The goal of many "pro-war libertarians" is, I believe, not to build the LP, but to neutralize it as serious competition to the GOP.
Even more than they hate the antiwar Left, the Neocons fear a strong “antiwar right,” which is how an antiwar LP would be perceived.
We live in a polarized nation. People think there’s only “Left” and “Right.” Many people pick their team and support—dittohead fashion—the position their “team leaders” dictate.
So long as “anti Iraq War” is associated solely with the Left, the Neocons can rely on a solid base of support from voters identifying themselves as Right.
But an “antiwar Right” would confuse Rightist voters. They’d say, “Gee, I’m right-wing, so how do I go on this Iraq War issue? I thought only Leftist America-haters opposed the war. But now I see that people on ‘my team’ oppose it too! Maybe I should take a closer look into this issue…”
The quickest, most effective way to end this war, and prevent future wars, is a broad "Left/Center/Right" single-issue coalition against the war.
Unfortunately, some (thankfully, not all) antiwar progressives want to "own" the antiwar issue. They wish to use the peace movement to attract supporters to other progressives issues. And so they'd rather Rightists not show up at antiwar events.
Those progressives who wish to "own" the antiwar issue are thus aiding Neocons -- who also want progressives to "own" the antiwar issue.
However, those who put the cause of peace first, will seek coalitions with like-minded peaceniks, so as to build a broad "Left/Center/Right" peace coalition -- the Neocon's worst nightmare.
Shireen Abu Akleh in her own words - [image: (FILE) A photo taken on October 15, 2018. Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh takes a photo during the coverage of the closure of Lubban al-Sha...
3 hours ago