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.


> 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.


Mark Parkinson

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]