Here's an interesting editorial:

As Tony Blair yesterday reaffirmed his determination to confront Saddam, the Stop The War coalition was able to present an impressive list of celebrities to add glamour to the fight to save Iraq from Anglo-American terror...

Everyone who is anyone from the soft-headed centre to the anti-democratic Left is there. All are welcome - except the people in whose name the party is being thrown: the Iraqis...

The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Iraqi dissidents are an embarrassment to the Left. After enduring misery few of us can imagine, they have discovered that, without foreign intervention, their country won't be freed from a tyrant who matches Stalin in his success in liquidating domestic opponents. Only America can intervene. Therefore an American invasion offers the possibility of salvation.

In local news, my (anti-warrior) lawyer called my attention to this group: Neighbors for Peace and Justice.

They want the L.A. City Council to, a la Berkeley, pass an anti-war resolution:

WHEREAS, the government has estimated that a war would cost 200 billion dollars, resulting in less federal funding for education, health care, job training, and housing in a time of increasing need for residents of Los Angeles; and

Maybe less federal funding for those things would be a good thing. Perhaps instead we could attack the root causes of, for instance, why there's a health care crisis in L.A. County and why we need to keep building new schools. Perhaps the Neighbors could let everyone know what's the second-largest building in each state capitol. Instead of whining about the loss of their social welfare programs, perhaps the Neighbors could turn for a second to the plight of the Iraqis under Saddam or whatever successor dictator eventually replaces him.

WHEREAS, a war would result in the death of Iraqi civilians, as well as military casualties, including U.S. service men and women. Additionally, a war would result in widespread environmental destruction; and

All wars result in deaths. Hopefully using smarter weapons those deaths and resulting environmental damage could be minimized. If there is a war, there won't be widespread environmental destruction unless either we have to go nuclear, or Saddam is able to launch another one of his scorched earth policies. Hopefully we could eliminate him or get him to surrender or flee before that time.

WHEREAS, a preemptive attack by the U.S. not only sets a dangerous precedent for the international community, but also promises to destabilize the entire Middle East region; and

There might be some truth in this. See my various other comments in the archives.

WHEREAS, the Bush administration has failed to present credible evidence that Iraq poses a military or security threat to the United States.

Ditto.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Los Angeles: supports all international diplomatic efforts to resolve the current conflict with Iraq and opposes any military action against Iraq unless as a response to a direct military attack by that country.

In other words, the Neighbors supports the U.N. and only the U.N., and we can only fight back if we're directly and militarily attacked.

So, the moment that the Iraqi navy comes sailing up the L.A. River to take downtown L.A., the Neighbors will be there, pitchforks in hand. I can't believe someone wrote the last bit unknowingly. More likely, I imagine they had a bit of a smirk on their face as they did so. Perhaps a more honest approach by the Neighbors would be to call this a Pre-emptive Surrender Petition/Resolution.

I'm glad I read the fine print, I wonder if the signatories to this petition did the same.