Editorial: Stop the Current Illegal War before the next one begins

You, telling me the things you're gonna do for me.
I ain't blind and I don't like what I think I see.
Takin' it to the streets, takin' it to the streets,
no more need for runnin', takin' it to the streets.

-- "Takin' It to the Streets" (recorded by the Doobie Brothers, written by Michael McDonald)



While the Senate threw a slumber party with some Democratic members fighting for the Reed-Levin measure that would not Bring the Troops Home Now, while the administration tried to reset the clock on the escalation progress report, Tina Richards' Grassroots America and Iraq Veterans Against the War launched the campaign Funding the War is Killing the Troops.



A long with Cindy Sheehan, whose currently on a national tour to raise awareness (see Camp Casey Pease Institute for more details), they are takin' it to the streets.



The summer of 2006 was a summer of protest with fasts, war resisters going public and much more. Summer of 2007? Seems like everyone's focused on DC. (Sheehan, Richards and IVAW are not focused on DC.) Seems like everyone's humming, "If you're going to DC, wear some flowers in your hair . . ." What happened to getting the word out? What happened to protests around the country? What happened to inspiration?



Howard Zinn rightly noted, we are citizens not politicians. We're also not DC based lobbyists. The peace movement has made strides. Pham Binh (Dissident Voice) notes IVAW's membership is growing a strong sign of how much their work is appreciated. Meanwhile the latest CBS News-New York Times poll found that 74% of Americans say the illegal war is going badly and 61% of respondents said that any future funding of the illegal war should be tied to a timetable for withdrawal.



61%. An impressive number. A sign of how much the peace movement has achieved. For those who have forgotten, a few months back when the Dems in Congress were performing their May shell game, the Party Hacks were out in full force claiming that the weak measure in both houses (which funded the illegal war) was something great. The public has figured out better and that's why Congress' approval rating has plummeted. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, I might as well vote for Obama." For the record, what is with the left's reluctance to note that "I was always against the illegal war" Obama was also always opposed to withdrawal? The Republicans have a video clip -- one of many -- that they've already begun circulating of Obama saying that.



(Note: We've gone back and forth over linking to the video since it's a GOP site. We've decided not to. If you need to see it, e-mail or you can find it yourself by searching "Obama's Double- Speak." The GOP handout promoting it notes: "But in 2004, Obama said that a quick withdrawal from Iraq would be 'a slap in the face' to the troops. And in 2006, he said that he did 'not believe that setting a date certain for the total withdrawal of U.S. troops [was] the best approach to achieving'." We would suggest to John Edwards that the next time Obama wants to claim he was right all along, Edwards toss those -- and other -- statements to Obama for clarification. When Elaine and C.I. met Obama in 2004, when he was still the "anti-war" candidate, he told them he did not support withdrawal which is among the many reasons they consider him a fake and a phony.)



DC actions, when applying pressure, are not to be underestimated; however, they are not to be overestimated either. And when DC actions are all you're doing, you're not doing enough. Add to that the fact that the 2008 elections will be held next year (but are already covered like they are next week) and DC based activism makes a lot of people leery due to the fact that the peace movement rolled over in 2004.



We're not rolling over and we call out those that do. It's one thing to support the campaigns of Mike Gravel or Dennis Kucinich who are calling for an end to the illegal war, no theft of Iraqi oil and no permanent bases in Iraq. It's another thing entirely for the peace movement to latch onto the least worse of two evils.



The results of that approach were perfectly clear in 2004. John Kerry tried to run to the right of the Bully Boy and in the immediate aftermath of the 2004 elections, we were told Iraq really wasn't an issue and there were other more important things to focus on, WalkOn, WalkOn.org.

Naomi Klein decried it as it was happening. Any organization fighting to end the illegal war (or pretending to) should be put on notice that the people will not put up with the same thing in 2008.



An individual can vote (or not vote) for whomever he or she chooses. That can be the lesser of two evils or someone they believe in. Each individual will have to make up their own minds on that. And the peace movement, as a movement, doesn't need to provide cover (again) for candidates who pledge "a smarter [illegal] war." The peace movement does not need to pick up the pieces after the election. There are new organizations now and those who try to do as they did in 2004 will quickly find themselves left on the sidelines.



The peace movement should be focused on ending the illegal war and that means applying pressure to any and all candidates. It does not mean free passes.



The real work is going on and has always gone on outside of DC. The mood of the people has shifted and the same CBS-New York Times poll that found 61% wanting any future funding to come with a timetable for withdrawal also found 8% of respondents saying no more funding period. That's something the peace movement should be focused on now, raising that 8% to an even higher number.



On Friday, White House flack Tony Snow held a press conference. What was his first item of business? "First," he said, " the President made some important remarks this morning in the Rose Garden, pointing out that Congress has an important obligation to step up and pass legislation to support our troops and their missions for the coming year." That's a lie and one US Senator Carl Levin is happy to repeat as well.



"Funding the war is killing the troops" is a very basic message. It's understandable, it's memorable and it needs to be focused on. IVAW and Tina Richards have come up with a great slogan that punctures the hot air balloon of the administration's. But for that message to get out to all, it's going to take more than just some DC lobbying.



The power is, and always is, with the people. On any given day, a dozen ridiculous excuses are offered as to why today isn't like Vietnam. There's the nonsense whine of the "we don't have a draft!" There's the crap about apathy. There's a lot of commentary being spoken by people who apparently forgot what they once lived through.



Reality is that the peace movement has accomplished more in a shorter period in terms of public opinion than was done in Vietnam. Reality is that the protests came alive when Nixon expanded the illegal war into Cambodia (the same will happen if Bully Boy declares war on Iran). Reality is that we're being told a lie. Now we've pretty much rejected (except for the 28% die hards) the lies that led us into an illegal war. But we're still buying one lie. We're buying the lie that Congress is going to do something. It was only Congress' repeated refusals to do anything, under LBJ and then under Nixon, that helped enrage the people. It wasn't just that a president wasn't listening, it was that a Congress wasn't listening. Repeatedly.



The Party Hacks are pushing the Slumber Party as proof that the Dems are "trying." (Trying our patience, yes. Anything else, no.) That happened then as well. And when the people waited and waited for some action to be taken to bring the troops out of Vietnam and no action was being taken, the people got active. It can be really tough for people to face the fact that both the White House and Congress would betray them. But that's what happened then and that's what's happening now.



Funding the war is killing the troops. As that message gets out more and more and sinks in, con games won't work, not even briefly. And as the disgust (already showing up as demonstrated in the polls) simmers and settles, the people will do what they always do, take control of their government and comfy, fat politicians in DC will realize they aren't the bosses, they are only the representatives.



Funding the war is killing the troops. Funding the war is killing Iraqis. Funding the war is continuing the war. Getting that message out to the people will end the illegal war. If the peace movement demonstrated as much faith in the people as they do in politicians, it would already be over.