[lbo-talk] Is the Anti-War movement in decline?

Doug Henwood dhenwood at panix.com
Wed Nov 14 06:03:35 PST 2007


On Nov 14, 2007, at 7:57 AM, Lenin's Tomb wrote:


> Cockburn seems to suggest that the failure to identify with
> insurgents in
> Iraq signifies the hegemony of Democratic discourse and the
> acceptance of
> the logic of the war on terror - thus causing many of the problems
> faced by
> the antiwar movement. However, I really don't think that's right.

No it's not. AC's analyses are sometimes blinded by his hatred of liberals, which probably has something to do with his internal spat with his Nation colleagues. But while it's easy to say that Iraqis are doing the right thing by fighting the invader (well easy for me - I doubt Bill O'Reilly would agree), it's hard to cheer the resistance as a positive force the way it was in the cases of the NLF and the Sandinistas. The resistance itself doesn't have much of a vision for Iraq should they succeed in driving the U.S. out - in part because it is such a varied group.

By the way, the evolving pundit line in the U.S. is that the Reps are gaining momentum on the war. E.g.:

<http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6867.html>


> GOP finds solid ground on Iraq war
> By: John Bresnahan and Martin Kady II
> Nov 13, 2007 08:51 PM EST
>
> For the first time since losing control of Congress in 2006,
> Republicans are back on offense in the political struggle over the
> Iraq war, as Democratic plans to force a change in strategy by
> President Bush through peeling away his GOP support continue to
> yield few results.
>
> Republicans are increasingly buoyed by perceived divisions among
> Democrats, seeming signs of progress on the ground in Iraq and the
> fact that the first brigade of U.S. troops started coming home
> Tuesday.
>
> Democrats insist they are still united on ending the war.
>
> Public opinion polls also overwhelmingly favor Democrats who back a
> quick end to the conflict, and on Tuesday, Democratic leaders
> unveiled a report showing that the Iraq campaign will cost far more
> — as much as $3.5 trillion — if the United States stays engaged in
> Iraq for another decade.
>
> But after a summer of bitter partisan battles over the war,
> Democrats are going into an Iraq funding battle this week with
> little hope of dividing Bush and Republicans on Capitol Hill, and
> they privately seem resigned that the White House will continue to
> have its way on funding the long-running conflict.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list