Robert Naiman wrote: > Contrary to conventional wisdom, there are realistic and useful things > that Congress could do to downsize the drone strike policy:
I don't know who the conventional wiseguys are, but reforms can happen when there are debates within the ruling class. (The classic case was the ruling-class split over the Vietnam war.) Some of those reforms can actually benefit those outside of the ruling class, at least in the short run. That is, people who protest the US military/intelligence state can push policies away from those which favor some ruling class factions (e.g., the 2003 war against Iraq) and toward policies that favor other factions (e.g., increased aid to help with natural disasters). Of course, as actually implemented even the latter policies will favor those with the most political clout (as seen in aid for Haiti). A larger protest movement might actually push the ruling class to do foreign aid better or even make major concessions. The Obamen seem pretty wedded to drone attacks (likely because it's better than using troops) so I have a hard time getting how asking Congress to "get the CIA out of drone strikes; stop 'secondary strikes' and attacks on rescuers" etc. will have any effect. Who would replace the CIA, for example? the Pentagon? would the latter be better in some way? -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
