[Marxism] Re: Anybody but Kerry

[John Enyang <x03002f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Professor Chomsky,

I refer to your email attached below. Your charge that I support the
"destruction of the US social security system" and "the militarisation of
space" etc, bizarre in the extreme. Your assertion is not only unfounded;
it is eerily reminiscent of spurious charges made by many an establishment
figure, red-baiting liberals among them, who sought to discredit you
personally, slanderously asserting, for instance, that your efforts to
place events in Cambodia in an historical and political context tarred you
as a supporter or at least an apologist for "genocide in Cambodia" etc.

Now on the contrary, it is self--proclaimed liberal figures such as
yourself who, in falling in line behind the war candidate offered by one
wing of the Washington establishment, eviscerate domestic and
international opposition to the ruling class consensus by giving credence
to such meaningless differences as exist between "muscular
internationalism" vs "preemptive war".

I note also that in keeping with your dishonest support for the muscular
international wing of the U.S. ruling class (a grouping that surely does
support and implement the policies you so dishonestly charged me, and by
extension a large part of the anti-imperialist left with supporting), you
saw more merit in biliously slandering me than in addressing the comments
made by fellow muscular internationalist Barack Obama to the Chicago
Tribune, threatening war against Iran, Pakistan should his party gain
power -- as appended in my original email to you below.

What a decline for someone of your stature and integrity.

With disgust,
John Enyang

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Noam Chomsky wrote:

> Interested to hear that you favor destroying Social Security, OSHA, the
> limited medical care system, the last vestiges of progressive taxation,
> etc., and that you are in favor of radical escalation of militarization of
> space and eliciting the predicted responses from Russia, China, etc., which
> are driving the world towards likely nuclear war, etc.
>
> I'm not.
>
> At 11:06 AM 9/27/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>
> >Dear Professor Chomsky,
> >
> >I write to register my disgust and disappointment with your public
> >support for the war candidate offered up by the liberal (sic) wing of the
> >US establishment -- transparent despite the fact that you've disguised it
> >behind the "safe  states" strategy.
> >
> >John Enyang
> >
> >http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0409250111sep25,1,7098310.story?coll=chi-news-hed
> >
> >The Chicago Tribune
> >
> >CAMPAIGN 2004: US SENATE RACE
> >
> >Obama would consider missile strikes on Iran
> >
> >By David Mendell
> >Tribune staff reporter
> >Published September 25, 2004
> >
> >U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama suggested Friday
> >that the United States one day might have to launch
> >surgical missile strikes into Iran and Pakistan to
> >keep extremists from getting control of nuclear bombs.
> >
> >Obama, a Democratic state senator from the Hyde Park
> >neighborhood, made the remarks during a meeting Friday
> >with the Tribune editorial board. Obama's Republican
> >opponent, Alan Keyes, was invited to attend the same
> >session but declined.
> >
> >Iran announced on Tuesday that it has begun converting
> >tons of uranium into gas, a crucial step in making
> >fuel for a nuclear reactor or a nuclear bomb. The
> >International Atomic Energy Agency has called for Iran
> >to suspend all such activities.
> >
> >Obama said the United States must first address Iran's
> >attempt to gain nuclear capabilities by going before
> >the United Nations Security Council and lobbying the
> >international community to apply more pressure on Iran
> >to cease nuclear activities. That pressure should come
> >in the form of economic sanctions, he said.
> >
> >But if those measures fall short, the United States
> >should not rule out military strikes to destroy
> >nuclear production sites in Iran, Obama said.
> >
> >"The big question is going to be, if Iran is resistant
> >to these pressures, including economic sanctions,
> >which I hope will be imposed if they do not cooperate,
> >at what point are we going to, if any, are we going to
> >take military action?" Obama asked.
> >
> >Given the continuing war in Iraq, the United States is
> >not in a position to invade Iran, but missile strikes
> >might be a viable option, he said. Obama conceded that
> >such strikes might further strain relations between
> >the U.S. and the Arab world.
> >
> >"In light of the fact that we're now in Iraq, with all
> >the problems in terms of perceptions about America
> >that have been created, us launching some missile
> >strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us
> >to be in," he said.
> >
> >"On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy
> >in possession of nuclear weapons is worse. So I guess
> >my instinct would be to err on not having those
> >weapons in the possession of the ruling clerics of
> >Iran. ... And I hope it doesn't get to that point. But
> >realistically, as I watch how this thing has evolved,
> >I'd be surprised if Iran blinked at this point."
> >
> >As for Pakistan, Obama said that if President Pervez
> >Musharraf were to lose power in a coup, the United
> >States similarly might have to consider military
> >action in that country to destroy nuclear weapons it
> >already possesses. Musharraf's troops are battling
> >hundreds of well-armed foreign militants and Pakistani
> >tribesmen in increasingly violent confrontations.
> >
> >Obama said that violent Islamic extremists are a
> >vastly different brand of foe than was the Soviet
> >Union during the Cold War, and they must be treated
> >differently.
> >
> >"With the Soviet Union, you did get the sense that
> >they were operating on a model that we could
> >comprehend in terms of, they don't want to be blown
> >up, we don't want to be blown up, so you do game
> >theory and calculate ways to contain," Obama said. "I
> >think there are certain elements within the Islamic
> >world right now that don't make those same
> >calculations.
> >
> >"... I think there are elements within Pakistan right
> >now--if Musharraf is overthrown and they took over, I
> >think we would have to consider going in and taking
> >those bombs out, because I don't think we can make the
> >same assumptions about how they calculate risks."
> >
> >A last resort
> >
> >Obama's willingness to consider additional military
> >action in the Middle East comes despite his early and
> >vocal opposition to the Iraq war. Obama, however, also
> >has stressed that he is not averse to using military
> >action as a last resort, although he believes that
> >President Bush did not make that case for the Iraq
> >invasion.
> >
> >[Extra text deleted]
> >
> >
> >http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/9706965.htm
> >
> >Posted on Sun, Sep. 19, 2004
> >
> >Obama willing to support more troops in Iraq; Keyes
> >questions war critics
> >
> >CHRISTOPHER WILLS
> >
> >Associated Press
> >
> >SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - Democratic Senate candidate Barack
> >Obama said Saturday he would be willing to send more
> >soldiers to Iraq if it is part of a strategy that the
> >president and military leaders believe will stabilize
> >the country and eventually allow America to withdraw.
> >
> >"If that strategy made sense and would lead ultimately
> >to the pullout of U.S. troops but in the short term
> >required additional troop strength to protect those
> >who are already on the ground, then that's something I
> >would support," said Obama.
> >
> >His Republican opponent, Alan Keyes, suggested
> >Saturday that critics of the Iraq war are endangering
> >American lives.
> >
> >Keyes said some people, including Democratic
> >presidential candidate John Kerry, are calling the war
> >a mistake because, in hindsight, there were no weapons
> >of mass destruction.
> >
> >"But, you know, the wisdom of hindsight is going to
> >leave a lot of Americans dead," Keyes said.
> >
> >Both candidates spoke Saturday to an Illinois News
> >Broadcasters Association meeting in Springfield.
> >
> >Obama, who opposed invading Iraq, said President Bush
> >has bungled his handling of the war. It has cost
> >thousands of lives, reduced American security abroad
> >and distracted from the hunt for Osama bin Laden and
> >other al-Qaida terrorists, he said, but pulling out
> >now would make things worse.
> >
> >A quick withdrawal would add to the chaos there and
> >make it "an extraordinary hotbed of terrorist
> >activity," he said. It would also damage America's
> >international prestige and amount to "a slap in the
> >face" to the troops fighting there, he said.
> >
> >Kerry has accused Bush of hiding a plan to mobilize
> >more National Guard and Reserve troops after the
> >election. Kerry says if elected, he would withdraw
> >American troops from Iraq within four years - a
> >timetable that Obama said he can accept.
> >
> >"Given the situation on the ground, I think if we had
> >our troops out in four years, that would be an
> >extraordinary accomplishment," Obama said.
> >
> >Keyes defended Bush's decision to invade, saying the
> >president had information that Saddam Hussein was
> >trying to develop weapons of mass destruction to share
> >with terrorists.
> >
> >"I know John Kerry and others have been running around
> >and with the wisdom of hindsight they've been
> >second-guessing," Keyes said. "But you know, the
> >wisdom of hindsight is going to leave a lot of
> >Americans dead, and that's why I don't think he's fit
> >for the presidency."
> >
> >The Bush administration argued before the war that
> >Hussein was stockpiling weapons. The U.S. weapons
> >inspector has now concluded they did not exist,
> >although Hussein may have hoped to re-start his
> >weapons program some day.
> >
> >A commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist
> >attacks also concluded there was no evidence Iraq and
> >al-Qaida had a collaborative relationship. The
> >commission said Iraq had ignored bin Laden's request
> >to establish training camps in Iraq and for help in
> >obtaining weapons.
> >
> >Keyes canceled his appearance at the broadcasters
> >convention and instead spoke to the group by
> >telephone, saying he was attending a political rally
> >for Vice President Dick Cheney. He did not answer a
> >question about whether he had been invited to the
> >event.
> >
> >At the recent Republican National Convention, Keyes
> >called gay people "selfish hedonists" - a label that
> >he said "of course" applies to Cheney's lesbian
> >daughter. The remark angered many Republican leaders,
> >although Keyes argues he never attacked Cheney's
> >daughter personally.
> >
> >"No such comment occurred," he said Saturday. "The
> >only folks who brought up her name were the people in
> >the media. I think that is well understood by folks in
> >the Republican Party, the vice president and everybody
> >else."
>
>
>






_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism