I disagree with this. If there was something productive that the list could do about the problem, no doubt something would be done to produce some compromises and action. My suspicion is that this is one of those theatrical performances that really have to do with people being irritated with each other.
As for your second argument, I feel that radicals need to get over this kind of manicheanism and accept that the people they are ostensibly talking to can accept complex and contradictory view of reality (aka despite the fact that the Iranian government is problematic and does some fucked up things, its still a thousand times more legitimate than any U.S. intervention.)
robert wood
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
> wrobert at uci.edu wrote:
>
>> I guess, that for myself, the irritation hasn't come from the
>> quantity of the posts so much as the repetitive nature of the
>> argument.
>
> It's repetitive because it's a really important, general, recurring
> problem.
>
> If I wanted to be ungenerous I would be tempted to say that the problem
> is that people would rather be right than on the right side. The crazy
> thing is that the mullahs, though they are not right, *are* on the right
> side.
>
> Bein' from Kentucky mahself -- home of the Hatfields and McCoys -- I have
> no problem at all with the idea that the enemy of my enemy is, at least
> pro tempore, my friend.
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>