[Peace-discuss] Congress: no $$ for war without debate & vote

Tue Nov 18 11:50:34 EST 2014

Dear Karen,

You rationalize ignoring Congress on the grounds that Congress "does not
represent the people." But according to public opinion polls, the American
public supports airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. If Congress
supports airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, then according to these
opinion polls, Congress IS representing the people.

If you look around, you will see that people who have a possibility of
achieving something concrete in the political system on other issues take
objective reality as a starting point. It's a symptom of weakness that the
peace movement in the United States doesn't have strong institutions to try
to defend its interests in the political system, as other reform interests
do. In this vacuum, the ideological ultra-left has more sway. I suspect, in
fact, that the ultra-left has a tendency to cotton to anti-war issues
precisely because it's an arena where ultra-left, anti-reform voices
perceive that they can have more sway. In the labor movement, in the
environmental movement, in the women's rights movement, ultra-left voices
are a fly on an elephant. One can easily ignore them, it's obvious that
they have little hope of significant impact. But in the anti-war movement,
there is no elephant. In this context, a culture has developed of more
indulgence of ultra-left voices, even though they have no more prospect of
accomplishing anything concrete in this arena than they do in any other
arena. These ultra-left voices have a tendency to try to gain a hearing for
themselves by attacking reform efforts, rather than by organizing their own
efforts.

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
(202) 448-2898 x1

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Karen Aram <karenaram at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Robert, we at AWARE have held monthly demonstrations against war for a
> long time, including many in addition to the regular monthly ones. We
> also have a table at the market almost every other week throughout the year
> disseminating anti-war literature, and on the AWARE tv program we promote
> contacting our government leaders in respect to "war". I have only been
> involved with AWARE for a year and half, but others have been active for
> years, and perhaps could better address your question.
> To be clear, I support, sign and circulate most of your petitions, but
> though it may appear petti to denigrate this particular one, it does in
> essence reflect the divide between the Left in America. That is, the sense
> that Congress does not represent the people, but rather the lobbyists
> representing the 1%. Yes Obama set a precedent last year by going to
> Congress for funding, but its not just about the funding. The debate tends
> to be when and how to wage war, how to finance it, not whether we should
> have it.
> Last year Congress successfully refused strikes on Syria, out of mere
> opposition to Obama, I congratulate you on your successful efforts at the
> time, but this year they have a "perfect villain", to rally behind in spite
> of their opposition to the President.
> The issue should be "no war" period. Not about funding it, there are
> always ways around funding.
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 09:03:59 -0600
> To: karenaram at hotmail.com
> CC: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; cge at shout.net; sf-core at yahoogroups.com
>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Congress: no $$ for war without debate & vote
> From: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>
> I look forward to receiving invitations on this list to future public
> activities in Champaign-Urbana on the war attempting to engage Congress,
> organized by Carl and Karen.
>
> So far, I see nothing going on. Is there a lot of activity going on in C-U
> that I don't know about? Why aren't invitations to these wonderful
> activities being posted on this list?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> (202) 448-2898 x1
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Karen Aram <karenaram at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I  agree with Carl, while  I understand how one might feel that going to
> war without congressional approval is wrong, and we should request
> congressional approval as a matter of process, in hopes that funding war
> will be rejected, nonetheless I agree that the "big picture" requires we
> insist on no war rather than permission or funding for war.
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:52:11 -0600
> To: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> CC: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; sf-core at yahoogroups.com;
> occupy.cu at gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Congress: no $$ for war without debate & vote
> From: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>
>
> We should urge our representative and senators to oppose any funding for
> war, period.
>
> A Congressional "authorization for the use of force" cannot make mass
> murder legal under international law.
>
> America's criminal war-making (and provocations of Russia and China) is in
> aid of the economic advantage of the American one percent - via their
> control of the Eurasian economy - and monstrously dangerous to the rest of
> the world, including Americans, who pay for it.
>
> We should instead call upon the Congress to institute impeachment
> proceedings against the war-makers in the US government, starting with the
> President.
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2014, at 2:30 PM, Robert Naiman <noreply at list.moveon.org>
> wrote:
>
> Dear C. G. Estabrook,
>
> The Pentagon has requested $5 billion in new funding for the new war in
> Iraq and Syria. *But Congress has not yet debated and voted on an
> authorization for the use of military force* [AUMF] [1], and *budget
> watchdog groups say the Pentagon can easily find the money in the massive
> budgets it already has*. [2]
>
> *Urge your Representative and Senators to oppose* any new funding for war
> in Iraq and Syria until Congress has debated and voted on an authorization
> for the use of force and the Pentagon has explained why it needs more money
> on top of the massive budgets it already has, *by signing our petition at
> MoveOn*.
>
> *http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/no-war-money-without-debate*
> <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/no-war-money-without-debate>
>
> I explained why the idea of Congress giving the Pentagon new tax dollars
> for the war before Congress debates and votes on an AUMF is outrageous six
> ways from Sunday in a piece at Truthout. *You can read and share that
> here:*
>
>
> *http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/27478-5-billion-for-iraq-syria-war-three-reasons-to-oppose*
> <http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/27478-5-billion-for-iraq-syria-war-three-reasons-to-oppose>
>
> Here is the text of our petition at MoveOn:
>
> "Members of Congress should oppose any new funding for war in Iraq and
> Syria until Congress has debated and voted on an Authorization for the Use
> of Military Force [AUMF] and the Pentagon has explained why it needs more
> money on top of the massive budgets it already has."
>
> *Urge your Representative and Senators to stand up for transparency and
> accountability by signing and sharing our petition:*
>
> *http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/no-war-money-without-debate*
> <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/no-war-money-without-debate>
>
> Thanks for all you do to help end, limit, and constrain war using
> democracy and the rule of law,
>
> Robert Naiman
> Just Foreign Policy
>
> References:
> 1. “Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine: We're in ISIS war 'without legal
> authority,'” Laura Koran and Ashley Killough, CNN, November 12, 2014,
> http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/12/politics/tim-kaine-isis/index.html
> 2. “The Pentagon's Budget Bamboozle: Lawmakers should look very closely at
> the latest Pentagon funding request,” Ryan Alexander, Taxpayers for Common
> Sense, U.S. News & World Report, Nov. 12, 2014,
> http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2014/11/12/congress-should-look-closely-at-pentagon-overseas-funding-requests
>
> ------------------------------
>
> This message was sent to C. G. Estabrook by Robert Naiman through MoveOn's
> public petition website. MoveOn Political Action licensed and paid for this
> service, but does not endorse contents of this message. To unsubscribe or
> report this email as inappropriate, click here:
> http://petitions.moveon.org/unsub.html?i=26332-2656067-aTBFi0
> *Want to make a donation?* MoveOn is entirely funded by our 8 million
> members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny
> staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
> <https://civic.moveon.org/donatec4/creditcard.html?cpn_id=687>
> [image: Web Bug from http://petitions.moveon.org/o?i=26332-2656067-aTBFi0] [image:
> Web Bug from
> http://list.moveon.org/wf/open?upn=e1-2F-2FEAR3sQFfdoSEDub2TS80s1kPnZTIE4eTkmcKsntUL-2BuYM0l-2F7viSkwd7CopMdM6kuQhNvWuhkcimy-2F741YMbVHBeS3UoNvO5XzTuWFsSRuX9BqfE0bNGWQFUoHncOrRGuarC-2F8S7noh8bh5LKtWQYaKq0081GcQ7skzrM32KgEt7G6Bs-2Bzd06Sarqac5Pocha7rFZBOGkI5FoKNbi0aoU4Ew3psebTLsqf-2B5tBQtQlyDUi3VWevUv9s6yW-2Bg]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20141118/a0ff18ca/attachment-0001.html>