[Peace-discuss] Feckless Democrats

[Chas. 'Mark' Bee]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
To: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Cc: "Chas. 'Mark' Bee" <c-bee1 at itg.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Feckless Democrats


> There are apparently two ways to be anti-war, as the term is being used 
> currently.

rofl  Because all artificial either-ors formulated by political opponents 
are correct.

>
> The first is to recognize that the US government has consistently 
> misrepresented the situation in the Middle East, from the 9/11 attacks to 
> the Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction," to justify murderous and criminal 
> policies, up to and including what the Nuremberg Tribunal called "the 
> supreme international crime" (i.e., worse than terrorism) -- 
> launching an aggressive war.  The US should therefore withdraw completely 
> from Iraq (and Afghanistan), as a large majority of Iraqis wish; pay 
> reparations; and hold accountable those guilty of prosecuting this war, in 
> accord with the Nuremberg principles, the UN Charter, and international 
> law.
>
> The second way is to call for a "re-deployment" of US forces in the Middle 
> East, so that the central point of the long-term US policy in the region, 
> control of the region's energy resources (a decisive advantage over Europe 
> and Asia), can be maintained,

  Without troops present?

 while the US washes its hands
> of any responsibility for the countries it has invaded and devastated.

  Thin fiction.