<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceType"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceName"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="State"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="country-region"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Comic Sans MS";
panose-1:3 15 7 2 3 3 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
h2
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:18.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
font-weight:bold;}
h5
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
font-weight:bold;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Comic Sans MS";
color:black;
font-weight:bold;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'>I thought it appropriate to post this article from December 2009 because
the <st1:City w:st="on">Houston</st1:City> chapter of Veterans for Peace is
currently having a radio show entitled <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>: Out Now. Stan Merriman
produced it. Anyway, he had Robert Greenwald as his guest on Monday and Jodie
Evans, co-founder of Code Pink was the guest today. Supposedly, Tom Hayden will
be tomorrow’s guest. Read the article below. Jodie Evans and Tom Hayden
supported Barack Obama for president 100% and believed all his rhetoric.
Evidently, they had peanut butter in their ears when he said he is against “dumb”
wars and <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region> was the dumb
war and <st1:country-region w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:country-region> is the “right”
war which anyone would take to mean that he had no intention of getting the <st1:country-region
w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region> OUT of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>. Now, it would seem
some people are rethinking our little foray into <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>. I called and made a
comment on today’s Open Journal and asked Jodie Evans if she agreed with
my comment and she did. I strongly got the impression that Stan’s
co-host, Madeleine Crozat-Williams wants <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region>
soldiers to REMAIN in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>
in order to protect the women there. Evidently, she read the book, <u>Three
Cups of Tea</u> and it made some sort of impression on her. I obviously cannot
speak for Madeleine, but her comments and questions to Jodie made me think
Madeleine wants the soldiers to remain in that hell hole ostensibly to protect
women from the Taliban. I am cc’ing Stan and Madeleine with this e-mail
so they can tell us how they feel about <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region>
soldiers remaining in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:country-region>
and how their president is continuing the bloodshed in the <st1:place w:st="on">Middle
East</st1:place>.<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'>According to the article below, Tom Hayden STILL plans on voting for
Obama if he runs in 2012!! I don’t know why Stan Merriman is having Tom
Hayden on a radio show regarding <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> and pulling all the
soldiers out when Tom Hayden evidently still supports the individual who is
continuing the bloodshed. This makes no sense to me at all. In fact, I don’t
even know why VFP Chapter 12 is having a radio show! Any human being with an
ounce of brains and compassion realizes that our presence in the <st1:place
w:st="on">Middle East</st1:place> was and is illegal and immoral. Must people
be spoon fed all the time?! Must we reduce everything to the economic
consequences for Americans of our staying in the <st1:place w:st="on">Middle
East</st1:place> as Robert Greenwald did on Monday?! Is ANYTHING AT ALL about
what is humane and morally right as opposed to what is economically viable for
the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region>?!<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'>Is anyone on this list listening to VFP’s <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>:
Out Now radio show on KPFT? If so does anyone have any comments on this? If you
missed the last two shows they are archived at the website.<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'>Kris<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'><a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/dec2009/nati-d04.shtml">http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/dec2009/nati-d04.shtml</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=4 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></b></p>
<h2><b><font size=4 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>The
pro-war <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> and
Obama’s Afghan escalation<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></h2>
<h5><b><font size=2 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>By
David Walsh <br>
4 December 2009<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></h5>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> magazine, the American
liberal-left publication, has responded to President Barack Obama’s
speech Tuesday night announcing the dispatch of an additional 30,000 US troops
to <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>
with a flurry of articles. The commentary is both an effort at damage control
and a new attempt to mislead the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> population and keep it within
the bounds of the present political setup.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Obama’s
speech represents a turning point for the American intervention in the region
and for the Obama administration itself. The government elected on the slogan
of “change,” with the assistance of “left” forces such
as the <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em>, has now
fully revealed its warmongering character. The Afghan escalation will lead to
massive destruction and death, new atrocities, new war crimes—all in
pursuit of the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region></st1:place>
ruling elite’s economic and political interests.<font color=red><span
style='color:red'><o:p></o:p></span></font></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 color=red face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:red'>The<em><i><font face="Times New Roman"> Nation</font></i></em>
strongly endorsed Obama in the summer and fall of 2008. In July 2008, the
magazine authored an open letter to the Democratic presidential candidate
(“Change <strong><b><font face="Times New Roman">We</font></b></strong>
Can Believe In”), eventually signed by a good many of America’s
liberal luminaries (including Phil Donahue, Barbara Ehrenreich, Jodie Evans of
CodePink, Eric Foner, Eli Pariser of MoveOn.org, Norman Solomon, Studs Terkel,
Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn and others).</span></font> The letter declared:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>“Your
candidacy has inspired a wave of political enthusiasm like nothing seen in this
country for decades. In your speeches, you have sketched out a vision of a
better future—in which the United States sheds its warlike stance around
the globe and focuses on diplomacy abroad and greater equality and freedom for
its citizens at home—that has thrilled voters across the political
spectrum.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Last
October, on the eve of the election, an editorial in the <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> asserted that “American
democracy finds itself at another crossroads, facing a new democratic vista.
The choice between Barack Obama and John McCain could hardly be clearer.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Obama’s
December 1 speech and the openly militaristic and aggressive character of his
policy, as well as its obvious continuity with Bush’s policies, embarrass
the <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> and place it in
a discomfited political position. It has been exposed as an enabler of
imperialist war and reaction.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>In an
even more troubling problem for the magazine’s editors, ten months of an
administration that has handed over billions to the banks while doing nothing
for the jobless, and will now proceed with a major intensification of the
neocolonial war in <st1:place w:st="on">Central Asia</st1:place>, have produced
disillusionment and disappointment within wide layers of the population.
Inevitably, that mood will turn to open opposition.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>It is
above all the danger of a popular break with Obama and the Democrats that
propels the <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em>’s
editors and writers into print.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 color=red face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:red'>It would be wrong to characterize the <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> as antiwar in any serious sense,
or as an opponent of American imperialism. The magazine’s leading
articles on Tuesday’s speech, by Katrina vanden Heuvel, Tom Hayden, John
Nichols, Robert Dreyfuss and Robert Scheer, make no attempt to dissect
Obama’s lies and contradictions. They include no demand for an immediate
withdrawal of American forces from the region. There is no mention of
colonialism or American geopolitical interests. “Oil” and
“energy” never appear among the more than 5,000 words in the
articles.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> writers express virtually no
concern for the decades of suffering of the Afghan people as a result of US
intervention. (Hayden makes the only reference to the human devastation, the
perfunctory comment that “Civilian casualties are under-reported
according to the UN mission in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>.”)
Kunduz, the scene of a recent massacre, and Bagram, the <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> base where
torture and murder have been carried out, receive no mention. Remarkably, the
only use of the word “torture” in the various pieces (in
Nichols’s article) is in the context of <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Obama’s </font></i></em>supposed inner anguish in
attempting to placate proponents and opponents of sending additional troops.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> treats the Afghan intervention
much as the rest of the American mainstream media does, as either an
appropriate or a misguided effort to defend US interests or make <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> and
the region “secure” and “stable.” It is a thoroughly
establishment organ.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Nichols
(in “Obama Has Spoken—Now, Let’s Have a Debate”) calls
Obama’s speech a “carefully-constructed and nuanced call…for
the extension of the <st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region>
occupation of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>.”
He expresses his respectful disagreement with the decision to escalate and
urges a debate in Congress.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>In his
comment (“Exit: 2011?”), Robert Dreyfuss, fresh from his service on
behalf of US destabilization efforts in Iran, writes: “Having had lengthy
discussions with many, perhaps most, of Obama’s advisers on Afghanistan
and Pakistan over the past two years, it’s clear to me that those
advisers believe passionately that vital US interests are at stake in that
conflict.” He too, however, begs to differ.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>This
extraordinary confession of closeness to top officials in the American state
appears in an ostensibly “left-wing” publication.<strong><b><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></b></strong>Dreyfuss unequivocally vouches for
Obama: “He, and his team, aren’t supporters of global, military
hegemony by the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United
States</st1:place></st1:country-region>.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Vanden
Heuvel, the <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em>’s
editor and publisher, who could barely control her rapture over Obama’s victory
last November, terms the Obama speech “a tragic moment—both for the
nation and his presidency” (but not, apparently, for the people of <st1:place
w:st="on">Central Asia</st1:place>, who will by far suffer the most). By
“tragic,” she means—although she does not care to spell it
out—that the escalation politically unmasks Obama.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Liberal
filmmaker Michael Moore, in his open letter to Obama issued on the eve of the
West Point speech, speaks somewhat more candidly, asserting that an escalation
“will do the worst possible thing you could do—destroy the hopes
and dreams so many millions have placed in you.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>In her <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> piece, vanden Heuvel writes of
“a President we had high expectations for,” who is
“escalating a war that may well deplete this country of the resources
needed to rebuild its promise, while doing little to nothing to make us or the
region more secure or stable.” But why did she and her editorial board
have such “expectations,” why, in short, did they understand and
foresee nothing?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 color=red face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:red'>Tom Hayden and Robert Scheer, veterans of the 1960s protest
movements, play at more leftish stances. Hayden, a former Democratic state
legislator in <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State>,
dramatically declares (in “Obama Announces Afghanistan
Escalation”), “It’s time to strip the Obama sticker off my
car,” before hastily reassuring his readers that he will support Obama in
the 2012 election!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Scheer
(“Afghanistan: Here We Go Again”) provides a history of US
intervention in Afghanistan, including the role played by President Jimmy
Carter, the latter’s national security adviser and current adviser to
Obama, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Richard Holbrooke, “now Obama’s
civilian point man on Afghanistan,” in fomenting and financing Islamic
fundamentalism.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>However,
Scheer, the former editor of <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Ramparts</font></i></em>
magazine, draws no conclusions from the history, except to observe cynically,
“So here we go again, selling firewater to the natives and calling it
salvation.” What is the <st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region>
doing in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>?
He has no idea: “Thanks to the political opportunism of the current
Commander-in-Chief the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>
war is still without end or logical purpose.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>What do
the <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em>’s writers
propose as a response to the Afghan escalation?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Vanden
Heuvel bemoans the continuing grip of the “<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">National</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Security</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType w:st="on">State</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>” and the lack
of “countervailing voices or centers of power and authority to challenge
the liberal hawks and interventionists.” She advocates, in all apparent
seriousness, the establishment of a new think tank on “national security
issues,” as well as the building of “a broad-based movement for
change” of an unspecified character.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The
favored solution of the various writers, in keeping with the <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em>’s central task of
reinforcing or resurrecting illusions in the Democratic Party, is the
application of pressure on “progressive” Democratic members of
Congress, with the aim of slowing down or blocking funding for the <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>
war.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Typically,
Hayden places hope in “Representative Jim McGovern’s resolution
favoring an exit strategy [that] has 100 co-sponsors and Rep. Barbara
Lee’s tougher bill to prevent funding for escalation,” which now
has 23 sponsors.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>He
continues: “Key political questions in the immediate future are whether
Representative David Obey, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, will
oppose <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>
funding without a surtax [sic] is only bluffing, and whether Senator Russ
Feingold will step up with legislation for a withdrawal timetable.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Nichols
too depends on the “substantial Democratic discomfort with Obama’s
plan to surge tens of thousands of additional troops” to <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>,
also mentioning Reps. McGovern and Obey, Senator Feingold and Vermont
Independent Bernie Sanders. Nichols goes farther, however, holding out hope
that far-right Republicans will bloc with the “antiwar” Democrats.
He cites approvingly the positions of North Carolina Republican Walter Jones
Jr., a self-described “Pat Buchanan American.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>There is
hardly a more fantastical, futile policy than reliance on the Democrats (and
Republicans) in Congress to end the wars in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region>
and <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>.
As Obama’s decision to accelerate the latter conflict demonstrates once
again, the Democratic Party is an imperialist party, devoted to the interests
of the American corporate-financial oligarchy.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> editorial board, composed of
liberals, ex-leftists and opportunists of various stripes, expresses the
interests of a section of the American upper-middle class. Their collective
superficiality, self-delusion and impressionism have a social basis. The <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> writers speak for a highly
privileged, complacent section of the population, largely insulated from the
consequences, military and economic, of the Obama administration’s
policies.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The
American “left” to a prominent man or woman endorsed Obama in 2008,
or greeted the victory of an African-American candidate with enthusiasm as a
“historic” moment. Individuals with the reputation for opposition
to the status quo, such as Moore, professors Zinn and Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein
and many others, lined up behind the Democratic candidate, misleading the
American population.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Words and
political endorsements have consequences. The <em><i><font
face="Times New Roman">Nation</font></i></em> has thousands of readers, the
individuals just referred to have a large audience. This “left”
shares responsibility for Obama’s policies, including the bloody results
of his decision to send 30,000 more troops to <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The
escalation in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>
vindicates the perspective of the <em><i><font face="Times New Roman">World
Socialist Web Site</font></i></em> and the Socialist Equality Party:
uncompromising opposition to the Obama administration and the Democratic Party.
We base ourselves on a class analysis of this administration and the Democrats.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The old
“antiwar” movement has collapsed, as serious protest against the
wars in the Middle East and <st1:place w:st="on">Central Asia</st1:place> cuts
across its support for Obama. Resistance to Obama’s wars can be based
only on socialist opposition to imperialism as a global system and a turn to
the working class, the only social force that can do away with the source of
imperialist war and oppression.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face="Comic Sans MS"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:black;font-weight:
bold'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></b></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>