[Peace-discuss] What needs to be said…

[Morton K. Brussel]

…when a war based on lies is opposed because too many Americans are  
dying, the implication is that it can be made right by reducing the  
American death toll.

When a war that flagrantly violated international law is opposed  
because it was badly managed, the implication is that better  
management could make for an acceptable war.

When the number of occupying troops is condemned as insufficient for  
the occupying task at hand, the White House and Pentagon may figure  
out how to make shrewder use of U.S. air power -- in combination with  
private mercenaries and Iraqis who are desperate enough for jobs that  
they're willing to point guns at the occupiers' enemies.


…The best way to avoid becoming disillusioned is to not have  
illusions in the first place. There's little reason to believe that  
Obama is inclined to break away from the routine militarism of U.S.  
foreign policy. But it's plausible that grassroots pressure could  
pull him in a better direction on a range of issues. He seems to be  
appreciably less stuck in cement than the other candidates who still  
have a chance to become president on January 20, 2009.

This is from Norman Solomon's sage reflections, at

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/78638/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080307/736732fd/attachment.html