[Peace-discuss] debate in Iran about prospects of anti-Iran Trump-Russia deal
Robert Naiman
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
Fri Jul 13 17:41:54 UTC 2018
Here's our alert calling on Nancy Pelosi to renounce her ties to Trump's
"regime change" policies in Iran - in particular, to renounce her support
of the MEK terrorist cult:
Nancy Pelosi: Renounce Ties to Trump’s “Regime Change” Policies in Iran
https://www.change.org/p/nancypelosi-renounce-your-ties-to-trump-s-regime-change-policies-in-iran
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
(202) 448-2898 x1
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Mildred O'brien via Peace-discuss <
peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>
> While you guys are settling the dust on domestic politics, Secy. State
> Pompous is out defending us from threats of "Iranian terrorist plots,"
> warning Teheran that its actions have "a real high cost" and urging our
> Arab allies (UAE and Saudi Arabia) to "turn the economic screws" on Teheran
> by starving it of oil revenue and applying further sanctions after Trump's
> withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear agreement. He claimed that Iran is
> using diplomatic compounds in Europe and elsewhere as cover to plot
> terrorist attacks (like the CIA has done for years all over the world?)!
> Iran denies the allegations against its diplomats as an attempt to damage
> its relations with the European Union. \\
>
> Midge O'Brien
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.
> net>
> To: Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
> Cc: Peace-discuss List <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Sent: Fri, Jul 13, 2018 10:29 am
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] debate in Iran about prospects of anti-Iran
> Trump-Russia deal
>
> Maybe we should concentrate on the people we’re killing - at home and
> abroad - rather than the politicians you want to get into office. We should
> rescue the former, not the latter.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 13, 2018, at 9:55 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
> wrote:
>
> "The reversal of Roe v. Wade might lead us to do what we should for
> pregnant people - universal health care, child allowances, free education,
> housing, a universal basic income."
>
> It might do that. It might also cause pigs to fly.
>
> This is like saying that we should ban Salvadorans and Guatemalans from
> fleeing to the U.S. so they will go back home and foment revolutions that
> will remove the conditions that are causing them to flee. It's a brutal
> logic, that if applied is certain to increase brutality in the short run,
> with a very dim prospect of leading to less brutality in the long run. Much
> more likely, such logic will merely serve as a fig leaf for increased
> brutality.
>
> So far, increased restrictions on abortion in Republican states have not
> led to such things. And that's what we're talking about. Abortion will
> never be illegal in New York or California. The overturn of Roe v.
> Wade might well lead to criminalizing abortion in the most reactionary
> states, the states least likely to enact "universal health care, child
> allowances, free education, housing, a universal basic income."
>
> But at least we're having an honest conversation now. This is why you want
> Republican rule. You want to overturn Roe v. Wade and criminalize abortion.
> It's your democratic right to want these things. But you should be honest
> about what your true motivations are, rather than trying to trick people
> into thinking that your motivation for supporting Republican rule has
> something to do with peace.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> (202) 448-2898 x1
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 6:48 AM, Estabrook, Carl G via Peace-discuss <
> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>
> The reversal of Roe v. Wade might lead us to do what we should for
> pregnant people - universal health care, child allowances, free education,
> housing, a universal basic income. It would cost less than the military to
> protect human lives rather than end them.
>
> Abortion obviously ends a human life. Many of us summarize our political
> views as, “I'm basically against anything that ends human lives or destroys
> the planet we live on.”
>
> Most of my friends who have had abortions - or seriously considered it -
> did so for economic reasons - even privileged people. Those of us who have
> children know that it is of course a disruption - even adoption.
>
> Social and economic disruptions should be overcome, if we’re against
> things that end human lives, but we’re in the grip of a capitalist society
> that exploits human lives for the profit of the few.
>
> Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out that Roe was decided
> for economic and eugenic reasons: “Frankly,” she said in July 2009, “I had
> thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about
> population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want
> to have too many of.”
>
> Those of us who oppose war and exploitation that end human lives should
> work against economic and social circumstances that convince people that
> they must do so as well. --CGE
> ------------------------------
> *From:* naiman.uiuc at gmail.com [naiman.uiuc at gmail.com] on behalf of Robert
> Naiman [naiman at justforeignpolicy.org]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 13, 2018 3:10 AM
> *To:* Estabrook, Carl G
> *Cc:* ewj at pigs.ag; C G Estabrook; Peace-discuss List
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] debate in Iran about prospects of
> anti-Iran Trump-Russia deal
>
> I don't believe that "abortion is murder," the way you guys do. And I
> don't think that abortion should be criminalized, the way that you guys
> apparently do.
>
> But I'm not in favor of there being more abortions. I'd rather see better
> availability of, awareness of, and use of contraception.
>
> Sweden has more liberal abortion laws than the U.S. and fewer abortions
> per capita. They also have better sex education, better availability of,
> awareness of, and use of contraception.
>
> Just because you are against criminalizing something, doesn't mean you are
> in favor of there being more of the thing. Just because you are against
> something, doesn't mean you have to support laws to criminalize it.
>
> I support decriminalizing the use of marijuana. That doesn't mean that I
> favor greater use of marijuana. I don't. I have no problem with social
> measures to discourage the use of marijuana per se. I am against
> criminalization.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> (202) 448-2898 x1
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:36 PM, Estabrook, Carl G via Peace-discuss <
> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>
> Only if he's consistent.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Peace-discuss [peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] on behalf
> of e. wayne johnson via Peace-discuss [peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net]
> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 8:17 PM
> To: Robert Naiman; C G Estabrook
> Cc: Peace-discuss List
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] debate in Iran about prospects of
> anti-Iran Trump-Russia deal
>
> Bob, you are awash with quotables these days -
> > "The point is to save the lives of innocent human beings. Peace people
> > are supposed to care about that."
>
> (Bob waxes pro-life.)
>
> > -------Original Message-------
> > From: Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> >
> > To: C G Estabrook <cgestabrook at gmail.com>
> > Cc: Peace-discuss List <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] debate in Iran about prospects of
> anti-Iran Trump-Russia deal
> > Sent: Jul 13 '18 07:31
> >
> > The point of the enterprise isn't to make anyone like the United
> > States. More people can hate the United States, it's no skin off my
> > nose.
> >
> > The point is to save the lives of innocent human beings. Peace people
> > are supposed to care about that.
> >
> > Robert Naiman
> > Policy Director
> > Just Foreign Policy
> > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> >
> > (202) 448-2898 x1
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:47 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss
> > <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I’lll believe it when I see it - or when the USG reverses its
> > > war-making and -mongering.
> > >
> > > Anything up to that is posturing and propaganda. “The US seeks
> > > peace, but, unfortunately…"
> > >
> > > On Jul 12, 2018, at 4:42 PM, Robert Naiman
> > > <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Soon I expect an initiative from the Congressional Progressive
> > > Caucus to try to end the Saudi war in Yemen, invoking the War Powers
> > > Resolution to try to force a House floor vote on the
> > > unconstitutional and unauthorized war.
> > >
> > > Then the key question will be: whether the House leadership can be
> > > forced to allow a vote.
> > >
> > > The battle will be Democrat against Democrat, and Republican against
> > > Republican. It will be Progressive Caucus and Liberty Caucus against
> > > the House Republican leadership and whichever Democrats collaborate
> > > with the House Republican leadership.
> > >
> > > Here's a foreshadow from Adam Smith:
> > >
> > > https://twitter.com/HASCDemocrats/status/1017477541031014401
> > >
> > > HOUSE ARMED SERVICESVerified account @HASCDemocrats
> > >
> > > FollowFollow @HASCDemocrats
> > >
> > > More
> > >
> > > . at RepAdamSmith: There is a terrible humanitarian crisis occurring. I
> > > am working with @RepRoKhanna on a bill to stop us from blindly
> > > supporting Saudi Arabia’s actions in #Yemen.
> > >
> > > 1:35 PM - 12 Jul 2018
> > >
> > > You can encourage support of this effort here:
> > >
> > > 34 Reps. Threatened War Powers to Stop Hodeida Assault. Press Them
> > > to Follow Through
> > >
> > >
> > https://www.change.org/p/34-reps-threatened-war-powers-to-st
> op-hodeida-assault-press-them-to-follow-through
> > >
> > > Robert Naiman
> > > Policy Director
> > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > >
> > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 5:24 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss
> > > <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > When, in our lifetimes, have the USG - and the Democrat party - not
> > > wanted to commit a horrible crime?
> > >
> > > Identifying nice Democrats has not been a way to meliorate those
> > > crimes. It’s rather a mode of collaboration.
> > >
> > > On Jul 12, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss
> > > <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Are you kidding me? Of course not. Who claimed that it was?
> > >
> > > It's argument that if two groups of people are fighting, and one
> > > side wants to commit a horrible crime, and the other side doesn't,
> > > you should support the side that doesn't want to commit the horrible
> > > crime. You don't have to marry them. You just have to help them win,
> > > to the extent that you are able.
> > >
> > > Robert Naiman
> > > Policy Director
> > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > >
> > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss
> > > <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Is that a reason to support Israel’s killing now?
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > On Jul 12, 2018, at 3:09 PM, Robert Naiman
> > > <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > When I was in high school, I read an interview with a Russian Jew
> > > who had lived through the Russian Civil War. He was asked why so
> > > many Russian Jews had supported the Communists. He said: "There were
> > > two groups of people with guns. One group wanted to kill Jews. The
> > > other didn't. It wasn't hard to choose sides."
> > >
> > > Robert Naiman
> > > Policy Director
> > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > >
> > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Estabrook, Carl G via Peace-discuss
> > > <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > There were people in the American government that argued that
> > > attacking Iraq in 2003 was not the best way to control the Mideast.
> > > We could oppose the attack without supporting them or their vicious
> > > politics.
> > >
> > > -------------------------
> > >
> > > FROM: Peace-discuss [peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] on
> > > behalf of Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss
> > > [peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net]
> > > SENT: Thursday, July 12, 2018 2:32 PM
> > > TO: C G Estabrook
> > > CC: Peace-discuss List
> > > SUBJECT: Re: [Peace-discuss] debate in Iran about prospects of
> > > anti-Iran Trump-Russia deal
> > >
> > > You're now making the point that I was making from the beginning.
> > > Anybody who expects that Russia will take its interests as they
> > > perceive them into account less than other countries do is likely to
> > > be disappointed. Accepting this reality doesn't require being
> > > particularly cynical about the motivations of the Russian
> > > government. It just means accepting that the Russian government is
> > > like other governments.
> > >
> > > This doesn't mean that one has to accept a "vulgar Marxist" view
> > > that what governments will do is always reducible to or
> > > understandable by reference to crude self-interest. Competing
> > > factions articulate different arguments for national self-interest,
> > > and these arguments can have very different moral consequences, and
> > > some of the people supporting the arguments care about the moral
> > > consequences.
> > >
> > > So, for example, right now there are people in Washington who are
> > > arguing that continuing to support the Saudi-UAE assault on Yemen is
> > > not in the interest of the U.S., and the U.S. should instead
> > > pressure Saudi-UAE to stop the assault on Hodeida and agree to the
> > > UN peace deal. People who care about moral consequences want that
> > > argument to win, even if they themselves would be happy to see the
> > > U.S. empire crash and burn.
> > >
> > > Robert Naiman
> > > Policy Director
> > > Just Foreign Policy
> > > www.justforeignpolicy.org
> > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> > >
> > > (202) 448-2898 x1
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 3:12 PM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss
> > > <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Wouldn’t we be shocked if someone said, “Americans always lean
> > > toward the side that serves their interests”?
> > >
> > > In our case the interests are those of dominant social groups in
> > > this country - and in an age of neoliberalism, run counter to those
> > > of the majority, here and abroad.
> > >
> > > On Jul 12, 2018, at 10:52 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss
> > > <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Russians always lean toward the side that serves their
> > > interests.”
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> > -------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________ 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/20180713/b6bfe2c4/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list