|
|
[from discussion on a Green Party
listserv]
by Doug Mann
The kind of responsible exit plan that Jay is proposing
isn't much different from the kind of responsible exit plans trotted out by "antiwar," pro-occupation Democrats shortly after
the 2003 invasion, and by Nader early in 2004.
How can anyone expect the US government, especially under GW Bush to
"guard the oil" for Iraqis against greedy US oil corporation interests? How can anyone expect the Bush administration to do
the occupation in a "responsible" way that would make the continued presence of US troops OK to a large majority of Iraqis,
that would not fuel the insurgency, etc.
Bush did not go into Iraq with a quick exit strategy, and is not likely to
give serious consideration to a quick exit strategy until he has no other choice. Remember the Vietnam War? Nixon pulled out
the bulk of the troops, (all of the troops in direct combat roles, we were told) within 90 days of the start of his second
term. McGovern had promised to do the same within 6 months after taking office. That's because there wasn't much point to
keeping an army in Vietnam that was unwilling to fight. US soldiers were shooting more of their own officers than enemy soldiers.
That is why the troops were brought home and the draft discontinued.
The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts called
for the immediate, unilateral, unconditional, and total withdrawal of troops from Iraq early in 2004 after going through a
very deliberate consensus process regarding how to respond to the occupation of Iraq in a manner most consistent with the
4 pillars and ten key values of the Green Party.
By the fall of 2004, the Green Party's presidential candidate, David
Cobb was calling for the immediate, unilateral withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. So were most Green Party candidates for
federal offices.
Opinion surveys suggest that the Out Now! position has the support of a majority of voters who identify
with the Democratic and Green parties, and probably did as early as the Spring of 2004.
Ned Lamont ran against and
beat Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary last month. Lamont called for the immediate, unilateral withdrawal of US troops
from Iraq, and made that THE central issue in his campaign.
Keith Ellison has been calling for the immediate,
unilateral withdrawal of US troops from Iraq for a long time, since very soon, if not immediately after the invasion. It wasn't
the central issue in the campaign, but it certainly was a factor that helped him get the DFL endorsement, that prompted his
main rivals to challenge him in the primary, and that helped him win the primary. His position on the war is popular with
Democrats, especially in the city of Minneapolis. And
I am sure a lot of Greens and Green leaning voters participated in the DFL primary in order to help Keith Ellison win the
primary.
|
|
|