MadSam:*The people of our country overwhelmingly desire that we strike back at the culprits of the New
York disaster…not pussyfoot around and negotiate for years.
*
Perhaps so. I think the people of our country overwhelmingly want to see some kind of justice for this mind-boggling act; I think they’d like to see bin Laden and his band ousted; and I think they might possibly want some additional force used against the Taliban for their role as harborers. But beyond that, I think what the people of this country most want is to feel safe. I don’t think the people of this country want to see body bags with American soldiers in them. The Gulf War has left the impression that war is a largely push-button affair. You kick some ass with minimal casualties to your own side. But what did the Gulf War actually achieve? Have you been reading about how difficult it would be, how much carnage might be involved–including to the US side–to fight a ground war with the aim of (depending on who you talk to ) 1) getting bin Ladin and his followers; 2) overturning the Taliban; 3) routing Saddam while you’re at it; 4)eliminating “terrorism.”
It may well be that an ounce of “pussyfooting” will be worth a pound of American and NATO corpses. It’s almost certainly the case that spending $20billion to make airports more safe, and put federal marshals on every plane will go further to protect against this kind of event than will massive “revenge” against Afghanis, a subject people.
BTW, filmyak: how do you expect anyone to take you seriously with “jokes” like that last one about Arafat’s blood. Are you a debating, or calling names in the kindergarten schoolyard?
Wow, I never realized that adding a bit of humor at the end of a post would make everything else I said become irrelevant? Sure is a good thing Cecil NEVER uses humor at all, we’d be sure to think he was an idiot!
London, would you mind saying where and when that Kissinger interview was broadcast? Interestingly, Kissinger makes not a whisper of CIA involvement with bin Laden in this op-ed he did for the Washington Post
Olentzero, quoting from a bunch of horrible things that happened in the middle of a war isn’t proof of anything in re the specific question of Sharon’s guilt or innocence. Nothing in any of the things you quoted points to Sharon even indirectly. Except for the deliberate massacre at Sabra and Shatila, none of them are anything other than awful things that happen in the middle of a war. Some of the things you cite are things that happened (I’m going to make the large assumption that they’re all true incidents) to single people somewhere. Others are single incidents here and there. The account of refugees is supposed to prove what, exactly? That war creates refugees? This is news? None of them amount to a pattern of anything remotely approaching genocide.
I read a few accounts online, (since you were so lazy in your cites I wound up having to do my own search), that did find ways to hold him indirectly responsible for Sabra and Shatila (one of which was a Lyndon Larouche site, which certainly doesn’t say much for his enemies). This would be heavily based on the idea that he would know exactly what his Lebanese allies intended to do upon entering the Palestinian refugee camps, that he directly approved their entrance, and that he did so with that knowledge. This despite the fact that he wasn’t even a military commander on the scene, and that Israel had taken the area over mere days before, in the midst of a combined civil war and Israeli invasion in which a certain amount of chaos will be happening and tons of decisions are being made in quick succession. But Sharon is supposed to be so omniscient and so omnipotent in the midst of all this that he will know for a fact, before it happens, that the Lebanese will march into these Palestinian camps and look to murder every single one of them they can get their hands on. Even though nothing remotely similar had ever occurred before or would ever again under his watch. Even though today, as prime minister, he took heat from his right-wing allies for showing restraint in the early part of his administration, despite having been elected with a mandate to be as tough as it took towards the Palestinian revolt.
Accusing him of being a war criminal is not just a bit of a stretch. It’s typical of the blood guilt that has always been the centerpiece of anti-Semitic libel.
What’s telling is that in the online links I read, they’re going after Sharon but not after any of the Lebanese who were directly responsible.
But then everything is the fault of the Jews.
Mandelstam: What are you going to say when( and I pray it doesn’t happen)a new batch of terrorists harbored in Syria, Afghanistan or elsewhere wipe out 100,000 lives instead of 5000? Of course the solution is not simple but more IMMEDIATE effort whether by trade embargos or (even though it is currently against the law) assasinations of the terrorist leaders must be done and soon.
When the 2 embassies in Africa were bombed several years ago, “negotiations” were useless as you can see by 11 Sept 2001.
let’s be real. that 10 second clip played over and over is propaganda. as is the loop of clips showing people singing patriotic songs and waving flags. imagine what kinds of propaganda could be made of video clips of us americans!
Mandelstam – It’s one heck of a web site but I found it in the end…
Assuming you have Real Player installed…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/ >
Under the heading ‘Analysis’ >
click on the link: ‘Henry Kissinger on the new shape of American Foreign Policy’
It downloads in a second, the interview is just under 5 minutes long.
FWIW, the ‘Today’ radio programme is probably the premier morning political show in the UK and has excellent, reasonably in-depth interviews. It’s available on internet radio, starting at 1.00am east coast time.
The what does? Palestinian refugee camps in another country were targeted for destruction, and the residents thereof either further displaced or actually slaughtered. The Israeli army either did nothing about it or actively provided support (enclosing the camps and offering heavy equipment to finish the job), which proves firstly the Israeli army was complicit. And you cannot tell me that Sharon was completely unaware of what was going on since these atrocities occurred over a period of weeks rather than days or hours. He should have put a stop to it if it was not what Israel intended to do in the invasion of Lebanon. He didn’t. He didn’t reprimand his generals for organizing the massacres of Sabra and Shatila. Not stopping massacres and not punishing those responsible demonstrates total complicity to me.
Just as I do not hold all of Islam responsible for the atrocities of Tuesday, I do not blame all Jews for the actions of a few of its more bloody-minded members. Is that understood?
And I hold the Phalangists and Haddad troops just as responsible for Sabra and Shatila as the IDF, but it would not have been as bloodily effective as it was without IDF organization and support.
MadSam: “When the 2 embassies in Africa were bombed several years ago, “negotiations” were useless as
you can see by 11 Sept 2001.”
Last time I looked the “retaliation” against those acts took the form of two bombing raids, both of which killed many civilians, and one of which knocked out what turned out to be one of the Sudan’s only pharmaceutical plants. One could conclude that violent military strikes were useless as you can see by 11 Sept 2001.
Of course it’s a complicated problem, MadSam. Do you see me denying that? My point was that the American people want safety, howevermuch they are now being lead down the path of revenge. There are plenty of Americans who’d prefer to see emphasis being placed on security, intelligence, diplomacy, political solutions, police-type actions against terrorists–and with a minimum of deaths for the US and its allies as well as the civilians of countries such as Afghanistan. It’s by no means clear that that first set of solutions will be any less efficient in curbing/ending terrorism that will massive retaliatory bloodshed, or a long and grueling ground war, still less by what some delight in calling World War III.
London, thanks very much for the extra effort. I’ve downloaded stuff from BBC radio in the past, and I do recommend that others give it a listen.
here are plenty of Americans who’d prefer to see
emphasis being placed on security, intelligence, diplomacy, political solutions,
police-type actions against terrorists–and with a minimum of deaths for the US
and its allies as well as the civilians of countries such as Afghanistan. It’s by no
means clear that that first set of solutions will be any less efficient in
curbing/ending terrorism that will massive retaliatory bloodshed, or a long and
grueling ground war, still less by what some delight in calling World War III.
The above is by Mandelstam/
Mandelstam: Diplomacy works well if the enemy is one who reasons. When its the terrorist who will destroy babies and children without the bat of an eye, diplomacy is meaningless. I certainly do not agree with bombing innocent peoples but breaking our rules of conduct and assasinating the target enemy is fine with me
Years ago, the Arab governments who tried and failed to destroy Israel, decided to use “Palestinians” as pawns against Israel.
Remeber when the kingdom of Jordan decided not to reabsorb the West Bank into Jordan, because it viewed the Palestinians as a fifth.
The people in the refugee camps have not been absorbed by rich Arab countries, even while they hire laborers from all over the world.
Paltestinian nationalism didn’t exist many years ago, it was stirred up by powerful people to cause trouble for Israel.
Mind you, the Arab countries kicked out many Jews during the past 60 years, they were absorbed by Israel.
The Palestinian people are, I repeat, pawns.
They are victims of their Arab brothers as much as of anyone else.
column within Jordan.
I don't want ANYONE bombed into oblivion. Even at my most enraged moments, I have never wanted the extermination of Palestinians, Afghanis, or any Islamic or Arabic group. I do want those leaders who endorse terrorist attacks on civilians borught to justice. I want Osama Bin Laden dead. I want the leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad dead. But, the deaths of civilians is not a goal to strive for.
Have some civilians been killed in the US bombing of Iraq? Sadly, some have. But examine the cost of our planes, our pilot training prorams, and our bombs and missiles. All this money is spent so that raids hit their targets and only their targets. Accidents still happen. But, and I keep saying this because it is of utmost importance and relevance to this debate, the accidental killing of civilians during an attack on military targets is not comparable to the deliberate killing of civilians in (The same list. The list I have not seen any posters deny or defend) discoes, pizzarias, and beaches.
I support the US bringing Bin Laden to trial, or assasinating him if necessary. I support military action against any government that harbors him or other terrorists. When then the fighting is over and the criminals are dead, I support humanitrian aid for Afghanistan and any other country that needs it. With the terrorists dead, no government funding terrorist activities, and the US handing out food and medicine few people would continue to spout Great Satan rhetoric and very few would listen.
Re-The Gulf War
Any claims that this was about democracy, or terrorism, or freedom are propaganda. The US became involved only because of Kuwaiti oil. When Iraq was beaten, we withdrew and returned control of Kuwait to its government. The Kuwaiti givernment is a model of democracy. A whopping 10% of the population can vote. The voting populace is composed entirely of Islamic men from rich families. That is why the Gulf War did not stop terrorism. It was never really intended to.
Re-Mossad
Israel does not have the funds to carry out an operation on the scale that the US proposes. Even if it did, Israel must be far more careful than the US. If we declare war on Afghanistan for harboring and funding terrorists, we will receive support from many other countries. The governments of some Arab nations may object to our actions, but it is highly unlikely that they will go to war against us. If Israel were to declare war on Afghanistan for harboring and funding terrorists, the Arab nations would likely use it as a chance to declare war on Israel.
We basically live in a revisionist country… and only the people like us who seem to read our news aggressively have any idea of what’s really going on in the outside world RE: this situation.
I mean, in the Marx thread, I wrote a bit about WWII and oil… true stuff that is not taught to us at any time in school.
I wonder if people will begin waking up to that here and now…
The same philanthropic funding that has built wonderful museums and university buildings has also funded programs at academic institututions. Such support from special-interest foundations has had an influence on the recording of history that is not dissimilar to the effect of special-interest money on politics. Money can buy one’s desired version of history just as surely as money can buy government legislation.
Olentzero, let’s be clear about your position. As you hold that the illegal occupation of Palestine began in 1948, this would mean, by extension, that you consider each and every Israeli government and Israel itself to be an illegal state, although you have yet to just come out and say that. We both know that’s what you meant when you said the illegal occupation started that year, because it could have no other meaning.
So as far as you’re concerned, virtually anything Israel does is illegal. So why should any of us consider your statement about Sharon being a war criminal to have any sort of objective validity? To you, his mere presence on the scene makes him complicit in Sabra and Shatila. Shoot, his mere membership in the government of the time would probably do that for you. This is how the Palestinians in the great majority think, too, and until they get over this line of thought, there’s not going to be any room for negotiation and compromise.
IIRC Sharon sued Time magazine (in an American court) for libel when they called him a war criminal. He won. The Belgian charges on Sharon’s complicity in the tragedies at Sabra and Shatila have been withdrawn pending further legal review. The evidence for accusing him of being a war criminal, and for Israeli “genocide” is tenuous at best, libelious at worst.
Ya know, I believe he was implicitly responsible for these crimes. Israeli courts agree. I don’t like the man. But calling him a war criminal is a little harsh, especially in light of the evils perpetuated by his counterpart, Yasser Arafat.
There are many good and caring people in the world who drive good organizations providing peace and comfort to many people. There are many good people who are trying their best to make the world a better place. Unfortunately, there are also an abundance of greedy, self-serving people who follow their own narrow, self-serving agendas. I would be better off focusing on the good in all people, as opposed to adopting my usual cynical stance. I’ll probably have to continue fighting my innate cynicism the rest of my life.
That said, I believe it is often beneficial to communicate perceived corruption and deception in government and the media. Very slanted views of the world are presented by these groups, and I believe it is our duty to try to grasp the “hidden agenda” or bias in their communications.
I provide what I believe to be facts and a rational analysis of them. You’re welcome to dispute either, and it’s no real skin off my nose.
No, the fact that he was Defense Minister at the time, and thus in charge of the Israeli Defense Forces which have been shown to be openly complicit in the atrocities, is what does it for me. Not because he’s an Israeli, or even because he’s a Jew. I have no idea who the Israeli Ministers of Agriculture or Education were in the summer of 1982 but I don’t hold them ultimately responsible for the atrocities committed during the invasion of Lebanon. Sharon was in the position of authority, accountability, and responsibility as regards the IDF and therefore I hold him responsible.
And that’s the line of thought that’s going to perpetuate the barbarity from both sides in Palestine. As long as Israel blames the Palestinians for blaming them, y’all might as well sit on your couch eating popcorn and watching CNN waiting for the peace accord that’ll finally hold.