Ian Murray wrote:
>
> [ de-re-territorialization anyone? ]
>
> If we are going to intervene, there will have to be rules
> Fetishising sovereignty is a dictators' charter, but Martini
> interventionism would be worse
>
Did you extract this passage, or was it extracted in the original?
Nothing good will _ever_ come from any action of the U.S. government outside its own borders. There is neither empirical nor theoretical evidence for any hope to the contrary. (I'm _not_ saying anything about its internal actions.)
This has important tactical and strategic implications. Those who recognize the validity of this proposition must find ways to introduce a change of attitude through large sections of the current anti-war movement. The majority of those now involved in that movement think they are struggling against _Bush's_ War, not the U.S. War. When the let-up comes (for whatever reason) we must be left with a large core who are prepared to continue working between crises to build for the next one. And to start the next one at a higher level.
The framework does not exist locally for me to move in that direction at this time. And the necessary thinking will have to come from people who are testing their thinking in practice.
Carrol