[Peace-discuss] Let's not fight between Bernie supporters and Tulsi supporters

Wed Mar 20 10:24:01 UTC 2019

Let's not forget that Snarl supported Trump. The blood of Yemeni children
is on Snarl's hands.

===

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

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 5:19 AM Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
wrote:

>
> Look up the estimates for how many civilians have been killed in U.S.
> drone strikes in all theaters since 2001.
>
> Then look up the numbers for the number of children who have starved to
> death in Yemen alone as a result of the U.S.-Saudi war and blockade since
> 2015.
>
> Come back and report when you've finished your homework.
>
> ===
>
> Robert Reuel Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> (202) 448-2898 x1
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 5:16 AM Robert Naiman <
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> But there is no reason to do that, unless you don't understand anything
>> about how life on Planet Earth works, and you don't care to learn, because
>> you actually don't care about the consequences of your actions.
>>
>> ===
>>
>> Robert Reuel Naiman
>> Policy Director
>> Just Foreign Policy
>> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>> (202) 448-2898 x1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 5:11 AM C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <
>> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>>
>>> “Practical’ as this advice is, re-read it, imagining oneself at the
>>> appropriate time and place - and substituting 'concentration camps’ for
>>> ‘drone strikes.’
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Mar 20, 2019, at 3:24 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <
>>> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I see no prospect of prohibiting the U.S. from using drones as weapons
>>> per se. There is no meaningful support for this idea anywhere in the United
>>> States, neither in Washington, nor in public opinion. Partly because it's
>>> fundamentally an irrational idea - there's nothing intrinsically worse
>>> about using a drone as a weapon than a cruise missile strike - in fact, the
>>> contrary is true, strike for strike, the cruise missile is worse. And
>>> there's no call to ban cruise missiles. So I'm not particularly scandalized
>>> by these words from Tulsi and Bernie - they're running for President of the
>>> United States, not student council at a Quaker college. There are things we
>>> could do to protect civilians from U.S. drone strikes, like ending the wars
>>> that the drone strikes are part of, but banning drones is not one of them
>>> in any future we can see. If I were advising Tulsi and Bernie - and in a
>>> way, I am, I'm talking to people who talk to them - I would not advise them
>>> to call for getting rid of drones. I would advise them to call for getting
>>> rid of wars that the drones are part of. The way to protect civilians from
>>> U.S. drone strikes in Afghanistan and Syria is to get the U.S. the hell out
>>> of Afghanistan and Syria.
>>> >
>>> > We've made the progress we have on ending unconstitutional U.S.
>>> participation in the Saudi war in Yemen by distinguishing it from the war
>>> against Al Qaeda. If we hadn't done that, we wouldn't have gotten anywhere.
>>> >
>>> > If we want to end any wars around here anytime soon, it seems likely
>>> that we will have to speak specifically to the wars. We need to talk about
>>> ending the Saudi war in Yemen, we need to talk about ending the war in
>>> Afghanistan, we need to talk about ending the war in Syria. We need to talk
>>> about preventing a military attack on Venezuela. We need to stop the U.S.
>>> from arming Ukraine. We need to cut off U.S. military and police aid to the
>>> government of Honduras. We need to be specific to the things that the U.S.
>>> is doing, in the places that the U.S. is doing them.
>>> >
>>> > Think about Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi is going to AIPAC. How far do
>>> you think we're going to get, trying to ban drones, when Nancy Pelosi is
>>> going to AIPAC? Absolutely nowhere.
>>> >
>>> > But ending U.S. participation in the Saudi regime's wars in the Middle
>>> East - that's something we could conceivably do. That's something we might
>>> even be able to force Nancy Pelosi to support. We did it in the case of the
>>> Saudi war in Yemen. We forced Nancy Pelosi to come out against it. It
>>> wasn't easy. It was hard. Much, much harder than it should have been. But
>>> we did it. That proves it's possible. Maybe, if we put more pressure on
>>> Nancy Pelosi, we could shake some more war-ending apples loose from the
>>> tree.
>>> >
>>> > ===
>>> >
>>> > Robert Reuel Naiman
>>> > Policy Director
>>> > Just Foreign Policy
>>> > www.justforeignpolicy.org
>>> > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>>> > (202) 448-2898 x1
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 8:38 PM J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss <
>>> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>>> > Robert Naiman wrote:
>>> >> "Brothers and sisters, we must not fight each other between the Bernie
>>> >> supporters and the Tulsi supporters. We must unite against the common
>>> >> enemy: the Clinton-Pelosi-Harris-Booker supporters."
>>> >
>>> > Sen. Sanders in his "Meet the Press" interview from 2016 --
>>> >
>>> https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/bernie-sanders-would-use-drones-to-fight-terror-542522435844
>>> >
>>> >> Chuck Todd: What does counterterrorism look like in a Sanders
>>> >> administration? Drones? Special forces? Or what does it look like?
>>> >>
>>> >> Bernie Sanders: All of that and more.
>>> >>
>>> >> Chuck Todd: You're okay with the drone, using drones--
>>> >>
>>> >> Bernie Sanders: Look, drone is a weapon. When it works badly, it is
>>> >> terrible and it is counterproductive. When you blow up a facility or a
>>> >> building which kills women and children, you know what? Not only
>>> doesn't
>>> >> do us any -- it's terrible.
>>> >>
>>> >> Chuck Todd: But you're comfortable with the idea of using drones if
>>> you
>>> >> think you've isolated an important terrorist?
>>> >>
>>> >> Bernie Sanders: Yes.
>>> >>
>>> >> Chuck Todd: So that continues?
>>> >>
>>> >> Bernie Sanders: Yes.
>>> >
>>> > Rep. Gabbard in her "Intercept" interview from 2018 --
>>> > https://theintercept.com/2018/01/17/intercepted-podcast-white-mirror/
>>> >
>>> >> Jeremy Scahill: I’m wondering what your position, I know that in the
>>> >> past you have said that you favor a small footprint approach with
>>> >> strike forces and limited use of weaponized drones. Is that still your
>>> >> position that you think that’s the — to the extent that you believe
>>> the
>>> >> U.S. military should be used around the world for counterterrorism, is
>>> >> that still your position?
>>> >>
>>> >> Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Well, when we’re dealing with the unconventional
>>> >> threat of terrorist groups like ISIS, al Qaeda and some of these
>>> other
>>> >> groups that are affiliated with them, we should not be using
>>> basically
>>> >> what has been and continues to be the current policy of these mass
>>> >> mobilization of troops, these long occupations and trillions of
>>> dollars
>>> >> going in, really abusing the Authorization to Use Military Force and
>>> >> taking action that expands far beyond the legal limitations of those
>>> >> current AUMFs.
>>> >>
>>> >> So, with these terrorist cells, for example, yes, I do still believe
>>> >> that the right approach to take is these quick strike forces,
>>> surgical
>>> >> strikes, in and out, very quickly, no long-term deployment, no
>>> >> long-term occupation to be able to get rid of the threat that exists
>>> and
>>> >> then get out and the very limited use of drones in those situations
>>> >> where our military is not able to get in without creating an
>>> >> unacceptable level of risk, and where you can make sure that you’re
>>> not
>>> >> causing, you know, a large amount of civilian casualties.
>>> > So it appears that Gabbard and Sanders are united against one common
>>> enemy:
>>> > anyone who objects to continuing the drone war.
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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/20190320/836e1747/attachment-0001.html>