US labor federation calls for return of troops from Iraq

[tocqueville]

31 minutes ago

CHICAGO (AFP) - The largest US labor federation has called for the rapid return of US troops from Iraq.


It was the first time in the federation's 50-year history that the AFL-CIO has taken a position squarely opposing US foreign policy or military action.

"An unending military presence will waste lives and resources, undermine our nation's security and weaken our military," the AFL-CIO stated in a resolution adopted at the federation's convention in Chicago Thursday.

The resolution called for proper equipment to protect the troops, an expansion of veterans benefits and "a commitment to bring them home rapidly."

The federation, which has nearly 11 million members, also blasted President George Bush for misleading the public.

"The American people were misinformed before the war began and have not been informed about the reality on the ground and the very difficult challenges that lie ahead," it said. "It is long past time for the Bush administration to level with the American people and for Congress to fulfill its constitutionally mandated oversight responsibility."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050728/ts_alt_afp/usiraqwarlabor

[lvx35]

1. Yep. This be the new AFL-CIO. Hallelujah!

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. Sorry but this is one thing I don't think unions should get in to

Economic policies - yes

Health care - yes

Employment issues - definitely

CAFTA - yes

The war in Iraq - no

Even though I agree with much of this statement, I don't see it as a union issue. I used to be a site rep for my union and we actually lost members due to the union's stance on political issues that had nothing to do with our profession. A big one was abortion. I still don't understand why a teachers' union should take a position on abortion. I strongly agreed with the union's pro-choice stance. But I saw members drop out because of it.

Labor is in a crisis in our country. These unions need to clean their own houses and focus on solving their internal problems. Adopting a resolution on the war in Iraq is a waste of the delegates' time, IMO.

[Disturbed]

3. They will most likely get their wish..

somewhat in Mar. '06 when maybe around 60% of U.S. Troops will be pulled out in time for the '06 Congressional Elections. In the remaining months there will be more death and mayehm. A silver lining is that the War is over. No more "War On Terror". Now it is only "The struggle against violent Extremists". Doesn't that make things better?

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Unions could accomplish a great deal more

and maybe even improve working conditions and the labor market for the returning soldiers. That is what they should be focusing on, not adopting resolutions that the WH will just ignore.

[lvx35]

5. I disagree.

Its about getting more people on the streets, more people invovled in Unions at a grassroots level, as a cultural phenomenon. The truth is that Unions are a sort of elite class for a growing number of US workers...Wal-Mart and McDonalds workers can only dream of being a teamster, its a class higher than them as far as pay and benefits. I think the AFL-CIO has the right idea...whether it will work right away, we'll see. But I think it will.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. So do you think

anti war statements like this will help build up membership in unions?

[lvx35]

7. Yes.

The key is that I don't believe its the pro-war right wing who are the only people who aren't organized at this point, its also a huge amount of urban workers who would consider themselves more liberal, and I think they would be a far more powerful economic engine for Dems if they were organized, rather than making minimum wage. I think its in the long term interest of both Dems and Unions, because the two have a synergy.
I also think war opinion has been turning, but see how far that goes.