(ANSWER): March 20th, 2010 - March on Washington

[Kassad]

National March on Washington
on Saturday, March 20, 2010


Representatives of 34 antiwar organizations, including the ANSWER Coalition, delivered an open letter to President Obama strongly opposing his anticipated decision to expand the war in Afghanistan.

The letter pledges to “to build the kind of massive movement --which today represents the sentiments of a majority of the American people--that will play a key role in ending U.S. war in Afghanistan.”

The U.S./NATO military intervention in Afghanistan is not a so-called war of necessity. It is a colonial-type war. The people of Afghanistan will resist until the foreign occupation ends. The U.S. war effort is doomed. Tens of thousands more troops will be sent into the country because the Pentagon cannot figure out what else to do. The continued war and its escalation threaten the lives of untold thousands of Afghan people and U.S. soldiers.

The ANSWER Coalition is demanding the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan as well as Iraq.
Momentum is building for major national events in March 2010, including the March 20 National March on Washington with joint actions in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Please see below for details.

http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/60529.jpg

People from all over the country are organizing to converge on Washington, D.C., to demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan and Iraq.

On Saturday, March 20, 2010, there will be a mass National March & Rally in D.C. We will march together to say “No Colonial-type Wars and Occupations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine!" We will march together to say "No War Against Iran!” We will march together to say “No War for Empire Anywhere!” Instead of war, we will demand funds so that every person can have a job, free and universal health care, decent schools, and affordable housing.

A day of action and outreach in Washington, D.C., will take place on Friday, March 19, preceding the Saturday march. There will be coinciding mass marches on March 20 in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

Cindy Sheehan and a coalition of groups has announced a new initiative set to begin in March 2010 called Peace of the Action, an integral part of which will be a camp that will be set up beginning March 13. This camp will be a staging area for people coming to DC to take part in anti-war activities.

March 20 is the seventh anniversary of the criminal war of aggression launched by Bush and Cheney against Iraq. One million or more Iraqis have died. Tens of thousands of U.S. troops have lost their lives or been maimed, and continue to suffer a whole host of enduring problems from this terrible war.

This is the time for united action. The slogans on banners may differ, but all those who carry them should be marching shoulder to shoulder.

The initiators and endorsers of the March 20 National March on Washington (preceded by the March 19 Day of Action and Outreach in D.C.) include: the ANSWER Coalition; Muslim American Society Freedom; National Council of Arab Americans; Cynthia McKinney; Malik Rahim, co-founder of Common Ground Collective; Ramsey Clark; Cindy Sheehan; Medea Benjamin, co-founder of CODEPINK; Debra Sweet, Director, World Can’t Wait; Mike Ferner, President, Veterans for Peace; National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and Occupations; U.S. Labor Against War; Arab American Union Members Council; Al-Awda, the Palestine Right to Return Coalition; Heidi Boghosian, Executive Director, National Lawyers Guild; Ron Kovic, author of “Born on the 4th of July”; Juan Jose Gutierrez, Director, Latino Movement USA; Col. Ann Wright (ret.); March Forward!; Partnership for Civil Justice; Palestinian American Women Association; MANA - Muslim Alliance in North America; Alliance for a Just and Lasting Peace in the Philippines; Alliance for Global Justice; Claudia de la Cruz, Pastor, Iglesia San Romero de Las Americas-UCC; Phil Portluck, Social Justice Ministry, Covenant Baptist Church, D.C.; Blase & Theresa Bonpane, Office of the Americas; Coalition for Peace and Democracy in Honduras; Comite Pro-Democracia en Mexico; Frente Unido de los Pueblos Americanos; Comites de Base FMLN, Los Angeles; Free Palestine Alliance; GABRIELA Network; Justice for Filipino American Veterans; KmB Pro-People Youth; Students Fight Back; Jim Lafferty, Executive Director, National Lawyers Guild - LA Chapter; LEF Foundation; National Coalition to Free the Angola 3; Community Futures Collective; Advocates for Indigenous California Language Survival; Companeros del Barrio; Barrio Unido for Full and Unconditional Amnesty; Michael Berg; Action Center for Justice - Charlotte, NC; Bay Area United Against War; Casa las Américas; Community Organizing Center, Columbus, Ohio; CT-SAW (Connecticut Students Against the War) ; Delaware Valley Veterans for America; Hawai'i Solidarity Committee; Malcolm X Center for Self-Determination; Texans for Peace; and many more.

Click here (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=5940&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_U SER_REQUESTS) to become an endorser.

http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/60557.jpg (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2302&donate=btn-2)

[Kassad]

March 20th Coalition Planning Committee
Sets Plans for March on Washington
Momentum for the March 20 National March on Washington is growing. The demonstration is expected to draw tens of thousands of people to Washington, D.C. to demand “U.S. Out of Afghanistan and Iraq Now!”
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/60647.jpg

Former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (above)
commenting at the March 20th Planning Committee
meeting that took place in Washington, D.C., on Sat, Dec. 12.
On Saturday December 12, a meeting of the March 20th Coalition Planning Committee was held at the Justice Center in Washington, D.C.

In addition to the ANSWER Coalition, the March 20th Planning Committee meeting was attended by representatives of the Alliance For Global Justice, Anti-War College, Dignity (co-founded and represented by Cynthia McKinney), Goucher Alumni for People’s Solidarity, Iraq Veterans Against the War, March Forward!, Muslim Alliance in North America, Muslim American Society Freedom, National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, National Committee to Free the Cuban Five, National Council of Arab Americans, National Lawyers Guild, Peace of the Action and World Can’t Wait.

In addition to those in attendance at the December 12 planning meeting, over 700 organizations and individuals have endorsed the March 20 National March on Washington. Most recently, United States Labor Against the War (USLAW) passed a resolution to endorse at their 2009 National Labor Assembly. Click here to add your/your organization’s name to the growing list of endorsers. (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=5940&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_U SER_REQUESTS)

People will be coming by bus, van, car, train and plane from across the country to be in D.C. on Saturday, March 20. If you are interested in organizing transportation, click here to fill out the Transportation Form. (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=6140&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_U SER_REQUESTS)

On March 20, there will be coinciding demonstrations in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

March 20 is the seventh anniversary of the criminal war of aggression launched against Iraq. The demonstration will demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan and Iraq. Instead of war, we will demand funds so that every person can have a job, free and universal health care, decent schools, and affordable housing.

The March 20th Coalition Planning Committee discussed a scenario for the March 20th action. People will gather at the White House for an opening rally. During the rally, we will construct hundreds of coffins representing the multinational victims of war. On the march, we will carry and deliver the coffins to various corporate and government entities that have played a role in the promotion of the war and the exploitation of people in the United States.

Get Involved:

Endorse (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=5940&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_U SER_REQUESTS)
Organize Transportation (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=6140&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_U SER_REQUESTS)
Download Flyers:color (http://answer.pephost.org/site/DocServer/March_20_flyer__color_.pdf?docID=7982), black & white (http://answer.pephost.org/site/DocServer/March_20_flyer__black_and_white_.pdf?docID=7981)
Volunteer (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=6141&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_U SER_REQUESTS)
Donate (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2302)
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/60649.jpg (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2302)

[Kassad]

An end-of-year message from Brian Becker, National Coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition: http://answer.pephost.org/site/News2/1623586530?abbr=ANS_&page=NewsArticle&id=9263&news_iv_ctrl=1621

[Atlanta]

Glad to here that they have started building this early, ill be there.

[RedScare]

I'll be there, and I'll put up flyers on my college campus.

[Kassad]

Veterans, Military families speak out: "Why I'm marching on March 20."
http://answer.pephost.org/site/News2/327825654?abbr=ANS_&page=NewsArticle&id=9281&news_iv_ctrl=1621

[Kassad]

High School Students and Teachers Speak Out: "Why I'm Marching on March 20."
http://answer.pephost.org/site/News2/886170836?abbr=ANS_&page=NewsArticle&id=9293&news_iv_ctrl=1621

[Red Rebel]

I'll be organizing a car pool from my campus. Hopefully one year into the Obama administration the people of the USA will see that it is still the same imperialist wars that Bush is fighting and will come out.

[Kassad]

I'll be organizing a car pool from my campus. Hopefully one year into the Obama administration the people of the USA will see that it is still the same imperialist wars that Bush is fighting and will come out.

There's going to be buses coming from your city if you think that might be easier for you: http://www.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=M20_transportation

[Kassad]

All out for the March 20th March on Washington!
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/61103.jpg
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/61105.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2302) http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/61106.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_endorse) http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/61107.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_volunteer)


Check out the new March 20th website: www.March20.org (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_homepage)!
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/60651.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_homepage)

[Red Rebel]

There's going to be buses coming from your city if you think that might be easier for you: http://www.pephost.org/site/PageServ...transportation (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=M20_transportation)


Thanks comrade but my campus is 3-4 hours outside of the city and it is quicker to just travel straight to DC.

[Ironwill]

I seriously think I might go to this. Its a few hours away and I have been wanting to be involved in a protest.

[Communist]

_____________


Workers World editorial (http://www.workers.org/2010/editorials/march_20_0218/)

Protest on March 20

Published Feb 10, 2010 6:52 PM

In the year since President Barack Obama became commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces, several assumptions made earlier by millions of people who wanted no more wars — in the Middle East or elsewhere — have fallen.

So many placards and puppets carried at anti-war demonstrations before the election focused on President George W. Bush’s personality as the reason for the brutal and illegal invasions and occupations that were mercilessly beating down resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush was seen as shrewd but oafish — the war as a terrible mistake made by a crude, selfish and unprincipled man with narrow horizons. And, of course, there was always the sinister figure of Vice President Dick Cheney.

Now there is a very different presidential team in the White House. But the wars go on as before, even if the rationale given for them is more finessed and the patriotism not quite as blatantly jingoistic as before. Indeed, this Democratic administration is putting even more money into the pockets of the military-industrial-banking complex and has widened its wars to include Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen and a huge armada around Iran.

An election has never stopped a war. Forces much more powerful than mere elected officials are behind the gigantic Pentagon machine. It should be remembered that it was Richard Nixon — no flaming liberal, he! — who finally presided over the end of the Vietnam War. Like Bush, this criminal in the White House had tried every dirty trick to stay in office and justify the war. But during his presidency demonstrations were being supplemented with desertion, refusal to fight, and militant, mass action by youth and active-duty soldiers.

The Vietnamese continued to fight heroically, the world was outraged, and the U.S. ruling class finally decided it couldn’t win. So Nixon became the “statesman” who presided over the final pullout of troops.

It has taken some time — time in which tens of thousands of people have died — for the reality to sink in that the change of administrations is not going to bring an end to the Iraq war. In this period, the workers in the United States have been hit with the worst capitalist recession since the 1930s — one in which a short-lived recovery for the stock market brought no recovery to the job market, despite colossal bailouts to the banks and brokerage houses by the Obama administration.

While the wars grind on, public sector jobs are disappearing as states face huge budget cuts. On the federal level, the budget is being balanced on the backs of the workers even as Obama exempts the military from any freeze on spending.

The wars abroad and the economic misery at home cannot be viewed separately. They are two sides of the same coin. In both cases, the predatory class of super-rich exploiters is using the state to protect and guarantee its monstrous profits while the workers, in uniform or in civvies, are expected to put their money and their lives on the line.

The anti-war demonstrations in Washington and elsewhere called for March 20, the seventh anniversary of the Pentagon’s “shock-and-awe” assault on Iraq, will be an important gauge of whether the movement has been able to regain momentum in the new political environment.

Workers World endorses the March 20 actions, and will be participating in them around the country.


____________________________________




Articles copyright 1995-2010 Workers World (http://www.workersworld.net/wwp/pmwiki.php/Main/AboutThisSite).
Verbatim copying and distribution of entire
article is permitted in any medium without royalty
provided this notice is preserved.

[Ricardo]

I'm definitely going, taking a bus down from Boston. This is gonna be my first protest, is this supposed to be huge?

[Kassad]

I'm definitely going, taking a bus down from Boston. This is gonna be my first protest, is this supposed to be huge?

We expect tens of thousands to be marching this year. Last year, we had about 10,000 people march on the Pentagon and corporate offices nearby and we believe the small turnout was due to what we consider the post-Obama election apathy that subdued much of the anti-war movement, due to people being convinced that he would end the wars. Since war and occupation have only been escalated, we now see the anti-war movement being reinvigorated. We expect the march to be quite large.

If you'd like to contact or work with ANSWER Boston, you can reach them here: 857-334-5084 · [email protected] ([email protected])

[Communist]

.
Pentagon spends billions to terrorize civilians (http://www.workers.org/2010/world/afghanistan_0225/)
By Deirdre Griswold
Feb 17, 2010 5:12 PM

Feb. 16 — It is now four days since U.S. Marines stormed into the town of Marjah in Afghanistan, backed up by helicopter gunships, fighter jets and drones. Some 9,000 U.S. troops are taking part in Operation Moshtarak, which means “together” in the Dari dialect — a bright idea from some psyops genius meant to beguile the local population.

These U.S. troops, part of the Obama administration’s “surge” of 30,000 additional forces sent to Afghanistan, are supplemented by 4,000 British soldiers and a few thousand Afghans. So altogether you have some 15,000 troops, equipped with the most modern weapons, pitted against what the Pentagon estimated to be about 400 Taliban fighters with only handheld guns and mortars and dug-in improvised explosive devices to slow the advancing forces.

The types who thrilled to Hitler’s tank battalions rolling across the farmlands of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union would undoubtedly find this display of raw imperialist military power in Afghanistan equally stimulating. For ordinary working people around the world who are not turned on by the latest death machines, it is appalling.

In what has become a monotonous Pentagon mantra, the media repeat that everything is being done to prevent civilian casualties. In this well-publicized-in-advance campaign, the U.S. generals told the people to stay home and not risk being hurt. So why did their fighter jets bomb a building in Marjah with people inside, killing 12, half of them children?

The NATO commanders in charge also admit to another eight civilian deaths so far in the offensive in Helmand province, but shrug it off as an acceptable cost of war.

How Afghans view the ‘surge’

What kind of war is it where one side has all the tactical advantages? Where only the determination of the population to resist the invaders keeps the outsiders from completely taking over the country?

No matter what cozy labels U.S. and British military planners attach to their hideous offensives in order to “win the hearts and minds” of the Afghan people, it isn’t working.

A well-informed article in the British newspaper Guardian on Feb. 16, called “How Afghans see Operation Moshtarak,” says international coverage of this military push “is in sharp contrast to the way it is regarded on the ground in Afghanistan.”

The writer, Nushin Arbabzadah, is an Afghan woman who grew up in Kabul. She reports that the opposition newspapers, which regard the government of Hamid Karzai as illegitimate after an election riddled with fraud, have “belittled the operation, casting doubt over the strategic importance of Marjah and Nade Ali, and highlighting the issue of civilian casualties there.”

Her article also summarizes the main points in an interview with Mullah Abdul Rezaq Akhund, identified as the Taliban commander in Marjah. It was conducted in Pashto and posted on the Cheragh Daily website.

Mullah Akhund put forward four reasons why the NATO forces considered Helmand province of geostrategic importance and therefore had chosen it for their well-publicized offensive. Reporter Arbabzadah characterizes these as “conspiracy theories,” but adds that “Mullah Akhund’s views reflect those of a majority in Afghanistan.”

According to the Guardian reporter, “The Taliban commander alleged that the U.S. and the U.K. intend to set up surveillance centers along the border to collect Iranian military and intelligence data. Akhund further alleged that since Helmand is also close to Gwadar, a Pakistani port which is of economic significance to China, controlling Helmand allows Washington to curb the influence of its main economic rival in the region.

“He then went on to allege that the U.S. and the U.K. were also interested in taking control of the drug production laboratories located in Helmand in a bid to profit from the international heroin business. The fourth reason, as alleged by Akhund, is Helmand’s uranium resources. In the Taliban commander’s own words: ‘According to eyewitnesses, British forces are bringing a large amount of equipment to the area and have started extracting uranium there and British transport planes land and take off from this area several times every day.’”

What this shows is that, while the imperialist militaries may enjoy enormous technological advantages, the resistance in Afghanistan is neither insular nor ignorant of what is going on in the world.

While U.S. politicians have used semi-religious terms, like “evil-doers,” to provide some rationale for the war, this Taliban commander is pointing out material reasons why the imperialists are trying to control the region.

Workers in the U.S. and Britain — and Afghanistan too — are being forced to cough up the money for this war. Unlike the resistance fighters, who seem invisible because they dress and look like the people, the troops “surging” around Marjah look like they are landing on the moon, so swaddled are they in protective armor and encumbered with all the things that soldiers from an alien country need to survive — from water and food to night vision equipment, not to speak of weapons and ammunition.

And it all costs — big time. At a time when bridges are falling down in the U.S., the Pentagon is buying portable ones strong enough to hold armored vehicles as they cross the canals that crisscross Helmand province. It’s another piece of equipment the grunts have to carry with them as they “surge.”

How many school buses can be bought for the price of a light armored vehicle? The Army has signed a contract for 2,131 LAVs, adding up to $4 billion. That’s almost $2 million apiece, or the equivalent of nearly 30 school buses every time one of these wheeled tanks gets blown up in Afghanistan.

Congress added $160 billion to the fiscal year 2010 Pentagon budget for Overseas Contingency Operations — about half of it for the war in Afghanistan.

The drain of imperialist wars on the economy is bleeding all social programs in the U.S. — which is especially painful in this period of high unemployment and low wages, when tens of millions of workers and their families need every bit of help they can get.

Several opportunities are coming up for the anti-war, pro-people movement in the U.S. to carry out its own “surge”: the March 4 (http://www.revleft.com/vb/march-4-national-t129351/index.html) demonstrations of students and youth against cutbacks and tuition hikes; the March 20 anti-war protests; and the April 10 (http://www.revleft.com/vb/april-10-2010-t126495/index.html) March for Jobs in Washington.
Be there!
Stop the wars and occupations!
_______________________________


Articles © 1995-2010 Workers World (http://www.workers.org/). (http://wwppitt.weebly.com/)
Verbatim copying and distribution
of this entire article is permitted in
any medium without royalty provided
this notice is preserved.

[CynicalIdealist]

I'm too low level of a poster to post links, but it's on pephost. I'm considering both promoting this rally and participating in it. Thoughts?

[Kassad]

I'm too low level of a poster to post links, but it's on pephost. I'm considering both promoting this rally and participating in it. Thoughts?

Welcome to the forum. I'm glad to hear you want to help organize. If you would like to volunteer with the ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) Coalition on March 20th, you can do that here: http://www.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_volunteer

Information about buses, materials and logistics can be found at the www.March20.org (http://www.March20.org) website. If you have any questions, let me know.

[Communist]

.
Bail Out movement endorses March 20 (http://www.workers.org/2010/us/march_20_0311/)

By Sara Flounders
New York
Mar 5, 2010

The Bail Out the People Movement (http://bailoutpeople.org/), meeting in New York on Feb. 24, voted to endorse and help to mobilize for the March 20 National March on Washington. The demonstration, called by the Answer Coalition, raises the slogans: U.S. out of Afghanistan and Iraq, Free Palestine, Reparations for Haiti, and Money for Healthcare, Jobs and Education. The endorsement, proposed by the International Action Center, had unanimous support and was followed by a concrete discussion of outreach, transportation and material to take to Washington.

The bi-weekly meeting of approximately 40 people included a number of students and youth focused on plans for the March 4 National Day of Action to Defend Public Education.

Transport Workers Union Local 100 members raised that there will also be a protest at transit hearings on March 4 over the latest threats to lay off 1,000 TWU members. A march will link the two rallies opposing education and transit cuts.

The BOPM meeting included a discussion of the May 1 United Worker and Immigrant Rights rally planned for Union Square and a report on the successful launch meeting of more than 100 people from 56 organizations the week before.

Members of Peoples Organization for Progress raised their campaign to oppose the closing of hospitals in New Jersey. Initial plans for the April 10 Jobs Action in Washington were also briefly discussed. The meeting ended earlier than usual so that women activists would have time to meet and discuss their plans for an International Working Women’s Month rally on March 27 at Union Square. The meeting reflected a level of intense community activism, solidarity and organizing on many fronts.

________




Articles copyright 1995-2010 Workers World (http://www.workers.org/wwp/). Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

[Kassad]

Community leaders and organizers speak out:
“Why I’m marching on March 20”

The Saturday, March 20 demonstration to demand "U.S. Out of Afghanistan and Iraq Now" has been endorsed by over 1,500 organizations and individuals.
Here is what some of the organizations that are mobilizing have to say:

Whether Bush or Obama, when it comes to war and occupation, there’s no difference. It’s the same soup, just a different bowl. The U.S. government is still engaged in a war of empire and occupation. It wages a war against Muslims abroad and at home.
The government spends billions of dollars dropping smart bombs on dumb missions, while the American people go without jobs, homes, health care, and decent, accessible education.
Muslims must unite with those who resist oppression and love freedom and justice. Our strength is in our unity and our resistance. Therefore, we march.

– Mahdi Bray
Executive Director, Muslim American Society Freedom



The NCA, a fundamental constituent of the anti-war movement, in alignment with other coalition partners, are drawing attention to the massive shift of resources from development and fighting poverty to fund useless wars and destruction. Irrespective of who’s in the White House, the policies have proven to be identical in maintaining a hegemonistic empire. Our community, in particular, is subjected to harsh profiling and alienation policies; but remains determined to fight the source of injustice. …
We call on our Arab-American community, and their friends, to mobilize on March 20th denouncing wars and shifting dire resources, and to tear down the wall of fear and intimidation.
Click here to read the full statement. (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=9379)

– Mounzer Sleiman
Vice Chair, National Council of Arab Americans



Visible protest—marching to stop the crimes of our government—makes a difference because we show what we won’t accept, and we learn what we’re up against. These wars are not legitimate. People around the world must see that we don’t support them, and know that to us, American lives are not more important than their own.
Join World Can’t Wait Saturday March 20 in protest!
Click here to read the full statement. (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=9387)

– Debra Sweet
National Coordinator, World Can't Wait



Please make an urgently needed donation to support our March 20 student travel fund!
Make a generous donation to help high school students travel to Washington D.C. for the March on Washington. (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2421) It costs a lot for organizations to rent buses and for individuals to buy tickets to come to Washington, D.C. We are setting up a scholarship fund to help cover the transportation costs for high school students. How much we can provide will be based on how much we raise. Please click here to make a generous donation and help a new generation of activists take their place in today's anti-war movement. (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2421)
More information about March 20 is available at www.AnswerCoalition.org (http://www.answercoalition.org/).
Help build the March 20 March on Washington!
Find out about transportation from around the country (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/PageServer?pagename=m20_transportation)
Organize Transportation (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/PageServer?pagename=m20_organize)
Download literature (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/PageServer?pagename=m20_flyers)
Volunteer (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/PageServer?pagename=m20_volunteer)
Endorse March 20 (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/PageServer?pagename=m20_endorse)
See the list of endorsers (http://www.pephost.org/site/News2/PageServer?pagename=M20_endorserslist)

[Kassad]

http://www.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/62689.gif

United University Professions (UUP)
resolution in support of March 20th
United University Professions (UUP) -- the union representing more than 34,000 academic and professional faculty on 29 State University of New York campuses and several other New York State schools -- passed the following resolution at its 2010 Winter Delegate Assembly calling on UUP leaders, chapters and members to build UUP participation in the March 20 demonstration in D.C. as part of the labor contingent:
Delegates adopted a Resolution Calling for Participation in the March 20 Demonstration against the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars in Washington, DC from the Labor and Higher Education Committee.
WHEREAS, March 20 marks the seventh anniversary of the start of the war and occupation in Iraq; and
WHEREAS, a national anti-war march and rally will take place in Washington DC on March 20 to call for an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and
WHEREAS, US Labor Against the War has endorsed the March 20 mobilization; and
WHEREAS, UUP is a charter member of USLAW and has a long history of participating in anti-war action; therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Delegate Assembly calls on UUP leaders, chapters, and members to build UUP participation in the March 20 demonstration in DC as part of the labor contingent.
Click here to view the resolution on the UUP website (http://uupinfo.org/das/10_w_da.html) (scroll down).

[Communist]

.
ALL OUT! March 20 anti-war actions (http://www.workers.org/2010/editorials/march_20_0318/)

Mar 11, 2010


U.S. imperialism’s crimes against the Iraqi people are so great that no amount of lying in the corporate media can wipe them out. That doesn’t stop these manufacturers of instant misinformation from trying. They have hypocritically presented a patently fraudulent election, held under an occupying power and administered by a puppet regime, as a sterling example of democracy and courage.

There are still nearly 100,000 U.S. troops in Iraq seven years after the illegal aggression, plus an equal number of “contractors” — mercenaries. The U.S. occupation has left more than 1 million dead and created 5 million refugees. It has exacerbated ethnic and religious differences leading to the brink of a partition of the country. Its puppet regime has been pressured to pass laws turning over Iraqi natural wealth to imperialist concerns, thus sowing the seeds of a potential civil war.

But the corporate media, by apparent prior agreement, writes glowingly of Iraqis dipping their fingers in ink as if the election were a proof of Iraqi sovereignty.

All the more reason why anyone who opposed this war at the beginning, and the millions more who want it over with now, should head to the protest in Washington or other regional centers on March 20 to make their voices as strong and dramatic as they can.

Just as in the days of George W. Bush, a Republican, U.S. wars and occupations continue in Iraq under the Democratic Party administration, even expanding in Afghanistan and stretching into Pakistan. The Pentagon is also intervening in Somalia and Yemen and continually threatening Iran, with or without a first strike by the Israeli military. Not to speak of other interventions threatened in the Caribbean, South America and the Pacific.

In this period, the workers in the United States have been hit with the worst capitalist recession since the 1930s — one in which a short-lived recovery for the stock market has brought no recovery to the job market, despite colossal bailouts to the banks and brokerage houses by the Obama administration. This crisis at home has focused attention here on the desperate economic questions facing the working class and oppressed peoples.

But there is no way to separate the need to fight imperialist war from the need to struggle on basic economic issues. The two struggles must be carried on simultaneously and intertwined.

The March 20 demonstrations, in Washington, Los Angeles and San Francisco, called by the Answer Coalition to mark the seventh anniversary of the criminal U.S. invasion of Iraq, raise the slogans: U.S. Out of Afghanistan and Iraq; Free Palestine; Reparations for Haiti; and Money for Health Care, Jobs and Education. Many other anti-imperialist, anti-war, community and progressive organizations have endorsed these actions, including the International Action Center and the Bail Out the People Movement.

Workers World has endorsed them, too, and calls again upon the working-class and progressive people to mobilize participation in them throughout the country.
__


Articles copyright 1995-2010 Workers World (http://wwppitt.weebly.com/). Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

.

[Communist]

.
The U.S. Military Surge in Afghanistan & Pakistan (http://www.the-spark.net/csart651.html)

On December 1, President Obama, using West Point as a military backdrop, announced that he was escalating the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama said he was sending 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, and that there will also be a “civilian” surge to reinforce the military surge. As for Pakistan, Obama said that the U.S. had an “effective partnership” with the Pakistani military to escalate that war, also.

The surge is much bigger than Obama portrayed. First, he gave to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates the authority to add 5,000 more troops.

This means that the U.S. plans on having more than 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan by next year. Adding in the civilian surge from the CIA, State Department, and other agencies of government, along with the 56,000 additional mercenaries, Senator Claire McCaskill’s Contract Oversight Subcommittee made a conservative estimate that there will be more than 220,000 U.S.-funded personnel on the ground in Afghanistan. NATO also expects to bring in 7,000 more troops, bringing their numbers up to 35,000.

Obama’s attempt to sugar coat the surge is flatly contradicted by Obama’s own people. For example, General David Patraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, said that the U.S. war in Afghanistan will be much longer and more difficult than the war in Iraq, that it will take much more “sustained” effort. Meanwhile, the Pentagon announced that it is preparing a war plan for five years. This is why in Afghanistan, the U.S. is spending a billion dollars to construct a massive embassy complex, and it is in the midst of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on its ever expanding bases at Bagram and Kandahar. In Pakistan, it’s the same: the U.S. is constructing an enormous embassy war compound in Islamabad, as well as huge consulates in key cities.

Nor is there a “responsible end” to the war in Iraq, as Obama claimed in his speech. Bombings, assassinations and other terrorist attacks are increasing by the day in that country. The terrible violence and ethnic cleansing from Bush’s surge might have tamped down the civil wars that the U.S. provoked in order to divide and rule in Iraq. But the violence never stopped, and it is now getting worse. So, even though the Pentagon desperately needs to transfer a large number of the 110,000 U.S. troops that are now in Iraq to Afghanistan, it may have difficulty doing so. The U.S. has already postponed the beginning of the withdrawal from January to March 2010.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has also hinted that the Iraqi government may “ask” the U.S. to stay past the deadline.

Obama’s speech was also short on specifics about the escalation of the U.S. war in Pakistan, a country of 170 million people. He congratulated the Pakistani military for carrying out its murderous offensives over the last year in both the isolated and mountainous tribal areas that border on Afghanistan as well as the Swat Valley. But Obama did not mention that the U.S. has been stepping up its bombing and shelling of the country, or that U.S. special forces, mercenaries and other assassination squads have been increasing secret raids. Nor did he mention the terrible toll that the war was taking on the population.

Finally, Obama made a point to say that the U.S. was engaged in other wars as well, including Yemen and Somalia. And barely two weeks after the speech, the Obama administration announced that it had bombed Yemen, and that it is tripling military aid, as well as sending special forces as “advisors” to that country. There was another announcement that Obama sent U.S. military forces into Somalia to carry out a raid.

U.S. military intervention into both countries is nothing new. But calling attention to it served as a warning that the U.S. wars in Central Asia and the Middle East did not stop the U.S. military from taking action anywhere else in the world. It also served as a reminder to the American people that rather than reducing the U.S. wars in the Middle East and Central Asia, Obama is increasing them, building on what his predecessor, George W. Bush had done.

The Roots of U.S. Intervention

In his speech, Obama asserted that the U.S. military began its involvement in Afghanistan after the attacks of September 11, 2001 took 3,000 U.S. lives.

Nothing could be further from the truth. U.S. involvement in Afghanistan dates all the way back to July 1979, when the U.S. actively began to try to lure the Soviet army into invading Afghanistan, using the Afghan population as bait.

This was confirmed by former President Carter’s National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, in a 1998 interview with the French weekly magazine, Le Nouvel Oberservateur. “According to the official version of history,” explained Brzezinski, “CIA aid to the mujahedin began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality, closely guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet intervention.”

In February 1979, the Shah of Iran, the U.S.-backed dictator, had been overthrown by a broad-based popular revolt that had been taken over by the mullahs. This encouraged fundamentalist movements that challenged regimes throughout the region, including such U.S. client states as Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states. These movements, led by feudal warlords and clergy, harkened back to the superstitions and prejudices of the Middle Ages. But they were also aimed against foreign domination.

This agitation reached far: into Afghanistan, which bordered on the Soviet Union and even inside the Soviet Union itself. Efforts by the Soviet regime to try to bolster the Afghan regime failed, to no small degree because the U.S. secretly provided money and support to the fundamentalists and warlords. So, in December 1979, the Soviet military invaded.

After the Soviet invasion, Brzezinski wrote Carter that by luring the Soviet Union into Afghanistan, the U.S. was finally going to give the Soviet Union its own Viet Nam War. The U.S. provided the private armies of warlords and religious fundamentalists with huge amounts of arms and financial assistance, which was supplemented by the Saudi regime, as well as other oil-rich Gulf states.

The war lasted for more than nine years.

The Soviet Union was eventually forced out, and all this was done at a minimal price to the U.S. military. For the U.S. military, this was seen as a great victory at the expense of its sole super power rival, a victory that helped speed up the crisis that led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

But the Soviet invasion and war in Afghanistan helped the U.S. and its client states in another way, by allowing them to deflect the nationalist fundamentalism that had spread after the success of the Iranian revolution.

The U.S. and its international coterie of sheiks, kings and dictators were able to appeal to fighters from all over the Arab world to oppose the Soviet invader, thus ridding themselves of possible opponents, sending them off to Afghanistan, where they were financed, armed and trained by the CIA.

After the Soviet Union was forced out of Afghanistan, Robert Gates, the deputy director of the CIA during most of the Soviet-Afghan war, characterized the situation this way: “It was a great victory. Afghanistan was at last free of the foreign invaders. Now Afghans could resume fighting among themselves – and hardly anybody cared.”

The Soviet-Afghan war cost one million lives. After that war ended, a new war began, a civil war that cost another half a million lives. During the battle of Kabul from 1992 to 1996, every major group had both allied with and fought against every other major group at one time or another.

But this civil war did not produce a victor. None of the warlords proved themselves capable of imposing their domination over all the others. For the U.S., the problem was the longer the civil war went on, the more Afghanistan became a source of instability that could boil over and either bring down one or more of the U.S.-sponsored regimes, or expand into a regional war. And this growing instability was in a strategically vital part of the world. Afghanistan itself was impoverished, but it is located at the crossroads of Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, and it borders on much of the world's known energy resources. The question was raised again of who would control and build up the state apparatus in the country to keep order and safeguard the imperialist interests.

The Taliban: A Pawn in an Old Rivalry

At that point in 1994, the U.S. turned to the Pakistani military as a surrogate to help impose some kind of state apparatus on Afghanistan, backed by Saudi financing. The Pakistani military’s intelligence arm, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI), had already played a major role in the previous war in Afghanistan, partnering with the CIA in arming and training the mujahedin, and providing sanctuary along its border region for the mujahedin fleeing from Soviet attack.

Inside Pakistan there were millions of Afghan refugees from both wars settled in vast camps. Out of these camps the ISI recruited and trained young Afghans into a new army, the Taliban, with the aim of wresting control of the country from the various warlords and imposing order based on the laws of Islamic fundamentalism.

Some warlords opposed the Taliban, often with the support of Pakistan’s traditional enemies, India, Iran and even some ruling groups inside the former Soviet Union. Others, not wishing to buck the powerful backers of the Taliban, saw the writing on the wall and fell in line behind the Taliban.

Tribal leaders and many ordinary people, exhausted by the wars and filled with revulsion for the corrupt rule of the warlords also welcomed the Taliban as an alternative, only to be subject to the Taliban’s new, more virulent brand of control.

The Taliban took power in 1996, turning Afghanistan into a client state of Pakistan, which helped Pakistan against its traditional enemy, India. The U.S. never formally recognized the Taliban government. Instead, the Clinton administration sent contradictory signals to the Taliban, sometimes seeming to work with it, other times, freezing it out. The U.S. was trying to balance with conflicting forces in the region, between Pakistan and India, while the Taliban was used as Pakistan’s pawn. Nor did U.S. policy toward the Taliban change in 2001 after Bush took office. As late as May 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell presented the Taliban with an award and cash for the eradication of the opium crop. Obviously, the Bush administration was still keeping the door open to the Taliban. U.S. policy towards the Taliban government in Afghanistan remained cautious.

In addition to the Taliban, the Pakistani military also recruited in the mid-1990s fundamentalists for support in Pakistan’s regional struggle with India. Pakistan had worked with many of these fundamentalists earlier in Afghanistan during the war against the Soviet occupation, when the CIA had trained and armed them. Among these fundamentalists was Osama bin Laden. As a member of one of the wealthiest families in Saudi Arabia, bin Laden had earlier served as a conduit for Saudi money to help finance the CIA war against the Soviet Union. In return, the CIA had provided bases and training for bin Laden’s foreign fighters.

In 1996, bin Laden returned in a chartered jet to Afghanistan. The 9/11 Commission found that: “Pakistani intelligence officers reportedly introduced bin Laden to Taliban leaders in Kandahar, their main base of power, to aid his reassertion of control over camps near Kowst, out of an apparent hope that he would now expand the camps and make them available for training Kashmiri militants.” The 9/11 Commission concluded: “It is unlikely that bin Laden could have returned to Afghanistan had Pakistan disapproved. The Pakistani military intelligence service probably had advance knowledge of his coming, and its officers may have facilitated his travel.”

The Pakistani secret police used bin Laden’s organization, al Qaeda, to provide Pakistan with guerillas in its ongoing conflict with India over the disputed territory of Kashmir. Given the close ties between the CIA and the ISI, there is no doubt that the U.S. at least tolerated, if not favored this arrangement.

However, bin Laden and other fundamentalists also began to present problems for the U.S., even taking credit for terrorist attacks aimed at the U.S. In 1998, three U.S. embassies in Africa were bombed simultaneously, killing hundreds of Sudanese, Tanzanians and Kenyans, as well as 12 U.S. personnel. The Clinton administration retaliated by bombing a Sudanese pharmaceutical plant and also launched two cruise missiles at what was reported to be an al Qaeda training facility in Afghanistan. But there was no immediate retaliation from either the Clinton or the Bush administrations following the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen that killed 17 U.S. sailors.

The CIA called the process in which its former proteges – such as al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden – turned against the U.S., “blowback.”

In the Bull’s Eye

On September 11, 2001, two passenger jets struck the World Trade Center and another jet struck the Pentagon, the symbols of U.S. economic and military might. Clearly, U.S. imperialism would respond with overwhelming force. The U.S. assigned blame to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda and prepared to go to war.

But against which country? Some in the Bush administration, especially Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, clearly favored using 9-11 as the perfect excuse to invade Iraq and finish off their old nemesis, Saddam Hussein, who was sitting on top of all that oil. But other, more “reasonable” members of the administration pointed out that a big invasion force would be required to defeat Iraq and occupy the country, a force that it would take time to put together. What the U.S. needed, they reasoned, was a quick and easy victory, as a way of demonstrating U.S. force. So the U.S. put Afghanistan in its cross hairs, especially since the Afghan military was weak, with the added advantage that the U.S. could make use of a ready-made army in Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance, which had continued to fight the Taliban. This would enable the U.S. military to devote a reduced number of its own troops to the war, while letting the Northern Alliance do a lot of the heavy lifting.

It goes without saying that neither the Taliban nor Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9-11. But that was the least of the Bush administration’s concerns.

Less than a month after the 9-11 attacks, the U.S. and British forces began to bombard Afghanistan. Within two months, the U.S., with the help of the Northern Alliance, had pushed the Taliban out of its last significant stronghold in southern Afghanistan. The war was short, and the victory seemingly complete.

In December 2001, with the last battles ending, the U.N. sponsored a conference in Bonn, Germany at U.S. behest to select and install a new government in Afghanistan. Big powers and small, the self-proclaimed “international community,” made a lot of promises that no one had any intention of keeping. The new Afghan government was headed by Hamid Karzai, who was just another warlord. He had at first been allied with the Taliban and then worked for the Unocal oil company, which for a time had plans to construct a pipeline through Afghanistan. In reality, the U.S. had returned the power in Afghanistan to some of the same warlords who had torn the country apart in the previous decade.

Most important for the Bush administration, the apparent quick victory in Afghanistan let it focus its attention on what had always been its main objective, the impending war in Iraq. The U.S. left a relatively small occupation force of 5,200 troops in Afghanistan, supplemented by a few thousand more NATO troops.

Af-Pak Blowback

Before the invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. had put enormous pressure on the Pakistan government not to defend the Taliban against the U.S. invasion. But the U.S. then excluded Pakistan from the international conference in Bonn, which had set up the new Afghan government, and deprived the Pakistani government from having any say or influence over the new Afghan government.

Pakistan’s loss was its historical rivals’ gain, especially India in partnership with Iran. India had stood behind the warlords of the victorious Northern Alliance that had taken power. Delhi then went about increasing its influence and ties with Afghanistan, building four consulates in the country, sponsoring a massive aid program, helping to train the army and putting up the new parliament building and chancery in Kabul. India’s most ambitious Afghan project was a new highway to the Iranian port of Chabahar so that Afghanistan, which is landlocked, would no longer need to use Pakistani ports.

This was part of a bigger Washington tilt in favor of Delhi that culminated in 2008 when the U.S. signed an agreement that allows India to buy civilian atomic technology, including nuclear fuel, from American firms, even though it is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Pakistan responded. The Taliban was its chief asset in Afghanistan, and the Pakistani military very quickly began to use it. The Pakistani military and ISI provided refuge for the Afghan Taliban in the Pakistani tribal areas. By the next year, 2002, the remnants of the Taliban began to carry out raids against the U.S. occupation forces. They were joined by some of the other warlords, who had been excluded from the Karzai government and had been declared enemies of the Afghan state. The U.S. and NATO responded to these raids with air attacks and shelling in Afghanistan that resulted in numerous civilian casualties. At the same time, discontent in Afghanistan began to grow against the government of Karzai and the warlords.

Thus a new, low intensity war against the U.S. occupation began in some parts of Afghanistan where the Taliban and warlords had been strongest. But in these early years, 2002 to 2004, the U.S. was preoccupied with Iraq. A big part of its forces were thrown into the Iraq invasion, which took place in March 2003. The occupation of Afghanistan had become the “forgotten war.”

Behind the scenes, the U.S. tried to push the Pakistani military to reorient itself from its rivalry with India to patrolling the Afghan border and cracking down on the Taliban. Under U.S. stewardship, in 2004, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf began a peace process or “composite dialogue” with India predicated on the oath “not to permit any territory under Pakistan’s control to be used to support terrorism in any manner.” The ISI demobilized thousands of jihadi fighters in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, moving some of their camps inland. Six Pakistani army divisions (about 80,000 to 100,000 men) were repositioned from the eastern border with India to the western border with Afghanistan. The ISI was reformed, with the more Indo-phobic and jihadi officers purged.

The U.S. pressured Musharraf to crack down on the Taliban, who took refuge inside Pakistan. In March 2004, Musharraf dispatched 80,000 Pakistani soldiers to the tribal areas – but in a selective raid to go after opponents of his regime, while leaving untouched the Taliban itself. The Pakistani military still met stiff resistance, and the military campaign was a disaster. Some Pakistanis, veterans of the assorted wars in Afghanistan going back 20 years, formed their own independent Taliban, opposing the Pakistani regime. Over the next two years, the Pakistani army mounted eight more incursions. With every raid, the new Pakistani Taliban grew stronger. Of course, what is now called the Pakistani Taliban was not one organization, but over a dozen atomized groupings throughout the tribal areas.

But the Pakistani military continued to support the Afghan Taliban. In 2006, Islamabad went further, allowing two Afghan warlords, Jalaladdin Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, to also use Pakistan’s tribal areas as a base of their operations for Afghanistan.

The Disastrous U.S. Occupation

Faced with the rising insurgency in Afghanistan, by 2005 the U.S. military had increased its troop presence inside Afghanistan to almost 20,000. But more troops meant more targets for insurgents. In that year, the number of U.S. casualties suddenly doubled, reaching 99. In response, the U.S. retaliated with massive aerial bombing campaigns and large-scale house raids in Afghanistan. The number of civilians killed in the process skyrocketed.

What is called the Taliban was only a small part of the forces beginning to take up arms. Other groupings were led by warlords, drug smugglers, kidnappers and others who had stayed afloat in the devastated and impoverished country through criminal activities, and who hid behind religious fundamentalism in order to impose their own control over the population.

But in 2006, the U.S. occupation forces were still engulfed in the worsening war in Iraq. With little possibility to increase troop levels in Afghanistan, the U.S. increased its air strikes and bombings on Afghanistan by a factor of 10 over the previous year. In 2007, the number of air strikes almost doubled again. Civilian casualties skyrocketed. In 2008, more civilians were killed than in the previous four years combined. At the same time, there were no jobs and no necessities. The rising civilian death toll and the general devastation drove more and more of the population against the occupation.

The resistance, atomized as it was, began to take away bigger and bigger swaths of the country from U.S. and NATO control. During the last year, it has expanded to the previously quiet west and north of Afghanistan. The insurgents claimed control of 50 per cent of the country in 2006, increasing to more than 80 per cent today. According to Major General Michael Flynn, the NATO military chief of intelligence in Afghanistan, insurgents now have shadow governors in 33 out of 34 provinces.

An example of what this means: the U.S. military, in order to ship its ammunition and provisions by road, is forced to pay off Taliban and other insurgent groups not to attack their convoys – at a cost of at least tens of millions of dollars per year. And that’s not the least of it. The U.S. also provides funding for more than one-third of the annual budget of the ISI, the Pakistani intelligence service, which in turn helps fund the Afghan Taliban. Thus, the U.S. provides a substantial portion of the funding to the very forces it is fighting.

The war in Pakistan has also grown bigger and more destructive. Since 2007, for example, the Pakistani military has carried out four offensives inside the Swat Valley, causing up to three million refugees. Due to the impossible conditions of the refugee camps, most refugees are now being housed throughout neighboring parts of Pakistan, an enormous burden, which can only spread opposition to the Pakistani regime. The sophisticated terrorist attacks in recent months in Islamabad, Rawalpini and Lahore – Pakistan’s political, military and cultural capitals, respectively – demonstrate the reach of the terrorist network, and not just geographically. These attacks could not have been carried out without some collaboration inside the Pakistani state apparatus itself. This is not to say that the regime is in danger of falling any time soon – but its problems are multiplying.

So far, the Pakistani military continues to refuse to push the Taliban and other militias opposing the occupation of Afghanistan out of the border regions. U.S. officials described the American and NATO surge of troops as a hammer, but they said it required a Pakistani anvil on the other side of the border to prevent the Taliban from retreating to the mountains. But so far, the Pakistani military has cooperated only in a selective manner. Of course, increasing U.S. pressure or a few U.S. concessions, or a combination of both, may eventually bring the Pakistani government to cooperate with the U.S. more fully – that is, if it is able to, given the rising opposition at home.

Rampant Catastrophes

The sum total of U.S. policies in the region has created an unending chain of disasters, as the U.S. has used and manipulated peoples and militaries for its own purposes and gain, fueling one war after another that has ground up entire populations, turning them into fodder. In 1979, the U.S. stirred up a civil war in Afghanistan simply in order to weaken the Soviet Union. Once the consequences of the civil war threatened to destabilize the region, the U.S. then used Pakistan and the Taliban against the warlords. The U.S. then played India, Iran and the warlords against Pakistan and the Taliban – arming all the sides against each other. The U.S. has stoked the wars and the bloodshed. And each time the U.S. has thrown gasoline on the fire, millions of people have died.

The consequences of U.S. policies have also come back to haunt it again and again. This was illustrated in the weeks following Obama’s announcement. On December 30, a suicide bomber struck a key CIA building in Forward Operating Base Chapman in Khost Province. The attack killed seven CIA agents, including the head of the base, two agents from Xe, formerly known as Blackwater, who were coordinating drone attacks inside Pakistan, as well as a Jordanian captain. It turns out that the bomber, a Jordanian intelligence agent, was a double agent secretly working with the Pakistani Taliban. The CIA thought that this agent had valuable information that would allow it to carry out an especially damaging strike. Instead, it was the Taliban that inflicted the damage. The CIA admitted that it had suffered some of the heaviest casualties in its history.

In revenge for these attacks, the U.S. almost immediately escalated drone strikes against Pakistan. In the first 19 days of this year, there were 11 strikes. Compare that to all last year, when the U.S. had carried out 44 attacks from drones. If the U.S. keeps up the present pace of drone attacks, there will be hundreds of drone attacks, raining bombs and rockets onto the population. This reign of terror has turned the anger of the population against the U.S., pushing increasing numbers of people to support the insurgency.

This was illustrated a couple of weeks later when a double suicide attack just yards away from the presidential palace in central Kabul provoked a gun battle in which three U.S. soldiers were killed. Kabul, where most of the foreign forces and government are based, is heavily guarded and fortified. The only way the attackers could have gotten through was with some form of collaboration from security forces inside the capital.

Finally, the U.S. was forced to postpone or give up one of its initiatives to buttress the Afghan state apparatus, what it called the Local Defense Initiative. This program was supposed to help Afghans form their own militias to resist the Taliban by providing them with weapons. The U.S. stopped the program after it found that it was just helping to create more forces independent of the government. This is what already happened in the northern city of Kunduz, where several armed groups confronted the Taliban, only to begin to collect taxes and become an independent power.

In other words, they were creating warlords who could come back against them at the moment when the U.S. is trying to strengthen the Afghan state apparatus in order to impose order.

The more the U.S. intervenes, the worse it gets.

Of course, the U.S. surge in Afghanistan could produce such carnage, or the U.S. could successfully bribe enough warlords that it could put a damper on the war for a while. So far it has only produced the opposite, adding to the destabilization of the whole region.

The Stakes for the U.S. Population

In his speech at West Point, Obama resorted to the same rhetoric as Bush to justify escalating the war in Afghanistan, claiming that Afghanistan constitutes the “epicenter of violent extremism.... It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11.” Obama then said that new terrorist plots against the U.S. are being spawned there as well: “...it is here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak.... In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror.”

This speech is part of the blatant hype that the Obama administration has steadily produced. In this last period, Obama’s justice department went so far as to propose to hold a show trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in lower Manhattan, hoping to inflame New York City’s population. Even New York City’s gung-ho Mayor Bloomberg had to turn them down because of the outrageous problems such a circus would produce. The news media picks up Obama’s drum beat. In January, the supposedly staid Washington Post ran the headline,“Report says Al-Qaeda still aims to use weapons of mass destruction against U.S.” This is the same kind of scare-mongering that is being pumped out by the media regularly across the country. Then there are the “redoubtable” authorities, who are always pictured as on guard, protecting the population from attack, foiling terrorist plots everywhere.

Yet it was the ordinary passengers and crew on an airplane over Detroit who stopped a Nigerian man from blowing the plane up, while all the authorities managed was a big show of useless searches of airline passengers, causing enormous delays for people struggling to get home during the Christmas holidays.

Of course there is a real terrorist threat that can touch the U.S.
population. But that threat is a consequence of the monstrous wars carried out by the U.S. military, wars that are waged in the name of the American people. It is these wars that threaten to spawn terrorism, or, as the CIA calls it, “blowback,” against the ordinary people of this country.

All this talk about terrorism is nothing but a pretext used by the U.S. government to justify more wars fought for other reasons. After 9/11, the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan not to stop terrorism, but to demonstrate U.S. imperial might. The U.S. invaded Iraq not to stop WMD’s, but for oil. Obama is now escalating the war in Afghanistan... in order to reinforce U.S. imperial domination of the region. Millions of people are killed, countries destroyed so imperialism can gobble up the wealth of the world.

Obviously, the U.S. population does not support these wars, with their growing casualties. Working people are fed up with the trillions of dollars in spending for those wars, as their standard of living is being driven down by the explosion in job cuts and unemployment, the lack of social programs, and everything else.

The American population has absolutely every interest to oppose these barbaric wars, to oppose the bombing and violence against other peoples.

U.S. troops – out of those countries immediately!

Out of Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia!

All U.S. troops out of the more than one thousand military bases all over the world!

.

[Kassad]

All out for the
March 20th March on Washington!
Show Them Why You Are Marching — and Make Some Noise!
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/61105.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2302) http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/61106.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_endorse) http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/61107.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_volunteer)
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/62722.jpg
In just days, we will be taking to the streets! We are hearing from people all over the country who are coming to bring their message to D.C., and we want to share with you some of the plans and ways that you can make an important contribution to the impact of the March 20 National March on Washington to demand "U.S. Out of Afghanistan and Iraq Now!"
Visual Impact
As always, there will be thousands of printed and handmade signs. We will also be making hundreds of coffins with flags representing the multinational victims of U.S. wars of aggression, and many people are bringing coffins that they are making themselves. You can help make and carry coffins in the march by arriving at Lafayette Park between 10 a.m. and 12 noon.
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/62721.jpg
Many people are bringing photographs showing Afghan and Iraqi victims of war. Others who have family members and friends who have been killed or injured in Afghanistan or Iraq are bringing photographs to represent their loss. The human cost of war, for all the numbers, is ultimately immeasurable. We urge people to join in this representation.
Students facing tuition hikes and cutbacks, workers who have been laid-off from their jobs, people without health care and facing foreclosure or eviction, or others feeling the domestic impact of the war are bringing some visual representation of their struggles. This may be in the form of a handmade sign, or it may be another type of creative visual representation.
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/62723.jpg
You can also bring visuals that are specific to the stops on the march. We will be marching from the White House to the offices of Halliburton, Washington Post, Mortgage Bankers Association of America, National Endowment for Democracy and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
For example, Cheney puppets would be great to have when we go to Halliburton. You might want to bring a copy of the Washington Post to return to their doorstep since it’s functioning as pro-war propaganda rather than real news. Think about each stop and be creative!
Be Seen AND Be Heard
We’ll have speakers on the rally and march, and of course we’ll be chanting. We also want to have as many drums as possible, so we are encouraging everyone who can to bring a drum (or a bucket or other implement on which you can drum). The drums should have straps so you can hold them while at the rally and on the march.
If you are not able to bring anything, don't worry. You can pick up a sign when you arrive.
Here are a few things you can bring

Handmade sign with a slogan
Coffin
Photograph of Afghan or Iraqi victim of war
Photograph of a family member or friend who has been killed or injured in Afghanistan or Iraq
Visual representation of the domestic cost of war
Specific visuals for the stops on the march
Drums or drumming implement (with straps so you can hold it)

Click here to let us know what you can bring. (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=6501&ACTION_REQUIRED=URI_ACTION_U SER_REQUESTS)

Click here for additional details about the march. (http://answer.pephost.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&page=NewsArticle&id=9396)
Check out the March 20th website: www.March20.org (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_homepage)!
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/60651.png (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_homepage)

[Communist]

.
U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization
Demonstrate March 20 in DC
Condemn Civilian Slaughter in Afghanistan! All U.S. Troops Home Now! (http://www.usmlo.org/arch2010/2010-03/VR100311.htm#01)

http://www.usmlo.org/arch2010/photos/091205.northampton.mass.afg.jpg

Voice of Revolution denounces the U.S. organized surge in Afghanistan, responsible recently for yet another slaughter of 27 civilians, including women and children. From the beginning, “Operation Moshtarak” (“together” in the Dari language) in Helmand province has been marked by attacks on civilians, with 12 killed by rockets landing on their homes the second day of the offensive and many dozens more since. General Stanley McChrystal, the head of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan regularly comes forward with utmost cynicism, calling the loss of life “regrettable” while saying efforts would be made to “avoid future incidents.” Further indicating the false character of the apologies from McChrystal are the fact that they are becoming as common as the criminal drone and other bombing attacks slaughtering civilians.

McChrystal was head of the Joint Special Forces Command (JSOC) before taking command of the war in Afghanistan. He is notorious for his covert and illegal “black operations” in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including assassinations, kidnappings and numerous drone attacks against civilians. He is also known for being responsible for the torture and other crimes at the Bagram prison in Afghanistan. That President Barack Obama has chosen McChrystal as the General to win the “hearts and minds” of the people of Afghanistan indicates that this is not at all the goal of the U.S.-NATO operation.

It would certainly appear that once again, the U.S. expected a quick victory, in the hopes of dampening anti-war sentiment in the U.S. and worldwide while also diverting from the deepening economic crisis at home.

The war in Afghanistan is already one of the longest wars waged by the U.S., with more than 1000 U.S. soldiers now killed. The brutal killing and attacks on the people of Afghanistan are mounting and yet more is being prepared. An even larger surge is anticipated for attacks on Kandahar.

Far from winning the hearts and minds of Afghanistanis or Americans, the slaughter of civilians and destruction of the country has strengthened resistance, in Afghanistan and the U.S. The people of Afghanistan have never submitted to foreign occupation and clearly are not doing so now.

The peoples of the world also reject the foreign occupation of Afghanistan and are demanding the immediate withdrawal of foreign troops. Americans are demanding All U.S. Troops Home Now! and an end to all U.S. wars of aggression and occupations.

http://www.usmlo.org/arch2010/photos/090321.dc.antiwar013.jpg

We say let the Pentagon budget be used for reparations for U.S. crimes, in Afghanistan, Iraq and worldwide! While the U.S. and other governments claim they wish to ultimately withdraw the troops from Afghanistan, they will not give up their aim of maintaining control of this strategic part of the world. Let no one be fooled be claims of apology for civilian deaths or of withdrawal. The U.S. will insist on control, through its own troops or those of others. It is the resistance of the peoples that is the only sure path to peace!

.
.

[Kassad]

I'll be leaving tonight to head to Washington. I'll be back on Sunday and I'll give a full report. Send me a private message if you're going to be there and would like to get involved or say hi to jolly old Kassad.

[Communist]

.
What will it take to end the wars? (http://www.workers.org/2010/editorials/wars_0325/)

Mar 18, 2010

There can no longer be any doubt about the character of the wars being waged by the U.S. government in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They represent more than a mistaken policy or a particularly brutal group of politicians in the pockets of the oil companies.

These wars flow from the economic system that prevails in the United States. The class that sits atop this vast capitalist economy is never satisfied. Millionaires have become billionaires largely on the super-profits wrung from their worldwide empire.

The imperialists cannot be reasoned with, made to see the error of their ways, or appealed to on a humanitarian basis. The all-mighty profit motive is too strong for that. They will not concede that their ambition to control the world — over the dead bodies of Iraqis, Afghans and U.S. soldiers — is impossible to achieve. Not until they are confronted with rebellion at home as well as abroad will they reconsider their course of action, as finally happened with the Vietnam War.

This explains why the current wars seem to go on endlessly, why the invasion of Iraq has lasted seven years and the assault on Afghanistan even longer.

It explains why a Democratic administration, elected very largely on the hope that it would bring home the soldiers and National Guard, still has 98,000 troops in Iraq, plus an equal number of mercenaries; why this administration has escalated the war in Afghanistan, is attacking Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, and shows no sign of pulling back from the area.

The class character of these wars also explains why the war makers are vulnerable.

The system that spawned the wars is bringing unemployment and extreme poverty to tens of millions inside the United States itself. The wars grow increasingly unpopular as the public treasury is looted to pay for them.

Workers’ taxes provide not only the hundreds of billions for current wars but billions in interest on the debt incurred by past wars. Every public service is being cut back — but not the military or the interest payments to the banks. While the military-financial-industrial complex wallows in cost-plus contracts, returning veterans run into a wall of unemployment and foreclosures, not the welcoming jobs they had hoped for.

Something has to give. So much long-term misery for the working class cannot be contained within the present social fabric.

That’s why the class orientation of the anti-war movement is so important. Struggles are breaking out all over for jobs, decent wages, pensions, health care, to stop foreclosures and evictions, budget cuts and layoffs. These struggles can only grow as the economic crisis becomes ever more intractable.

In these pages we have written for several months about the importance of the anti-war demonstrations on March 20 and encouraged our readers to be there. At the same time, Workers World has helped to build the national actions to save education that brought out hundreds of thousands on March 4 and the upcoming May Day demonstrations that will unite elements of the labor movement with the immigrant community.

In unity, there is strength. Uniting the struggles of the workers and the oppressed communities with the struggle against imperialist war is the only way to defeat the war makers. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. knew that. So did Malcolm X, Huey Newton and Muhammad Ali.

The turning point in the Vietnam War came when the communities of color in the U.S. refused to be used as cannon fodder any longer and recognized the Vietnamese not as their enemies but as people oppressed by the same slave masters. That’s when U.S. soldiers began refusing to go to battle against them.

Inherent in the economic crisis of today is the possibility that the working class as a whole — Black, Latino/a, Native, Arab and white — will actively turn against these wars, not just at the ballot box but in the streets, as the cost of unbridled militarism becomes unbearable.

But it can’t happen without leadership. The number one task of anti-war activists is to help build the bridges that can bring about such unity.

The demands of the workers and the oppressed for jobs, schools, union wages and an end to racism, sexism and homophobia must also be the demands of the anti-war movement, because they challenge the exploiting class of profiteers that is addicted to war. The struggle against the “chain of command” in the factory or the office is also a challenge to the military chain of command that allows officers to order young workers to kill or die on the battlefield in the interests of the boss class.

Disruption of this deadly status quo is the task of all who want peace and social justice.
___________






Articles copyright 1995-2010 Workers World (http://wwppitt.weebly.com/). Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

[Ricardo]

Are these anniversary protests usually just marches or are there other things like sit ins, occupations, and blockades? It's just gonna be me and three of my friends and we're not affiliated with any groups so I don't really know what's happening.

[Jimmie Higgins]

West Cost comrades: ANSWER is also organizing a march for San Francisco. Go to their website for further details.

[the last donut of the night]

Although I cannot go, I am excited to see what these marches will bring. It seems that they may be the turning point for the anti-war movement when it comes to two approaches: siding with Dems and liberal organizations, or allying with working-class political groups? We can only see. Kassad, your organization has done a great job. Keep us posted.

[¿Que?]

So I have been keeping an eye on CNN off and on all day today to see if they mention this. So far, no.

[Red Rebel]

Well there is your problem, you have been watching CNN. Although Brian Becker of ANSWER was on C span last year.

Besides that it was a great march.

[the last donut of the night]

I've heard the numbers of people there was pretty small. Is that true?

[Kassad]

I've heard the numbers of people there was pretty small. Is that true?

No, it wasn't. It was larger than last year, which was about 10,000 people. I'm kind of busy at the moment, but I'll have a detailed report on it later on, along with links that will come once ANSWER makes a full report of the events.

[Kassad]

Thousands take to the streets to demand:
U.S. out of Afghanistan and Iraq now!
http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/63227.jpg

Photo by Bill Hackwell
Click here to see a slideshow from the March 20 March on Washington (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ANS_homepage)


http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/62629.jpg (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fanswer.pephost.org%2Fsit e%2FNews2%3Fpage%3DNewsArticle%26id%3D9453&t=Thousands%20take%20to%20the%20streets%20to%20dem and%3A%20U.S.%20out%20of%20Afghanistan%20and%20Ira q%20now!) http://answer.pephost.org/images/content/pagebuilder/62630.jpg (http://twitter.com/home?status=Thousands%20take%20to%20the%20streets% 20to%20demand%3A%20U.S.%20out%20of%20Afghanistan%2 0and%20Iraq%20now!%20http%3A%2F%2Fanswer.pephost.o rg%2Fsite%2FNews2%3Fpage%3DNewsArticle%26id%3D9453 )



On Saturday, thousands of people converged at the White House for the March 20 March on Washington—the largest anti-war demonstration since the announcement of the escalation of the Afghanistan war. By the time the march started at 2 p.m., the crowd had swelled up to 10,000 protesters.

Dozens of buses came from at least 44 cities in 19 states. Demonstrators rallied and marched shoulder to shoulder to demand “U.S. Out of Iraq and Afghanistan Now,” “Free Palestine,” “Reparations for Haiti” and “No sanctions against Iran” as well as “Money for jobs, education and health care!”

Speakers at the Washington rally represented a broad cross section of the anti-war movement, including veterans and military families, labor, youth and students, immigrant right groups, and the Muslim and Arab American community.

Following the rally, a militant march led by veterans, active-duty service members and military families made its way through the streets of D.C. carrying coffins draped in Afghan, Iraqi, Pakistani, Somali, Yemeni, Haitian and U.S. flags, among those of other countries, as a symbol of the human cost of war and occupation. Coffins were dropped off along the way at Halliburton, the Washington Post, the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs and other institutions connected to the war profiteering, propaganda, and human suffering. The final coffin drop-off was at the White House—the decision-making center of U.S. imperialism.

Click here to see a slideshow of the March 20 March on Washington. (http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ANS_homepage)

The demonstration received substantial media coverage. It was featured in a major story on page A3 on the Sunday Washington Post (click here to read it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/20/AR2010032002876.html)). An Associated Press article on the March on Washington was picked up by a large number of newspapers and media outlets in the United States and abroad.

Joint demonstrations in San Francisco and Los Angeles drew 5,000 protesters each.

In San Francisco, the demonstration included the participation of UNITE HERE Local 2 hotel workers, who are presently fighting for a contract; students, teachers and parents who have been organizing against education budget cutbacks; and community members and activists who have been engaged in a struggle to stop fare hikes and service cuts.

In Los Angeles, demonstrators marched through the streets of Hollywood carrying not only coffins but also large tombstones that read “R.I.P. Health care / Jobs / Public Education / Housing,” to draw attention to the economic war being waged against working-class people at home in order to fund the wars abroad. Essential social services are being slashed to pay for the largest defense budget in history.

The March 20 demonstrations mark a new phase for the anti-war movement. A new layer of activists joined these actions in large numbers, including numerous youth and students from multinational, working-class communities. A sharp connection was drawn between the wars abroad and the war against working people at home. Though smaller than the demonstrations of 2007, this mobilization was larger than the demonstration last year—the first major anti-war action under the Obama administration. The real-life experience of the past year has shown that what we need is not a change in the presidency, but a change in the system that thrives on war, militarism and profits.

These demonstrations were a success thanks to the committed work of thousands of organizers and volunteers around the country. They raised funds, spread the word through posters and flyers, organized buses and other transportation, and carried out all the work that was needed on the day of the demonstration. We took to the streets in force even as the government tried to silence us with tens of thousands of dollars in illegal fines for postering in Washington, D.C., and felony charges against activists for postering in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

We want to especially thank all those who made generous donations for this mobilization. Without those contributions, we could not have carried out this work.

March 20 was an important step forward for the anti-war movement. We must continue to build on this momentum in the months ahead. Your donation will help us recover much-needed funds that helped pay for this weekend's successful demonstration, as well as prepare for the actions to come. Please make a generous donation to support the anti-war movement. (http://answer.pephost.org/site/Donation?ACTION=SHOW_DONATION_OPTIONS&CAMPAIGN_ID= 2302)

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Representatives of 34 antiwar organizations, including the ANSWER Coalition, delivered an open letter to President Obama strongly opposing his anticipated decision to expand the war in Afghanistan.

Their faith in the capitalist state and its commander-in-chief is touching. :wub:

[Kassad]

Their faith in the capitalist state and its commander-in-chief is touching. :wub:


Your elitism always provides for a decent laugh.

[the last donut of the night]

Their faith in the capitalist state and its commander-in-chief is touching. :wub:


It's not that they somehow think Obama will actually care about the letter. It's a symbolic action: to tell Obama more people are getting fed up with his imperialist wars. And although these marches surely won't get the US out of Afghanistan and Iraq, they give the message that the American people are slowly, but strongly (I hope) beginning to see the lies about these wars. It makes sense in a time of low class consciousness. It's not like we can magically call 2 million workers to convey in Washington and have banners calling for the end of capitalism. It doesn't work that way.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

It's not that they somehow think Obama will actually care about the letter. It's a symbolic action: to tell Obama more people are getting fed up with his imperialist wars.

..which promotes the illusion that the commander-in-chief of the capitalist state not only cares what working people think, but actually can and will change things as a result.


And although these marches surely won't get the US out of Afghanistan and Iraq, they give the message that the American people are slowly, but strongly (I hope) beginning to see the lies about these wars.

They will give "the message" to who? The commander-in-chief of the capitalist state? The pentagon? Congress? Not only are these bodies unwilling, they are fundamentally incapable of eliminating imperialist capitalism, which is the source of war.

The majority of people have opposed the war in Iraq for years upon years. The capitalist rulers don't care. They act in their own interests. They invade countries when they see fit and they withdraw when they see fit. They don't care what workers think.

These reformist marches promote the myth of "democracy" that the US capitalists use to prop up their rule. They support the lie that workers can influence "their representatives" in government. They support the lie that we can air our grievances and get a hearing. They act as a pressure release valve, a cause of confusion, and a tether to the capitalist system.

In reality, the capitalist state rests on and defends capitalist rule. In reality, as long as their is capitalism, there will be war. In reality, nothing short of a military defeat, mass mutiny, workers actions (strikes, hot cargoing, blockades, etc.) or a combination thereof will end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


It makes sense in a time of low class consciousness.

I don't know if I'd bring up class and class consciousness, since their isn't a single mention of the working class in any of the materials of any of these "anti-war organizations."


It's not like we can magically call 2 million workers to convey in Washington and have banners calling for the end of capitalism. It doesn't work that way.

Who said anything about doing that? Don't confuse your fantasies of leading the glorious masses into battle with communist revolution.

The working class will liberate itself. The job of those who are class conscious is to point the way forward. To represent the future in the present. To help clarify. To point out the line of march and the ultimate aims of the movement. We don't interests separate from the proletariat.