perfidy

Johno, thanks for supplying the link to the article on De Genova, who called for the defeat of American forces in Iraq, and the deaths of American soldiers. Dr. Foner's response to De Genova's remarks, disavowing them, was appropriate. De Genova is perhaps engaging in fashionable anti-Americanism, part of a new radical chic. 

Calling for defeat of the American forces serves no purpose, and is antithetical to the goals of a peace movement. It only alienates American moderates, and possibly anti-war veterans. Just as the four Iraqi citizens who died in the first night of air attacks on Baghdad, American troops have families. It is equally tragic when American soldiers die in combat, or at the hands of suicide bombers. One of the reasons that I oppose this war is because no one should have to die to remove a leader who posed no significant threat to the United States. It should be up to the Iraqis themselves to decide what they want to do about their leadership. It is not the place of the United States to dictate who runs foreign countries; there has been quite enough of that in America's past. 

No good can come of such rantings as those offered by De Genova. He'll only make people angry, and create more support for the war. He also reminds me of people who shoot abortion doctors to preserve life, though that's a weak analogy at best. The goal of an anti-war movement should be to increase the numbers of those who oppose the war, not to increase the numbers of those who support it. But what's most important here is that nothing is served by anyone's death in Iraq. Blood is red, country of origin notwithstanding.