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]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] Anti-war tactics/strategy (formerly Blair's speech -- keep the momentum going)










On 18 Feb 2003 at 21:17, Dermot Moynihan wrote:

> I'm not *questioning* their motives. I'm fairly convinced of them.

Given that there's been no expression of this in the media and I found none from the 50
odd strangers I talked to on the march. I am surprised at this opinion and what must
inform it.

> Incidentally, what's insulting about wanting to put your own
> children's lives before those of other people's? At the end of the day
> none of us really practice *equality*. We put those we care for ahead
> of everybody else.

This is not useful - the same logic shows that there are no 'pacifists', everyone's only
interested in self-preservation etc.

> No, but they may well fear something nasty happening on the
> underground or to their kids somewhere when they're not around to
> protect them.

I agree that plenty of people feel this way. I don't think many (if any) came on the march
for that reason. Lots of people were afraid to go on the march especially after the
security warnings.

> >Things have changed since 1991, but not in the way that you argue. In
> >1991 and in Yugoslavia, some justification, however little you may
> >agree with it, could be made for intervention,
>
> I see no argument for military intervention in either of those two
> examples.

With all due respect, your view (and mine) are not the issue here :)

> I'm suggesting when dealing with somebody who "has very real fears of
> terrorist attacks" as the original post mentioned, that we might
> inform them how what they fear is more likely to occur if Iraq is
> actually attacked.

agreed

> I would *rather* appeal to people's sense of morality. However, If
> they are protesting against the war because of a sense of
> self-preservation, i.e. as a tactic, appealing to their sense of
> morality is likely to be a waste of time. But worth trying none the
> less.

The morality line is what would get longer term commitment. Many, many people are
'changed' because they went on that march.


> *Why* they marched becomes important only because we are trying to
> build a vast movement to prevent future wars. And because we want them
> to march again. And again.

agreed

Mark Parkinson
Bodmin
Cornwall



_______________________________________________
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 casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]