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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (29630)	10/5/2003 2:57:46 PM
From: t2	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 89467

In some ways you have to stand in awe of the gall, that will allow Sharon to say "We have no intention of escalating," when he just has. I am usually against Bush's methods to handle this type of problem..not respecting boundries etc.. ..but where are the suicide bombers getting their training? What are their resources when Israel controls the Palestinian territories? Only if you put pressure on the leaders in the region that it is unacceptable to silently encourage suicide bombings, will Syria and others take action (maybe they had already done that..I don't know). OK maybe they can make a case for helping train freedom fighters are trying to liberate Palestine..but that attacks should be against Iraeli military or government offices and NOT innocent civilians. I will acknowledge that these suicide attacks has resulted because of the desperation of the Palestinian people but maybe it is time to stop because such acts are accomplishing nothing to help their people right now. You can also see the thinking of the US government..what happens when weapons get better; if suicide bombings are seen as some sort of way to get to heaven, just imagine the volunteers ready to attack the US. Attacking the leadership by all means is the answer and that includes putting serious pressure on the leaders of the region..and this strike might be effective in that goal. In the future the weapons may be far more powerful/maybe even nukes. Although I dislike Sharon and Bush as leaders, it is easy to see the situation from their perspective. In the long run, maybe it is the right way to deal with the situation. It may be in the best interest of palestinians/israelis and their neighbours in the LONG run.

To: lurqer who wrote (29630)	10/5/2003 5:08:12 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Israel attacks Islamic Jihad base in Syria in retaliation for suicide bombing, army says "In Washington, Bush administration officials said Israel had not informed Washington in advance of its retaliatory strike." But then, why should they inform us, when according to Sharon, they control us. sfgate.com JASON KEYSER, Associated Press Writer Sunday, October 5, 2003 (10-05) 13:33 PDT MAJDAL SHAMS, Golan Heights (AP) -- Israel bombed a target inside Syria that it claimed was an Islamic Jihad training base, striking deep inside its neighbor's territory Sunday for the first time in three decades and widening its pursuit of Palestinian militants. The airstrike -- a retaliation for a suicide bombing Saturday that killed 19 Israelis -- alarmed the Arab world and deepened concerns that three years of Israeli-Palestinian violence could spread through the region. Washington urged both sides to show restraint -- but added a pointed criticism of Syria, saying Damascus "must cease harboring terrorists and make a clean break from those responsible for planning and directing terrorist action from Syrian soil." With little option for military retaliation, Syria turned for international support. On requests from Damascus, the U.N. Security Council and the 22-member Arab League called emergency sessions for Sunday as Syria's foreign minister Farouq al-Sharaa sought measure to deter Israeli "aggression." Leaders of Islamic Jihad and other militant groups are based in Syria, but Jihad on Sunday denied having any training bases there. Syrian villagers near the targeted site said the camp had been used by Palestinian gunmen in the 1970s but was later abandoned -- and was now only used by picknickers and other visitors to its spring and olive groves. The raid was a dramatic new tactic for Israel in its attempts to stop Palestinian militants. Closures, assassinations and military strikes into Palestinian areas have failed to stop suicide attacks, and Washington strongly opposes expelling Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat as Israel has threatened. Israel said the bombing signalled it would pursue militants wherever they found support -- and it added an accusation that Iran also backs Islamic Jihad. "Any country who harbors terrorism, who trains (terrorists), supports and encourages them will be responsible to answer for their actions," government spokesman Avi Pazner said. The strike was launched just hours before the start of Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. It also came on the eve of the anniversary of the 1973 war between Israel and Syria, when Israel fought off a Syrian attack aimed at reversing Israel's 1967 seizure of the Golan Heights, a strategic border plateau. Sunday marked Israel's first military action deep in Syria since 1973. The Israeli attack at about 4:30 a.m. hit several targets at the Ein Saheb camp northwest of Damascus, Israeli security officials said. Hours later, plainclothes security officials banned journalists from approaching the camp. Dense trees blocked the site from view. In Washington, Bush administration officials said Israel had not informed Washington in advance of its retaliatory strike. Raanan Gissin, adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, said the base was financed by Iran and used by several terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Undated footage said to be from the camp, taken from Iranian TV and released by the Israeli military on Sunday, shows a military officer conducting a tour of the camp. Hundreds of weapons, including grenades with Hebrew markings apparently captured from Israel, were displayed in one room. Underground tunnels were packed with arms and ammunition. Another group, the tiny Syrian-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command said it once used the camp, 14 miles northwest of Damascus, but that it is now deserted. A civilian guard was injured in the air strike, the group said. However, a senior Popular Front member, speaking on condition of anonymity, acknowledged that there is close cooperation between his group, Islamic Jihad, the militant group Hamas, and the Lebanese guerrilla faction Hezbollah. All four train together, mostly in Lebanon, but also in Syria, he said. In an understanding with the Syrian government, Hamas and Jihad leaders have been careful in recent months to give statements from Lebanon to avoid the impression that they still operate from Damascus. Still, Syrian President Bashar Assad is on the defensive, with the United States accusing him of hosting extremist groups and sponsoring terror. Assad, after meeting with Secretary of State Colin Powell in May in Damascus, indicated that his government had closed certain offices of Palestinian militant groups. However, last weekend, U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said that "there is much more that Syria needs to do, and that message is being communicated to them." Despite Syria's complaint to the United Nations, it seemed unlikely it would retaliate. Syria has 380,000 active duty soldiers, but Israel holds a commanding technological edge. Israel is more worried about Syria's growing missile program and its ability to launch chemical and poison weapons into Israel's cities. Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon -- three Arab countries border Israel -- condemned the air strike. "It can drag the whole region into a circle of violence," said Jordanian Foreign Minister Marwan Muasher. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat also weighed in, saying the Israeli attack could destabilize the region even further. Saturday's suicide bombing in Haifa had raised concerns Israel would carry out threats to expel Arafat, despite U.S. opposition. In an apparent attempt to avert that possibility, Arafat on Sunday appointed an emergency Cabinet headed by Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia. The United States, trying to put its peace efforts back on track, has in past days appeared willing to give Qureia a chance, and any Israeli action against Arafat could force Qureia's immediate resignation and cause chaos in the Palestinian areas. Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for Saturday's bombing, in which a 27-year-old Palestinian woman, identified as Hanadi Jaradat, blew herself up inside the beach-front restaurant Maxim, popular with both Arabs and Jews. Fifty-five people were wounded. Overnight, Israeli troops demolished the Jaradat family home in the West Bank town of Jenin in line with army practice. The United States opposes expelling Arafat, and it appears Israel launched Sunday's air strike as an alternative response -- at least for now. It was dramatic enough to satisfy the Israeli public's demand for retaliation but was unlikely to endanger Israel's ties with Washington.

To: lurqer who wrote (29630)	10/5/2003 5:35:31 PM
From: NOW	Respond to of 89467

Imperial democracy and self-rule By Renato Redentor Constantino Wonder no more why the Bush administration refuses to give a timetable to Iraqi self-government. Days after his $87-billion speech where he called on the Iraqi people to “rise to the responsibilities of a free people,” US President Bush continues to insist that elections and self-rule will not be on his Iraq agenda for some time. Which sort of means a period that extends from tomorrow till whenever. Or at least until a truly submissive pro-American government is securely installed in Iraq. Secure, that is, from Iraqis intent on throwing out their erstwhile and present-day tormentors. “This question I put to the defenders of this war,” said the first president of the Anti-Imperialist League of the US, George Boutwell, in response to America’s annexation of the Philippines a century ago. “What is the end that you seek? Is it the vassalage of these people? If so, then you are the enemies of the republic and the betrayers of the principles upon which the republic thus far has been made to rest.” Enemy. Betrayer. Such appropriate words for the imperial power responsible for the tragedy in Iraq unfolding today. A Zogby survey in August asked Iraqis whether “Baath Party leaders who committed crimes in the past [should] be punished.” According to the right-wing American Enterprise Institute, which commissioned the survey, a thoroughly unforgiving 74 percent of the Iraqi public stated that Saddam’s henchmen should be punished. Unforgiving, huh? It will be interesting to find out what the 74 percent will do when they find out that the US occupation army has hired Mukhabarat officers to hunt down remnants of Saddam’s regime. Yes, Mukhabarat officers. Signed-up and rented. The very Baathist security forces, according to TheWashington Post, “renowned across the Arab world for its casual use of torture, fear, intimidation, rape and imprisonment.” It’s a shame the Post didn’t say it like it is, said Chris Floyd of the Moscow Times; it would have made a great headline -- “War Criminals Hire War Criminals to Hunt Down War Criminals.” But maybe the 74 percent have already discovered the betrayals. Or maybe portions of the 74 percent are already doing something about the perfidies being perpetrated in their name. A connection, perhaps, with the increasing daily dosage of bullets, bombs and grenades being fed US troops daily? Who knows? Maybe some of the 74 percent remember Dr. Hussain Majid, who has been appointed by the US as the chief medical officer of Abu Ghraib Prison. Once upon a few months ago, it was Saddam Hussein’s nastiest torture and execution center; today, Abu Ghraib Prison is the cleanest US jail complex in Iraq. It’s a laudable transformation -- from macabre to sanitary -- except that before the American invasion, Majid was the head doctor of . . . Abu Ghraib Prison. The same jail, incidentally, where Americans are now coming under attack four out of seven nights and where two GIs were killed recently in a mortar attack. Remember the US occupation army’s applause over the surrender of ex-Iraqi defense minister Gen. Sultan Hashim Ahmed the other day? “The noose is tightening,” they said. The noose? Tightening? Judging by a report of The Associated Press, the noose looks more like a loose gold necklace. In return for his surrender, Ahmed was promised by US Gen. David Petraeus that his name would be taken out of the 55 Most Wanted List and that he would be treated with “utmost dignity and respect.” After all, in his bizarre letter of appeasement to Ahmed, General Petraeus reminded the ex-Baathist minister that “we do share common traits” such as “supporting our leaders in a common and just cause.” Petraeus considered Ahmed as a “most respected senior military leader . . . a man of honor and integrity.”Ahmed -- the man who, after a cease-fire was agreed at an airstrip near the Kuwait-Iraq border in 1991, persuaded Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf to allow Iraq to use military helicopters for “official business.” “Official business” being the slaughter of the Shi’as in Basra and the Kurds in the north who had risen in revolt in response to Bush the Elder’s call to “the Iraqi people to take matters into their own hands and force Saddam Hussein to step aside.” Few today remember that Saddam’s regime had almost collapsed because of the Shi’a and Kurdish peoples’ rebellion. But the revolt was doomed because the US just had to intervene -- by stopping the rebels from reaching arms depots, by denying them shelter and by giving Ahmed’s choppers and “Saddam Hussein’s Republican Guard safe passage through American lines in order to attack the rebels.” The reason behind the treachery? As the TV journalist Peter Jennings put it, the US wanted Saddam gone but “just didn’t want the Iraqi people to take over.” “We clearly would have preferred a coup,” said Bush Senior’s National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft. “There’s no question about that.” A Saddam government without Saddam. “[L]ocal conditions do not permit of employing in responsible positions any but British officers competent . . . to deal with people of the country . . . efore any truly Arab façade can be applied to edifice,” said Gen. Stanley Maude in 1917. An edifice that Britain had hoped would be stable enough and look Arab enough to sustain its imperial interests. If the Shi’a and Kurdish rebellion of 1991 spread beyond Basra, Nasiriyah and Sulaimaniyah, instead of an imperial edifice with an Arab façade, the Americans would have likely confronted an actual Arab edifice -- beyond US control. And so they would have none of it. So long as the empire is able to build its edifices, it matters little whether the materials come from vile creatures like Saddam or felons such as Chalabi. In March a US State Department document had already explained why the Bush administration today is so intent on rejecting the clamor for a speedy turnover of power to Iraqis: “[L]iberal democracy would be difficult to achieve [in Iraq] . . . Electoral democracy, were it to emerge, could well be subject to exploitation by anti-American elements.” The empire distrusts democracy and fears empowered people. Filipinos should know. America does not want to be reminded that it is responsible for destroying the first Republic in Asia. Instead, the memory that the US wants to propagate is that it is responsible for bringing democracy to Asia via the Philippines. Via the landmark election in 1907 which established what many still refer to as the country’s first democratic institution, the Philippine Assembly. In fairness to the empire, the US did provide for the mechanics of democracy in the elections of 1907. Such as limiting the exercise to male Filipinos above 21, who had held office under the hated Spaniards, who owned real property of significant value, and who could read, write or speak Spanish or English. Mechanics which ensured that only 1.41 percent of the population would vote and that the victors would come from the elite class that the Americans were grooming for leadership. The first taste of “democracy” under America. By such facts is the legacy of the US-sponsored 1907 elections measured. An election held a mere month after the US hanged the great Filipino hero Macario Sakay; just two months after the US colonial army banned the Filipino flag, and only six years after 600,000 Filipinos in the island of Luzon alone had been killed or had died of disease as a result of the US occupation. abs-cbnnews.com

To: lurqer who wrote (29630)	10/6/2003 10:42:02 AM
From: TigerPaw	Respond to of 89467

The significance of the operation is more in terms of its symbolic message to the Syrians Since this came at the same time that Dick Cheney took control from Rumsfeld of operations in Iraq it gives pause to think that a new strategy is in play. Rumsfeld had seemed to back off, just at bit, trying to stabilize the country before starting any new ventures. The Cheney plan, in conjunction with Israel, may be to get the war into Syria so that the military can be back in fighting mode, not peacekeeping mode, until after the elections. If so, Israel will keep poking it's air-powered finger into Syria's chest until there is an angry response, and Cheney will feel compelled to step in. TP cnn.com