Michael Pollak wrote:
>
>
> Bloodless war in itself, were it possible, would be is a good thing.
> Whether we get a juster order or a worse one out of this war will not be a
> function of how bloodless it is. It will be a function of whether Bush
> and his gang of madmen are voted out office in two years, which I think is
> fully possible.
Perhaps we will get someone as wonderful as Jimmy Carter, who encouraged the massacres in East Timor, more or less ordered the murder of Bishop Romano, started the Afghanistan War.
Oh sure, voting Bush out of office will do wonders. With a Democrat in office managing the occupation of Iraq (with all the atrocities that always accompany such an occupation) everyone will want to give the new man a chance and he will be able to supervise the murder of several nations and several million people without a real movement against it.
How long will this superstition of a "new" policy in the white house go on destroying chances to build a real progressive movement in this country.
Carrol