Does Norman Podhoretz Hate America?
is an egregious affront to George Kennan to portray him simply and completely
as the man who invented the containment strategy vis-à-vis the Soviet
Union, then infer from that his posthumous support for the neocons' calls for
endless war against Islam. Kennan was firmly against the Vietnam War and appeared
before Sen. William Fulbright's Foreign Relations Committee to attack U.S. involvement
there. His antiwar testimony was considered so controversial that CBS refused
to cover it live prompting its president, Fred Friendly, to resign over that
decision. Though he argued against the dangers of precipitate withdrawal, Kennan
said that there is "...more respect to be won in the opinion of this world
by a resolute and courageous liquidation of unsound positions than by the most
stubborn pursuit of extravagant and unpromising objectives."
I think a fair
reading of history would have Kennan resolutely against the folly of Iraq and
the neocons' naive pursuit of complete U.S. dominance over all competitors,
through preemptive wars if and whenever necessary to consolidate that dominance.
In fact the neocons really wish to forever repudiate John Quincy Adams description
of the U.S. as a country that "...goes not abroad in search of monsters
to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She
is the champion and vindicator only of her own."
~ Peter Thom,
Against the War
some factors limiting the size of antiwar demonstrations are beyond ANSWER's
control, others – such as the hard left atmosphere of the protests and
the overemphasis on tangential, divisive issues – aren't. One byproduct
of ANSWER's strategy has been a splintering of the antiwar movement. There are
many groups organizing small protests, dispersing energy that should go into
generating the largest possible actions.
Last spring, the
organizers of ANSWER recognized that they were not getting sufficient numbers
at their protests, and changed strategy.
They issued an
open letter to other antiwar activists, inviting them to join a broader
coalition aimed at holding single issue demonstrations. The September 15th protest
is the first manifestation of that, but more time will be needed to see if this
strategy will work. Herding together the many disparate elements of the peace
movement is going to be challenging.
The next attempt
comes on October 27, when 10 regional demonstrations
are planned. I'm helping to organize one in
San Francisco and I hope that other individualist opponents of the war will
try to engage this coalition.
~ Marc Joffe,
Misses Cheney's Memo
is telling us it is about oil, but he is a smart guy, he knows it is not about
oil for American consumers. How can it be about oil, but not be about oil? Greenspan
is signaling an important tipping point, but he leaves it to the informed listener
to connect the dots.
Granted, oil production
and availability to consumers may be affected very little by who owns or controls
the resource in the ground. To turn oil wealth into income you have got to sell
and control determines who gets the contracts to extract, process, and ship.
It will even affect the terms. Will it be Russian, Chinese, French, or American
companies making the profit and what sort of royalties will they have to pay?
It can be about oil for Bush and his associates and a wide swath of businesses
tied to the fortunes of particular oil companies. Crony capitalism has long
been the norm in Central and South America and much of the Old World. And our
own history includes many episodes in which we caught a mild case of the infection,
usually associated with some trivial imperial adventure such as the Spanish-American
war, spearheaded by volunteer adventurers such as the Roughriders, and requiring
little effort or expense on the part of our citizenry as a whole. But now the
infection has captured both our government and our view of what is normal.
Greenspan is telling
us it is politically incorrect to notice that crony capitalism has become not
only acceptable, but mandatory. But the reality has lost its ability to deeply
offend, and the pretense is becoming a mere irritating inconvenience which he
is ready to shrug off.
for subsidizing the speculative, high risk adventures that benefit the few,
the few that have succeeded in making themselves matter. The statement "it
is about oil" is not a statement about a particular war or particular resource,
it is a statement about our way of life and who Greenspan has in mind when he
says "we" need to do something. It is about oil, and it is about much
more than oil.
~ Clint Greene
Not in Kansas
in the Army and stationed in Emerald City, Baghdad at the moment. I just want
to say that I've read Antiwar.com everyday since discovering it only a few months
Keep up the good
~ (Name withheld)