> Nathan Newman wrote:
>
>> On the other hand, I have great confidence in our ability to challenge the
>> current war fever, as I wrote. And great confidence in the current new
>> generation of activists to try new better tactics that actually promote
>> positive alternatives, rather than just a "no" strategy.
>
> The first task, it seems to me, for a peace movement right now would
> be to stop the U.S. from doing anything horridly crazy. I don't think
> you need to come up with an alternative; for the moment, "no" is
> urgently ok. Time is pretty short, from the sound of some of the
> rhetoric. Over the longer term, I agree that just saying "no" isn't
> enough, but that's an issue for the longer term.
>
> Doug
How does the peace movement answer the point that "we have to do something" or that the US needs to prevent more terrorism? Not my questions of course, but just curious.
Jacob Segal