Just the statement that North Korea has nothing to do with current discussion of Iraq is a political position, given that many who criticize the war on Iraq note the hypocrisy in ignoring the real nuclear threat from Stalinist North Korea.
Those who argue that it is irrelevent whether the WWP are defenders of Saddam Hussein's regime and defenders of North Korea's government are ignoring reality. The war on Iraq is not isolated from other issues. The WWP and ANSWER connects them to broader issues all the time. But when others connect it to North Korea and note the WWP's horrendous politics around that country, suddenly the only issue is Iraq.
As some people have noted, back during Vietnam, there were those who tried to build a broad-based but narrow movement around opposition to the Vietnam War, excluding almost every other issue possible to maximize unity.
But that's not the WWP's strategy. They connect Afghanistan, Iraq, anti-racism in the US, the Palestinian cause, Mumia and every cause they care about into one package. Having done so, they can't then say-- our critics are talking about something other than Iraq. Our critics are being divisive.
It's all ridiculous rhetoric. It evades the reality of the WWP's horrendous support for Chinese fascism and North Korean, well I'm not sure what to call it since Stalinism would be a compliment to that regime.
It's not "redbaiting", since both Chuck and I support coalitions like United for Peace and Justice that are loaded with "reds" in their leadership. It's like the defenders of Estrada saying that those attacking him are "racist." It demeans the term.
-- Nathan newman