[Peace-discuss] Ritter and Ellsberg: Forget Iraq! Anti-war mvt must unite to prevent US war against Iran

[n.dahlheim at mchsi.com]

I'd trust Ritter's instincts---he probably has a better perspective on Iraq and the Administration than 
anyone else.


----------------------  Original Message:  ---------------------
From:    Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com>
To:      "Morton K. Brussel" <brussel4 at insightbb.com>, peace-discuss at anti-war.net
Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ritter and Ellsberg: Forget Iraq! Anti-war mvt must unite to prevent US war against Iran
Date:    Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:08:35 +0000

> Scott Rittter has the answer for the anti-war movement, IMHO. Here's the end of 
> the article Mort just sent, along w/ Ritter's bio (always surprising to recall 
> what his background is)...plus links to both articles.
>    
>   Jenifer
>    
>   "The antiwar movement in America must make a strategic decision, and soon: 
> Contain the war in Iraq, and stop a war from breaking out in Iran.  The war in 
> Iraq can be contained simply by letting war be war.  There is no genuine good 
> news coming out of Iraq.  There won’t be as long as the United States is there.  
> As callous as it sounds, let the war establish the news cycle, and let the 
> reality of war serve to contain it.  The surge has failed.  Congress may not act 
> decisively to bring the troops home, but it is highly unlikely that Congress 
> will idly approve any massive expansion of an unpopular war that continues to 
> fail so publicly. 
>   
> Iran, however, is a different matter.  Congress has already provided legal 
> authority for the president to wage war in Iran through its existing war powers 
> authority (one resolution passed in 2001, the other in 2002).  Likewise, 
> Congress has allowed the Bush administration to forward deploy the 
> infrastructure of war deep into the Middle East and neighboring regions, all in 
> the name of the “global war on terror."  The startup costs for a military strike 
> against Iran would therefore be greatly diminished.  Sustaining such a conflict 
> is a different matter, but given current congressional reticence to stand up to 
> a war-time president, it is highly unlikely any meaningful action would be taken 
> to stop an Iranian war once the bombs start falling.  And we should never forget 
> that Iran has a vote in how this would end; once it is attacked, Iran will 
> respond in ways that are unpredictable, and as such set in motion a string of 
> cause-effect military actions with the United States and
>  others that spins any future conflict out of control. 
>   
> The highest priority for the antiwar movement in America today must be the 
> prevention of a war with Iran.  The strategic objectives should include getting 
> Congress to repeal the war-powers authorities currently on the books, thereby 
> forcing the president to seek new congressional approval for any new war.  
> Likewise, a concerted effort must be undertaken to counter the disinformation 
> being spread by the Bush administration and others about the nature of the 
> Iranian threat.  Every action undertaken by the antiwar movement must be 
> connected to one or both of these strategic objectives.  This is not the time 
> for one-off sophomoric newspaper advertisements, but rather for sustained action 
> focused on generating congressional hearings and public debate across the entire 
> spectrum of American society.  From the colleges and universities to the 
> churches and on to the public square of small-town America, public information 
> talks, presentations and panels must be held.  Communities
>  should flood local media outlets with requests for coverage and appeal to 
> regional media to run stories.  Mainstream media will follow.  Demonstrations, 
> if useful at all, must be focused events linked to an overall campaign designed 
> to facilitate a strategic objective.  
>   
> We all should remember the fall of 2002.  Many felt that there was no chance for 
> a war with Iraq, especially once U.N. inspectors made their return.  In March 
> 2003, everyone who thought so was proved wrong.  The fall of 2007 is no 
> different.  There is a sense of complacency when one speaks of the potential for 
> a war with Iran.  But time is not on the side of those who oppose conflict.  If 
> nothing is done to change the political situation inside America regarding Iran, 
> there is an all too real possibility for a war to break out in the spring of 
> 2008. 
>   Sadly, there really is no alternative for the antiwar movement: Put opposition 
> to the war in Iraq on the back burner and make preventing a war with Iran the 
> No. 1 priority, at least until the national election cycle kicks in during the 
> summer of 2008.  If a war with Iran hasn’t happened by then, it probably won’t.  
> And the national debate on Iraq won’t be engaged until that time, anyway.  A war 
> with Iran would make the current conflict in Iraq pale by comparison, and would 
> detrimentally impact the whole of America, not just certain demographics.  As 
> such, it is critical that we all put aside our ideological and political 
> differences and focus on the one issue which, if left unheeded, will have 
> devastating consequences for the immediate future of us all: Prevent a future 
> war with Iran." 
>   
> A former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served under Gen. H. Norman 
> Schwarzkopf during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Scott Ritter worked as a chief 
> inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq from 1991 until 
> 1998, helping lead the effort to disarm Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.  He 
> is the author of several books, including “Iraq Confidential” (2005, Nation 
> Books), “Target Iran” (2006, Nation Books) and “Waging Peace” (2007, Nation 
> Books).  “Target Iran,” with a new afterword by the author, has just been 
> released in paperback by Nation Books. 
> 
> 
> "Morton K. Brussel" <brussel4 at insightbb.com> wrote:    Scott Ritter's article...
> 
>   http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070927_ritter_stop_iran_war/
>   
> 
>   
> 
>   
> 
>           'A Coup Has Occurred'
>       by Daniel Ellsberg; consortiumnews.com; September 27, 2007
>   Editor’s Note: Daniel Ellsberg, the former Defense Department analyst who 
> leaked the secret Pentagon Papers history of the Vietnam War, offered insights 
> into the looming war with Iran and the loss of liberty in the United States at 
> an American University symposium on Sept. 20.
>    
>   Below is an edited transcript of Ellsberg’s speech:
>    
>   I think nothing has higher priority than averting an attack on Iran, which I 
> think will be accompanied by a further change in our way of governing here that 
> in effect will convert us into what I would call a police state.…
>   
> 
>   Another passionate plea…
>   
> 
>   http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=72&ItemID=13881
>   
> 
>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> 
> 
>        
> ---------------------------------
> Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel and 
lay it on us.> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss