Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: > > >Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: > > > >>The anti-war/anti-occupation movement has been far bigger -- > >>perhaps the biggest in history, counting participants worldwide -- > >>under Bush than it was under Clinton. > > > >That's because the wars and threat of future wars were bigger. If > >Bush decided to invade Iran, the antiwar movement would probably > >grow further - is that what you're hoping for? > > > >Doug > > Far from making more wars on its own, Washington is now re-mapping > and down-sizing the empire, in Korea and Germany. > > Smaller and manageable interventions concurrent with the occupation > of Iraq -- e.g., Haiti -- have come with European support. > > Washington will not invade Iran or Syria -- unless Israeli > freelancing creates an "incident" that really goes out of control. > --
Kerry has really put himself out on a limb, virtually promising to widen the war without limit in order to "stay the course." I don't think the present administration has the nerve or the political muscle to do that. A DP president might. Emphasize _might_; in general I think leftists should simply ignore the presidency and go about our proper business of doing out best to build mass movements on whatever terrain the enemy creates for us. That is, the presidency, like the Rockies for Lewis and Clark, are just part of the terrain we have to deal with. Carrol
