Sunday, April 22, 2007

AIPAC and the Anti-War Movement

In Dissident Voice by Gabriel Ash - It is becoming clear, if it ever wasn’t, that the Democratic Congress does not have what it takes to end the war in Iraq, or to stop any escalation that the Bush administration might contemplate. Congress will not cut funding. Congress will not even expressly forbid Bush to attack Iran. All the major Democratic presidential hopefuls have taken mushy, watered down nominally anti-war positions, but essentially endorse the indefinite continuation of U.S. military presence in Iraq. Obama, Clinton and Edwards are even more hawkish on Iran than Bush is. If any of them gets elected in 2008, he or she is set to continue and possibly escalate the conflict.

If you’re anti-war, you are also anti pro-war.

If you find excuses to defend the legitimacy of effective pro-war lobbying, you are not a peace activist, you are a war enabler.

Warmongering is wrong. Period. Nobody should get away with it. Subverting democracy in the interest of war is not just wrong, it should be criminal. And nobody should get away with it.

It is as simple as that.

War Enablers Welch, Leahy & Sanders are not only full of it, but full of excuses. Ask them about AIPAC, the continued funding of the Iraqi occupation, war with Iran and you'll get some obfuscatory answers.

1 comment:

  1. AIPAC is just doing what they were
    designed to do: defend I$rael
    with American blood. They money
    they use to leverage Congressmen
    is their methodology. Sanders is
    even more compromised by backing
    militarism in the Middle East for
    his fellow Jews. We must hold
    our elected reps to the will of
    Americans, not every group showing
    up with political cash!


Thanks for visiting.

Please be considerate... no off-topic, racist, sexist or homophobic comments.

Comment moderation is on.

No anonymous comments will be accepted..