Surface    |    Backfill    |    About    |    Contact


10.3.03

I've always thought Flynn and I didn't really see eye-to-eye on the war, but maybe it's more of a glass half full/half empty kind of thing. He links approvingly to a column arguing that an intensified and competently and multilaterally run "little war" -- the sanctions and containment being used against Iraq -- is a viable option for avoiding a "big war" (i.e., invasion) now or in the future, as well as avoiding the problems of losing credibility and encouraging Saddam that would be encountered if we simply packed up and dropped the war question. I've been hearing this type of thing a lot lately from moderate and/or realist doves who are tired of hearing that the antiwar movement has no alternative strategy to offer. I think it makes a good deal of sense, though it won't appeal to the types who think the best way to deal with Iraq is to eliminate capitalism.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home