A Forum for Grinches and Ho-Ho-Hoes

[Spanky]

[i] It was always in Syria's interest to keep the muslim/christian fight going there, even pre-palestinian move-in.

Important point and very true. I agree that Syria has been a destabilizing influence, but Israel and the US gave them the opportunity to achive their nefarious goals. Before then, Lebanon had achieved a political compromise among the various factions that proved to be pretty stable.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Valentine
Hijacking Catastrophe -- Blueprint for Empire : 9/11, Fear, and the Selling of American Empire

http://www.informationclearinghouse...article6895.htm

[fyi, 1 hour view all of this if possible -- you will learn a lot]

...Stay tuned. Clearly, Iran and Syria are next. Saudi Arabia? North Korea? Cuba and/or Venezuela?

* * *

Re the above link http://www.informationclearinghouse...article6895.htm - I just watched it and thought it was extremely well done. Very interesting and informative. Definitely worth watching.

Thanks for the URL. Personally, I think that Empire - the obviously true aim of the U.S. government - is barely concealed under the lofty rhetoric of Bush's State of the Union address. In its pursuit, the U.S. government is committed to the destruction of every government and people that stands in its way, in the Middle East and throughout the world.

"Freedom and democracy" for Iraq and "liberty" around the world are new code words for a very particular global strategy. According to this strategy, the Pentagon's military pre-eminence will be used to invade, bomb, subvert and threaten any and all countries in the formerly colonized and semi-colonized world that seek to maintain control over their own resources and retain even nominal independence and sovereignty. Bush and the neo-conservatives are the political spokespersons for this strategy. Congress and the courts fade into an ornamental status as Pentagon-enforced capitalism asserts itself as the real power in contemporary U.S. politics.

Someone please termiate this clown

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Spanky
The new democratic Iraqi government (if it survives) is going to be extremely hostile to Israel. It is very hard to find any Iraqi's that even think Israel has a right to exist.

cite please

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by bilmore
True to some extent, but I think the main force hasn't been the Israeli/American reactionary impulse, but the surrounding ME prime impulse. It was always in Syria's interest to keep the muslim/christian fight going there, even pre-palestinian move-in. UNIFIL probably brought more harming influence to L than did the US. This was just one of several 1940's mandate abortions that made no sense when the borders were laid out.

Do you think Israel is this divorced from the Middle East? The Israelis and Syrians have played fairly similar roles in Lebanon, and have had fairly similiar motivations.

Note that one deal the Syrians would like to cut is a Lebanon for Golan Heights deal.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Do you think Israel is this divorced from the Middle East?

No, and if I gave the impression that I think Israel is divorced from it all, I mispoke. I think it's central, in that it provides a focus for an awful lot of dissatisfaction. We can "fix" Iraq, Syria can "fix" itself, but Israel is still going to have to find a way to normalize its existence with the rest of the ME in orderfor the whole powderkeg to lessen. I think that's a possibility, if (and only if) the Palestinians can lose their martyrdom.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I can't believe that anyone on this board thinks that spreading democracy around the world would be a bad thing. But we probably differ about

- whether Bush is trying to go about it in the right way
- whether Bush is trying to go about it
- whether Syria's FOX-reported withdrawal from Lebanon and other good things that happen in the world have much of anything to do with US policy
- whether continuing repression in many of our closest allies (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc.) has much of anything to do with US policy

I agreed with the rest of this posting but I think this bit hit the hammer right on the head of nail. I generally support what the Bush administration is doing but these are valid points. The administration is being hypocritical, because it is not supporting democracy in Pakistan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. However, I don't think we really want democracy in these countries. In general we should push for democracy but sometimes maybe democracy is not a good thing. But again, my position is the height of hypocrisy. Does anyone think we would be better off if Saudi Arabia or Pakistan were democratic?

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Why? Lebanon's always had a strong opposition. And often an armed one.

Per a post a couple weeks ago, Club is under the impression that Lebanon is/was as totalitarian state, where the oppressed populace lived in fear of a dominating government.

{Not to say that some weren't oppressed . . .}

S_A_M

efs

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Per a post a couple weeks ago, Club is under the impression that Lebanon is/was as totalitarian state, where the oppressed populace lived in fear of a dominating government.

{Not to say that some weren't oppressed . . .}

S_A_M

efs

I still think that's true - they live in fear of Syria.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by sgtclub
cite please

I don't have a specific cite, but it is like asking me to cite support for the fact that most Republicans support tax cuts. Or cite support for the fact that most Argentinians think the Falklands should be part of Argentina. Or Spanish that think Gibrarltar should be part of Spain. I saw an episode of nightline where the reporter in Eqypt was trying to find just one Arab who thought Israel had a right to exist. He could not. Everytime I have traveled in in an Arab country I always get asked about the US support of Israel and how could America support Israel. I have never even met a Christian arab that supports Isreal. Can you cite me any poll that shows any support for Isreal in an Arab country?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sgtclub
cite please

Cf. Zogby (yes, the pollster oft cited on these boards), What Arabs Think -- this is a 2002 book based on extensive research and polling.

We're going to start looking to Spanky for a conservative realist's perspective on the board, Clubby, and assume you're giving us the neo-con wish-think angle.

Unless, that is, you can come up with as good a reality-based cite for the contrary position, that Democracy in Iraq is leading (not theoretically will lead, sometime after Bush has left office, after we are all dead, or once Global warming has put Washington under 10 feet of water) to a softening of attitudes toward Israel.

(editted to fix spelling and insert additional vituperative little zingers).

[Spanky]

I don't think most Americans realize this, but a large percentage of Arabs, see Arabia (that is from Mauritania or Morocco to Iraq and Syria down to Yemen) as a nation that has just not been unified politically yet. They see Israel as occupying part of the heart of the Arab nation. Many refer to Israel has the knife in the heart of Arabia. The hostility towards Isreal in the rest of the Muslim world is more religious and therefor not as intense (or at least less universal). Turkey in fact supports isreal. Eventhough the Iranian government is hostile to Isreal, there are many Iranians that support Isreal (mainly because it sticks it to the Arabs who they hate). But to the Arabs it is a nationalistic issue - so even Christian Arabs (coptics, Caldeans etc), and other non-mulim Arabs are strongly opposed to Isreal.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Spanky
I don't think most Americans realize this, but a large percentage of Arabs, see Arabia (that is from Mauritania or Morocco to Iraq and Syria down to Yemen) as a nation that has just not been unified politically yet. They see Israel as occupying part of the heart of the Arab nation. Many refer to Israel has the knife in the heart of Arabia. The hostility towards Isreal in the rest of the Muslim world is more religious and therefor not as intense (or at least less universal). Turkey in fact supports isreal. Eventhough the Iranian government is hostile to Isreal, there are many Iranians that support Isreal (mainly because it sticks it to the Arabs who they hate). But to the Arabs it is a nationalistic issue - so even Christian Arabs (coptics, Caldeans etc), and other non-mulim Arabs are strongly opposed to Isreal.

I think it's an issue mostly because it's been used to deflect popular anger from the ME despots. If you subjugate your people and trash their lives, it's good to give them something external to hate. Israel has been a good target for that, and the constant whine from Arafat has gone far in helping the rest of the ME keep the lid on. But, once (if?) the Palestinians start becoming a merged society, a lot of that goes away.

As to, do we really want democracy in those tyrant states, I think we do, and it's gonna be hell for a while once they get there. It's like working an industrial pressure vessel, and realizing that the relief is stuck closed - you know you have to knock if free, and there's gonna be a dangerous explosive mess when you do that, but you need to do it, because otherwise the pressure's only going up.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by bilmore
I think it's an issue mostly because it's been used to deflect popular anger from the ME despots. If you subjugate your people and trash their lives, it's good to give them something external to hate. Israel has been a good target for that, and the constant whine from Arafat has gone far in helping the rest of the ME keep the lid on. But, once (if?) the Palestinians start becoming a merged society, a lot of that goes away.

I agree with you that the despots use Isreal to divert attention from themselves. But I disagree with you that they need to fan the flames. I think that is the big myth. If you really undestand the Arab view, you can see that they see Israel as a foreigh occupation of Arab land. They view the fact that original residents of palestine are not allowed to return and any western jew can go there as a form of ethnic cleansing of Arab land. All the peace treaties are highly unpopular throughout the Arab world. If you have democratic countries in Arabia that have to respond to the public's wishes they will be less inclined to work with Israel. The current governments have practical reasons to work with (Even if behind the scenes) with Isreal. Democratic governments, that need the support of their populations, will have less of an incentive to work with the Israelis. Democracy may bring Arab political unity, and then Isreal will find itself surrounding by one hugely hostile Arab nation.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by bilmore
As to, do we really want democracy in those tyrant states, I think we do, and it's gonna be hell for a while once they get there. It's like working an industrial pressure vessel, and realizing that the relief is stuck closed - you know you have to knock if free, and there's gonna be a dangerous explosive mess when you do that, but you need to do it, because otherwise the pressure's only going up.

Hunh. I thought it was like bees.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Hunh. I thought it was like bees.

Mmmmm, honey.