How do you negotiate a truce with scattered bands of thuggish bandits fighting not for secular objectives but for religious fundamentalism? Let Afghanistan's elected government fight them. Negotiating a truce with a diverse groups of guerrillas will only undermine the Karzai government's authority and leave people increasingly skeptical of the power of the central government. With the U.S. preoccupied with the war in Iraq in this election year, and EU countries worried about Iran's nuclear program, this is the worst time to consider beefing up troop reinforcements in Afghanistan. Besides, the problem is complicated by Pakistan's ambiguous attitude toward the Taliban; Islamabad has skillfully used them to bargain more military aid from the US and to keep the warring tribes (including rival Taliban factions) quarreling with each other so that it can influence Afghanistan's strategic future.
Let's now turn the tables on Pakistan and ask it to send troops to fight in the Afghan war if it wants military and economic aid from the US to continue: after all, Pakistani ISI military intelligence played a big role during the Cold War in arming the mujahedeen that today constitute the Taliban leadership. The Karzai government will strongly resist Pakistan's involvement, of course, but then it will give it an additional motivation to shape up and clean up its own house without depending on outside forces.
The Taliban thrives on ignorance and indigence of local populace. In order to win the war against the Taliban, the Karzai government should open up more roads, build more schools and housings, start more television stations, supply more electricity, and create more urban centers -- i.e., focus more on economic projects to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan interior. The answer is not to bring in more foreign troops.
In today's war against Islamofascism, there's no stronger weapon than the free flow of information from the outside world. Show pictures of how a fellow Muslim country like Turkey or Malaysia is doing, or of how the once impoverished countries like India and China are advancing. It will be a much more potent weapon than the barrel of a gun.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/25/2008 07:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
#1
Great idea. Send more money so it can be stolen by local officials. Sorry, but this isn't an original idea, and it doesn't work because of corruption.
#2
With the U.S. preoccupied with the war in Iraq in this election year
Primary false assumption. Only the professional media are preoccupied, and they're preoccupied with the coming election. The Surge in Iraq is over; we're now increasing the number, and the aggressiveness, of the troops in Afghanistan, hence the increased number of encounters resulting in scores of dead Taliban.
The decision this week by Zimbabwe's opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party to pull out of Friday's presidential run off election will not have surprised many people in Zimbabwe. A growing chorus of doubt regarding the legitimacy of the poll has been raised, which came amid mounting political violence in the country.
Hours before the opposition party announced its decision on Sunday, a rally in the capital Harare -- initially banned by police before courts ruled the MDC could go ahead -- was violently broken up by pro-Mugabe youth militia.
After winning the March 29 poll, albeit with a margin insufficient to be declared outright winner of presidential elections, opposition party leader Morgan Tsvangirai appeared to be in a dominant position to win Friday's run-off poll.
Arthur Mutambara, who contested the presidential poll at the head of a smaller faction of the MDC, had offered to back Tsvangirai the second round. Analysts also believed that the harsh economic conditions which have seen many Zimbabweans seeking refuge in neighbouring countries could have worked in his favour.
But agreeing to participate in the run-off was a gamble by opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai in the face of contrary arguments from some sections of the Zimbabwean society who felt it was naive to expect a fair vote in a terrain dominated by Mugabe and his associates.
Zimbabwe's former minister of finance and losing presidential candidate, Simba Makoni, argued that a free and fair election was not possible under the current circumstances and campaigned vigorously for a government of national unity which he said would lead the country through a national healing process over the next two years, after which proper elections can then be organised.
The Feminist Political Education Project (FePEP), a grouping specialising in female participation in politics also called for the cancellation of the election in favour of a negotiated settlement. "Elections will not solve the crisis that faces Zimbabwe today. We have learnt from other countries that have experienced conflict that elections alone do not solve political governance crises. What Zimbabwe needs, is a negotiated settlement and the presidential elections run-off must be called off," said FePEP in a statement released early this month.
Zimbabwe entering deeper crisis
At independence in 1980, Zimbabwe was one of the strongest economies in southern Africa. Today the country is experiencing mounting poverty and hardship, with 80 percent unemployment, a valueless currency and rapidly escalating political tensions. For the majority of hard-pressed Zimbabweans, any kind of settlement will do -- many welcomed Tsvangirai's decision to pull out of election. "Tsvangirai has taken a very good decision under the circumstances, because had he continued with this election many people would have been killed this week, it is a decision in favour of the people of Zimbabwe against Mugabe. It is now up to the international community to act to stop Mugabe," Alois Chingwe, a Harare street vendor told IPS.
However, another Harare resident who asked not to be identified said Tsvangirai's withdrawal is a blow to the people of Zimbabwe who had risked beatings or even murder by voting for the MDC in March. "People have suffered enough already, others have died and had nothing to lose anymore. What this means is that Mugabe will have an easy victory which he does not deserve and the people of Zimbabwe will continue suffering, the pull out will be disastrous," he said.
But the MDC leader -- obviously aware of these sentiments-- said on Monday that people should think about those in the rural areas who have borne the brunt of the violence. "There will be individuals who will in the comfort of their homes say why did we withdraw. I can understand that, but please give consideration to those in the rural areas who are under siege and have no one to protect them," Tsvangirai, told a special US-based programme aimed at Zimbabwe.
Harare-based political analyst and director of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Director, Takura Zhangazha, told IPS that a government of national unity is now all but inevitable. "Negotiation is the most likely outcome of this impasse. The only issue is whether it will still be overseen by SADC under Mbeki or by the AU or the U.N. MDC has indicated that it is willing to share power, but I am not sure if they are willing to let ZANU-PF be the head of a coalition government. But it is most likely that negotiations will be the solution that will be sought by the regional and international community," said Zhangazha. "With or without MDC, ZANU-PF is going to try as much as possible to hold the election on Friday and then negotiate with its leader as the president because that's the only way they can survive. And they are serious about that," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/25/2008 07:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
REDDIT > WILL BRITAIN BECOME A DICTATORSHIP [London allegedly engaging in domestic repression?]; + READ MY LIPS:BRITS DEVELOP NEW SURVEILLANCE TECH THAT CAN INTERPRETE ORAL/STREET COBVERSATIONS AT A DISTANCE???
Looks like INTEL-PYWAR's MIND- AND LIP-READER, etc. PSYCH OPERATIVES ARE GOING TO BE OUT OF A JOB SOON - BEATEN BY SKYNET/MATRIX???
"Hi, John McCain. This is Alex. And he's my first. So far his talents include trying any new food and chasing after our dog. That and making my heart pound every time I look at him. And so, John McCain, when you say you would stay in Iraq for 100 years, were you counting on Alex? Because if you were, you can't have him."
-- Script for a TV ad being aired by MoveOn.org and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
HI, ALEX'S mom - John McCain here. Your boy is adorable, and I don't blame you for being crazy about him. Believe me, I know just how you feel. I have been blessed with seven children - Doug, Andrew, Sidney, Meghan, Jack, Jim, and Bridget - and I can tell you from experience that the intense bond you feel now is only going to get stronger with time. Even after Alex has grown into a young man, your love for him will pull at your heartstrings. Few things will give you greater peace of mind than the knowledge that your child is happy and well - and should anything threaten or hurt him, you will ache with distress and yearn to protect him.
So I understand why you might be wary and indignant if you've been told that I support an endless and unwinnable war in Iraq. Any decent parent would recoil from a politician who was blithely indifferent to the prospect of American troops fighting and dying for another 100 years.
But I am not such a politician! The last thing I want is to see our country mired in a war it is doomed to lose. That's the kind of war we were fighting in Iraq before the "surge" that began in January 2007 - the revamped counterinsurgency strategy that I had been advocating for nearly four years before President Bush finally agreed to change course.
Today, thanks to that change in strategy, our prospects for victory in Iraq are brighter than ever. "Don't look now, but the US-backed government and army may be winning the war," The Washington Post editorialized recently. Just the other day, a Page 1 story in USA Today highlighted how dramatically things have improved. "Roadside bomb attacks and fatalities," the June 23 story began, "are down by almost 90 percent over the last year." Of course there are no guarantees in wartime, but I think the chances are excellent that the war in Iraq will have ended in victory before your Alex is old enough for nursery school.
But even in a peaceful postwar Iraq there is likely to be a role for American troops, just as there is in other former war zones. Despite what MoveOn, AFSCME, and the Democratic Party would like you to believe, I don't envision another century of war in Iraq. I envision a century of peace. That's why, when a voter mentioned during a New Hampshire event in January that President Bush had spoken of "staying in Iraq for 50 years," I replied: "Maybe a hundred." After all, I continued, "We've been in Japan for 60 years. We've been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That would be fine with me, as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed." Senator Barack Obama and his supporters always omit the words in italics, but wouldn't you agree that they are essential to my meaning?
Whatever our political differences might be, you and I both hate war. My family has a long history of military service, and like my father and grandfather before me, I know only too well how terrible its costs can be. The sacrifices of war are not mere abstractions or political talking points to me. I could never be blithely indifferent about placing in harm's way the brave Americans - among them my two youngest sons - who wear their nation's uniform and volunteer to defend its security and freedom.
And who knows? Perhaps your baby boy will grow up to be one of those brave Americans himself. The world will still be a dangerous place, and we will still need young men and women to stand guard against those who would harm us. If Alex chooses to step forward, he will have the support and esteem of a grateful nation. And, I feel quite sure, of his proud and loving mother.
#2
Hotair has a video done by Major (Ret) Eric England's wife (he's running for Congress) with her two young boys --- she's from Poland (guys, she's beautiful) ..... well, click here and go read about her and watch her 30 second rebuttal!
(just so i can chuckle at MoveOut's venomous frothy response to it when it shows up in my in-box... ...yeah, so i'm too lazy to get off their distro list. Know thy enemy, as we say at the 'burg.)
#4
I imagine it's gone viral, Querent. I think it's safe to assume at least half the country will have seen it soon. It may even show up on The Daily Show -- according to a comment at HotAir.com. he doesn't think much of MoveOn.org's efforts thus far.
#5
The evil Dr. Soros and MoveOn.org try to remake the world in their image once again--a world that is safe for drug users and extreme left wing moonbats. I have difficulty thinking the MoveOn adds are effective--they seem so transparent.
Its extremely unlikely that Barack Obama and his campaign will get in legal trouble for featuring a revised version of the presidential seal. But like Michael Dukakis riding in a tank or John Kerry declaring that he voted for war funding before he voted against it, we may have just witnessed one of those unexpected moments that, in retrospect, comes to define one of the candidates unflattering traits.
The decision to create the Seal of Obamerica seems like an almost deliberate response to Peggy Noonans column about the difference between Old America and New America, and how each partys candidate embodies one of the two. When President Bush speaks, the Obama campaign doesnt just want to change the rhetoric, the policies, and the man behind the lectern; apparently the seal seems a bit stodgy and old-fashioned for their tastes as well.
In November, well be hard-pressed to find a voter who says they voted for McCain because some Obama staffer thought it would be a good idea to redesign the presidential seal, just as no one is going to vote against Obama because some overzealous volunteer made two women in headscarves move further away so they would be outside camera angles. (Of course, a third example of this,we need more white people! we need more white people! will be a bigger story, because it will be a recurring pattern instead of one or two instances of bad judgment.) Now comes word that Obama has gotten rid of the Obamerica seal. Yes, boys and girls, the Obama campaign killed a week-old seal! Where's Greenpeace when you need 'em?
But the fact that the someone on the campaign said some variation of, Hey, lets have Obama speak with his own redesigned version of the seal, and that either no one objected or the objections were overruled may become a symbol of hubris and disconnect on par with the candidates litany of what motivates bitter small town voters during a fundraiser on Billionaires Row in San Francisco earlier this year.
The Obama camp uses the word change more frequently than commas and perhaps in that constant repeating of the mantra they occasionally miss that a country yearning for change wants improvement, not change for the sake of change. What exactly was wrong with the presidential seal? The idea that a candidate and the people around him should deem it lacking, and that an upgrade would be an all-blue version that incorporates his campaign logo into the seal is strange. The idea that no grownup was around to shake a head and say, you dont change the seal of the office you seek while on the campaign trail furrows the brow. Perhaps most perplexingly, why use the Latin yes we can as a replacement for E Pluribus Unum (Out of Many, One)? Wasnt this campaign pledging to unite the country? Didnt this guy wow the political world with a debut speech that called for no red states or blue states, but red white and blue states? . . .
As Kurt Andersen noted in New York magazine, its easy to conclude that the precisely diverse crowds behind Obama represent the America. But they actually leave out large swaths of an America that, if old, isnt gone yet and this isnt even getting into the headscarves.
Its not only that the people who create and run the media and who love Obama occupy the social and cultural upper rungs. The world depicted in the media, broadly construed not just straight journalism but everything we watch and read and hear is overwhelmingly a bright, shiny, upscale, youngish world. Uneducated white people, residents of the so-called C and D counties, and the elderly in other words, Hillary Clinton voters are seldom allowed into the mass-media foreground, and when they appear its usually as bathetic figures, victims or losers. (And working-class black pop culture is considered part of the sexy mainstream in a way that working-class white pop culture is not.)
The redesigned logo, the will.i.am video, the cover of mens Vogue, his ability to be deemed one of the fittest men in America (despite the occasional cigarette), his Versace-dedicated line, the news that he regularly trades lengthy e-mails with Scarlett Johansson. . . . We get it, the guy is cooler than 99 percent of us will ever be. We will hear endless comparisons to John F. Kennedy, the last president who enjoyed the status of a style icon.
But its easy to imagine John Kennedy winning the 1960 election even if he hadnt been cool. Its hard to imagine him winning if he hadnt gotten to the right of Nixon on national security. Having the coolest-looking seal in the world on your lectern cant compensate for weaknesses of the man speaking behind it.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/25/2008 10:36 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
HO gottem a seal problem?
Maybe it's just an ice-cream problem?
#3
I'm amused that the self proclaimed champion of 'Hope and Change' used Latin on the seal. The office responsible for shield and device heraldry within the US government dropped the use of Latin and French on such devices over a decade ago. Day late, dollar short. Some change.
#4
OBAMAS SET FASHION WORLD ON FIRE: Barack's style seen on Milan runway; Michelle's 'View' dress still in demand.
In Milan, Donatella Versace used the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee as inspiration for her Spring-Summer 2009 collection presented Saturday evening. Calling Obama "the man of the moment," Versace said the new line was designed for "a relaxed man who doesn't need to flex muscles to show he has power."
This is what the Obama 'anti-Smear' site is saying...
The truth about Barack's birth certificate
Lie:
Obama Is Not a Natural Born Citizen
Truth:
Senator Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, after it became a state on August 21st, 1959. Obama became a citizen at birth under the first section of the 14th Amendment
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
But look at the 'Hour of Birth' on the Obama Birth Certificate: 7:24 PM.
Now look at the 'Hour of Birth' on a blank birth certificate you can download and fill in yourself from PhotoBucket. Link to Blank Certificate, you saw it here first!
Looks a little hinky, agreed.
However, main point is the same: Barack Obama is a natural-born citizen because he was born in Hawaii to an American mother. In the same way, John McCain is a natural-born citizen because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone to American parents. Let's find something more worthwhile to fight about, 'k?
Posted by: one eyed wolf ||
06/25/2008 01:38 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Perhaps the real birth certificate is not available because it would indicate that the parents were not married?
#5
I suspect his father's religion was listed. The newborn is rarely consulted in such matters. He just doesn't want to deal with the ramifications of that.
#6
"Let's find something more worthwhile to fight about, 'k?"
If George Bush put out an obviously fake birth certificate, or fake anything, that would be worthwhile to every news outlet in town. But we must not forget, this is the "Messiah".
Posted by: one eyed wolf ||
06/25/2008 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Gotta wonder why the the Obama campaign didn't scan the original document instead of showing a computer generated, laser printed certificate.
Posted by: ed ||
06/25/2008 20:53 Comments ||
Top||
#8
actually, I think "born to a woman" might be contentious for the Obama "divine birth" crowd. tooooo icky, and not biblical enuf?
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/25/2008 22:12 Comments ||
Top||
Baghdad, Iraq The war in Iraq is not yet finished for U.S. combat forces but you can almost see the end, just over the horizon, from my office perched in the Red Zone of downtown Baghdad. This last May saw the lowest monthly American military deaths of the entire war: 19 to include four non-combat fatalities. Attacks on U.S. Department of Defense contractor convoys have dropped by a phenomenal 20 times from one in five incidents at the beginning of 2007 to approximately one percent of cargo movements today. Oil production has exceeded pre-war volumes and the Iraqi government is on its way to financial self-sufficiency. Provincial elections are sure to happen this fall which will further reintegrate the once-estranged Sunni minority back into local governance.
Over the last three months, the Iraqi army has successfully taken the lead in major security operations in Mosul against the last in-country stronghold of al-Qaeda, and against Iranian-supported Shia militants in Basra and Baghdads Sadr City. The political will now exists in the democratically elected Iraqi government to finally rid the country of all militias. Among the hundreds of Iraqis with whom I work, a common refrain is: Bes jaish wahid bil Iraq jaish Iraqi! (Only one army in Iraq the Iraqi army!) This is a direct counterpoint to the Jaish al Mehdi of Moqtada Sadr and evidence of a growing faith in their nations ability to protect itself. Here is the exit strategy writ large: Get the American-trained Iraqi security forces stood up and U.S. combat units can come home.
The impact of the Iraq mission on world security is also dramatic and counter to what is commonly heard in the media and academic elites. The Iraq conflict has drawn fanatical Islamists to fight nearer to home, and as a just-released Canadian institutes study details, overall international terrorism fatalities outside of the Iraq war have plunged by 40 percent since 2001. The Simon Fraser University Human Security Brief records that, due to the humiliating recent defeats experienced by Al Qaeda in Iraq, popular support in the Islamic world for the perpetrators of 9/11 has fallen off precipitously. For example, in Pakistan (where al-Qaeda is arguably most deeply entrenched): support for Osama bin Laden has dropped from 70 percent in August 2007 to 4 percent in January 2008.
After going from success to success over the past three decades, from destroying a super power (the Soviet Union) in Afghanistan, to blowing up American embassies in East Africa and the USS Cole off Yemen, onto 9/11, and nearly pushing Iraq into civil war in 2006, the Islamic extremists have now failed dramatically. Their jihad to dominate the Islamic world and beyond has smashed against the twin rocks of a steadfast American will and the Iraqi peoples natural desire to live free of tyranny, whether from Saddam, al-Qaeda, or Iran. Nothing dissuades recruiting like catastrophic failure.
Strongly held arguments challenge the Iraq conflict as central to the war on terror with the claim that the real al-Qaeda of bin Laden is not present on the battlefield here. That statement ignores the nature of jihadi extremism as a pan-Arab ideology. Iraq is central, if not the key nation, in the Arab world. Baghdad is ground zero. Not the mountains, caves, and isolation of the Afghan-Pakistani border. When Robert Baer, former CIA operative and now commentator for Time, states that al Qaeda is an idea, a way of thinking, when he argues against our taking the war on terror to Iraq, he is right on, but not in the way he uses that statement. What is the death knell of the efficacy of an idea? When reality proves it does not work. Bin Laden himself has said the war in Iraq is central to his jihad, and we are taking him at his word here. The Muslim world sees that the al-Qaeda idea kills far more Muslims than infidels. The Muslim world sees the failure of the suicide bomber the only significant weapon of jihadi terrorism to force out the American Army from one of the greatest lands of Islam. The al-Qaeda idea has died a violent death on the battlefields of Iraq.
Carter Andress, CEO and principal owner of American-Iraqi Solutions Group, is author of Contractor Combatants: Tales of an Imbedded Capitalist.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/25/2008 07:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in Iraq
#1
TOPIX > MCCAIN, OBAMA ADVISERS: FUTURE US SECURITY HINGES IN ASIA + US SEES CLIMATE CHANGE AS SPARKING NEW WARS.
As before, OSAMA + RADICAL ISLAM > SAVING THE JIHAD = THERE CAN ONLY BE TWO. US/US-ALLIES + ISLAMIST CENTRAL ASIA [Nukular?], at least for time being as per Osama's + Zawi's, etals. natural lifetime???
* 2008-2012 > iFF both the USA + IRAN "TAKE A BREAK" from the WOT, DARE 2008-2012 = NEW "WAR OF ATTRITION" [post Six-Day War/1967 Arab-Israeli Conflict]AS PER [RAMPAGING?]MILITANT-TERR GROUPS VV FUTURE ISLAMIST ASIA [future Nukular?]???
-- It is a great cliché for journalists to report on their conversations with cabbies. I dont care. Was in Milwaukee and had a cabbie with one of those white Muslim hats on those Muslim beanies. I asked him where he was from. He said Somalia. And he said utterly unprompted by me how grateful he was to be in America. For one thing, his native country was war-torn.
And then he said, This is America, the land of opportunity and he said it with such a sweet sincerity (in that lilting, musical accent).
Very odd that I should have mentioned Anne Sofie von Otter earlier in this column. She is a Swedish mezzo-soprano, and she features in an episode I have discussed in Impromptus before. Years ago, she was in Carnegie Hall, and she had occasion to refer to America as the land of opportunity. (I wont bog you down in details now.) And many in the audience laughed laughed because they thought ASvO was being sarcastic or ironic. Instead, she was being perfectly sincere.
Anyway . . .
Friends, I am a restrictionist, when it comes to immigration. Even so, I sometimes think when I meet such people as that Somalian that immigrants will be the salvation of us all. White, liberal, secular America is tired, clouded, and unappreciative.
-- A final vignette, or scene, or mood from the Midwest: I was in a small town in Illinois a village, really. A farming community. The sky seems bigger there than in the East broad, long, and huge. The clouds are enormous, and impossibly white and puffy.
The cemeteries are filled with German names, and the earliest tombstones are engraved in German. Yes, they are part and parcel of the American story.
Through my windows in a gracious old home wafted soft, warm breezes What is so rare as a day in June? Also through those windows wafted churchbells and train whistles lots of train whistles, which is such an American sound.
President Reagan ended his second inaugural address with that phrase, that idea: the American sound. (And he was from small-town Illinois, incidentally.)
What is my point? None, really just appreciation, and Ill see you real soon.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/25/2008 09:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Joe Klein, an A-list journalist who has written for The New Republic, The New York Times, The Washington Post, LIFE and Rolling Stone, and authored the novel Primary Colors, writing at Time magazine's 'Swampland' blog (boldface emphasis added):
The notion that we could just waltz in and inject democracy into an extremely complicated, devout and ancient culture smacked--still smacks--of neocolonialist legerdemain. The fact that a great many Jewish neoconservatives--people like Joe Lieberman and the crowd over at Commentary--plumped for this war, and now for an even more foolish assault on Iran, raised the question of divided loyalties: using U.S. military power, U.S. lives and money, to make the world safe for Israel. And then there is the question--made manifest by the no-bid contracts offered U.S. oil companies by the Iraqis--of two oil executives, Bush and Cheney, securing a new source of business for their Texas buddies. Please note: this is not some career 'activist' over at DU with a screen name like 'DeathToAllRepubs' or 'Ih8neoKKKons' who's earned a '10,000 posts' star by his name--this is a mainstream, A-list, top-of-the-heap journalist working for a major news outlet. Time-fargin'-magazine!
I confidently predict he will not be fired, disciplined, or even seriously critiqued by anyone at Time or one of the other A-list publications. He is at no risk of being named a Kieth Olbermann 'World's Worst Person.'
If that's not enough to make you nervous, scroll down into the comments. The descendants of Julius Streicher are alive and well:
Good on you and your guts for being the first big-time MSM pundit that I've seen to actually say something like this out loud. It just makes one seethe. All this warmongering and sacrifice to 'promote democracy' for the benefit of what's essentially one of the world's few remaining apartheid states, and one that's had a long, sordid, and unanswered history of assassinations and oppression. And if there is any red flag that global corporatism is the real next big threat to liberty worldwide (NOT terrorism), the Iraq War was it.
You got it right, Joe. . . . And I'm very glad that people (particularly Jewish commentators) are starting to speak openly about the fact that the neocons' loyalties might be a bit conflicted.
To be fair, there's also some pushback in the comboxes:
Your comment about 'Jewish neoconservatives' is simple anti-semitism. It's like saying that white Americans who support NATO have divided loyalties, because they favor policies that defend Europe, at the exepnse of America. Not surprising that isolationism and anti-semtisim go hand in hand, a la Pat ('the Nazis weren't the problem') Buchanan. Straighten up.
Excuse me, I am against the surge, as it happens, against the war, as it happens, and, as it happens, I agree with your criticism. I hold these opinions as a citizen of this country, not as a Jew. I am going to repeat what other people have said, that your posting is anti-semitic by implying that the Jewishness of certain pro-war people is sufficient evidence to call into question their allegiance to our country. But I don't think you realize the gravity of your problem. Yours is an idea that can most easily be traced to German right-wing propaganda starting in the 1840s (see Bruno Bauer, and Marx 'On the Jewish Question' and continuing through the 1940s with Nazi propaganda. You find yourself in a great tradition. I strongly urge you to apologize and to retract your bigoted statement.
The problem is there's too much junior-trainee Julius Streicher, and not enough pushback, in our so-called mainstream press.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/25/2008 06:56 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
How do you negotiate a truce with scattered bands of thuggish bandits fighting not for secular objectives but for religious fundamentalism? Let Afghanistan's elected government fight them. Negotiating a truce with a diverse groups of guerrillas will only undermine the Karzai government's authority and leave people increasingly skeptical of the power of the central government. With the U.S. preoccupied with the war in Iraq in this election year, and EU countries worried about Iran's nuclear program, this is the worst time to consider beefing up troop reinforcements in Afghanistan. Besides, the problem is complicated by Pakistan's ambiguous attitude toward the Taliban; Islamabad has skillfully used them to bargain more military aid from the US and to keep the warring tribes (including rival Taliban factions) quarreling with each other so that it can influence Afghanistan's strategic future. 
By Carter Andress
