Update from the Heartland
No.369
5.1.09 – 11.1.09
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
No.369
5.1.09 – 11.1.09
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- The Gaza war [368] continues with only very brief respites. Hamas (AKA Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya, or Movement of the Islamic Resistance) seeks only violence. After the carnage at the Gaza UN school, Mahmoud Zahar, a top Hamas leader, proclaimed that they would kill Jewish children anywhere in the world – that children are fair game. This sort of machismo, reverse logic is precisely why innocent Palestinians continue to pay a dreadful price for the militancy of Hamas. If they could only see reality . . . .
-- The Egyptian-French ceasefire proposal at least tried to find roots, even if only tenuously. Representatives of Hamas and Israel joined in the Cairo talks to attain a ceasefire, to stop the killing long enough to negotiate a broader peace in the Gaza situation [368].
-- Then, we have Khaled Mashaal, a Damascus [Syria]-based Hamas leader, condemning Israel's attack on Gaza as a “holocaust” in an Al-Jazeera broadcast speech, and rejecting any negotiations . . . while Hamas representatives were in Cairo for the Egyptian-French cease-fire discussions. Ah yes, I’m so impressed . . . nothing like leading from the front. The hypocrisy is staggering.
[Please read the Comments section below for an extended exchange on Hamas.]
A former President’s opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
“An Unnecessary War”
by Jimmy Carter
Washington Post
Published: Thursday, January 8, 2009; Page A15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/07/AR2009010702645.html?wpisrc=newsletter
The Minnesota State Canvassing Board declared Alan Stuart ‘Al’ Franken the winner of the U.S. senatorial election by a mere 225 votes [0.006%]. Senator Norman Bertram ‘Norm’ Coleman Jr., who Franken defeated, has filed legal actions contesting elements of the vote count. The governor and secretary of state have indicated they will not certify Franken’s election until the court cases are resolved. Thus, it appears Minnesota will join Illinois with diminished congressional representation.
Apparently, the CIA racked up another success on January 1st, with a reported drone missile strike on a building in South Waziristan near the Afghan border. The Pakistani government confirmed the deaths of Usama al-Kini, a Kenyan national and reportedly chief of al-Qaeda operations in Pakistan, and his deputy Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan, also a Kenyan national. These two were responsible for the Islamabad Marriott Hotel bombing (20.9.2008) [353] and the Nairobi U.S. Embassy bombing (7.8.1998). Another one bites the dust . . . hey, hey! Congratulations to the darkside operatives.
On Thursday, I listened to President-Elect Obama’s speech on the economy at George Mason University. First and foremost, what a refreshing change . . . to listen to a leader who speaks clearly and with rhythm; Obama possesses a powerful tool for his job. Regardless of our political affiliation, leaning, preference or opinions, he is inspirational. Obama added more words but little meat to his American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan [368]. I think some elements of his plan are pointed in the correct direction, and there are other elements for which I am quite skeptical.
More nomination by the incoming Obama administration:
-- Virginia Governor Timothy Michael ‘Tim’ Kaine has apparently been tagged to serve part-time as chairman of the Democratic National Committee – logical choice for the DNC, but odd choice in terms of commitment. We’ll see how this works out for the Dems.
-- Nancy Killefer – Chief Performance Officer (new) in the White House Office of Management and Budget
-- Leon Edward Panetta – Director of Central Intelligence
For all the savvy cabinet and staff nominations by the Obama administration, the nomination of Panetta as DCI is strikingly odd – a politician with no intelligence experience. This is one nomination I do not agree with, but I hope it works out for us. Yet, more importantly, I hope Panetta does not re-politicize the CIA, which would hurt the national security of this Grand Republic.
-- John O. Brennan – Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security (chief counterterrorism adviser)
News from the economic front:
-- Minutes from the December meeting of the Federal Reserve indicate their worries that the current recession could last well into this year and perhaps longer.
-- Alcoa plans to reduce employment by 15,000 (-14.5%) as well as other cost cutting measures including a 50% reduction in capital expenditures.
-- Time Warner announced they will take a US$25B 4th Quarter write-off with US$15B from its cable unit alone.
-- Intel expects to report 4th Quarter revenue of US$8.2B, down 23% from the previous year.
-- The Bank of England reduced its benchmark interest rate by half a percentage point to 1.5% – the lowest level in the central bank’s history [1694]. Also, the British government warned that its earlier prediction of the economy recovery in the second half of 2009 now looks doubtful.
-- Same-store December retails sales did not meet even lowered expectations from a wide range of stores, including Wal-Mart, Target and Neiman Marcus.
-- Citigroup and top Senate Democrats struck a deal on a measure that would allow judges to set new repayment terms for mortgage holders who wind up in bankruptcy court. The deal may well become a pivotal agreement to aid recovery of the mortgage market.
-- The economy shed another half a million, non-farm jobs in December, bringing the unemployment rate to 7.2% – the highest rate since January 1993.
L’Affaire Madoff [365]:
-- The SEC is reportedly expanding its probe into the Madoff scandal . . . I should hope to shout! I can’t wait to read about the results. I suspect there are plenty of dirty hands beyond Madoff in this disaster.
-- Less than two weeks prior to his arrest, as his investment company was collapsing, Madoff hit up and received US$250M from one of his oldest friends and biggest financial backers – Carl Shapiro. Do we need more evident that Bernie has no conscience?
-- Then, almost on cue, federal prosecutors disclosed as part of Madoff’s bail revocation hearing that about 100 signed checks totaling US$173M had been discovered in his office desk drawer. He also wanted to transfer US$200-300M to certain employees, relatives and friends. I suspect this is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg in the mound of evidence this man has little if any of what we might recognize as moral values. The judge is expected to issue his decision on Monday, and I truly hope he revokes Madoff’s bail and slaps his butt in jail awaiting trial, maybe even helping him find a jail-yard love-buddy.
The Blago Scandal [365]:
-- After all the bravado from the Senate about not seating Roland Burris, as Blago’s selectee, and rejecting his credentials on Tuesday, Majority Leader Senator Harry Mason Reid of Nevada reversed himself the next day to make nice with Burris. Blago called their bluff and won, using the race card. I hope this foolish little vignette gives Blago some sense of satisfaction before he is impeached, tried, convicted and sent to prison for a long time. Despite the lack of any detectable spine in Harry Reid, my opinion remains the same – Burris may well be a good man, but his appointment is tainted by a corrupt governor and he should not be seated.
-- The Illinois House of Representatives voted on the articles of impeachment against Governor Blagojevich on Friday. They passed House Resolution 1671 by a vote of 114-1. I have not yet identified the one lone vote against impeachment, but I would like to know who and why, just out of curiosity.
-- ABCNews chose Pamela Meyer Davis, president and CEO of Edward Hospital in Naperville, Illinois, as their Person of the Week. Five years ago, Pamela alerted the FBI to apparent corruption in the administration of state government, specifically regarding a building permit application for her hospital. That investigation eventually caught Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich in his ‘pay to play’ shenanigans. I join ABCNews to praise Pamela Davis for her integrity and courage. Her conduct stands in stark and dramatic contrast to the disgraced governor. If you did not see the broadcast, here is the URL link:
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6615027
Comments and contributions from Update no.368:
“I find your comments on the murder of Nizar Rayyan and his family disgusting and callous. I did not realize how you aligned yourself with Zionism, nor how blind and one-sided you could be to the history of the conflict.”
For a little perspective:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/04/terrorism/
http://www.philipweiss.org/
My response:
Wow! There is quite a bit packed into those two sentences.
First, I do not align myself with any political ideology, Zionism or otherwise – never have, never will.
Second, I am a supporter, advocate and friend of anyone who chooses to live in peace and respect their neighbors. Nizar Rayyan was neither. He was a thug by the strictest definition of the word.
Third, there is nothing in the Israeli constitution or national policy that seeks extermination of any of their neighbors. The Hamas mission statement as well as multitudinous public statements seeks elimination and eradication of Israel, and extermination of the Jews. See the second point above.
Fourth, we can continue to play the chicken & egg game regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but I respectfully submit that it serves no purpose. They have both made mistakes; they are both culpable; let’s move on. One day, they (we) will choose to look to the future rather than the past.
Fifth, as with Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas seeks conflict with Israel as justification for their existence, and there are those in the region who are quite content stoking those fires to serve their hegemonic purposes, using the Palestinians as hapless dupes.
Lastly, there is no doubt in my little pea brain that there is one simple answer – choose to live in peace with and respect your neighbors. Fatah has made enormous progress toward that end; Hamas has not. They ignored the ceasefire and chose to lob rockets into Israel; why should any nation tolerate such conduct?
So, if my treatment of Rayyan’s death was disgusting and callous, my apologies. I do not seek to offend anyone. And yet, I see my words as only reflective of the violent death of a violent man who chose his path. I hold no grief or compassion for him – his innocent children and to a certain extent his wives, yes; I am sorry they had to perish as a consequence of his violence. C’est la guerre!
. . . round two:
“You are justifying the killing of family members, women and children because you feel it is righteous to murder someone who you judge to be a criminal and worthy of state assassination. Without the rule of law, the ability for all sides to express their points of view, to defend their positions, to justify what appears to be "terrorism", then we have to rely on the judgment of the conqueror for analysis of who is the bad guy and who is the good guy. You know that I would never justify suicide bombing as a response to any kind of hardship me or my family might be under, but that statement, on my part, is actually quite naïve, for I really have no idea what I would do, nor do you, if: a foreign nation took my home, a foreign power murdered my wife, children, and family members, a foreign power blamed me for my anger and characterized me as an enemy and my belief and faith as evil because I do not go quietly into the night as that power went about its normal life as if I didn't exist, using my land, my home and abusing what is left of my family. This rather feeble attempt on my part to put some perspicacity on the situation will fall on deaf ears just as it did over a hundred years ago, and just as it did in March 2003. I won't belabor the point further.”
. . . my response to round two:
There are many critical elements here.
First, as [Generalmajor Karl Philipp Gottlieb] von Clausewitz so succinctly stated, “War is diplomacy by other means.” Hamas sought violence; they’ve got violence. The forbearance of Israel under the near constant abuse by Hamas has been admirable. Once Hamas exceeded the threshold of Israeli tolerance, war was inevitable. Once the trigger is pulled for war, I am not and never will be an advocate for half-measures or constraints. War is killing, plain and simple. Let’s get it done as quickly as possible.
Second, if Hamas respected its neighbors and sought to negotiate grievances in good faith, war would not have been necessary. Unfortunately, when one of the Hamas grievances is the destruction of Israel and death to the Jews, good faith is moot.
Third, Hamas is not the legitimate, elected leadership of the Gazan Palestinians. They seized control in a violent coup d’etat in June 2007. To give them legitimacy serves no purpose of peace. These guys are thugs, terrorists, and the antithesis of peace. To glorify them as some noble freedom-fighters ignores reality.
Lastly, as I write in this week’s Update, the Press coverage of the Israeli action is so typical and as always regrettable. As Sherman said, “War is hell,” and indeed it is. All this lamentation about children killed and injured by the Israeli tank round, and not one word of the provocation. Islamo-fascist terrorists have repeatedly demonstrated their lack of respect for human life; it should be no surprise that they use schools, mosques, hospitals and other sanctuaries for their violent activities. I am sympathetic to the tank commander and gunner who pulled the trigger; that was not an easy shot, but there is little doubt in my little pea-brain that it was a necessary shot. Let us cast our accusatory finger in the proper direction.
. . . round three:
“You start off with a fallacy in the beginning. Hamas was honoring a cease fire until the Israelis broke it in Nov. After that, the militant wing, or whatever you want to call it, fired a few rockets, maybe 6(?) during the month of Dec, which killed no one, and Israel used that as justification to do the same thing we did to Iraq. Do I have my facts wrong?”
. . . my response to round three:
Why would the Israelis break the ceasefire?
So, as long as I injure no one, it is OK if I lob explosive rockets around the countryside?
What leads you to believe that Hamas is an innocent, peaceful, community organization?
I am left with the impression that you believe Israel is the aggressor. If so, what purpose would the Israelis have to attack Hamas?
. . . round four:
“The question is not why, but did they? I am watching news shows that are not mainstream- democracynow.com for example, reading Glenn Greenwald at salon.com, Juan Cole, at informed comment.com, Philip Weiss, (google him, he is a Jewish journalist) people who are trying to see the whole picture, both sides. Hamas, as far as I can tell is a product of the repression and ghettoizing of the Palestinians. It is a community organization, and a political party, and a militant group. We can not judge them through our vantage point because there is no way we can relate to what has happened to them. As I said earlier, I do not know what I would do if my home was taken, bull dozed or whatever, or my family killed. But it is our responsibility to be honest arbiters and fair in our support of both sides. At this point we only support the Israeli side, and in this country there is no voice for the other side. You are a very factual and honest judge of history. Investigate and decide for yourself if Israel broke the cease fire, and then you can try and answer the question as to why. As to your last question, the answer can be found in the answer, if there is one, to why did we attack Iraq? And what good has it done? Even conservative estimates are saying 100,000 plus civilians have been killed, and an Islamic leaning govt in place.”
. . . my response to round four:
The problem with “did they” is the reliability and accuracy of the Press. My news sources suggest ‘no;’ yours apparently suggest ‘yes.’ So, who are we to believe? Further, my question of ‘why’ helps me sort through disparate information sources, and often helps me find alternative, corroborating bits & pieces. In this case, I can find little if any motivation for the IAF / IDF to attack Hamas. However, I have been wrong before, and I may be wrong here.
Hamas, like it’s cousin Hezoballah, is a product of chiefly IRI state-sponsorship of terrorism. For decades, Iran has enabled and sought surrogates to perform it’s dirty work. Yes, certainly, the poverty and status of the Palestinians has been fertile ground for nurturing hatred and violence against Israel. Like their cousins to the north, Hamas has been quite effective with its collateral community and social activities, but that does not alter the violent basis of the organization – it’s objectives and purpose remain the same, and it is not to help the Palestinian people.
As with so many aspects of the Palestinian predicament, we invariably get into a chicken & egg philosophical debate, which in turn inevitably pushes us to retrospection rather than future-look. As long we (they) remain mired in such non-productive debate, there will never be a solution. At least Fatah has matured to an extent and largely abandoned their terrorist past, and substantive progress has been and will be made on the West Bank. Not so, Gaza!
So, I connect the dots and what image emerges? Hamas is dependent predominantly on IRI financial and material support. Other Arab sponsored have substantially abandoned them. The IRI has, wants, seeks, and will do whatever it can to perpetuate violence against Israel, and Hamas, like Hezoballah, is the agent of that aggression.
I truly believe the majority of Palestinians are no different from any of the rest of us. They want to live in peace, enjoy some degree of prosperity, and raise their children to have a better life than themselves. Unfortunately, the IRI could careless about the Palestinians, so the meat-grinder continues to churn out victims.
We have debated the Battle for Iraq. I have not altered your opinion and you have not altered mine. While there has been grotesque mismanagement of the post-invasion period, and I believe Rummie should and will bear the burden of that shame, just as McNamara bears the shame of Vietnam, I think history will eventually show direct and knock-on good has and will come from the Battle for Iraq. Iraqis are now free to lean whatever direction they wish; that is the beauty of freedom. What I hope for is that they will not return to state-sponsorship of terrorism, that they will not become a puppet of the IRI, and that they will become an example for the region that democracy can flourish.
. . . round five:
“I don't think Iraq was a state sponsorer of terrorism. The labels used early in Bush's administration should all be thrown out just as every case against a water boarded prisoner should be as well. (See Christopher Hitchens you tube,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58
who originally supported water boarding, and then had it done to himself) It was alleged that Saddam gave money to families of suicide bombers. That may be so. But it is a complicated chicken and egg situation as you mentioned, and one's freedom fighters are another's terrorists, and all that. Hamas seems to be autonomous more than a satellite for Iran. Iran is a secular nation run by religious right wingers. Again it is complicated- as geopolitical positioning plays out- but that religious framework, Islam, makes Iran more sympathetic with the Palestinian cause- which is normal and natural, as we are more aligned with judeo Christian sentiments with Israel. But in the real world it is more than sympathy, because historical fact shows us that Israel illegally took their land and won't give it back. And this is land that people still living have lost, along with their family members lives. Should they go quietly into the night, as I asked before? Would you? That the international community does not address this is the root problem. The immediate problem is Israeli over reacting to Hamas rocket firings, and the subsequent slaughter of innocent people as we comfortably sit here at our computers and talk about it. News sources are not the issue, to me, it is who you choose to believe. When Rice and Bush and others, including Dems, say Hamas is at fault, and lay the blame solely with them, and I know for a fact that it is not that one-sided, then it is not the news source- it is the spin coming from people who have a purpose in wanting us (the US) to believe something that isn't true. Just as Rice and Bush manipulated us into an unnecessary war in Iraq, and I would say in Afghanistan as well, (in as much as 17 Saudis and a couple Egyptians actually flew the planes), they have no standing to be telling us anything at this point. I fear that Obama will fall into step with this as well and more slaughter will follow. We will see. Read Philip Weiss, or Juan Cole, or any source other than what we see on TV or in Israeli influenced media. They have every right to sway our opinions, just as the Palestinians do. But there are zero resources in this country for the other side of the issue to be put forth by non-Israeli outlets, other than satellite or internet media. It is our responsibility to sift through the propaganda and then speak out for those who have no voice. For we as human beings on this tiny speck are in fact all in it together, and if we can't look out for those who can not speak for themselves, or in this case reach an audience- then what good are we- no better than cows watching a passing train, as someone once said. Here is a different view from Canada:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDmLrOUKnpE&feature=channel_page ”
. . . my response to round five:
One of the beauties of freedom . . . we are all entitled to think what we wish. Saddam was a consistent state-sponsor of international terrorism. He was in the top-5 for 20 years; never no.1 (that distinction has consistently gone to the Islamic Republic of Iran for 30 years). We can choose to see Saddam as some innocent, peace-loving, unfortunate victim of American hegemony. That is our choice. I know he was not the innocent some suggest.
There should be no “case” against any battlefield captive. My opinion of the status of battlefield captives in the War on Islamic Fascism has not changed, and you know my opinion. Further, my opinion regarding the interrogation of battlefield captives also remains unchanged. We are NOT talking about criminal procedure; we are talking about war.
Yes, Hamas is more rogue and independent than Hezoballah, but they are hardly independent. In fact, they are far more dependent upon financial, material and military support from the IRI than just a few years ago; and now, the IRI is virtually the only state left supporting them. Yet, I would not call Hamas a satellite of the IRI; they are Sunni and not particularly ideologically compatible with the Shiia Iranians, but any port in a storm, as they say.
I am not advocating that the Palestinians go quietly into the night. Quite the contrary, I want all Palestinians to live in peace, to prosper, and to raise their children to have a better life than they had. If the Palestinians rejected terrorism and decided to live in peace, I believe we would be enthusiastic in our support and offering our assistance for their protection from aggressors. As long as they continue to profess the destruction of Israel and death to the Jews, they will not have our support. This is about peace, not religious dogma.
Like any intelligence processing task, we take in information, ascribe a perhaps subtle reliability & accuracy assessment, and try to find the picture among all the dots. The Press is a major source of that information, and thus does play a major role. Take for example, the vidclip of the alleged aftermath of the UN Gaza school attack; that vidclip could be made anywhere, anytime; we do not know what preceded that event. Such is the nature of war. Even the subway shooting in Oakland is confusing, and that was an isolated event witnessed by many people. War is far more confusing – the fog of war.
. . . round six:
“As effective as it is at times as a debating technique, putting premises in the mouths of others which they never said is simply distracting. I'm afraid I am guilty of it, though I can't cite a specific example right now. But implying that I thought Saddam innocent and peace-loving is not accurate or fair in this context. Israel is the benefactor of 3 billion dollars a year and much of that is the munitions we sell them which have killed at least 257 children as of yesterday, and the UN has unanimously called for a ceasefire, while Israel has intensified the attack.
“I have no idea, nor do you, of what type of support Iran gives Palestine, or the elected govt, Hamas. There is no doubt they give them aid and the puny little rockets they fire at Israel, which are illegal, but can not be compared to the devastation caused by the modern weaponry we have supplied to Israel- those practically harmless weapons I would guess do come from Iran, or militant elements in Iran. But you leave out so much of the heart of the situation: the taking of others land and then occupying them, and then fencing them in in ghettos and then bombarding crowded and neighborhoods while the US nods in agreement. It would lead one to believe not only because of our loss of moral standing by the invasion of Iraq, but also our acquiesence (we abstained from calling for a halt in the slaughter-257 slaughtered children so far-) that we are nothing but whores, having been bought and sold. I am ashamed of our leadership, RIce, Bush, Dem and Rep Senators, commentators. I had such high hopes for Obama's election. We shall see.”
. . . my response to round six:
I used first person plural intentionally as it includes me; I did not use second person singular. I did not intent to ascribe such a view to you, only to point out that there are those who refuse to see Saddam for what he was. ‘Nuf said.
Yes, we have long supported Israel. There were years the Soviets supplied Egypt, and we did not. Today, we support Egypt as well as Israel. Things change. The chicken & egg conundrum of ‘who shot John’ will not help us find a solution; and, as long as Hamas chooses to persist in trying to make Israel the bad guys, we will have the same result. Two simple facts speak volumes to me: Israel holds no policy of hatred toward anyone; Hamas/Hezoballah/IRI seek the destruction of Israel. Israel has and will continue to defend itself and its citizens. Hamas can choose to live in peace, or they can continue to antagonize & attack Israel. They choose; they reap the consequences.
If I was an Israeli leader, I would argue for intensifying the offensive against Hamas terrorists (or freedom fighters, regardless of what label they choose), just as I have argued for intensifying our offensive against Islamo-fascists wherever they may hide.
BTW, Hamas was not elected to lead Gaza; they seized control from the Palestinian Authority in a violent coup d’etat that ended on 14.June.2007; hardly a fair & free election.
If we wish to discuss / debate the history of the region, I’m game; I love history; but, looking backward will not help us find solutions.
We may see a fundamental change under Obama-Clinton, but I suspect not. They are no different from any previous administration when it comes to dealing with those who wish to live in peace and those who do not. We shall see.
. . . round seven:
“I'm not sure why you continue to avoid the main problem that Israel took someone's land and continues to illegally settle on someone else's land. This is the fundamental problem, and just because Israel has our support does not make it legal, right, moral or just. You speak of Hamas as if they were you or I, free to go to work, the store, pick up their kids from school! They are living in a walled in compound with no access to services, food, communication, basic needs. Until we talk apples and apples we will not be able to discuss this rationally. They are living under occupied circumstances by an invading army and can not possibly choose anything but to die or resist. What would you do? You would fight to the finish with every ounce of energy in your body! There is no solution but the UN, with US support, to police the situation and get people to talk. Of course the radical wing of Hamas, an elected party, which fought with the US backed Fatah will be hardcore and unbending! Look at the blood spilled! Whose blood! do the body count. How can you gloss over the slaughter of all these children and innocent civilians? Cap, we are responsible for the deaths of nearly a million people in Iraq. When does the sheer sense of humanity finally make a dent in our consciousness? But supporting a cease fire, demanding the parties talk and not use the weapons we sold them to slaughter more people is the only sane and humane position to take. We are not honest brokers- we are siding with the bully. There I have vented my frustration, and I don't mean it directed at you personally. But you mention if you were an Israeli leader. What would you do if you were a Hamas leader?”
. . . my response to round seven:
I was wondering when we would get around to this. Here we are.
The stage for the current situation was set with the Balfour Declaration (2.November.1917), which set expectations for the end of British Protectorate in the Middle East. The ownership of the land takes us in many interesting directions. Nonetheless, the British, U.S., and UN recognized Israel in 1948, as part of the overall division that created the other states of the region. The Arabs chose to fight. We can argue over the land
Hamas has no choice . . . au contrare, mon frère.
What would I do if I was the leader of Hamas? I would turn the focus and energy of my people inward to ourselves. I would abandon hatred, terrorism and corruption. I would work to build self-sufficient infrastructure and industry. Instead of spending scarce resources on weapons, I would turn those resources to the benefit of the people. I would seek the path to become a respectable nation among nations. I would also build an internal security service to seek out and eliminate those elements (internal & external) who wished for foment violence for perceived grievances.
I respectfully do not agree. Israel would not be doing what they must do if they were not threatened. There are many things I am staunchly critical of in Israeli policy, but self-defense is not one. Israel is not the bully. They have survived and thrived despite being grossly outnumbered on all sides. After many wars, they have managed to find peace with Egypt and Jordan. They have managed at least a raproach mal with Saudi Arabia. Now, even Syria is looking for peace. The West Bank under Abbas’ leadership is slowly progressing toward peace and statehood. Many in the Arab world have turned their backs on Hamas. If the IRI was not deep in their stirring the pot, I doubt Hamas would have seized control in Gaza and I doubt they would be doing what they are doing now.
It is tragic what is happening to innocent Palestinians. Truly sad. Unfortunately and regrettably, they are the pawns of the IRI and their agents, Hamas.
. . . round eight:
“Cap, did you watch this?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/024765.html ”
. . . my response to round eight:
Yes, I have.
There are a number of actions by the Israeli government with which I have strong and fundamental disagreement. One of the issues at the top of that list is the government policy, enhanced by Ariel Sharon, regarding the West Bank settlements. While the settlements, for the most part, have not injured anyone like indiscriminate ballistic rockets or children with vests of explosives, they are comparable in terms of offense. The Israelis have most often taken the high moral ground in the conflicts with its neighbors, but from my perspective, with the settlements, they have sacrificed and rejected that moral high ground. As Hamas rockets anger Israelis, Israeli settlements anger Palestinians, and are a graphic demonstration of a paucity of Israeli respect for the Palestinian people. I am also of the opinion that when statehood comes to the Palestinians, which it inevitably will, those settlements including the residents, infrastructure and everything else associated with them will become Palestinian. If the people who live there do not want to be Palestinian citizens, then they should move to Israel. Further, during that transition, I would assign international security forces to ensure those settlements are not damaged or altered in any manner. The Israeli policy of West Bank settlement has been wrong for many years. I have condemned that policy at every opportunity I could find. The settlement policy failed that most fundamental test: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
. . . round nine:
“Holy Mackeral! I knew we really do have some things in common! (Don't worry I won't let on that I think you agree with me in general!) From some conversations I have had with people who hate Jimmy Carter, I would say a two state solution has a hard row to hoe. Apparently today more slaughter is going on.”
. . . and my response to round nine:
I do not hate Jimmy Carter. Hate is a very strong word I reserve for only a few people. I admire him as a human being. I just disagree with him on a number of issues like the Israeli-Palestinian situation and his performance as POTUS. Other than that, he is a good man with compassion for his fellow man.
A different contribution:
“I read with interest Nathan Freier's article [368] on strategic shocks. He does lend credence to the Bush doctrine. After reading it my thoughts center on three points. First, preemptive strikes are necessary to prevent most shocks and surprises, but they will not prevent them all. The best businesses in the world preempt their competition whenever possible in order to beat them. The best defense department in the world must do the same. So, planning for preemptive action is required and valuable. Second, dealing successfully with shocks and surprises like 9/11 depends upon speed more than planning. One reason the USMC is so successful is speed. Reorganizing our military into speedy composite units is a good thing. Speedy military action requires realistic ongoing training. Rarely do leaders have time to think it all through before acting when speed is called for in order to win and survive. Training, experience, and courage take over in a speedy response. Third, domestic military action is an option that cannot be overlooked, yet is a slippery slope. Most of us who served in the military did not consider domestic action given the focus was somewhere else. Not today. Terrorists operate in the USA now. To think otherwise is foolish and dangerous. They are biding their time for the next shock or surprise. We should be ready to pounce. Even so, I am cautious about domestic military action, because it requires top leaders with wisdom beyond their years and without political ends. Those folks are hard to find and rarely get elected. Let us hope we picked right last November.
“Regarding Israel, no mosque is safe from harm if it harbors weapons to be used against others. Go to war to win or do not go at all. If all the mosques harbor weapons, they are targets. If the bad guys attack and then hide with their families, all are at risk. A peace treaty cannot be one-sided. Israelis are wise to defend themselves from those who want to kill them all. Yet, they are condemned for doing so. They exited the Gaza and the Palestinians have a chance to form a state of their own. But, it will never happen unless they observe peace agreements, which they did not do once again. The Palestinians will never succeed using suicide bombers against a Jewish people who still have memories of those who wished to eliminate them from earth altogether. Time for a more lasting and peaceful strategy to emerge, but it will never happen if only one side accepts the other. Varvel captures it quite well below. Israel deserves to live free and safe. So do the Palestinians. We should keep our eye on Iran who fuels this destruction and hate.
“There are many issues that President Bush will be pounded for including the economy and spending. He certainly deserves scrutiny for overspending. Regardless, he did two main things that history will eventually judge him well –
(1) President Bush kept us safe from attack after Sept. 11; and
(2) he stayed close to the military who volunteer to keep us safe.
I commend him for doing so. He told us after 9/11 his presidency would be defined by the war on terror. He was right. I suspect the next presidency will have to face the fury of terrorists. Let us hope courage is plentiful.
“The Madoff scandal will reach far before it is over. How it went on for so long is a good indicator of more people helping it along. There are many swindlers in this one who will face justice in time. The highest punishment available is appropriate and probably not enough.
“Until nutty positions on prostitution and drugs are reversed and made legal, the porn and drug industry will continue to be mismanaged and damage people who trade unlawfully in both. The Libertarians and some Europeans have this one right. Prohibition does not work period. It enslaves people and makes criminals of many. The nonsense will stop someday. May it come sooner rather than later.
“Let us hope in 2009 that all people seek freedom to live their lives without infringing upon the rights and lives of others.”
My reply:
Preemptive action has always been contrary to U.S. policy, so the Bush Doctrine of preemptive action ruffles quite a few feathers. Yet, it seems to me that folks who reject preemptive action have probably never been in a fight. When presented with a bona fide threat, I have no intention of waiting for the blow. During the Cold War, Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) was sufficient to blunt any urge toward preemption. Yet, in the War on Islamic Fascism, we fight an enemy who seeks the pleasures of 72 virgins in the Great Beyond; MAD offers no such deterrence. Our enemy abides by none of the rules of warfare.
The Posse Comitatus Act [PL 45-263 (1878)] remains valid law, but it has been blurred in recent years, and I’m not so sure for the better. Freier’s hypothesis points toward serious modification or elimination of Posse Comitatus. We must be prepared.
The Varvel cartoon is quite descriptive and insightful, and accurate I might add.
I’m not a fan of GWB, but he did keep the Homeland safe.
We agree on the potential reach of the Madoff Scandal. I just hope the judge sees him for what he is and revokes his bail. Let him spend his days in jail while he awaits trial.
Yea verily! Until we learn that in a free society, prohibition of perceived immortal private conduct will never, ever be successful, no matter how painful the righteous moral minority makes it. The best we can do is remove the prohibition, regulate it for the common good, and minimize the collateral damage.
. . . a follow-up comment:
“Well said. I'd rather ruffle feathers and get it right than to look the other way and react to a devastating attack that could have been prevented. Preemptive action is possible. We need to use it wisely.”
Another contribution:
“Actually I thought [Bill Richardson] should have been sec of state. Not that it makes any difference now.”
My reply:
You were not alone in that thought. I have always admired Richardson’s skill as a negotiator. He has a rare ability to absorb elements of an issue and find mutually acceptable compromise . . . good qualities for a secretary of state – a moot point, now. I wonder if the Richardson situation shares similarities to the Spitzer fiasco – political vendetta. The Richardson investigation has gone on for several years, so I understand; so, for this to happen now stinks of politics rather than justice. American politics is an ugly, nasty business.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
The follow-up news items:
-- The Gaza war [368] continues with only very brief respites. Hamas (AKA Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya, or Movement of the Islamic Resistance) seeks only violence. After the carnage at the Gaza UN school, Mahmoud Zahar, a top Hamas leader, proclaimed that they would kill Jewish children anywhere in the world – that children are fair game. This sort of machismo, reverse logic is precisely why innocent Palestinians continue to pay a dreadful price for the militancy of Hamas. If they could only see reality . . . .
-- The Egyptian-French ceasefire proposal at least tried to find roots, even if only tenuously. Representatives of Hamas and Israel joined in the Cairo talks to attain a ceasefire, to stop the killing long enough to negotiate a broader peace in the Gaza situation [368].
-- Then, we have Khaled Mashaal, a Damascus [Syria]-based Hamas leader, condemning Israel's attack on Gaza as a “holocaust” in an Al-Jazeera broadcast speech, and rejecting any negotiations . . . while Hamas representatives were in Cairo for the Egyptian-French cease-fire discussions. Ah yes, I’m so impressed . . . nothing like leading from the front. The hypocrisy is staggering.
[Please read the Comments section below for an extended exchange on Hamas.]
A former President’s opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
“An Unnecessary War”
by Jimmy Carter
Washington Post
Published: Thursday, January 8, 2009; Page A15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/07/AR2009010702645.html?wpisrc=newsletter
The Minnesota State Canvassing Board declared Alan Stuart ‘Al’ Franken the winner of the U.S. senatorial election by a mere 225 votes [0.006%]. Senator Norman Bertram ‘Norm’ Coleman Jr., who Franken defeated, has filed legal actions contesting elements of the vote count. The governor and secretary of state have indicated they will not certify Franken’s election until the court cases are resolved. Thus, it appears Minnesota will join Illinois with diminished congressional representation.
Apparently, the CIA racked up another success on January 1st, with a reported drone missile strike on a building in South Waziristan near the Afghan border. The Pakistani government confirmed the deaths of Usama al-Kini, a Kenyan national and reportedly chief of al-Qaeda operations in Pakistan, and his deputy Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan, also a Kenyan national. These two were responsible for the Islamabad Marriott Hotel bombing (20.9.2008) [353] and the Nairobi U.S. Embassy bombing (7.8.1998). Another one bites the dust . . . hey, hey! Congratulations to the darkside operatives.
On Thursday, I listened to President-Elect Obama’s speech on the economy at George Mason University. First and foremost, what a refreshing change . . . to listen to a leader who speaks clearly and with rhythm; Obama possesses a powerful tool for his job. Regardless of our political affiliation, leaning, preference or opinions, he is inspirational. Obama added more words but little meat to his American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan [368]. I think some elements of his plan are pointed in the correct direction, and there are other elements for which I am quite skeptical.
More nomination by the incoming Obama administration:
-- Virginia Governor Timothy Michael ‘Tim’ Kaine has apparently been tagged to serve part-time as chairman of the Democratic National Committee – logical choice for the DNC, but odd choice in terms of commitment. We’ll see how this works out for the Dems.
-- Nancy Killefer – Chief Performance Officer (new) in the White House Office of Management and Budget
-- Leon Edward Panetta – Director of Central Intelligence
For all the savvy cabinet and staff nominations by the Obama administration, the nomination of Panetta as DCI is strikingly odd – a politician with no intelligence experience. This is one nomination I do not agree with, but I hope it works out for us. Yet, more importantly, I hope Panetta does not re-politicize the CIA, which would hurt the national security of this Grand Republic.
-- John O. Brennan – Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security (chief counterterrorism adviser)
News from the economic front:
-- Minutes from the December meeting of the Federal Reserve indicate their worries that the current recession could last well into this year and perhaps longer.
-- Alcoa plans to reduce employment by 15,000 (-14.5%) as well as other cost cutting measures including a 50% reduction in capital expenditures.
-- Time Warner announced they will take a US$25B 4th Quarter write-off with US$15B from its cable unit alone.
-- Intel expects to report 4th Quarter revenue of US$8.2B, down 23% from the previous year.
-- The Bank of England reduced its benchmark interest rate by half a percentage point to 1.5% – the lowest level in the central bank’s history [1694]. Also, the British government warned that its earlier prediction of the economy recovery in the second half of 2009 now looks doubtful.
-- Same-store December retails sales did not meet even lowered expectations from a wide range of stores, including Wal-Mart, Target and Neiman Marcus.
-- Citigroup and top Senate Democrats struck a deal on a measure that would allow judges to set new repayment terms for mortgage holders who wind up in bankruptcy court. The deal may well become a pivotal agreement to aid recovery of the mortgage market.
-- The economy shed another half a million, non-farm jobs in December, bringing the unemployment rate to 7.2% – the highest rate since January 1993.
L’Affaire Madoff [365]:
-- The SEC is reportedly expanding its probe into the Madoff scandal . . . I should hope to shout! I can’t wait to read about the results. I suspect there are plenty of dirty hands beyond Madoff in this disaster.
-- Less than two weeks prior to his arrest, as his investment company was collapsing, Madoff hit up and received US$250M from one of his oldest friends and biggest financial backers – Carl Shapiro. Do we need more evident that Bernie has no conscience?
-- Then, almost on cue, federal prosecutors disclosed as part of Madoff’s bail revocation hearing that about 100 signed checks totaling US$173M had been discovered in his office desk drawer. He also wanted to transfer US$200-300M to certain employees, relatives and friends. I suspect this is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg in the mound of evidence this man has little if any of what we might recognize as moral values. The judge is expected to issue his decision on Monday, and I truly hope he revokes Madoff’s bail and slaps his butt in jail awaiting trial, maybe even helping him find a jail-yard love-buddy.
The Blago Scandal [365]:
-- After all the bravado from the Senate about not seating Roland Burris, as Blago’s selectee, and rejecting his credentials on Tuesday, Majority Leader Senator Harry Mason Reid of Nevada reversed himself the next day to make nice with Burris. Blago called their bluff and won, using the race card. I hope this foolish little vignette gives Blago some sense of satisfaction before he is impeached, tried, convicted and sent to prison for a long time. Despite the lack of any detectable spine in Harry Reid, my opinion remains the same – Burris may well be a good man, but his appointment is tainted by a corrupt governor and he should not be seated.
-- The Illinois House of Representatives voted on the articles of impeachment against Governor Blagojevich on Friday. They passed House Resolution 1671 by a vote of 114-1. I have not yet identified the one lone vote against impeachment, but I would like to know who and why, just out of curiosity.
-- ABCNews chose Pamela Meyer Davis, president and CEO of Edward Hospital in Naperville, Illinois, as their Person of the Week. Five years ago, Pamela alerted the FBI to apparent corruption in the administration of state government, specifically regarding a building permit application for her hospital. That investigation eventually caught Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich in his ‘pay to play’ shenanigans. I join ABCNews to praise Pamela Davis for her integrity and courage. Her conduct stands in stark and dramatic contrast to the disgraced governor. If you did not see the broadcast, here is the URL link:
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6615027
Comments and contributions from Update no.368:
“I find your comments on the murder of Nizar Rayyan and his family disgusting and callous. I did not realize how you aligned yourself with Zionism, nor how blind and one-sided you could be to the history of the conflict.”
For a little perspective:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/04/terrorism/
http://www.philipweiss.org/
My response:
Wow! There is quite a bit packed into those two sentences.
First, I do not align myself with any political ideology, Zionism or otherwise – never have, never will.
Second, I am a supporter, advocate and friend of anyone who chooses to live in peace and respect their neighbors. Nizar Rayyan was neither. He was a thug by the strictest definition of the word.
Third, there is nothing in the Israeli constitution or national policy that seeks extermination of any of their neighbors. The Hamas mission statement as well as multitudinous public statements seeks elimination and eradication of Israel, and extermination of the Jews. See the second point above.
Fourth, we can continue to play the chicken & egg game regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but I respectfully submit that it serves no purpose. They have both made mistakes; they are both culpable; let’s move on. One day, they (we) will choose to look to the future rather than the past.
Fifth, as with Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas seeks conflict with Israel as justification for their existence, and there are those in the region who are quite content stoking those fires to serve their hegemonic purposes, using the Palestinians as hapless dupes.
Lastly, there is no doubt in my little pea brain that there is one simple answer – choose to live in peace with and respect your neighbors. Fatah has made enormous progress toward that end; Hamas has not. They ignored the ceasefire and chose to lob rockets into Israel; why should any nation tolerate such conduct?
So, if my treatment of Rayyan’s death was disgusting and callous, my apologies. I do not seek to offend anyone. And yet, I see my words as only reflective of the violent death of a violent man who chose his path. I hold no grief or compassion for him – his innocent children and to a certain extent his wives, yes; I am sorry they had to perish as a consequence of his violence. C’est la guerre!
. . . round two:
“You are justifying the killing of family members, women and children because you feel it is righteous to murder someone who you judge to be a criminal and worthy of state assassination. Without the rule of law, the ability for all sides to express their points of view, to defend their positions, to justify what appears to be "terrorism", then we have to rely on the judgment of the conqueror for analysis of who is the bad guy and who is the good guy. You know that I would never justify suicide bombing as a response to any kind of hardship me or my family might be under, but that statement, on my part, is actually quite naïve, for I really have no idea what I would do, nor do you, if: a foreign nation took my home, a foreign power murdered my wife, children, and family members, a foreign power blamed me for my anger and characterized me as an enemy and my belief and faith as evil because I do not go quietly into the night as that power went about its normal life as if I didn't exist, using my land, my home and abusing what is left of my family. This rather feeble attempt on my part to put some perspicacity on the situation will fall on deaf ears just as it did over a hundred years ago, and just as it did in March 2003. I won't belabor the point further.”
. . . my response to round two:
There are many critical elements here.
First, as [Generalmajor Karl Philipp Gottlieb] von Clausewitz so succinctly stated, “War is diplomacy by other means.” Hamas sought violence; they’ve got violence. The forbearance of Israel under the near constant abuse by Hamas has been admirable. Once Hamas exceeded the threshold of Israeli tolerance, war was inevitable. Once the trigger is pulled for war, I am not and never will be an advocate for half-measures or constraints. War is killing, plain and simple. Let’s get it done as quickly as possible.
Second, if Hamas respected its neighbors and sought to negotiate grievances in good faith, war would not have been necessary. Unfortunately, when one of the Hamas grievances is the destruction of Israel and death to the Jews, good faith is moot.
Third, Hamas is not the legitimate, elected leadership of the Gazan Palestinians. They seized control in a violent coup d’etat in June 2007. To give them legitimacy serves no purpose of peace. These guys are thugs, terrorists, and the antithesis of peace. To glorify them as some noble freedom-fighters ignores reality.
Lastly, as I write in this week’s Update, the Press coverage of the Israeli action is so typical and as always regrettable. As Sherman said, “War is hell,” and indeed it is. All this lamentation about children killed and injured by the Israeli tank round, and not one word of the provocation. Islamo-fascist terrorists have repeatedly demonstrated their lack of respect for human life; it should be no surprise that they use schools, mosques, hospitals and other sanctuaries for their violent activities. I am sympathetic to the tank commander and gunner who pulled the trigger; that was not an easy shot, but there is little doubt in my little pea-brain that it was a necessary shot. Let us cast our accusatory finger in the proper direction.
. . . round three:
“You start off with a fallacy in the beginning. Hamas was honoring a cease fire until the Israelis broke it in Nov. After that, the militant wing, or whatever you want to call it, fired a few rockets, maybe 6(?) during the month of Dec, which killed no one, and Israel used that as justification to do the same thing we did to Iraq. Do I have my facts wrong?”
. . . my response to round three:
Why would the Israelis break the ceasefire?
So, as long as I injure no one, it is OK if I lob explosive rockets around the countryside?
What leads you to believe that Hamas is an innocent, peaceful, community organization?
I am left with the impression that you believe Israel is the aggressor. If so, what purpose would the Israelis have to attack Hamas?
. . . round four:
“The question is not why, but did they? I am watching news shows that are not mainstream- democracynow.com for example, reading Glenn Greenwald at salon.com, Juan Cole, at informed comment.com, Philip Weiss, (google him, he is a Jewish journalist) people who are trying to see the whole picture, both sides. Hamas, as far as I can tell is a product of the repression and ghettoizing of the Palestinians. It is a community organization, and a political party, and a militant group. We can not judge them through our vantage point because there is no way we can relate to what has happened to them. As I said earlier, I do not know what I would do if my home was taken, bull dozed or whatever, or my family killed. But it is our responsibility to be honest arbiters and fair in our support of both sides. At this point we only support the Israeli side, and in this country there is no voice for the other side. You are a very factual and honest judge of history. Investigate and decide for yourself if Israel broke the cease fire, and then you can try and answer the question as to why. As to your last question, the answer can be found in the answer, if there is one, to why did we attack Iraq? And what good has it done? Even conservative estimates are saying 100,000 plus civilians have been killed, and an Islamic leaning govt in place.”
. . . my response to round four:
The problem with “did they” is the reliability and accuracy of the Press. My news sources suggest ‘no;’ yours apparently suggest ‘yes.’ So, who are we to believe? Further, my question of ‘why’ helps me sort through disparate information sources, and often helps me find alternative, corroborating bits & pieces. In this case, I can find little if any motivation for the IAF / IDF to attack Hamas. However, I have been wrong before, and I may be wrong here.
Hamas, like it’s cousin Hezoballah, is a product of chiefly IRI state-sponsorship of terrorism. For decades, Iran has enabled and sought surrogates to perform it’s dirty work. Yes, certainly, the poverty and status of the Palestinians has been fertile ground for nurturing hatred and violence against Israel. Like their cousins to the north, Hamas has been quite effective with its collateral community and social activities, but that does not alter the violent basis of the organization – it’s objectives and purpose remain the same, and it is not to help the Palestinian people.
As with so many aspects of the Palestinian predicament, we invariably get into a chicken & egg philosophical debate, which in turn inevitably pushes us to retrospection rather than future-look. As long we (they) remain mired in such non-productive debate, there will never be a solution. At least Fatah has matured to an extent and largely abandoned their terrorist past, and substantive progress has been and will be made on the West Bank. Not so, Gaza!
So, I connect the dots and what image emerges? Hamas is dependent predominantly on IRI financial and material support. Other Arab sponsored have substantially abandoned them. The IRI has, wants, seeks, and will do whatever it can to perpetuate violence against Israel, and Hamas, like Hezoballah, is the agent of that aggression.
I truly believe the majority of Palestinians are no different from any of the rest of us. They want to live in peace, enjoy some degree of prosperity, and raise their children to have a better life than themselves. Unfortunately, the IRI could careless about the Palestinians, so the meat-grinder continues to churn out victims.
We have debated the Battle for Iraq. I have not altered your opinion and you have not altered mine. While there has been grotesque mismanagement of the post-invasion period, and I believe Rummie should and will bear the burden of that shame, just as McNamara bears the shame of Vietnam, I think history will eventually show direct and knock-on good has and will come from the Battle for Iraq. Iraqis are now free to lean whatever direction they wish; that is the beauty of freedom. What I hope for is that they will not return to state-sponsorship of terrorism, that they will not become a puppet of the IRI, and that they will become an example for the region that democracy can flourish.
. . . round five:
“I don't think Iraq was a state sponsorer of terrorism. The labels used early in Bush's administration should all be thrown out just as every case against a water boarded prisoner should be as well. (See Christopher Hitchens you tube,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58
who originally supported water boarding, and then had it done to himself) It was alleged that Saddam gave money to families of suicide bombers. That may be so. But it is a complicated chicken and egg situation as you mentioned, and one's freedom fighters are another's terrorists, and all that. Hamas seems to be autonomous more than a satellite for Iran. Iran is a secular nation run by religious right wingers. Again it is complicated- as geopolitical positioning plays out- but that religious framework, Islam, makes Iran more sympathetic with the Palestinian cause- which is normal and natural, as we are more aligned with judeo Christian sentiments with Israel. But in the real world it is more than sympathy, because historical fact shows us that Israel illegally took their land and won't give it back. And this is land that people still living have lost, along with their family members lives. Should they go quietly into the night, as I asked before? Would you? That the international community does not address this is the root problem. The immediate problem is Israeli over reacting to Hamas rocket firings, and the subsequent slaughter of innocent people as we comfortably sit here at our computers and talk about it. News sources are not the issue, to me, it is who you choose to believe. When Rice and Bush and others, including Dems, say Hamas is at fault, and lay the blame solely with them, and I know for a fact that it is not that one-sided, then it is not the news source- it is the spin coming from people who have a purpose in wanting us (the US) to believe something that isn't true. Just as Rice and Bush manipulated us into an unnecessary war in Iraq, and I would say in Afghanistan as well, (in as much as 17 Saudis and a couple Egyptians actually flew the planes), they have no standing to be telling us anything at this point. I fear that Obama will fall into step with this as well and more slaughter will follow. We will see. Read Philip Weiss, or Juan Cole, or any source other than what we see on TV or in Israeli influenced media. They have every right to sway our opinions, just as the Palestinians do. But there are zero resources in this country for the other side of the issue to be put forth by non-Israeli outlets, other than satellite or internet media. It is our responsibility to sift through the propaganda and then speak out for those who have no voice. For we as human beings on this tiny speck are in fact all in it together, and if we can't look out for those who can not speak for themselves, or in this case reach an audience- then what good are we- no better than cows watching a passing train, as someone once said. Here is a different view from Canada:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDmLrOUKnpE&feature=channel_page ”
. . . my response to round five:
One of the beauties of freedom . . . we are all entitled to think what we wish. Saddam was a consistent state-sponsor of international terrorism. He was in the top-5 for 20 years; never no.1 (that distinction has consistently gone to the Islamic Republic of Iran for 30 years). We can choose to see Saddam as some innocent, peace-loving, unfortunate victim of American hegemony. That is our choice. I know he was not the innocent some suggest.
There should be no “case” against any battlefield captive. My opinion of the status of battlefield captives in the War on Islamic Fascism has not changed, and you know my opinion. Further, my opinion regarding the interrogation of battlefield captives also remains unchanged. We are NOT talking about criminal procedure; we are talking about war.
Yes, Hamas is more rogue and independent than Hezoballah, but they are hardly independent. In fact, they are far more dependent upon financial, material and military support from the IRI than just a few years ago; and now, the IRI is virtually the only state left supporting them. Yet, I would not call Hamas a satellite of the IRI; they are Sunni and not particularly ideologically compatible with the Shiia Iranians, but any port in a storm, as they say.
I am not advocating that the Palestinians go quietly into the night. Quite the contrary, I want all Palestinians to live in peace, to prosper, and to raise their children to have a better life than they had. If the Palestinians rejected terrorism and decided to live in peace, I believe we would be enthusiastic in our support and offering our assistance for their protection from aggressors. As long as they continue to profess the destruction of Israel and death to the Jews, they will not have our support. This is about peace, not religious dogma.
Like any intelligence processing task, we take in information, ascribe a perhaps subtle reliability & accuracy assessment, and try to find the picture among all the dots. The Press is a major source of that information, and thus does play a major role. Take for example, the vidclip of the alleged aftermath of the UN Gaza school attack; that vidclip could be made anywhere, anytime; we do not know what preceded that event. Such is the nature of war. Even the subway shooting in Oakland is confusing, and that was an isolated event witnessed by many people. War is far more confusing – the fog of war.
. . . round six:
“As effective as it is at times as a debating technique, putting premises in the mouths of others which they never said is simply distracting. I'm afraid I am guilty of it, though I can't cite a specific example right now. But implying that I thought Saddam innocent and peace-loving is not accurate or fair in this context. Israel is the benefactor of 3 billion dollars a year and much of that is the munitions we sell them which have killed at least 257 children as of yesterday, and the UN has unanimously called for a ceasefire, while Israel has intensified the attack.
“I have no idea, nor do you, of what type of support Iran gives Palestine, or the elected govt, Hamas. There is no doubt they give them aid and the puny little rockets they fire at Israel, which are illegal, but can not be compared to the devastation caused by the modern weaponry we have supplied to Israel- those practically harmless weapons I would guess do come from Iran, or militant elements in Iran. But you leave out so much of the heart of the situation: the taking of others land and then occupying them, and then fencing them in in ghettos and then bombarding crowded and neighborhoods while the US nods in agreement. It would lead one to believe not only because of our loss of moral standing by the invasion of Iraq, but also our acquiesence (we abstained from calling for a halt in the slaughter-257 slaughtered children so far-) that we are nothing but whores, having been bought and sold. I am ashamed of our leadership, RIce, Bush, Dem and Rep Senators, commentators. I had such high hopes for Obama's election. We shall see.”
. . . my response to round six:
I used first person plural intentionally as it includes me; I did not use second person singular. I did not intent to ascribe such a view to you, only to point out that there are those who refuse to see Saddam for what he was. ‘Nuf said.
Yes, we have long supported Israel. There were years the Soviets supplied Egypt, and we did not. Today, we support Egypt as well as Israel. Things change. The chicken & egg conundrum of ‘who shot John’ will not help us find a solution; and, as long as Hamas chooses to persist in trying to make Israel the bad guys, we will have the same result. Two simple facts speak volumes to me: Israel holds no policy of hatred toward anyone; Hamas/Hezoballah/IRI seek the destruction of Israel. Israel has and will continue to defend itself and its citizens. Hamas can choose to live in peace, or they can continue to antagonize & attack Israel. They choose; they reap the consequences.
If I was an Israeli leader, I would argue for intensifying the offensive against Hamas terrorists (or freedom fighters, regardless of what label they choose), just as I have argued for intensifying our offensive against Islamo-fascists wherever they may hide.
BTW, Hamas was not elected to lead Gaza; they seized control from the Palestinian Authority in a violent coup d’etat that ended on 14.June.2007; hardly a fair & free election.
If we wish to discuss / debate the history of the region, I’m game; I love history; but, looking backward will not help us find solutions.
We may see a fundamental change under Obama-Clinton, but I suspect not. They are no different from any previous administration when it comes to dealing with those who wish to live in peace and those who do not. We shall see.
. . . round seven:
“I'm not sure why you continue to avoid the main problem that Israel took someone's land and continues to illegally settle on someone else's land. This is the fundamental problem, and just because Israel has our support does not make it legal, right, moral or just. You speak of Hamas as if they were you or I, free to go to work, the store, pick up their kids from school! They are living in a walled in compound with no access to services, food, communication, basic needs. Until we talk apples and apples we will not be able to discuss this rationally. They are living under occupied circumstances by an invading army and can not possibly choose anything but to die or resist. What would you do? You would fight to the finish with every ounce of energy in your body! There is no solution but the UN, with US support, to police the situation and get people to talk. Of course the radical wing of Hamas, an elected party, which fought with the US backed Fatah will be hardcore and unbending! Look at the blood spilled! Whose blood! do the body count. How can you gloss over the slaughter of all these children and innocent civilians? Cap, we are responsible for the deaths of nearly a million people in Iraq. When does the sheer sense of humanity finally make a dent in our consciousness? But supporting a cease fire, demanding the parties talk and not use the weapons we sold them to slaughter more people is the only sane and humane position to take. We are not honest brokers- we are siding with the bully. There I have vented my frustration, and I don't mean it directed at you personally. But you mention if you were an Israeli leader. What would you do if you were a Hamas leader?”
. . . my response to round seven:
I was wondering when we would get around to this. Here we are.
The stage for the current situation was set with the Balfour Declaration (2.November.1917), which set expectations for the end of British Protectorate in the Middle East. The ownership of the land takes us in many interesting directions. Nonetheless, the British, U.S., and UN recognized Israel in 1948, as part of the overall division that created the other states of the region. The Arabs chose to fight. We can argue over the land
Hamas has no choice . . . au contrare, mon frère.
What would I do if I was the leader of Hamas? I would turn the focus and energy of my people inward to ourselves. I would abandon hatred, terrorism and corruption. I would work to build self-sufficient infrastructure and industry. Instead of spending scarce resources on weapons, I would turn those resources to the benefit of the people. I would seek the path to become a respectable nation among nations. I would also build an internal security service to seek out and eliminate those elements (internal & external) who wished for foment violence for perceived grievances.
I respectfully do not agree. Israel would not be doing what they must do if they were not threatened. There are many things I am staunchly critical of in Israeli policy, but self-defense is not one. Israel is not the bully. They have survived and thrived despite being grossly outnumbered on all sides. After many wars, they have managed to find peace with Egypt and Jordan. They have managed at least a raproach mal with Saudi Arabia. Now, even Syria is looking for peace. The West Bank under Abbas’ leadership is slowly progressing toward peace and statehood. Many in the Arab world have turned their backs on Hamas. If the IRI was not deep in their stirring the pot, I doubt Hamas would have seized control in Gaza and I doubt they would be doing what they are doing now.
It is tragic what is happening to innocent Palestinians. Truly sad. Unfortunately and regrettably, they are the pawns of the IRI and their agents, Hamas.
. . . round eight:
“Cap, did you watch this?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/024765.html ”
. . . my response to round eight:
Yes, I have.
There are a number of actions by the Israeli government with which I have strong and fundamental disagreement. One of the issues at the top of that list is the government policy, enhanced by Ariel Sharon, regarding the West Bank settlements. While the settlements, for the most part, have not injured anyone like indiscriminate ballistic rockets or children with vests of explosives, they are comparable in terms of offense. The Israelis have most often taken the high moral ground in the conflicts with its neighbors, but from my perspective, with the settlements, they have sacrificed and rejected that moral high ground. As Hamas rockets anger Israelis, Israeli settlements anger Palestinians, and are a graphic demonstration of a paucity of Israeli respect for the Palestinian people. I am also of the opinion that when statehood comes to the Palestinians, which it inevitably will, those settlements including the residents, infrastructure and everything else associated with them will become Palestinian. If the people who live there do not want to be Palestinian citizens, then they should move to Israel. Further, during that transition, I would assign international security forces to ensure those settlements are not damaged or altered in any manner. The Israeli policy of West Bank settlement has been wrong for many years. I have condemned that policy at every opportunity I could find. The settlement policy failed that most fundamental test: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
. . . round nine:
“Holy Mackeral! I knew we really do have some things in common! (Don't worry I won't let on that I think you agree with me in general!) From some conversations I have had with people who hate Jimmy Carter, I would say a two state solution has a hard row to hoe. Apparently today more slaughter is going on.”
. . . and my response to round nine:
I do not hate Jimmy Carter. Hate is a very strong word I reserve for only a few people. I admire him as a human being. I just disagree with him on a number of issues like the Israeli-Palestinian situation and his performance as POTUS. Other than that, he is a good man with compassion for his fellow man.
A different contribution:
“I read with interest Nathan Freier's article [368] on strategic shocks. He does lend credence to the Bush doctrine. After reading it my thoughts center on three points. First, preemptive strikes are necessary to prevent most shocks and surprises, but they will not prevent them all. The best businesses in the world preempt their competition whenever possible in order to beat them. The best defense department in the world must do the same. So, planning for preemptive action is required and valuable. Second, dealing successfully with shocks and surprises like 9/11 depends upon speed more than planning. One reason the USMC is so successful is speed. Reorganizing our military into speedy composite units is a good thing. Speedy military action requires realistic ongoing training. Rarely do leaders have time to think it all through before acting when speed is called for in order to win and survive. Training, experience, and courage take over in a speedy response. Third, domestic military action is an option that cannot be overlooked, yet is a slippery slope. Most of us who served in the military did not consider domestic action given the focus was somewhere else. Not today. Terrorists operate in the USA now. To think otherwise is foolish and dangerous. They are biding their time for the next shock or surprise. We should be ready to pounce. Even so, I am cautious about domestic military action, because it requires top leaders with wisdom beyond their years and without political ends. Those folks are hard to find and rarely get elected. Let us hope we picked right last November.
“Regarding Israel, no mosque is safe from harm if it harbors weapons to be used against others. Go to war to win or do not go at all. If all the mosques harbor weapons, they are targets. If the bad guys attack and then hide with their families, all are at risk. A peace treaty cannot be one-sided. Israelis are wise to defend themselves from those who want to kill them all. Yet, they are condemned for doing so. They exited the Gaza and the Palestinians have a chance to form a state of their own. But, it will never happen unless they observe peace agreements, which they did not do once again. The Palestinians will never succeed using suicide bombers against a Jewish people who still have memories of those who wished to eliminate them from earth altogether. Time for a more lasting and peaceful strategy to emerge, but it will never happen if only one side accepts the other. Varvel captures it quite well below. Israel deserves to live free and safe. So do the Palestinians. We should keep our eye on Iran who fuels this destruction and hate.
“There are many issues that President Bush will be pounded for including the economy and spending. He certainly deserves scrutiny for overspending. Regardless, he did two main things that history will eventually judge him well –
(1) President Bush kept us safe from attack after Sept. 11; and
(2) he stayed close to the military who volunteer to keep us safe.
I commend him for doing so. He told us after 9/11 his presidency would be defined by the war on terror. He was right. I suspect the next presidency will have to face the fury of terrorists. Let us hope courage is plentiful.
“The Madoff scandal will reach far before it is over. How it went on for so long is a good indicator of more people helping it along. There are many swindlers in this one who will face justice in time. The highest punishment available is appropriate and probably not enough.
“Until nutty positions on prostitution and drugs are reversed and made legal, the porn and drug industry will continue to be mismanaged and damage people who trade unlawfully in both. The Libertarians and some Europeans have this one right. Prohibition does not work period. It enslaves people and makes criminals of many. The nonsense will stop someday. May it come sooner rather than later.
“Let us hope in 2009 that all people seek freedom to live their lives without infringing upon the rights and lives of others.”
My reply:
Preemptive action has always been contrary to U.S. policy, so the Bush Doctrine of preemptive action ruffles quite a few feathers. Yet, it seems to me that folks who reject preemptive action have probably never been in a fight. When presented with a bona fide threat, I have no intention of waiting for the blow. During the Cold War, Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) was sufficient to blunt any urge toward preemption. Yet, in the War on Islamic Fascism, we fight an enemy who seeks the pleasures of 72 virgins in the Great Beyond; MAD offers no such deterrence. Our enemy abides by none of the rules of warfare.
The Posse Comitatus Act [PL 45-263 (1878)] remains valid law, but it has been blurred in recent years, and I’m not so sure for the better. Freier’s hypothesis points toward serious modification or elimination of Posse Comitatus. We must be prepared.
The Varvel cartoon is quite descriptive and insightful, and accurate I might add.
I’m not a fan of GWB, but he did keep the Homeland safe.
We agree on the potential reach of the Madoff Scandal. I just hope the judge sees him for what he is and revokes his bail. Let him spend his days in jail while he awaits trial.
Yea verily! Until we learn that in a free society, prohibition of perceived immortal private conduct will never, ever be successful, no matter how painful the righteous moral minority makes it. The best we can do is remove the prohibition, regulate it for the common good, and minimize the collateral damage.
. . . a follow-up comment:
“Well said. I'd rather ruffle feathers and get it right than to look the other way and react to a devastating attack that could have been prevented. Preemptive action is possible. We need to use it wisely.”
Another contribution:
“Actually I thought [Bill Richardson] should have been sec of state. Not that it makes any difference now.”
My reply:
You were not alone in that thought. I have always admired Richardson’s skill as a negotiator. He has a rare ability to absorb elements of an issue and find mutually acceptable compromise . . . good qualities for a secretary of state – a moot point, now. I wonder if the Richardson situation shares similarities to the Spitzer fiasco – political vendetta. The Richardson investigation has gone on for several years, so I understand; so, for this to happen now stinks of politics rather than justice. American politics is an ugly, nasty business.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment