Medea Benjamin (CommonDreams): Building Peace in a Time of Perpetual War

[Jack Rabbit]

From CommonDreams
Dated Monday December 13

Building Peace in a Time of Perpetual War
by Medea Benjamin

There are many good reasons to oppose the occupation of Iraq, from the mounting casualties to the bankrupting of our economy to the increased anti-American feelings it has engendered. But there is one really compelling reason to call for the withdrawal of our troops: the Iraqis want us to leave.

A survey of Iraqis sponsored by the U.S. Coalition Provisional Authority in May 2004 showed that most Iraqis say they would feel safer if U.S. forces left immediately. An overwhelming majority of 80 percent also said they have "no confidence" in either the U.S. civilian authorities or military forces. If we really believe in democracy, then we should listen to the desire of the majority of the Iraqi people.

Our demands as a peace movement should be for the U.S. government to make a commitment to withdraw our troops by the end of 2005 at the latest; pledge that we will not maintain permanent bases in Iraq; and commit to ending the war profiteering by U.S. companies so that Iraqis have the opportunity to rebuild their own country.

So how do we build a peace movement that can put forward these demands in an effective way? Here are some practical things we can do.

1. Make real the human cost of the war on both U.S. and Iraqi lives.
2. Support military families who are speaking out against the war, and soldiers who are speaking out and refusing to fight.
3. Pressure Congress to stop further funding, investigate war profiteering and cut Halliburton and other contractors from the government dole.
4. Strengthen local peace work and bring the cost of the war home. The anti-war coalition must reach out to broader sectors of the community, especially religious groups, labor, communities of color and students.
5. Build the global coalition February 15, 2003 was indeed an amazingly powerful day when "the world said no to war."
6. Support efforts to decrease our dependence on oil. While the U.S. invasion of Iraq was not solely about oil, it is certainly true that if broccoli were Iraqi's main export, we would not have invaded. It's also true that until we get off our dependence on oil, we will continue to have policies in the Middle East that tie us to undemocratic regimes like Saudi Arabia or push us to invade countries like Iraq to control their oil.

Read more.

[Ken Burch]

1. Good piece

Medea Benjamin represents the type of people that Democrats need to keep energized if we are ever to regain the ability to win elections.
It was a big mistake for them to throw her off the convention floor in Boston this summer.

[Jack Rabbit]

2. Medea Benjamin is an active Green

She ran for the US Senate against Feinstein in 2000 and it would not surprise me to see her doing the same in 2006.

I don't think the Democrats did the wrong thing throwing her off the convention floor last summer. On the other hand, I don't think Ms. Benjamin did the wrong thing popping up on the convention floor.

Medea Benjamin is a thorn in the side of the establishment, even the liberal fringes of it. She succeeds, however briefly, in drawing attention to matters that are ignored by the corporate media. More power to her.

[Ken Burch]

3. I'm a bit puzzled

You think she was right to be on the floor, AND you think the Dems were right to throw her off it? Doesn't compute. Wouldn't you at least agree that the result on November 2 proves the Dems were wrong to make the convention a "politics-free zone" where no dissent was tolerated?

[Jack Rabbit]

4. Computing

The Democrats had an interest in conducting an orderly convention and not allowing anybody who wanted to make noise in going to the convention floor. Ms. Benjamin's purpose was to disrupt the convention and draw attention to the immorality of the war in Iraq, something about which the Democrats were being deliberately ambiguous.

Ms. Benjamin made her point and the Democrats kept their order.

I don't think Kerry's defeat (or apparent defeat) had a lot to do with making the convention a politics-free zone. It might have had more to do with not challenging Bush harder on the war and his immoral conduct of it. Kerry was trying to campaign against Bush's war policies on pragmatic grounds, and he wasn't entirely wrong to do that; after all, regardless of whether it was right or wrong to invade Iraq, Bush clearly does not know what he is doing. Emphasizing that side of that argument was probably best, but it was a mistake for Kerry not to also bring up the moral failings of Bush's actions. Bush cannot escape responsibility for torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo; it would not have been too difficult for Kerry to have scored some points with that approach.

[Demeter]

5. Even More Compelling--the Americans Want to Leave!

but who listens to US? Certainly not our government!