> > The position held by many Iraqis, as far as people
> I trust report it,
> > is that the U.S. should be replaced pronto by some
> international
> > peacekeeping force THAT EXCLUDES THE U.S. There's
> considerable worry
> > that, the U.S. having destroyed the Iraqi state, a
> very bad kind of
> > anarchy might prevail otherwise.
>
> But that is daydreaming. A movement demand for such
> an international
> force is _exactly_ the same as a movement demand
> that the U.S. stay
> there but be nicer and repair the damage it has
> done.
I agree here with Carroll. It was an international force, i.e., the UN, not the United States that enacted a genocidal embargo program in Iraq, killing upwards of 1.5 million people. Advocating an international force now would be no different from Bush imploring people not to "forget Poland." There is nothing unclear or impractical about Carroll's demand for the US to withdraw immediately and unconditionally from Iraq. This could only feasibly be done with the cooperation of domestic US worker and domestic/international military rank and file. Only those directly involved in the production of the machinery and execution of further genocide in Iraq, with the support of mass appeal among US citizens, can stop it. -- adx
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo