• Taking the Gloves Off
• Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
arthur
at
2007-04-04 09:44 AM
I'd like to start a discussion what sort of approach we should take in launching some polemics on the web and in newspapers etc.
My view is there is now very little pretence from the right (including the pseudo-left) that they do not support the violent suppression of democracy in the Middle East. There is a flimsy cover of trying to sound as though they are appalled by death and destruction inflicted on Iraqis by American aggressors, referencing "carnage" etc. They should be nailed on the fact that they know that mass murder of Iraqis is being carried out by terrorists to intimidate people electing their own government and that the loud mouthed demands for withdrawal that are very popular at the moment come from people who expect there to be more carnage if US troops are withdrawn. In some cases that is what people want and in others its because they know that the troops won't be withdrawn (and in others it is part of conscious pressure for policy changes by the Iraqi government by threatening withdrawal if it doesn't change policies (some, but not all of which changes are desirable). But in all cases it is despicable lack of solidarity against victims of the blackest possible reaction. |
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
keza
at
2007-04-07 04:30 AM
I agree that we should be taking a gloves off approach here.
Despite the fact that there is a lot of confusion among people in general about US strategy and why they went to war in Iraq, there should be no confusion about solidarity with the Iraqi people against this black reaction. The flimsy cover of media commentators who write about "the carnage" and simply blame it on the USA should be torn to shreds. And really it shouldn't be so hard to do. I was just reading a report in the New York Times which runs together a report of insurgents attacking Shia with a chlorine bomb in Ramadi and a day long battle between US forces and Shia militia south of Baghdad. It's an example of a completely non-analytical report of "the carnage". The article describes the chlorine bombing at the beginning of the article:
Then it moves without a break to a report of the US battle with Shiite miltia members and returns abruptly at the end to a bit more about the chlorine bombing:
The impact of such reporting is clearly to create the impression that the Iraqis are all just killing each other and it's a terrible, out-of-control situation created by getting rid of Saddam. We ought to be able to come in very strongly here and call for a solidarity movement with the Iraqi people against the enemies of democratic change who have now resorted to slaughtering people with chemical weapons. Currently this appalling black repression seems to be just passing people by as they call for troops to be withdrawn.
|
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
arthur
at
2007-04-07 08:26 PM
Yep, Just on the side, the use of chemical warfare in Ramadi is by Al Qaeda against Sunni, not Shia and reflects local Sunni tribes (and some Baathists) having already turned against them.
Theme should elaborate on it being a small minority of terrorists attacking the Iraqi people in the same way they attacked Americans on 9/11 and Australians and Indonesians in Bali and cowardly appeasers want to let them win while also boasting superior morality. |
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
youngmarxist
at
2007-04-07 09:06 PM
Perhaps it would be effective to say something like:
No matter what you think of Bush, the Iraqi people are being attacked, and need our support. It strikes me that any proposal to stand by the Iraqis automatically gets you the response: But what about Bush's dangerous and illegal war???So if you start off by at least acknowledging that argument exists, you might get through to more people. |
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
dalek
at
2007-04-09 08:46 PM
re taking the gloves off. Perhaps the people mentioned in this item could be asked for their opinion: http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Iraqi_Shiites_Unite_in_protest_against_0409.html Of course they are probably just - "islamofascists"- not representative- radical ratbags-rabble and not worth consulting eh? Dalek |
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
youngmarxist
at
2007-04-09 11:43 PM
Gee dalek, it took you twelve whole hours after the story came out to post that. Reflexes a little slow?
The Shi'ite's who are protesting in that story were called out by Moqtada al-Sadr, who is one of the people playing both sides of the fence - politician by day, winking (at least) at death squads overnight. No doubt he will either have to agree to rein in his militias, or be treated as part of the problem. As far as 'islamofascists' go, it should be pretty clear, if you cared, that we have generally referred to Sunni and Wahabi Islamist fundamentalists as 'islamofascists'. Those groups are the worst enemies of the Shia, and hate them like poison. Islamofascists are the common enemy of Iraqi democrats and the Shias who protested against the US occupation. If you have anything of actual substance to say, instead of spreading your anger all over Last Superpower why don't you start now? |
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
dalek
at
2007-04-11 12:15 AM
Er Young Marxist, Check out the underlined bits: Large anti-US rally held in Iraq
Last Updated: 12:48am BST 10/04/2007
|
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
byork
at
2007-04-11 04:56 AM
dalek likes to belittle others yet he is so reactionary that he cannot even understand that the big anti-US demonstrations in Iraq are evidence of the democracy that the US and other allies of Iraq helped create via the overthrow of the old fascist regime. A demonstration like that, openly against government policy, would never have happened under Saddam. (And, yes, this is the same dalek who opposed the multi-party elections after the old regime was toppled).
Of course, dalek, now that he is challenged, will try to deny that he supports the anti-US 'united front' in Iraq under al-Sadr's leadership, but the pattern is all too clear.
It really doesn't get worse than this.
Barry |
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
arthur
at
2007-04-11 08:25 AM
As far as I can make out the demo is a reflection of Sadr's climb down.
No time to elaborate on this but you can expect much louder shouting at the US as realignment towards a national unity government that can smash jihadis, baathists and death squads continues. Sadr would be in a more awkward position accepting the current crackdown on the death squads if he was not shouting louder at the US. Likewise the Iraqi Islamic Party (Muslim Brotherhood) needs to shout louder at the US because a sharper break is developing between Sunni leaders within the political process and jihadis and hard core Baathists outside it. Both parties are part of the current governing coalition which is opposed to US withdrawal (at present). Incidentally both SCIRI and Daawa were also holding demonstrations against the US shortly after the invasion. It was a necessary preliminary to joining the Iraqi Governing Council. Likewise the "Communist" party (also represented in the current cabinet) put out statements opposing the invasion. The difference was that Sadr's forces really were out to cause problems for the US forces at the time (eg he issued a fatwa in support of looting as long as clerics were given their split) while SCIRI, Daawa and the CP were just posturing. Its not clear yet but it looks to me like the demos are a sign of Sadr backing away from causing problems (like condoning the death squads), in favour of just posturing. |
• Re: Taking the Gloves Off
Posted by
dalek
at
2007-05-09 11:01 PM
Is this what you men by taking off the Gloves?U.S. Recruiting Hussein's Spies
|
