Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (59263)	11/28/2002 6:52:37 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

November 28, 2002 NYT Phony War II By WILLIAM SAFIRE WASHINGTON ? I am staring at a White House document that symbolizes "Phony War II," our campaign of finger-wagging and rostrum-rattling at Saddam. (The time of Allied paralysis between Hitler's blitz of Poland in 1939 and the spring of 1940 was called the phony war, or "sitzkrieg," which gave the Nazis time to prepare a crushing strike westward.) The document in hand is a letter sent individually to many leaders of the Iraqi opposition who plan to meet in London Dec. 10. Writing on White House stationery, the signers say, "The United States looks forward to a conference at which a full range of Iraqi oppositionists will lay out for the world their united vision for the future of Iraq." The key word is "united." Expecting the conference to be "a major public event that highlights the desire of Iraqis for freedom and for the creation of a peaceful, democratic, multi-ethnic Iraq assured of its sovereign territorial integrity," the signers hit the key hope again: "we appreciate your commitment to making this unified conference a success." The irony is in the signatures of four Americans. One is Richard Armitage, Colin Powell's alter ego. Another is Paul Wolfowitz, Don Rumsfeld's intellectual warhawk at the Pentagon. A third is Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's national security man. The Iraqi-unifying quartet is rounded out by the N.S.C.'s Stephen Hadley, guardian of Condi Rice's inscrutability. Most of these guys have been at each other's throats over Iraq policy since Nov. 27, 2001, when President Bush launched his first oratorical missile against Iraq. Wolfowitz and Libby want to go in and get it over with; Armitage wants to scare Saddam to death with U.N. resolutions; Hadley shuttlecocks back and forth, often reflecting the C.I.A.'s bewilderment. Not one of them, nor their bosses, could sign the letter alone. That's because the Iraqi "oppositionists" know that each represents a different shade of policy. Before the Americans could tell the divided Iraqis to form a united front, the Americans had to set the example. Hence the letter from our propositionists, designed to knock the heads together of the Iraqi oppositionists. Among their leading factions: Ahmad Chalabi, of the Iraqi National Congress in London, is despised by the C.I.A. and its State Department acolytes because his warning that the C.I.A.'s attempted mid-90's coup against Saddam had been penetrated was ignored. But this Ph.D. from the University of Chicago is aces high with the Pentagon, is usually accepted as coordinator by the Kurds, and will be energized by the signatures of Wolfowitz and Libby. Iyad Alawi of the Iraqi National Accord in Amman, Jordan, will like the name of State's Armitage, because State leans toward the Sunni minority in Iraq, with its support in the officer corps that offers "stability without Saddam." (Another State favorite was just charged as a war criminal.) The anti-Saddam Sunnis will be disappointed that no C.I.A. name signs the letter. Jalal Talabani and Massoud Barzani of the Kurds, building a democracy under our air protection in northern Iraq, will be reassured by the name of Wolfowitz, though the Pentagon's deference to Turkey's paranoia about possible Kurdish independence has prevented the U.S. from arming and training the main, 70,000-man anti-Saddam force on the ground. Mohammed Bakir Hakim, of the Supreme Islamic Revolutionary Council in Tehran, speaks for much of the Shiite majority in Iraq's south and is happy to see the name of State's Armitage on the letter. He is closest to the C.I.A., in contrast to the Kurds, whose on-the-ground intelligence has been scorned by our absent intelligence agency. That's how the Bush "uniteds" mesh with Iraq's soon-to-be-uniteds. But all this planning is taking place as if the war to liberate Iraq's peoples is just around the corner. What if the present period drags on and on? What if U.N. inspectors are manipulated and bamboozled by an Iraqi regime that was able to veto the tough-minded inspector Rolf Ekeus and get its preference, the see-no-evil Hans Blix? All this avid media attention on "after Saddam" would soon dissipate. Tyranny would then bob and weave and survive. At the end of Phony War I, Hitler emerged stronger than ever. Phony War II is now a year old, and time is on Saddam's side.

To: zonder who wrote (59263)	11/28/2002 7:02:01 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

The Real Revolutionaries By Robert Tracinski For months, courageous protesters have braved riot police to oppose the depredations of a warlike and oppressive regime bent on world domination. No, I am not talking about the "anti-war" protesters who menace the cities of Europe and America, the creeps who scale the barricade of a Starbucks storefront for no greater goal than the glee of smashing its windows. These are only brave and idealistic souls in their own warped self-image. I am talking about real courage and real idealism?the kind shown by the young men and women manning the very real and very deadly barricades of freedom in Iran?the students who, armed with nothing but a burning conviction of the rightness of their cause, are facing down a brutal theocratic dictatorship. Student protests in Iran flared up first in 1999, only to be brutally repressed, with student leaders dragged off to jail, tortured, and frequently killed. Since September 11, however, hundreds of thousands of young people have begun to rebel against the restrictions of Iran's Islamic theocracy. For the last two weeks, these protests have found a focus: the death sentence against dissident scholar Hashem Aghajari. His crime? In a lecture, he dismissed the authority of the regime's clerics and declared that every generation has the right to interpret Islam for themselves. For this, he is sentenced to be hanged. Aghajari, a tough veteran who lost a leg in the Iran-Iraq War, has refused to appeal his sentence, daring the regime to carry out the execution. Thousands of students have poured into the streets of Iran's cities, clashing with police and demanding that the sentence be lifted. But they are demanding far more than that. One of the student leaders, Abdullah Momeni, declares, "We demand unconditional release of Mr. Aghajari but demand freedom of speech and opinion for everyone and forever." They back this with an explicit call for separation of state and religion. Given that these young people have lived their whole lives under an Islamic dictatorship where deviation from fundamentalist dogma is punishable by death, the fact that they have even grasped the concepts of secularism and freedom of speech is extraordinary. They are revolutionaries in the truest, deepest sense, rebelling for the prerogatives of the individual mind against the stultifying rule of religious conformity. These protesters have driven Iran to what could be a crucial breaking point. In the past few days, the regime has sent mixed signals. Over the weekend, the nation's religious dictator, the Ayatollah Khamenei, ordered the religious courts to "reconsider" the verdict against Aghajari?an apparent cave-in to the protesters' demands. But in the past few days, he also ordered the regime's "militias"?gangs of fundamentalist thugs?to attack student protesters. As the last rulers of the Soviet Union learned, both alternatives are dangerous. To give in to the protesters emboldens them?but cracking down may spark an even greater rebellion. If ever there was a cause worthy of passionate support by those who claim to love freedom and progress, this is it. So why are the alleged "progressives" in the West ignoring it? Remember the people who used to clamor outside South Africa's embassies to protest apartheid? Why aren't they now holding vigil outside Iranian embassies? And the professors who so boldly signed petitions and organized boycotts against Israel?why aren't they organizing petitions to save their colleague in Iran? Why aren't the "peace activists" who so eagerly served as Yasser Arafat's human shields smuggling themselves into Iran to protect the freedom-fighters there? And the unkempt mobs who march in the streets to demand an end to "racist war"?why aren't they marching to demand an end to religious intolerance and theocracy? The ugly answer is that "freedom," "justice," and "progress" are just catchphrases used by these protesters to mask their real goal, which is to tear down Western Civilization. They are indifferent to the fate of the Iranian protesters because they agree with Iran's theocrats that America is the "Great Satan." These are the heirs of the twisted student protesters of the 1960s, who claimed they were oppressed by the Democratic National Convention?while they shrugged at the sight of Soviet tanks rumbling through the streets of Prague. "Freedom," "justice," "progress"?those are catchphrases the left should never have been allowed to steal. But they are still noble ideals, ready to be taken up by the brave young revolutionaries in Iran?and by anyone in the West who takes action to support their cause. aynrand.org

To: zonder who wrote (59263)	11/28/2002 7:16:04 AM
From: epsteinbd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So, from your own link: StanfordEdu: Impact aid to Israel : "In addition, the $ 1.8 billion in annual military aid is, in fact, a simple credit line to Amercan manufacturers and actually ends un costing Israel two to three times that amount in training staffing and maintenance, procurement of spare parts, and other related expenditures. The overall impact is to increase Israeli economic and military dependence on the US and to drain Israel fragile economy, taking money as from Israel's once-generous welfare system." End of quote, beach time, see you later. Happy Thanksgiving all!