Is there anyone on LBO who still believes the anti-war movement should make any other demand than this?
The U.S. has lost. But it will continue to remain there for years, with conditions growing steadily worse. Any multi-national force or any U.S. force will be simply a guise under which the war continues as bloody as before.
Before the Anti-war movement can have any significant impact on u.s. policy it must grow well beyond the strength it had reached before it was destroyed by the desertion of its national leadership to the DP. Hence the agitational material we put out and the propaganda and analysis which we put behind that material must focus on what will be happening two or more years from now.
Nixon seriously considered extending the Vietnam war into China: disguise a small defeat by wrapping it in a larger conflict. Hence the fact that the U.S. is completely lacking in the military strength to defeat Iran (except by mass terror bombing, of course) is not a guarantee against an invasion of Iran. A growing anti-war movement _not_ muffled by delusions of U.N. intervention (or other such delusions), and demanding more and more shrilly the removal of all military forces, _might_ prevent an attack on Iran and it _might_ hasten withdrawal from Iraq.
Nothing else an anti-war movement might do or say will have any effect whatever.
Carrol