An examination of Lamont’s positions and statements reveal a clear support for U.S. imperialism in the Middle East and around the world. His positions are similar to those of Rep. John MurthaÃƒÂ¢Ã¢”šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Âsupporting U.S. interventions but disagreeing on tactics to carry out those policies.
This isn’t even anti-war Lite. Rather, it’s complete support for the war but just wanting different tactics because the US is clearly losing.
Lamont’s web site states “that the war in Iraq has diverted far too many of our dollars, and too much of our attention, from our needs back home.” But Lamont stops far short of calling for complete and immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops. Instead, he supports Murtha’s plan for redeployment of “frontline troops out of harm’s way” and states that U.S troops should “continue to provide logistical and training support as long as we are asked.”Lamont fully ignores the will of the Iraqi people, who are against any foreign occupiers and are courageously fighting back. At no time has Lamont questioned U.S. imperialism and the many war crimes perpetrated against the Iraqi people, instead presenting minor changes so that a “winning strategy” can be reached. Unlike Lamont’s demagoguery, a true anti-war position calls for immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq, followed by reparations paid to the people of Iraq.
Polls now show Lamont at least even, if not ahead, closing from several points behind in just a month. (Ok, I may have to eat my words saying the loathsome Lieberman will win…)
Rather than pretend protest against the war(s), why not choose the real thing instead.
[tags]Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont[/tags]