|
Parent Article: Virtual March On Washington Gives Bush Wiggle Room |
|
|
|
NO NO NO NO NO !!!!! |
by Randall Cotton
recotton (nospam) earthlink.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
27 Feb 2003
|
I agree 100% with Joe's views on war as he stated in his article. However, I vehemently disagree with his primary point. Specifically, he claims "the message coming from moveon.org and truedemocracy.com in their talking points and templates stops short of rejecting war as an option, instead adopting the more widely-held position that war may be necessary if inspections fail." I'm familiar with moveon.org and truemajority.com (I presume you meant that, and not truedemocracy.com, which does not exist). I have *never* seen anything from them that states they support war in ANY circumstance. I challenge you to provide examples. For example, what part of "Win without war" or "Inspections work. War won't", their primary slogans, supports war?
moveon.org and truemajority.com along with dozens of other large mainstream coalitions such as the National Council of Churches, Veterans for Common Sense and Greenpeace have banded together to form the Win Without War Coalition (see winwithoutwarus.org). It is my view that this coalition is the key to supercharging the anti-war movement in America. As with the Vietnam war, it wasn't until nationwide mainstream organizations joined in the fight that the anti-war movement got real traction. It is my view that attempting to discredit this coalition with flippant accusations may be one of the best possible ways to stunt the growth of the anti-war movement. I implore the author to back up his claim with proof, otherwise he is defeating his own purpose, which I presume is to stop this war at all costs. |
