The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
Dear John, ----- Original Message ----- From: <email@example.com> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 5:20 PM Subject: [casi] Iraq - what next? >For a number of months we have had the view that some form of military >action from the US in Iraq is inevitable. The assumption which we made in >September appears as this year draws to a close to be more and more >accurate >(although only hindsight has 20:20 vision). Mass protest helped to stop the Vietnam War, and may well have prevented Nixon's use of nuclear weapons there. Action by grassroots activists probably helped to prevent the direct US invasion of parts of Central America in the 1980's. For you to say that this war is inevitable shows a lack of historical perspective as well as complicity with UK policy. In any case, assuming, as you do, that war is inevitable, virtually guarantees that the war will take place while protesting government policy, carrying out civil disobedience, etc, which have been shown to be effective anti-war tools in recent history, may, given a sufficiently broad nase of support, prevent an attack on Iraq. >In the last fortnight we have held meeting with various members of the >varying Iraqi opposition groups, the UK Ministry of Defence and attended >the >opposition conference at the Edgware Metropole. >We are arguing the following case: >a) It is important to minimise casualties and think of the Iraqi people >rather than just the oil >b) It is a bad idea to have an invasion which results in Iraq ending up >being controlled by the US government. This would be bad both for Iraq >and >the rest of the world (with the knock on effects). >It is, however, the case that unless there is a clear strategy that involves >US support for an uprising by the Iraqi people that the US understand can >work that they are likely to go for what they see as the easy option of >invading. >We are, therefore, trying to put such a strategy together. >We will be having further meetings with various people (mainly Iraqis) over >the Christmas holiday period. >If anyone feels they can add to this process please email me as above. >We think we have successfully made the point that an invasion of Baghdad >with the consequent street fighting in a city that is the home to 20% >(plus) of the Iraqis in Iraq would be something to be avoided. Even assuming that the MOD takes what you say seriously, and influences the US accordingly(a big assumption) there is no guarantee that massive casualties will not still take place. Destabilising the countryside is equally likely to produce massive casualties. War is fundamentally unpredictable, and, rather than accepting it's inevitability and offering to work with the war criminals who are about to attack Iraq, thereby helping to legitimise them, why don't you speak out against it and carry out civil disobedience? Your approach clearly makes you an accomplice in this. Do you have any business or economic interest in the outcome of the attack on Iraq? >We are arguing the case with the Military in the UK that in the event of a >decision for some action to be taken to remove Saddam Hussain from >power the >opposition should be given support for an uprising before any invasion >decision. Given that your initial assumtion that war is inevitable is false, the above reduces to support for a classic Western coup, resulting in the installation of a regime under the control of Washington and London, perhaps similar to the CIA operation that brought the Baath to power first in 1963. And civilian casualties are highly likely if not inevitable. Your whole position is just a pro-war argument. >Other issues are on the website at www.operationdeserthaven.org >We are looking at the issue of using UN resolution 949 to create safe >havens >in the South of the country particularly in the sacred cities. One >difficulty is how to resolve the issues around Kirkuk in the North. _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email email@example.com All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email firstname.lastname@example.org All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk