice Facebook pics.
As far as making a difference to the war, Obama's plans, or any government issue, I say not a bloody chance in hell.
Corporate America is running the show. Protesting to the government is like complaining to a beer vendor because you don't like the fair.