[Peace-discuss] Flyer for tomorrow's Main Event: draft
C. G. Estabrook
galliher at uiuc.edu
Fri Oct 5 22:12:12 CDT 2007
But is the Zionist influence in line with what the US ruling class wants
to do, or does it divert it? I think the answer's obvious.
Morton K. Brussel wrote:
> One can argue about who most determines present U.S foreign policy in
> the Middle East---Zunes assertion notwithstanding---but the obvious fact
> is that Israel is no stool pigeon for the Bush administration even if it
> is true that were the U.S. to oppose Israeli policies, it could largely
> reverse them. You are letting Israel's rabid supporters off the hook
> too easily. That Congress is lined up for condemning Iran is evidence of
> their effectiveness. The oil interests, for example, are not as united
> in lobbying for attacks upon Iran as are those of the Zionist lobby.
>
> By exaggerating, with the use of the word "directing", you are obscuring
> the obviousness of Zionist influence.
>
> ---mkb
>
>
> On Oct 5, 2007, at 8:57 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>
>> The question is, Is Israel and/or the (admittedly powerful) Israeli
>> lobby turning US policy away from the interests of dominant social
>> groups in the US -- e.g., energy and arms corps -- and taking it in
>> directions that those who hold wealth and power in the US don't want
>> to go? If so, the matter is easily solved: go to the CEOs of
>> Exxon-Mobil, Halliburton, Boeing, Merrill-Lynch, Citicorp, etc., and
>> point out that the USG is not acting in their interests but in the
>> interests of the Jewish state. They'll slap themselves on the
>> forehead and say, "Of course!" -- then call DC and tell the
>> administration to start working in their interests instead...
>>
>> On the other hand, if Israel has been recruited to those interests
>> (with deleterious effects from the militarization of their own
>> society), then the situation would look much as it does now.
>>
>> Stephen Zunes has rightly pointed out, "There are far more powerful
>> interests that have a stake in what happens in the Persian Gulf region
>> than does AIPAC, such as the oil companies, the arms industry and
>> other special interests whose lobbying influence and campaign
>> contributions far surpass that of the much-vaunted Zionist lobby and
>> its allied donors to congressional races" -- particularly if one
>> thinks that the Lobby has pulled US policy in a direction those
>> interests don't want it to go...
>>
>> Regards, CGE
>>
>> PS: Thanks for the proofing.
>>
>>
>> Morton K. Brussel wrote:
>>> A TYPO:
>>> US has struggled to control the government that resulted, even
>>> *thought *that …
>>> But I have a more serious comment regarding your remarks on Israel:
>>>> Isn't Israel really directing American policy in the Middle East?
>>> I am bothered by the question and its response. For one thing, it is
>>> the Zionist neocons in the administration, representing
>>> Israeli-Likkud expansionist interests, that have had an influence,
>>> not Israel per se, but perhaps I'm quibbling. In any case, one
>>> doesn't have to use the word "directing" in the question---perhaps
>>> "influencing" or "strongly influencing" would be more appropriate.
>>> Use of "directing " confuses what really has been going on. It is no
>>> doubt true that the Bush administration and its cohorts have their
>>> own impulses and ideology, aside from that of the Zionist cabal, for
>>> its policies in the Middle East, but there clearly is an entanglement
>>> between the two countries that cannot be cavalierly dismissed by
>>> simply implying that Israel is only a stool pigeon for the U.S. . One
>>> has only to look at the many close advisors to this administration,
>>> all promoters of of Israeli policies (advocating attacks on Iraq,
>>> Iran, Syria, Lebanon, not to speak of policies with respect to the
>>> West Bank), to be convinced that Israeli desires and actions have
>>> been a pernicious and aggravating influence on the Bush (and Clinton)
>>> foreign policy. All that is obscured in your response. Therefore, I
>>> think you should modify that part of the flyer. The rest of the flyer
>>> is to the point. ---Mort
>>> On Oct 5, 2007, at 6:28 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>>>> [A formatted version is attached. Text below. Suggestions welcomed.
>>>> --CGE]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WHY CAN'T CONGRESS STOP THE WAR?
>>>> And Other Questions About Our Wars in the Middle East
>>>>
>>>> [1] Why can't Congress stop the war in Iraq?
>>>> Actually, they can. All they have to do is stop paying for it. The
>>>> Constitution gives the Congress, not the President, the power "to
>>>> raise and support armies," and it specifies that "no appropriation
>>>> of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years."
>>>> All the Democrats -- who since last year's election control both the
>>>> House of
>>>> Representatives and the Senate -- have to do is to refuse to vote for
>>>> any more funding for the war. Because of the filibuster rule, it would
>>>> only take 41 votes in the Senate to kill any funding bill. In the
>>>> House, one person -- Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- can simply refuse to bring
>>>> a funding bill to the floor. The administration could use the money
>>>> already appropriated to bring the troops home, if the Democrats made it
>>>> clear that they will not vote for any more. And a new poll shows that
>>>> three out of four American don't support the President's new request
>>>> for
>>>> war funding.
>>>>
>>>> [2] So why don't the Democrats do that?
>>>> Because they support the same long-term policy in the Middle East that
>>>> the Republicans do. For more than fifty years, the US has insisted
>>>> upon
>>>> control of Middle East oil and gas, which are more extensive there than
>>>> any place else on earth. But not because we need them here at
>>>> home. In
>>>> fact, we import only a small bit of our energy resources from the
>>>> Middle
>>>> East: most of it comes from the Atlantic region -- the US itself,
>>>> followed by Canada, Nigeria, and Venezuela. But control of world
>>>> energy
>>>> resources gives the US control of our major economic competitors in the
>>>> world -- Europe and northeast Asia (China and Japan).
>>>>
>>>> [3] But aren't all the Democratic Presidential candidates against
>>>> the war?
>>>> Not exactly. The leading Democratic candidates are happy to attack the
>>>> horrible mess that the Republican administration has made in Iraq, but
>>>> they continue to support the long-term policy. They have a problem,
>>>> however: more than 70% of Americans oppose the war, and they gave the
>>>> Democrats majorities in the House and the Senate last year in order to
>>>> bring the war to an end. So the leading Democrats have to pretend that
>>>> they're against the war while admitting that even if the Democrats
>>>> regain the Presidency next year, the troops will not be withdrawn.
>>>> It's
>>>> been said that "The function of the Democratic Party is to sell
>>>> stuff to
>>>> the populace the Republicans can't get away with on their own, like
>>>> throwing single mothers and children off the welfare rolls or exporting
>>>> America's blue collar jobs to Mexico and China" -- and continuing a
>>>> war.
>>>>
>>>> [4] Aren't we bringing freedom and democracy to the people of Iraq?
>>>> They don't think so. A majority of the Iraqis -- in all parts of the
>>>> country -- want the US troops to leave. And sixty percent of Iraqis
>>>> think that it is acceptable to attack American troops, in order to get
>>>> them to leave. That's hardly surprising -- imagine how Americans would
>>>> react to an Arab army occupying the United States. As to democracy,
>>>> the
>>>> US didn't intend to allow a democratic government after the invasion in
>>>> 2003, but the (largely non-violent) resistance of the majority
>>>> community, the Shi'ites -- forced the US to conduct elections, and ever
>>>> since the US has struggled to control the government that resulted,
>>>> even
>>>> thought that government has little real authority in the country,
>>>> independent of American troops. In general, as the case of Palestine
>>>> shows, the US supports democracy only when it can count on elected
>>>> governments to do what they're told. Otherwise it supports
>>>> dictatorships, as in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
>>>>
>>>> [5] But won't there be chaos in Iraq if the US troops leave -- a
>>>> bloodbath, as there was in Vietnam?
>>>> There's chaos there now. We are probably responsible for a million
>>>> deaths since we invaded Iraq, four and a half years ago -- and perhaps
>>>> at least as many (including a half million dead children) in the
>>>> sanctions the US administered in the previous twelve years. We can
>>>> hardly say that we are preventing a bloodbath, although it is certainly
>>>> true that we owe the Iraqis huge reparations for what we've done to
>>>> their country and people. But it must be provided through neutral
>>>> agencies -- not the US military, mercenaries, or corporations.
>>>> (Incidentally, although the US made the same claim before we withdrew
>>>> troops from Vietnam in 1973, the bloodbath occurred in Cambodia -- a
>>>> country which the US did not occupy -- because we destroyed that small
>>>> peasant society by bombing it with many times the ordnance used in the
>>>> entire Second World War; it was in fact the Vietnamese army that put an
>>>> end to the bloodbath in Cambodia, while the US was still backing the
>>>> government that carried it out.)
>>>>
>>>> [6] Won't the terrorists follow us home?
>>>> Everyone recognizes that US actions in the Middle East are creating a
>>>> whole new generation of terrorists. The people apparently responsible
>>>> for the crimes of September 11, 2001, said they committed them because
>>>> of the murderous sanctions against Iraq, the oppression of the
>>>> Palestinians, and US military support for oppressive governments in the
>>>> Muslim holy lands. That in no way justifies them, just as continuing
>>>> American war crimes aren't justified by 9-11. But the administration
>>>> has not taken serious steps to prevent new terrorist attacks, even in
>>>> the US, by such things as examining all airline baggage and all
>>>> containers coming into US ports. Instead, the administration is
>>>> willing
>>>> to permit the continuation of the threat of terrorism to justify its
>>>> long term policy in the Middle East. Really to combat terrorism,
>>>> the US
>>>> has to reverse that policy and take seriously the control of nuclear
>>>> weapons. Instead, the Bush administration's torture policy, its secret
>>>> prisons, its illegal wire-tapping, and the abridgment of constitutional
>>>> rights, such as habeas corpus -- in which the Congress has collaborated
>>>> -- are impeachable offenses that have not made us safer from terrorism.
>>>>
>>>> [7] Shouldn't we attack Iran, which the President says is meddling
>>>> in Iraq?
>>>> That would be to commit another war crime, and a very dangerous one.
>>>> The US signed -- and in fact wrote -- the UN Charter, which forbids
>>>> "the
>>>> threat or use of force" in international affairs. The Nuremberg
>>>> Tribunal, after the Second World War, condemned the German leaders for
>>>> "initiating a war of aggression ... the supreme international crime,
>>>> differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself
>>>> the accumulated evil of the whole." And Iran is not only three times
>>>> the size of Iraq, it has a substantial military that's not prostrate
>>>> from years of sanctions. It's amazing that the US government, with
>>>> half
>>>> its army occupying Iraq, can talk with a straight about Iranian
>>>> "meddling." The US government is principally concerned that it does
>>>> not
>>>> control Iran's large energy resources, and that they may end up as part
>>>> of the Russian-Chinese energy grid. There seems to be a faction of the
>>>> Bush administration that wants to use the US Air Force and Navy to
>>>> prevent that.
>>>>
>>>> [8] Shouldn't we shift our attention to Afghanistan, where we're
>>>> fighting a good war?
>>>> The US attack on Afghanistan was also a war crime, which the US claimed
>>>> was justified by 9-11, because it suspected that Osama bin Laden was in
>>>> that country. In fact, the government of Afghanistan asked for the
>>>> evidence that he was responsible for the attacks and offered to discuss
>>>> sending him out of Afghanistan for trial. We don't know if they would
>>>> have done so, because the US refused to provide the evidence -- which
>>>> the director of the FBI admitted he didn't have -- or to negotiate
>>>> Instead the US launched a bombing campaign, with the clear
>>>> understanding
>>>> that it might result in the starvation of several million people -- who
>>>> of course had nothing to do with 9-11. Now the US has induced NATO
>>>> countries to provide troops to attempt to put down a growing resistance
>>>> to the government which we installed there.
>>>>
>>>> [9] Isn't Israel really directing American policy in the Middle East?
>>>> No. Although Israel is far and away the largest recipient of US
>>>> foreign and military aid, and there is a powerful Israeli lobby in the
>>>> US, American policy in the region serves the strategic and economic
>>>> interests of an American elite. For forty years, the US has used
>>>> Israel
>>>> as "cop on the beat," to help keep down America's real enemy in the
>>>> Middle East -- the desire of any group, right or left, to free the
>>>> region's resources from American control. Since the 1967 war, when
>>>> Israel demonstrated it could do that, it has become a stationary
>>>> aircraft carrier for the United States -- with bad effects on the
>>>> militarized Israeli society, which now has one of the highest poverty
>>>> rates in the developed world, in spite of billions of dollars from the
>>>> US each year. In return, the US gives Israel, which by law is the
>>>> state
>>>> of one racial group, a free hand to suppress the Palestinians.
>>>>
>>>> [10] What should we do?
>>>> Bring US troops, mercenaries, and corporations home. Negotiate fair
>>>> agreements with all the countries of the region, including reparations
>>>> and the removal of all nuclear weapons. And hold accountable those
>>>> guilty of prosecuting this vicious war and promoting its continuance.
>>>>
>>>> DEFUND war in the Middle East.
>>>> REFUND human needs at home and in Iraq.
>>>>
>>>> This flyer was prepared by members of AWARE (Anti-War Anti-Racism
>>>> Effort), a local Champaign-Urbana peace group. We meet every Sunday
>>>> 5-6:30pm in the basement of the old post office in Urbana. Visitors
>>>> and new members are welcome. <http://www.anti-war.net/>
>>>>
>>>> ###
>>>>
>>>> {\rtf1\ansi\deff1\adeflang1025
>>>> {\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Nimbus Roman No9 L{\*\falt
>>>> Times New Roman};}{\f1\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Nimbus Roman No9
>>>> L{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f2\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New
>>>> Roman;}{\f3\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Nimbus Roman No9 L{\*\falt Times
>>>> New Roman};}{\f4\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 Nimbus Sans L{\*\falt
>>>> Arial};}{\f5\fswiss\fprq2\fcharset0 DejaVu Sans;}}
>>>> {\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;}
>>>> {\stylesheet{\s1\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033\snext1
>>>> Normal;}
>>>> {\s2\sb240\sa120\keepn\rtlch\af1\afs28\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af1\langfe255\hich\f4\fs28\lang1033\loch\f4\fs28\lang1033\sbasedon1\snext3
>>>> Heading;}
>>>> {\s3\sa120\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033\sbasedon1\snext3
>>>> Body Text;}
>>>> {\s4\sa120\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs24\lang1033\loch\fs24\lang1033\sbasedon3\snext4
>>>> List;}
>>>> {\s5\sb120\sa120\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs24\lang1033\i\loch\fs24\lang1033\i\sbasedon1\snext5
>>>> caption;}
>>>> {\s6\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs24\lang1033\loch\fs24\lang1033\sbasedon1\snext6
>>>> Index;}
>>>> {\s7\sb120\sa120\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs24\lang1033\i\loch\fs24\lang1033\i\sbasedon1\snext7
>>>> caption;}
>>>> {\s8\sb120\sa120\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs24\lang1033\i\loch\fs24\lang1033\i\sbasedon1\snext8
>>>> WW-caption;}
>>>> {\s9\sb120\sa120\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs24\lang1033\i\loch\fs24\lang1033\i\sbasedon1\snext9
>>>> WW-caption1;}
>>>> }
>>>> {\info{\creatim\yr2007\mo10\dy5\hr14\min44}{\author C.
>>>> Estabrook}{\revtim\yr2007\mo10\dy5\hr18\min14}{\printim\yr1601\mo1\dy1\hr0\min0}{\comment
>>>> StarWriter}{\vern6800}}\deftab709
>>>> {\*\pgdsctbl
>>>> {\pgdsc0\pgdscuse195\pgwsxn12240\pghsxn15840\marglsxn1134\margrsxn1134\margtsxn1134\margbsxn1134\pgdscnxt0
>>>> Standard;}}
>>>> {\*\pgdscno0}\paperh15840\paperw12240\margl1134\margr1134\margt1134\margb1134\sectd\sbknone\pgwsxn12240\pghsxn15840\marglsxn1134\margrsxn1134\margtsxn1134\margbsxn1134\ftnbj\ftnstart1\ftnrstcont\ftnnar\aenddoc\aftnrstcont\aftnstart1\aftnnrlc
>>>>
>>>> \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\rtlch\af5\afs40\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs40\lang1033\loch\fs40\lang1033
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs40\lang1033\i0\b0 WHY CAN'T CONGRESS STOP
>>>> THE WAR?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\rtlch\af5\afs28\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs28\lang1033\loch\fs28\lang1033
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs28\lang1033\i0\b0 And Other Questions About
>>>> Our Wars in the Middle East.}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [1] Why can't Congress stop
>>>> the war in Iraq?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033{\rtlch
>>>> \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b{\b\i \tab {\b0\i0 Actually, they
>>>> can. All they have to do is stop paying for it. The Constitution
>>>> gives the Congress, not the President, the power "t}}}{\rtlch
>>>> \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i0\b0 o raise and support armies," and
>>>> it specifies that "no appropriation of money to that use shall be
>>>> for a longer term than two years." All the Democrats -- who since
>>>> last year's election control both the House of Representatives and
>>>> the Senate -- have to do is to refuse to vote for any more funding
>>>> for the war. Because of the filibuster rule, it would only take 41
>>>> votes in t
>>>> he Senate to kill any funding bill. In the House, one person --
>>>> Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- can simply refuse to bring a funding bill to
>>>> the floor. The administration could use the money already
>>>> appropriated to bring the troops home, if the Democrats made it
>>>> clear that they will not vote for any more. And a new poll shows
>>>> that three out of four American don't support the President's new
>>>> request for war funding.}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [2] So why don't the
>>>> Democrats do that?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b \tab {\b0\i0 Because they
>>>> support the same long-term policy in the Middle East that the
>>>> Republicans do. For more than fifty years, the US has insisted upon
>>>> control of Middle East oil and gas, which are more extensive there
>>>> than any place else on earth. But not becau
>>>> se we need them here at home. In fact, we import only a small bit
>>>> of our energy resources from the Middle East: most of it comes from
>>>> the Atlantic region -- the US itself, followed by Canada, Nigeria,
>>>> and Venezuela. But control of world energy resources gives the US
>>>> control of our major economic competitors in the world -- Europe and
>>>> northeast Asia (China and Japan). }}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [3] But aren't all the
>>>> Democratic Presidential candidates against the war?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b \tab {\b0\i0 Not exactly.
>>>> The leading Democratic candidates are happy to attack the horrible
>>>> mess that the Republican administration has made in Iraq, but they
>>>> continue to support the long-term policy. They have a problem,
>>>> however: more than 70% of Americans oppose
>>>> the war, and they gave the Democrats majorities in the House and
>>>> the Senate last year in order to bring the war to an end. So the
>>>> leading Democrats have to pretend that they're against the war while
>>>> admitting that even if the Democrats regain the Preside
>>>> ncy next year, the troops will not be withdrawn. It's been said
>>>> that "The function of the Democratic Party is to sell stuff to the
>>>> populace the Republicans can't get away with on their own, like
>>>> throwing single mothers and children off the welfare rolls o
>>>> r exporting America's blue collar jobs to Mexico and China" -- and
>>>> continuing a war. }}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [4] Aren't we bringing
>>>> freedom and democracy to the people of Iraq?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b \tab {\b0\i0 They don't
>>>> think so. A majority of the Iraqis -- in all parts of the country
>>>> -- want the US troops to leave. And sixty percent of Iraqis think
>>>> that it is acceptable to attack American troops, in order to get
>>>> them to leave. That's hardly surprising -- i
>>>> magine how Americans would react to an Arab army occupying the
>>>> United States. As to democracy, the US didn't intend to allow a
>>>> democratic government after the invasion in 2003, but the (largely
>>>> non-violent) resistance of the majority community, the Shi'it
>>>> es -- forced the US to conduct elections, and ever since the US has
>>>> struggled to control the government that resulted, even thought that
>>>> government has little real authority in the country, independent of
>>>> American troops. In general, as the case of Palest
>>>> ine shows, the US supports democracy only when it can count on
>>>> elected governments to do what they're told. Otherwise it supports
>>>> dictatorships, as in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. }}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [5] But won't there be
>>>> chaos in Iraq if the US troops leave -- a bloodbath, as there was in
>>>> Vietnam?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b \tab {\b0\i0 There's chaos
>>>> there now. We are probably responsible for a million deaths since
>>>> we invaded Iraq, four and a half years ago -- and perhaps at least
>>>> as many (including a half million dead children) in the sanctions
>>>> the US administered in the previous twelv
>>>> e years. We can hardly say that we are preventing a bloodbath,
>>>> although it is certainly true that we owe the Iraqis huge
>>>> reparations for what we've done to their country and people. But it
>>>> must be provided through neutral agencies -- not the US military,
>>>> mercenaries, or corporations. (Incidentally, although the US made
>>>> the same claim before we withdrew troops from Vietnam in 1973, the
>>>> bloodbath occurred in Cambodia -- a country which the US did not
>>>> occupy -- because we destroyed that small peasant societ
>>>> y by bombing it with many times the ordnance used in the entire
>>>> Second World War; it was in fact the Vietnamese army that put an end
>>>> to the bloodbath in Cambodia, while the US was still backing the
>>>> government that carried it out.)}}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [6] Won't the terrorists
>>>> follow us home?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b \tab {\b0\i0 Everyone
>>>> recognizes that US actions in the Middle East are creating a whole
>>>> new generation of terrorists. The people apparently responsible for
>>>> the crimes of September 11, 2001, said they committed them because
>>>> of the murderous sanctions against Iraq, the
>>>> oppression of the Palestinians, and US military support for
>>>> oppressive governments in the Muslim holy lands. That in no way
>>>> justifies them, just as continuing American war crimes aren't
>>>> justified by 9-11. But the administration has not taken serious ste
>>>> ps to prevent new terrorist attacks, even in the US, by such things
>>>> as examining all airline baggage and all containers coming into US
>>>> ports. Instead, the administration is willing to permit the
>>>> continuation of the threat of terrorism to justify its long term
>>>> policy in the Middle East. Really to combat terrorism, the US has
>>>> to reverse that policy and take seriously the control of nuclear
>>>> weapons. Instead, the Bush administration's torture policy, its
>>>> secret prisons, its illegal wire-tapping, and the abri
>>>> dgment of constitutional rights, such as habeas corpus -- in which
>>>> the Congress has collaborated -- are impeachable offenses that have
>>>> not made us safer from terrorism. }}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [7] Shouldn't we attack
>>>> Iran, which the President says is meddling in Iraq?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033{\rtlch
>>>> \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b{\b\i \tab {\b0\i0 That would be to
>>>> commit another war crime, and a very dangerous one. The US signed
>>>> -- and in fact wrote -- the UN Charter, which forbids "the threat or
>>>> use of force" in international affairs. The Nuremberg Tribunal,
>>>> after the Second World War, condemned
>>>> the German leaders for "initiating a war of aggression ... the
>>>> supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in
>>>> that it contains within itself the }}}{\rtlch
>>>> \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i0\b0 accumulated evil of the whole."
>>>> And Iran is not only three times the size of Iraq, it h
>>>> as a substantial military that's not prostrate from years of
>>>> sanctions. It's amazing that the US government, with half its army
>>>> occupying Iraq, can talk with a straight about Iranian "meddling."
>>>> The US government is principally concerned that it does not
>>>> control Iran's large energy resources, and that they may end up as
>>>> part of the Russian-Chinese energy grid. There seems to be a faction
>>>> of the Bush administration that wants to use the US Air Force and
>>>> Navy to prevent that.}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [8] Shouldn't we shift our
>>>> attention to Afghanistan, where we're fighting a good war?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i0\b0 \tab The US attack on
>>>> Afghanistan was also a war crime, which the US claimed was justified
>>>> by 9-11, because it suspected that Osama bin Laden was in that
>>>> country. In fact, the government of Afghanistan asked for the
>>>> evidence that he was responsible for the at
>>>> tacks and offered to discuss sending him out of Afghanistan for
>>>> trial. We don't know if they would have done so, because the US
>>>> refused to provide the evidence -- which the director of the FBI
>>>> admitted he didn't have -- or to negotiate Instead the US lau
>>>> nched a bombing campaign, with the clear understanding that it might
>>>> result in the starvation of several million people -- who of course
>>>> had nothing to do with 9-11. Now the US has induced NATO countries
>>>> to provide troops to attempt to put down a growing resistance to the
>>>> government which we installed there.}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [9] Isn't Israel really
>>>> directing American policy in the Middle East?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b \tab {\b0\i0 No. Although
>>>> Israel is far and away the largest recipient of US foreign and
>>>> military aid, and there is a powerful Israeli lobby in the US,
>>>> American policy in the region serves the strategic and economic
>>>> interests of an American elite. For forty years, t
>>>> he US has used Israel as "cop on the beat," to help keep down
>>>> America's real enemy in the Middle East -- the desire of any group,
>>>> right or left, to free the region's resources from American
>>>> control. Since the 1967 war, when Israel demonstrated it could do
>>>> that, it has become a stationary aircraft carrier for the United
>>>> States -- with bad effects on the militarized Israeli society, which
>>>> now has one of the highest poverty rates in the developed world, in
>>>> spite of billions of dollars from the US each year. In return, the
>>>> US gives Israel, which by law is the state of one racial group, a
>>>> free hand to suppress the Palestinians.}}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b [10] What should we do?}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b \tab {\b0\i0 Bring US
>>>> troops, mercenaries, and corporations home. Negotiate fair
>>>> agreements with all the countries of the region, including
>>>> reparations and the removal of all nuclear weapons. And hold
>>>> accountable those guilty of prosecuting this vicious war and prom
>>>> oting its continuance.}}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs21\lang1033\i\b
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\rtlch\af5\afs32\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs32\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs32\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs32\lang1033\i\b DEFUND war in the Middle
>>>> East.}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\rtlch\af5\afs32\lang255\ai\ab\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs32\lang1033\i\b\loch\fs32\lang1033\i\b
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs32\lang1033\i\b REFUND human needs at home
>>>> and in Iraq.}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\i\loch\fs21\lang1033\i{\rtlch
>>>> \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b0{\f1 This flyer was prepared by
>>>> members of AWARE }}{\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f1\fs21\lang1033\i\b0{\f2
>>>> (Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort),}}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\tx560\tx1120\tx1680\tx2240\tx2800\tx3360\tx3920\tx4480\tx5040\tx5600\tx6160\tx6720\rtlch\af2\afs24\lang255\ai\ltrch\dbch\af2\langfe255\hich\f2\fs21\lang1033\i\loch\f2\fs21\lang1033\i
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f2\fs21\lang1033\i\b0 a local Champaign-Urbana
>>>> peace group. We meet every Sunday 5-6:30pm}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\tx560\tx1120\tx1680\tx2240\tx2800\tx3360\tx3920\tx4480\tx5040\tx5600\tx6160\tx6720\rtlch\af2\afs24\lang255\ai\ltrch\dbch\af2\langfe255\hich\f2\fs21\lang1033\i\loch\f2\fs21\lang1033\i
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f2\fs21\lang1033\i\b0 in the basement of the old
>>>> post office in Urbana. Visitors and new members are welcome.}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\qc\tx560\tx1120\tx1680\tx2240\tx2800\tx3360\tx3920\tx4480\tx5040\tx5600\tx6160\tx6720\rtlch\af2\afs24\lang255\ai\ltrch\dbch\af2\langfe255\hich\f2\fs21\lang1033\i\loch\f2\fs21\lang1033\i
>>>> {\rtlch \ltrch\loch\f2\fs21\lang1033\i\b0 <http://www.anti-war.net/>}
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par \pard\plain
>>>> \ltrpar\s1\ql\rtlch\af5\afs24\lang255\ltrch\dbch\af5\langfe255\hich\fs21\lang1033\loch\fs21\lang1033
>>>> \par }_______________________________________________
>>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>>> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list