Howard Zinn- "Kerry Needs the Courage to Walk Away from Iraq"

[latebloomer]

from www.commondreams.org


Published on Thursday, September 16, 2004 by the Miami Herald


Kerry Needs the Courage to Walk Away from Iraq


by Howard Zinn


If John Kerry wants to win, he must recognize that our military intervention in Iraq is a disaster -- for Americans, for Iraqis, for the world. He must stop boasting about his courage in Vietnam and instead start talking about his moral courage in opposing that war. He needs to stop saying, as he did recently in the Midwest, that he defended this country when he was fighting in Vietnam. That is not an honest statement. If it were true, then he would not have turned against the war.


He was not defending this country when he fought in Vietnam. He was defending this country when he said that we were wrong to be in Vietnam and we should get out.


He should not be saying that he will wage the Iraq War better, that he will replace U.S. troops with soldiers from other countries. If it is immoral for our soldiers to be occupying Iraq and killing Iraqis every day, then it is immoral for foreign soldiers to do the same.


He should be clear: We are not defending our country by our war in Iraq, and we should get out.


He should stop saying what President Bush is saying, that we have to ''stay the course.'' We stayed the course in Vietnam and it cost more than 58,000 American lives and untold Vietnamese lives.


To those who say that we must not ''cut and run,'' Kerry can say, with some authority: We did cut and run in Vietnam, and it was the right thing to do.


Kerry needs to stop talking about how he will be stronger than Bush and how he will do more for our national security. He should stop accepting the traditional definitions of strength and security.


He should say that strength should not be measured in military terms, but in moral terms. Did the possession of almost 10,000 nuclear weapons prevent Sept. 11? Will a $400 billion military budget make us stronger or weaker? Will our military actions diminish terrorism or increase it?


Does not our strength lie in being an example to the world of a peace-loving nation, which uses its wealth not for bombs but for food and medicine, for our people and for others in need around the world? Should we not stop defining security in military terms, but talk instead of ''health security,'' ''job security,'' ``children's security''?


This is not Utopian. It is what Americans have shown that they want, before they are made hysterical and fearful by government propaganda. It is not simply a moral program, but a winning program.


William Lloyd Garrison, the great Massachusetts abolitionist, was urged by a friend to speak more cautiously. Garrison replied: ``Slavery, sir, will not be overthrown without excitement, a tremendous excitement.''


War and corporate thievery will not be overthrown without excitement, either. Kerry, if he will stop being cautious, can create an excitement that will carry him into the White House and, more important, change the course of the nation.


Howard Zinn, who served as a bombardier in the Air Force in World War II, is author of the best-selling 'A People's History of the United States"

[Gyre]

1. Truer words were never spoken.

I've got hope as long as there's a practical component to the American intelligensia. Thanks Prof. Zinn!

Gyre

[21winner]

2. Zinn needs to STFU.

Critics and cowards always blow hard in the living room. When it rains they scurry like cats.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cheshire]

5. I don't care who he is fighting in Nam and fighting against it were heroic

You are foolish if you think only what you say counts. I am sorry for you who can not see that Americans have different view and ideas and for you to tell someone to shut up because you dissagree makes you look like Bush. So maybe you need to step back and learn something before telling others what to do or think little man.

[jonnyblitz]

27. HAHAHAHA

I just know Howard Zinn has more class in his little finger then some low post count ahem..oh never mind. "Little man" is pretty good though. I have been called much worse by freepers. I will wear that insult from the likes of you as a badge of honor. :hi:

[DemBones DemBones]

15. What credentials do you have for telling Zinn to shut up?

?

[Ms. Clio]

18. Howard Zinn was a bombadier during WW2

And you were ... ?

I know what you are now.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

23. Zinn is a WWII Vet. Why don't you tell us about YOUR Service?

:eyes:

[necso]

3. Kerry has the courage.

But if we are going to look at each of his words like he was sitting in our living rooms, then we will never see this.

Kerry is campaigning, folks.

Between the number of people in this country unwilling to admit defeat yet, the advantage that announcing plans for withdrawal would give our enemies (it is potentially leverage), the drastic consequences of withdrawal, and etc, perhaps some can understand why Kerry is saying what he is.

So Kerry announces that he is for withdrawal. Does it help him?

And if it hurts him, then it prolongs the "war".

Now, are you bushido kind of positive that Kerry should announce plans for withdrawal.

I see the neos screaming that Kerry needs a plan for Iraq. I see others screaming that Kerry must announce withdrawal plans.

Explain to me the difference (and I know my neighbors don't see it either).

Of course I am for withdrawal -- another reason to vote Kerry -- not to doubt him.

When (if) Kerry is elected, then is the time to pressure him.

Doing so before this is not support, it is personal politics.

[LittleClarkie]

7. I think Kerry will do what is best

Best for the Iraqis. Best for the troops. And the best for us.

I believe firmly that he has to be given a honeymoon of sorts to show what he's going to do once he's in office. He wants to get the American face off this war. He wants to find some way to withdraw more gracefully than we did in Vietnam. The Saigon scenario would be a disgrace. I think he wants to find a way to stabilize the country before we leave.

We fucked it up after all. He will try to unfuck it up. To cut and run, as if to say "Sorry about the mess. (shrug) See ya," seems cowardly in its own right.

Hopefully he will be able to negotiate a peace. Hopefully with Bush out, people will be more willing to listen.

He will need time to find the diplomatic way out. That's all I ask for him before folks start throwing their medals at HIM.

Somewhere, Nixon would be laughing his ass off.

[kentuck]

6. "War and corporate thievery will not be overthrown without excitement..."

Isn't that the truth?

[hansolsen]

8. I agree with Mr. Zinn. Is that permissible to say in this forum? N/T

[LittleClarkie]

9. Sure

You'd be wrong, but sure you can agree. (kidding, just kidding)

Yes, it's permissable. I feel strongly that Kerry is right, and that he also believes he is right (in other words, won't be changing his opinion any time soon) but what would a discussion board be without alternate opinions.

I wouldn't make it a courage issue though. It takes courage to continue to say what you've always said about a subject, especially when you're also trying to win the presidency, and the truth as you know it isn't incredibly popular.

[hansolsen]

11. Just out of curiosity, how would you feel if Kerry were to take a much

stronger position against the war in Iraq between now and the election, especially in the debates?

Could you support that "new" position?
Would that alter how you see the campaign at all?

[LittleClarkie]

21. If he made known his logic

as to why he'd changed his position, I would not have a problem with it. I believe strongly enough in the man to know he wouldn't change it without a reason.

He will change course if the facts of the matter change. That's the difference between him and Bush. He won't just stay the course if we're headed for an iceburg. And there's a good chance that once he gets in there and has all the intelligence info a president would be privy to, he may just decided that the best course is to get the hell out of there. I trust him to make the right decision.

Right now, he's being pressed to have a solid position on this subject because of the campaign. No one wants to hear a 20 minute lecture about what's going on and all the options we have.

That's one reason he has trouble with soundbites. He knows too much and he knows there's about ten things he'd like to tell you for every one thing he does tell you. His campaign people and aides always have to warn him against over-explaining.

I just need to know I have an honest man in there who knows foreign policy, cares about the soldiers, and knows first hand what death looks like. He won't leave the soldiers in there a minute longer than he deems necessary. I'm willing to give him that honeymoon to get his bearings, see the situation and act accordingly.

[hansolsen]

26. Great. N/T

[Pastiche423]

17. I no longer know if it is or isn't

So, I will simply say, ditto.

[bigtree]

10. Zinn alienates everyone with his statement

who has not wrapped themselves in his notion of pacifism. We should recognize Kerry's commitment to peace and also acknowledge his early faithfulness to a presidential authority who betrayed his faith and patriotism. That's the point in emphasizing Kerry's service. He served faithfully, but his faith in government was betrayed by Nixon's ruling class oligarchy, much the same as today with Bush.

edit: BTW, the new dynamics of world terrorism mock our notions of pacifism and challenge us to to accept their violent recriminations as just and challenge us to respond with effective resolve without appeasement.

[hansolsen]

12. Qustion: What if Kerry does decide to take a much stronger position

against the war in Iraq between now and the election? What if he comes out in the debates with "new " plans for Iraq based on the evolving situation on the ground?

How would that effect your view of the campaign?

Could you support a Kerry plan to withdraw from Iraq sooner rather than later?

[bigtree]

14. He just might do that

I remember he said that our resonse may change according to an evolving situation there. That's why the complaints about the lack of a forthright stand don't make much sense. I don't think he can predicate that on any threat from insurgents. That should come at the behest of an elected authority.

[hansolsen]

16. So you are saying no change in policy could be warranted until Jan

2005 at the earliest, and perhps later if the elections are postponed? You think it inconceivable that Kerry would make changes now, and lay out new plans for Iraq before the debates, for example?

[bigtree]

19. Depends what the situation is

But more importantly, we can't do a thing unless we relinquish control over the resources and decision making there. The 'appointed authority is like a cancer which must be removed before any Iraqi has any assurance that they are in control of their own destiny. Also it would help if we would make it clear that we would be held accountable for our abuses in Iraq, in the international court or here at home in our own courts, and not just the grunts. That could be a simple as regime change here, or indictments and prosecutions of high officials like Rumsfeld and Cheney. Then we could marginalize those who are perpetrating violence on the Iraqi forces and others by demanding that opposition leaders (not the bloody terrorists) renounce supporter's violence in exchange for a stake in the political process. That might be spun as appeasement by the Bush cabal, so Kerry may have to bite his tounge on that one. I don't think the political process there begins or ends with elections. There will still be a great deal of reconcilliation and alliances to be built before Iraq can move towards democracy. It will not be an easy transition nor an assured outcome. But we must try.

The key will be whether the American people recognize that Bush will not change course and that Kerry almost assuredly will, and oust the counterfeit losers in the White House. New plans are fine, but I feel Kerry has already signaled with his policy pronouncements that he would not seek to hold on to power there. That may be enough of a beginning.

[hansolsen]

25. I agree with about 90% of your post, so let's leave it there. Thanks

for the debate / discussion. I appreciate it. Hans

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Who's "everyone"? I'm not a pacifist and I think he's right.

Kerry does need to show some courage and ethics and admit that the war is lost and come up with a realistic plan to get out of the Iraqi's country.

[Nicholas_J]

13. Problem is:

Excatly as stated bt Colin Powell.

"You broke it you bought it"

This is as much a principal of international law, the Geneva Convention, The Nuremburg Accords and the U.N. Charter as the prohibition of "pre-emtive war".

If Kerry just walks out of Iraq, the effects on international relations will result in something every bit as bad or perhaps even worse than the effects that were created by Bush going to war without getting a second vote from the United Nations was to begin with.

Under international law, even if you have gone to war illegally, you are obligated to leave the country you attacked with some sort of stable government and to do everything possible to avoid the kind of bloodbath and civil war that would result from an immediate pull out from Iraq.

It is absolutely necessary for Kerry to get broadbased international support based on a U.N. agreement for the members of the security council to all join in the financial and military obligation to strighten out Iraq as soon as possible.

The result of polls around the world that indicate that almost every nation's citizens and leadership would prefer Kerry as president, indicate that the world would likely rally around a Kerry presidency and join in hi plans for strightening out Iraq as the leader of a U.N. coalition.

This fact has been recently strengthed hy Vladimir Puutin's Statements in Pravda that the U.S. would be better off with Kerry as President. This is as strong a hint as is possible that Putin would side with the any Kerry proposal brought before the Security Council on U.N. participation in Iraq. Kofi Annan's statements about the legality of the War in Iraq is another such hint that Kerry's proposals would be accpeted by the U.N. with open arms.

John Kerry, probably the better choice


Something that makes Kerry stand out in my mind is his no nonsense approach to America's issues.

Dick Cheney said that if Kerry is elected, this country will be attacked. Cheney didn"t say how he came by this information, offers no validation, and is a rather unusual allegation to make with such certainty. If Cheney is privy to some confidential information, he"d be better served sharing that with us. Unless of course Cheney gets his stuff from those TV tarot card readers, or a close association with the now debunked, officially self appointed, voodoo priestess, Ms. Cleo.

The Swift Boat guys jumped up and down claiming Kerry lied about his service. One interesting flag bearer of this negative and slanderous assertion was a guy who admits he was not there, had no first hand knowledge of what transpired, and did not know anyone who was there when Kerry and his flotilla came under hostile fire. Too many phone calls to psychic hotlines apparently made up this guy's mind.

The Swift Boat guys who splatter Kerry seem to have a symbiotic relationship with the Bush meister - something to the tune of a check close to $100,000.00. Not to mention Bush"s personal attorney was legal counsel for the swift boat mud slinger, and not to mention Bush's senior adviser on Veteran Affairs was also working with the gift boat group.

This is starting to turn into something Journalists love to get their hands on. Real issues and not last week's bake sale. I started looking into this whole Kerry thing - is there something to the allegations of the neo-con jokesters on Capitol Hill?


http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/399/14242_Kerry.html

[ever_green]

20. Well, don't you agree

that at least with Kerry our pleas will not fall on deaf ears? If there was a large segment of the population who urged Kerry (when he's elected President of the United States in Nov.) to bring our troops home he would listen! Bush will not, he didn't listen to the many people (and countries) who demanded him not too invade.
With Kerry elected, we have hope of ending this nightmare. Kerry will do the right thing.

[latebloomer]

22. You're a lot more confident than I am

I haven't heard him listening to the huge group of his supporters who have urged him all along to take an antiwar stance.

I was just talking to a friend I hadn't seen n a month or so-- when I last saw her she was contemplating cmpaigning for Kerry. The war is one of her biggest issues. This time she is wondering if she'll even vote, though she probably will.

Another indication-- I watched the HUGE march at the RNC convention on C-Span. Anti-Bush slogans wee everywhere, of course. But pro-Kerry signs were extremely scarce.

The antiwar crowd does NOT feel Kerry is listening to us. And I seriously question whether his global goals differ so greatly from the PNAC agenda.

(Obligatory disclaimer-- I am still planning on voting for the man.)

[Carolinian]

24. How can we walk away when we're dependent on their oil?

[latebloomer]

28. Huh?

So we have to conquer their country and take hold of their oil because we need oil?

How about buying it from them instead?

I don't understand where you're coming from.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. Let's just hope that Kerry is listening to Zinn instead of the DLC.

The "war" is lost in Iraq and only getting worse while we try and save a hopeless situation.

If Kerry really wants to win this election he'd better come up with a realistic way out of Iraq. So far, he's limited himself to sniping at Bush's "mistakes" that most of us saw coming long before the first American crossed the border or the IWR vote.

Not even to mention the moral question of killing more Iraqis to "stabalize" the country.

[Radical Activist]

31. Zinn for Secretary of Defense!

Zinn is God! I find no current political writer to be more thoughtful and inspiring than Howard Zinn.

[genius]

32. He can only win by quitting the game in Iraq.

[no name no slogan]

33. Thank you, Howard Zinn

Iraq is not a zero-sum game. By quitting Iraq, we may actually end up doing the Iraqis and the world an immense favor.

Without the presense of a US occupation, maybe the uprising will cease. All sides may come to realize that not one of them will dominate, and they'll have to negotiate a peaceful settlement, instead of waiting for the US to "impose" peace from above.

With the US and Haliburton gone, maybe the Iraqis can get their electric and water supplies back online 24/7. The 3/4 of them now unemployed may be able to get jobs rebuilding their own nation, instead of relying on the largesse of the US (and being captive to US priorities).

Wow, Iraqis actually getting self-determination, instead of more "help" from the US. I wonder what could happen?