> >Not really. The point I'm trying to make is that Iraq is not some poor,
> >progressive state that would do wonders if only left alone by US
> >imperialism
>
> I don't remember. Has someone characterized Iraq in that way?
Well, you get that sense from parts of the "antiwar" movement -- that Washington alone is the embodiment of evil, and that Iraq is simply another imperial victim. Of course there're elements of truth here, and the war being revved up is the logical consequence of US Gulf policy that goes back to the 70s. But in some of the defenses of ANSWER and the RCP, or at least explanations for their involvement, many have cited the SWP and the Maoists organizing the early demos against the Vietnam war -- that small far-left groups have an honored history when it comes to this kind of thing. But defending Vietnam from imperial attack and defending Saddam from what's coming to him are, in my mind anyway, two completely different political and historical arguments involving different historical figures. This comparison to the Vietnam days is diversionary at best.
> Welcome back. The book going ok?
Thanks. As good as it can these days.
DP