>>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.
Well, 'we' are complaining about something that many people have been euchred into supporting. That doesn't seem to me to be very smart -- we're telling people that they're fools for signing up. That's a hard message to hear. And easier message would be 'yes, action on behalf of oppressed people is sometimes a good thing...but that's not what's going on here because we've no intention of doing anything to Turkey on behalf of the Kurds, and the Kurds are at least as badly oppressed as the Albanians of Kosova. So the evidence says that oppressed Kosovari are just a convenient excuse for something more rotten. The slime are lying to us all.'
>> 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?
No, just the dictators. Were the US and NATO behaving in a disinterested way, then I'd've said 'yes'. Because like it or not, that's the reality today.
>
>> 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.
NATO as a tool is certainly a tool of *Capitalist* imperialism. NATO in itself (N. qua N.) is just a group of countries. Ideals and behaviors quite often don't match up, whether in humans or institutions. And as Alinsky pointed out, that fact can be used for progressive purposes.