Middle East debacle - someone who really gets what's going on

Paul Craig Roberts: 'Attention deficit Americans are being misled to war'
Posted on Saturday, July 15 @ 10:33:25 EDT
This article has been read 2409 times.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Craig Roberts

A terrible thing is happening, and not enough Americans are aware to be able to do anything about it. Zionists in Israel and in the Bush administration are leading America into war with Iran, Syria, Hizbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine. The consequences for America, Israel and the Middle East will be disastrous, but as long as Washington is in thrall to Zionist paranoia, nothing can be done about it. Bush made this clear on July 14 when he rejected the plea from Lebanon's prime minister to pressure Israel to stop its attack on Lebanon.

The war began when Bush's neoconservative government invaded Afghanistan and Iraq under the pretense of "fighting terrorism." Neither front has gone well for America. The Israelis, seeing the growing domestic opposition to Bush's wars of choice, concluded that they are in danger of losing America's military intervention in behalf of their Middle East interests. Israel decided to force the issue.

Israel did this by bombing and invading Gaza, from which they had just withdrawn as part of a "Palestinian settlement." Israel's pretext was the capture of one Israeli soldier in Gaza in retribution for Israel's genocidal policies toward Palestine. Few Americans know that Israel has forced Palestinians into ghettos and walled them off from their farm lands, schools, and medical treatment.

By slaughtering scores of civilians and destroying the infrastructure of the fragile land in response to the capture of one Israeli soldier, Israel has made it clear that its policy is fire and sword.

Please read entire article below, it is well worth it.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=26899&mode=nested&order=0

Anything in existence not built on Truth will no last but will past away.

and it wouldn't surprise me if the entire royal family of the house of saud were to convert to judaism as part of the deal with the bfee.

It's possible to oppose Israeli policy w/o sounding like a raving anti-Semite.

How is that anti-semite? And you didn't comment on the gist of the article, so I guess I can assume that you agree with nothing he has to say? I am not sure, as it sounds to me like you are ignoring his arguments because you don't want to believe them.

But it's careless use of language. If he's talking about the right-wing of Israeli politics, he should say so. If he's talking about the Likud party, or the neocons, say that. Who exactly are the "Zionists?" Israelis? Republicans? Anyone the author doesn't like? Ahmadinejad uses that word constantly, as do other anti-Semitic organizations. So when Roberts uses a phrase like "Zionist paranoia," little alarm bells go off for me. It's inflamatory & uninformative. What is he really trying to say? IMO, rhetoric like that distracts from the possibly valid points he's attempting to make.

Whether you liked his language or not, does not take away from his main arguments. They are either valid or they are not.

He uses language to make his arguments. If that language is unclear, his argument is unclear.

It's not "kike" or "heeb" or anything like that. It's the name of a political movement. Would you prefer the term "Jewish Nationalists"? Because that's the correct definition of the word and exactly what Mr. Roberts is using it as here.

And yes, by "Jewish Nationalists", that combines all the militaristic and imperial ideals of nationalism with ethnic exclusivity. Sort of like oh, "German Nationalism".

He also makes clear that he's speaking of the people in charge of the shebang, who, yes, are very much nationalists, apartheidists, and all-around Israeli versions of our neoconservatives. Your average Israeli? Probably not a Zionist.

'Course, that's not to say that plenty of people exchange the term for "Jew" in general. But then again there are just about as many people who will scream "antisemite" at the first hint of criticism of Israel. So I guess it balances out.

Aryans, white supremacists, etc.

speak of ZOG=Zionist Occupation Government=US Government- also calling anyone who supports Israel or Jews "Zionists"

to me this Zionist Paranoia sounds no different than that terminology

Historically it has been used, at times, in a derogatory manner, much as the racist xenophobe Mr. Roberts uses it. Yes, that's exactly what he is. He writes for sites that the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated as hate sites. I just read an article he wrote at Lew Rockwell that slams Brown v. Board. He's a little more sophisticated than many purveyors of hate, but that only makes him more dangerous.

None of this has anything to do with criticism of Israel. Israel is absolutely deserving of harsh criticism, and I've strongly criticized it's actions frequently.

Oh, and you're totally wrong about what Zionism is.

this seems like a contradiction to me. How can an Israeli not believe in a Jewish state? That's like an American who doesn't believe in representive democracy. "Zionist" is a tricky term, and it's probably best just to avoid it. Other more specific labels can work, such as neo-con, Likud, etc. like Marie26 was trying to say.

I think when you say "Zionist" you are thinking of the Jews who strive for "Greater Israel" - the hard-right wing Jews who want to conquer Gaza and the West Bank and rebuild the Temple and all that. These "Zionists" get confused with other Jews who just want a Jewish nation, even at 1967 borders. IMO those Jews are also Zionists. Hope this helps shed light on why this term is so confusing.

.....wanting people at DU to show a tiny bit of fairness about the Israeli Palestinian issue. I agree that it would be nice but do you really expect that to happen??:sarcasm:

between two countries to take over the middle east? Two nuclear powers I might add. Will Isreal always be right because of the holocaust? Does that mean that whatever they want and any means to get it is okay? It is the people defending Israel, a country who has displaced people from their own land, who I find the most intolerant. They seem to do no wrong. And does that mean that I defend Hezbollah or any other group that kills innocents? No, it makes me sick. What I do know is that the oppression by Isreal will continue to foster more and more extremists just as our occupation of Iraq has.

......the neocons/fundies/bible thumping crowd thinks Israel does nothing wrong or if Israel do cause trouble them they must be justified in some way.

At the opposite end are the equally extreme liberals/progressives/?? who think Israel can do no right and might even be hell bent on starting a truly major conflict.

The only difference between the two extremes of can’t do anything wrong crowd and the can’t do anything right crowd is which end of the political scale they come from.

I, on the other hand, see Israel as sometimes having just cause and other times their actions being over the top. In this case they had provocation in the beginning but they chance going over the top if this bombing champaign continues. On the other hand the Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims/?? carries some of the blame for what is going on.

.....I'm not above admitting that Israel as well as the Arabs are right on some things and totally off base on others.

I just wish DU and liberals/progressives in general would stop and see how their anti-Israel stance hurts them politically.

I am basing what I believe on the alliance between the United States and the goals that our government has stated on many occasions. Are you saying that the United States could not possibly be in cahoots with Isreal to widen the mideast conflict to attain their already stated goals? My belief has nothing to do with being left or right but on the facts.

....liberals are just as extreme as the neocons when it comes to the issue of Israel.

The Israelis have been using that Victim Status as an excuse to do whatever they hell they want to do to the Palestinians. When they are called on it, they start throwing around the anti-semitism moniker, because they can, you see, because their ancestors were Victims.

We can feel terrible about what happened to the real victims of the holocaust without owing their descendents everything they want no matter who it prejudices.

But sometimes it's nice to try.

what if someone took the state of Pennsylvania, and said it had to go back to the Native Americans because they were there originally? You wouldn't be able to move, because you don't have a lot of money, plus you have been living in Pennsylvania a long time when the Native Americans weren't there, who are they to come back after this time and demand you give back the land?

That is the gist of why Arabs are pissed at Israel. That in effect is Zionism.

Technically Israel and the Hebrew people were in that land first, just like the Native Americans were, but it isn't very easy to just kick the Arabs off the land, just like most Americans wouldn't move.

You know that if someone did that to American territory people would fight back, and that is unfortunately what these people are doing. They don't have an army capable of fighting the IDF 1 on 1, so they use terrorism.

Over the years, what was once outrage, has simply become blind rage on the part of some Arabs in the area. They don't care about the innocent people they are killing anymore.

On the other we have the Israelis; who feel they have a rightful claim to the land, much as Native Americans would with Pennsylvania. They want what they believe is rightfully theirs. They feel wronged because not only did not have their land for 1000+ years, they had to work hard to get it.

Their children and other loved ones are regularly killed in terrorist attacks. They too once had outrage, that has simply turned into blind rage.

Only Israel receives support from America; and that gives them the air of credibility and civility. I highly doubt people in the Likud party and the extreme far right extra-Orthodox-Jewish people want to make peace. They want war. So do their enemy.

Unfortunately the Kadima party, which was supposed to be moderate, has to compete against that extremely nationalistic Likud party, and must act tough on terror.

Every time Israel strikes the terror groups, more terrorists are created, and the terrorists have new legitimate claims to back up their illegitimate methods of fighting because Israel is really doing bad things. However, Israel is merely responding to a threat to their security, and every time an Israeli is killed, more hatred and hawkishness brews in the populous.

Get the picture?

Oh give me a break. They are bombing infrastructure. Things that the general populous needs to live. Is there anything they would do that you would find indefensible?

I meant to say that is how they feel. (Or at least that is what is portrayed on IBA, state run television in Israel.) I am sorry I didn't mention that to you.

I'm aware of the history of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, so I'm not sure why you felt you had to post all that. It's an incredibly complicated issue w/a tormented history. My post was referring to the terms being tossed around in this article. Zionism simply refers to the historical movement to establish the state of Israel. But that term is tossed around often by anti-Semitic organizations & Arab states that don't accept the state of Israel. So for Hizbollah, for example, Israel is not a state, but simply "Zionists" occupying Palestinian land. Google "Zionist paranoia" & see what kinds of sites pop up. (or maybe "Zionist conspiracy" for even scarier stuff.) That's why I don't really like the phrase & I wonder where he got it from. I'm assuming he's talking about Israel, or maybe the neocons, but it's not really clear. That's why, ultimately, I feel like he just used the phrase cause it gives a nice insidious overtone.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

When used apart from each other? I have seen those words used frequently, and just because the Nazi's used them, doesn't mean that other people can't (now hopefully, they won't be used together. :-))

But, you know, if a Nazi uses the term "Nationalist Socialist", you can be pretty sure what he means. If a writer for a racist hate site uses the term "Zionist paranoia," you can be pretty sure what he means, too. If you're willing to see it.

In this country the neocons/fundies think Israel could never do anything wrong or at the very least should never be criticized regardless of what they do.:sarcasm:

At the other end are the equally extreme liberals/progressives who think Israel can do no right or at the very least should receive no favorable comments at all for any thing.:sarcasm:

The only difference between the can’t do anything wrong crowd, and the can’t do anything right crowd, is they come from opposite ends on the political scale. One is just as extreme and unreasonable as the other.

Israel is indeed wrong in how they are handling this situation, on the other hand the Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims/pick the term, are doing their fair share to inflame the entire matter.

to exist?

now that takes the cake of antisemitic rant on this thread

Israeli government hard liners may be responsible for terrible things, but Israel has a right to exist.

I wanted people to understand the original cause of all this. Just as it would be hard for the Arabs on the land to be moved, so too would it be hard for the Israelis. Don't jump to conclusions that were never posted. I don't take kindly to people saying things like that, when I never said Israel "had no right to exist."

Why don't you actually read the damn post before going off half cocked and making those kind of wild accusations.

and your statements amount to what I said

I stand by my statements


BTW the OP has cited an article by a paleoconservative racist Paul Craig Roberts

do you agree with him too?

but I was trying to explain the situation. Maybe you should go BACK and read the post AGAIN. You will find it was a summary of how each side feels. NOT how I feel!

It seems you only read the first few lines where I was trying to let people understand how the Arabs in the region feel.

Most of them could give a rat's ass about the Palestinians period.

Where are they in terms of helping the Palestinians except in supporting terror.

Hezbollah and Hamas are terrorist organizations.

Israel may be way over the line on how they are responding to the situation, but they apparently think they need to do this to stop what's happening in Lebanon right now.

I don't think the Arabs in general in the region give a crap about Palestinians, I think they mostly just hate Jews.

The OP is an article written by a hate mongerer.

This whole thread sucks.

I am bookmarking this thread just for this response. I have wanted to distill the picture for some folk who have just been unbending on their POV, but have never been able to make it as clear as this. May i copy this response (and credit you, of course)?

peace out...

forming an amen chorus regarding this article, is very disturbing. I attribute it to ignorance, I guess and nothing more sinister, but still it's disheartening to see propaganda gobbled up as if it were the gospel truth. Makes my heart sink wherever the propaganda comes from. And the other thing is, I'm getting the feeling that a lot of people don't know very much about neocons and the neocon philosophy.

I just googled the guy & he's a proud writer for VDARE, an anti-immigrant site that is a coalition of neoconservatives, nationalists & white supremacists. They're named after "Virginia Dare", the first white baby born in the US, and are devoted to "keeping America white". The Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled the group a hate site.

A selection of VDARE articles:

"Brimelow's site carries archives of columns from men like Sam Francis, who is the editor of the newspaper of the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens, a group whose Web page recently described blacks as "a retrograde species of humanity."

It has run articles by Jared Taylor, the editor of the white supremacist American Renaissance magazine, which specializes in dubious race and IQ studies and eugenics, the "science" of "race betterment" through selective breeding."

In addition to campaigning against minorities & non-white immigrants, VDARE has also accused "the Jews" of dominating the media w/the intent of allowing non-whites to immigrate to the US. In addition to VDARE, Roberts also writes for stellar publications like Townhall & NewsMaxx. I KNEW this guy was sketchy. People should be able to recognize code words like this.

SPLC Intelligence Report on VDARE : Keeping America White - http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=152

Robert's columns for VDARE - http://www.vdare.com/roberts/

It only makes the fawning over this article that much more shameful. I can't imagine why SmirkingChimp published it. Unfucking believable; the guy is an out and out racist pig who writes for the Rockwell site as well. I just skimmed a piece he penned that slams Brown v. Board.

Look at the coalition of support for this author - liberal sites like DU, conservative sites like Townhall, and white supremacist & anti-immigrant sites, too. People from each of these totally opposed groups all unite to praise articles by a racist xenophobe. What does that say about us? Does it mean that liberals are willing to support anything as long as it slams Israel? I sure hope not.

n/t

that I was not aware of some of his views on race. Having just read one of his articles after reading your post, I have to admit that I was taken aback. None of the editorials I have viewed in the past ever gave me the indicatiion that he held those kind of views. Having said that, I still agree with the gist of his argument in this case. However, I will have to rethink using him again as my source for future debate.

might get along great

he thinks similarly

My Epiphany: From Reaganaut To Anti-War Radical

02/07/06

By Paul Craig Roberts

A number of readers have asked me when did I undergo my epiphany, abandon right-wing Reaganism and become an apostle of truth and justice.

I appreciate the friendly sentiment, but there is a great deal of misconception in the question.

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/

which identifies vdare.com as a "hate site"

and look at Roberts articles, who he works for (Hoover Institute) and writes columns for Newsmax.com

and you still want to embrace him?

overlooked his article calling the SC decision to desegregate schools a "despicable" ruling that "devitalizes American democracy." So what if he's anti-war? Does that mean he's someone that should be trusted or listened to? Neo-Nazis are pretty anti-Israel as well, but I hope that doesn't mean they can find liberal supporters.

"Zionists" is the term that the white supremacists, aryans, etc. refer to Jews as.

for example they call our government ZOG=Zionist Occupation Government

to me this just sounds like more sophisticated propaganda of the same as in, PNAC=Zionists in the Bush Administration, agents of Israel.

that to me is anti=semitic

I believe that's exactly how this term is being used here, and the author's connections to white supremacist & anti-Semitic organizations just prove that. IMO, this article is just propaganda to trace Israel as the root of all evil.

associating the PNAC as an agent of Israel and using the term "neocon" as code for "Jewish non paleocon" basically.

There is no doubt that Richard Perle, Wolfowitz, and Feith are a) neocons; b) architects of the Iraq war; and c) I believe all signers of the PNAC letter to Clinton in 1998

But there were plenty of other signers, and neocons aren't limited to Jewish non-paleoconservatives either.

It's just a bash of Israel disguised as a conspiracy that has obviously attracted such famous web sites as "Smirking Chimp.com" to see it as something that fits the agenda that a) PNAC is bad; and well, b) PNAC is bad

"transform" the middle east on behalf of Israel and the Bushes/Cheneys/Blue-blood folks want the money war produces by selling arms as well as an ability to garner control of the oil.

It's an unholy alliance where fundamental ideology and unparalleled greed meet.

Excellent article. Thank you.

<snip>

Israel's American agents, the neoconservatives, have made it clear for years that their goal is to eliminate every Middle Eastern government that is not ruled by an American puppet friendly to Israel. The people who hold the important positions in Bush's government have frankly stated this position over and over. For example, a decade ago in 1996 a group of American neoconservatives who have comprised much of the sub-cabinet in the Bush administration wrote that Israel could gain American sympathy by blaming aggression on Hizbollah, Syria, and Iran and then seizing the strategic initiative by "engaging Hizbollah, Syria, and Iran as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon."

First, however, Iraq would have to be taken out. The first focus, said the neocons, should be "on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq - an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right."

Gentle reader, does it not strike you as strange that US citizens, most of whom have held presidential appointments in the Bush administration, are so concerned to plan how Israel can draw upon US blood and treasure to achieve Israel's objectives in the Middle East?

We certainly have to hand it to Israel and its American neoconsevative agents. They have succeeded on entirely false pretenses in launching two wars in the Middle East and now they have prepared the ground for a general conflagration.

its all an evil Zionist plot to take over the world. Seriously, this is a piece that steps awfully close to the line. Comments such as this one: "We certainly have to hand it to Israel and its American neoconsevative agents. They have succeeded on entirely false pretenses in launching two wars in the Middle East and now they have prepared the ground for a general conflagration." demonstrate an unhealthy fixation on Israel as the source of all evil. Israel is not responsible for the decision of bushco to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Yes, AIPAC is influential and pushed for it, but there's quite a bit of evidence that shows that the Israeli powers were less than thrilled about the prospect. And aside from that, what exactly were the false pretenses regarding Afghanistan?

The author commits sins of ommission as well as sweeping assertions with little or no evidence. Make accusations like this, you need to provide some footnotes with substantive evidence. The author neglects to mention that H'zbollah has been shooting rockets into Israel for the past several years, that it controls the southern border, that they not only abducted two soldiers from Israel but that they killed 8 others. These are serious provocations. Israel's response was bullshit- stupid and brutal, but it's a stretch to say that Israel plotted all of this to "force the issue".

Israel's actions in Gaza, the West Bank and its invasion of Lebanon are to be strongly condemned, but when you start in on the Zionist plots, and the assertions that Israel controls the US, you're treading in some pretty polluted waters.

I think you are truly being naive.

I make a cogent argument and that's your comeback? Yikes, not terribly impressive. You may think I'm naive; my sentiments towards you are harsher: I suspect your knowledge of history, rhetoric and propaganda are limited, and that you either never developed critical thinking skills, or they've grown rusty.

The fact is that sometimes simple statements are all I have left. So you feel harsh towards me, that's your right. I only said I thought you were naive. But if that's all it takes for you to vent your anger, fine. I posted the article because I believe that we have governments who are trying to take over the middle east. Sorry you don't like that or see it that way. But regardless of history, tell me why you think this is not possible or happening as we speak?

Marie's post #30 which documents the fact that this guy is an out and out right wing racist who writes for numerous hate sites. And then you might ask yourself why you so easily swallowed such thinly disguised hate speech.

Didn't Hitler and the Nazis think that?

and understanding it's roots, right wing zionism is just as important as understanding the neoCONs.

fyi

right wing xenophobe is saying. (Check the links in post #30)

If we screw things up sufficiently, they come in as liberators...5 years...10 years...eventually we lose.

for now, they are fellow travelers, but that could change.

From the article:

Under international law - the identical law that was used to try Nazi war criminals after World War II - Israel's invasion of Gaza is a monstrous war crime. The United Nations top humanitarian official, Jan Egeland, said that Israel's attacks on civilians and infrastructure violated international law.

If not, why does the US veto the UN's call for a cease fire?

Subject: Paul Craig Roberts=Paleoconservative Racist

along the lines of Pat Buchanan

http://www.vdare.com/roberts /

some of his credits:

Hoover Institution
Newsmax.com columns

Southern Poverty Law Center considers VDare a "hate site"

and this is where DU'ers are finding support now for anti Israel articles?

Smirking Chimp should know better

(credit to Marie26 for her research in finding this information out)

This thread is shameful

...when it comes to anti-Israeli material, some do not care where they get it from. When it is exposed as thinly-veiled anti-Semitism, some people here will still defend it. It is sickening!

hard for many people to think for themselves. It is so much easier to jump on the bandwagon of someone else's thoughts.

(btw: did you find out why your post this morning was deleted?)

it is just helping destroy the image of Democrats IMO as there are so many threads today bashing Israel, not just for the actions she is taking right now, but just to bash Israel. Many of them go to the Israel/Palestine forum.

But all in all, it seems like when the Repukes claim (and I've heard some do this) that Democrats are anti-semitic, threads like these just give ammo to that argument.

A Clean Break:
A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.

In which the words Zionism and Zionist are used freely and without confusion, I'll note, but the whole "blueprint" needs to be read. Then come back and tell us that you don't see any relationship between the strategic goals, key influentials and architects who eventually came to power, official and unofficial in the Bush admin-- and the overall fears of what may be unfolding as cautioned in this Paul Craig Roberts article.

http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm

Paul Roberts is an author who is/was a frequent contributor to vdare, an extremely bigoted and/or unreliable website. He seems to remain consistent here
" Washington is in thrall to Zionist paranoia ".

We don't want to provide him with any more publicity.

Thanks.