Home | About | Donate

Where Is the Democratic Alternative to Forever War?

Danny and readers,

You should have led off the candidates section with Tulsi Gabbord and Marianne Williamson. And anyone that is curious about them ought to watch their YouTube videos at campaign events and on mainstream news. They are so far beyond most of the rest of the Democratic Party candidates in regards to peace, military interventionism and foreign policy that it is pitiful.

It is a shame that you have dissed Tulsi for past positions and actions, given the extent she has made changes in her personal life. You as a former US soldier that initially seemed to support US military actions should know better. She should be praised for waking up and being willing to challenge the status quo on such things as this. And the same for being willing to go on Fox News and to talk at conservative conferences etc. If progressives do not share our points of view with conservatives they will never hear it and things will never change; and if we do not really listen to each other we will never come up with policies and actions that all can support.


This author is a tosser. Where do they find these people? If CD paid anything for the rights to post this they threw their money away. Does the author have a bit of a problem with Tulsi? Dismisses her stance with a sentence or two and embraces her critics without feeling the necessity of actually doing his own investigation. Total DNC type.

So many phonies out there. Yeah, Biden gets a B. Mr. West Point Tosser.


Entirely agree with the main sentiment of the article. Obama years had not much better international policies. The problems are how to change the Mil/ind complex back to other products. As one who grew up watching a father go unhappily from the inside edge of radar development to surface to ground missiles at Raytheon, I think it’ll be difficult to get them and others to stop making the huge profits on the tools of war. The other big problem is one from all points in history. What do we do with all those soldiers? How to reintegrate them into a failing capitalist system? We can’t give them land in the far out paganus anymore.

1 Like

The Democratic Party is also decidedly not the party of labor, the environment or health care. The Democratic Party maintains the illusion of being this party of the people in a way reminiscent of FDR’s New Deal party. This is a carefully constructed illusion. Obama was an integral part of that illusion.

The Republican attack on reproductive rights will help maintain the Democratic Party. If the national media can focus our attention on abortion they can get us to forget about health care and perpetual war—the issues the PTB actually care about.


I have to disagree. If he was a tosser I wouldn’t have been disappointed in him.

He has written a series of articles on American History that is in the spirit of Howard Zinn, calling out the crap of the official narrative and revealing the truth of the racism, imperialism, greed, corruption, and genocide that is the reality of the American story.


Excellent post, Cadet. The entire media is geared toward convincing the American people that without this massive perpetual military effort the USA could cease to exist at any given moment. I sure am glad it’s a Force for Good.

1 Like

I look for a STRONG antiwar candidate. Just hope that he/she can change the way the US thinks and acts about defense. For now, I’d say get rid of the whole National Security Administration, starting with Mr. B.

North Korea has come to prominence during this administration. A fresh start for Kim with this today:


You forgot Tulsi.


Gabbard is the one for this topic.
I found the grades distracting, I don’t agree w them, there is no basis for the rating & they pissed me off.


Sanders & Gabbard is the strongest ticket the Dems could run.

They both get the connection between spending trillions of dollars destroying other nations while at the same time “not having enough money” to do what needs to be done domestically.

Biden, Harris, Gillibrand, Booker, O’Rourke, Klobuchar have already demonstrated their propensities to selling out.

Warren would make an excellent attorney general or sect of education.


That’s all nice, but if he is so perceptive, how is it that he is so dismissive of the ONE person who has unequivocally put mindless and inordinately destructive regime change wars along with vastly wasteful military spending in the crosshairs?

If Tulsi is hanging out with “Islamophobes” as he suggests, what would be her interest in speaking out against regime change wars which so far have mostly been in country’s with large Muslim populations? If she were in any way Islamaphobic, why not push for even more wars and slaughter and misery? After all, the media would love her for that as would the DNC.

But that is not what she’s doing. And anyone writing an article on all the losers running on the Democrat side (with a photo of Kamala Harris) decrying the weak stance of Democrats (currently running) against rampant militarism and having Tulsi way down the list with very little illumination of her stance and dismissing her with baseless smears is a professional bullshitter. Unfortunately there’s a whole lot of that going on these days. Lots of sheepherders.

I like Howard Zinn. I’ve read a lot of his stuff. This guy does not compare. I think Howard Zinn would have found Tulsi quite remarkable.


If Sjursen was sincere about this article he would research this smear and not post it; so it is either a case of being too lazy to do his research or it is a deliberate smear. Either way by posting it his article and rating is worthless.


Sjursen’s weirdly optimistic here.

Gabbard is the only consistent anti-war voice among this pack. Sanders vacillates, which indeed puts him way in front of everybody else mentioned.

There’s no point passing anyone with no intention of keeping the country out of wars. That means everyone else here gets a solid F.

Clearly, the democratic alternative is not the Democratic alternative, and there’s no point discussing Republicans.


Common Dreams should discuss all the antiwar candidates including the ones most people have never heard of. It should discuss where they stand on all the issues so people can decide which antiwar candidate to vote for.


And skip the grade. That should be for the voter to do. Including recognition for those antiwar non-candidates and those Repubs who push antiwar, like for instance Rand Paul.


Warren for attorney general! She is fearless, bold, brave, and knows law.


Socially, we are up against a dilemma that Secy. of State JQ Adams spoke of. As a people we empathize with the sufferings of oppressed people around the world:

  • Syrians getting barrel bombs and (accused) chlorine gas dropped on them by the armed forces of their supposed government. Ditto for Iraqis during Saddam Hussein’s era. “Chemical Ali” came by that nickname for good cause.
  • Rwandans targeted for death by the Hutu ethnic group extremists during that infamous genocide.
  • Cambodians caught in “the killing fields”, oppressed by their radical-left Khmer Rouge govt. [Noam Chomsky gives Vietnam more positive credit for ending it than he gives anything the US has done, ever.]
  • And more.

The Hard Choice problem was stated by JQ Adams, that we are friends of freedom-loving people everywhere, but in the circumstances of his day, we will not assist any of them.

In our day, with the strength and resources of an empire at hand, what do we choose? A hard choice will inevitably be put to us. Will your anti-war candidate of choice tell us in a nationwide address that an incredible human disaster is happening in the Republic of XXX-ia, and that we as a nation won’t intervene militarily in it. Much like GHW Bush should have done with Somalia in 1992, not send any troops. And if people are massacred, or final solutioned, ah well, we won’t intervene.
– Do you accept that consequence? What do you do?*

(Also, fault on the Mainstream Media, and their “If it bleeds it leads” attitude towards the news. Do you think that GHW Bush would have intervened in Somalia if not for the constant news reports about the famine and the ‘technicals’ fouling up private NGO efforts to provide relief?)

*= During B Clinton’s air attack against Serbia over Kosovo, one anti-war letter writer proposed that we instead evacuate every oppressed Muslim Kosovar and impose economic sanctions on Serbia until they give in and do the right thing. :slight_smile:

That’s why I am so disappointed in him.

I don’t understand. Either option doesn’t fit with the man who wrote all those insightful articles in TruthDig. So it just really upsets me he would write like this in this article.

1 Like

Perhaps it is personal between him and Tulsi. I agree with your point regarding previous writings but this was taken straight from the DNC underhanded smear manual.


Agreed - excellent post! (But - grrrrr! - it’s TOE the line, not TOW it!!!)