Anti-War Movements

Kelley kwalker2 at gte.net
Tue Oct 16 16:35:56 PDT 2001


At 06:06 PM 10/16/01 -0500, Carrol Cox wrote:
>The plural is important here.
>
>No anti-war movement ever has stopped a war in any of its early stages,
>nor will any anti-war movement _ever_ wucceed in that.

ahh piffle! isn't going to be the same kinda war, carrol. that's my point. it's a battle. the rest of the "war" will go underground. the ME is too damn unstable for them to keep it up and they just aren't that stupid.

you can't fight terrorism the conventional way. they picked on Afg because it was conventient. but once they "get ObL" then they'll have to get the rest of the network that they didn't already. But they won't be in Afg any more and the conservatives are already crying fowl abt going into Iraq, so not a chance. They can't fight conventional warfare after they kick butt in Afg. They'll looking like laughing stocks of the entire world if they start going after more countries that "harbor terrorists".

my scenario is bigger than yours, so there.

wanna take another whack at the Snit® Dick-Sling-o-Meter?

kelley



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list