>I think we would do better, and be more honest, to
>leave off complaining about the acts of NATO merely
>because they are NATO's acts, and switch instead to
>illuminating US and NATO hypocrisy. Hold them to the
>ideals they claim. When they point to the Kosovari as
>justification for bombing Beograd radio stations, then
>we should point to the Kurds and ask loudly and
>repeatedly 'where are the bombed radio stations in
>Istanbul?'.
Why should "we" ask that? No agency of the U.S. government as presently constituted should even think of bombing radio stations anywhere.
>Our criticism, it seems to me, should be directed at
>the slime in power, who have a disgusting habit of
>protecting slime in power elsewhere. Thatcher resp.
>Pinochet is an egregious example. The US and NATO
>should be focusing on turfing out Milosevic and his
>ilk, and replacing them.
Who are the US and NATO to do such? The benign dictators of the world?
>We should criticise them
>strongly for not doing that. And we leftists should
>be concentrating on turfing out those who believe in
>the exploitation of the many by the few. They are our
>natural enemies, not NATO qua NATO.
What is "NATO qua NATO" other than an institution of U.S. imperialism? I'm an old-fashioned guy, I still use words like that.
Doug