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 : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (10702)	4/14/2006 9:24:55 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 22250

Crimson > Israeli historian Dr. Ilan Pappe of Haifa University takes issue with Noam Chomsky's reaction to the Mearsheimer and Walt article on the Israel lobby xymphora has also discredited him. xymphora.blogspot.com >>Thursday, April 06, 2006 Chomsky summary Some commentators have pointed out the excellent article (or here) by Ghali Hassan on Chomsky-gate. To summarize what I feel about Chomsky: Only in the United States could anyone have a ‘debate’ on the Lobby issue. The basic Mearsheimer/Walt thesis is absolutely true, and everybody in the world knows it. You have only to look at members of Congress reacting to the slightest hint that they don’t show sufficient fealty to Israel as if they were teenaged girls reacting to the arrival of the slasher in a slasher movie, or to look at AIPAC stating that it is going to have a particular member removed for not being sufficiently Israel-friendly, doing it, and then boasting about it, or to look at the consistent almost unanimous votes on the most outrageous anti-Palestinian motions imaginable. Chomsky isn’t an idiot, and is fully informed, so he knows the thesis is true. Despite this, Chomsky went out of his way to publish on the matter (he didn’t have to comment on it, and he certainly didn’t have to attack it), thus using his considerable intellectual reputation to provide cover for the Lobby to allow it to continue to do the evil that it does. Fine reading of Chomsky shows that there is a long-standing Zionist exception to his criticism of Empire. Put this all together, and Chomsky’s actions on this matter are deplorable, and put the lie to his entire life’s work.<<

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (10702)	4/15/2006 2:10:53 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 22250

Israel: The Dead Roach in America's Salad by Charley Reese antiwar.com >>The Israeli lobby and the neoconservatives are beating the drums for war with Iran. I hope the president is not that dangerously stupid. The betting on whether he is that stupid is about even. The neocons – who, being self-centered, seemingly have no concept of human nature – are advancing the premise that a military attack on Iran will cause the people to lose faith in their government and result in regime change. A military attack on Iran will have the opposite effect. The people will rally to their government, and any hope of regime change will be dead. That people will rally around their existing leaders in the face of an attack by a foreign power is as certain as sunrise. Neither Israel nor the U.S. could do a greater favor for the ruling mullahs and Iran's president than to launch an attack. It would cement their hold on power. The neocons' fallacious premise has already been disproved. In the first Gulf War, the first Bush administration confidently incited the Shi'ites and the Kurds to rebel after Saddam Hussein's forces were expelled from Kuwait. The administration thought that Saddam, embarrassed by a crushing military defeat, would fall from power in Iraq easily. Instead, he rallied his forces and crushed both the Shi'ites in the south and the Kurds in the north. Oops. In the first place, it is not embarrassing for a Third World country with obsolete equipment to be defeated by the world's No. 1 military superpower. In the second place, the Sunnis, however much they might have disliked Saddam, disliked even more the thought of being ruled by Kurds or Shi'ites. In the third place, by President George H.W. Bush's decision to not go to Baghdad, Saddam could say he duked it out with the world's superpower and was still standing after the fight. That, in most eyes, could be counted as a victory. Some months ago, an Iranian human-rights advocate pleaded with the current Bush administration to cease its rhetorical attacks on the Iranian government. She said, quite accurately, that such attacks make life impossible for Iranian reformers. Needless to say, the blockheads in Washington ignored her. What did we do when the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked? We rallied behind George W. Bush – Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. That's the natural reaction of normal human beings, and the Iranians are normal human beings. Attack their country and they will rally round the flag. The Iranians still insist they are not seeking nuclear weapons, and there's not a scrap of evidence to contradict that claim. They still adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. They have often called for a nuclear-free Middle East. Once again, the dead roach in America's salad is Israel. The U.S. hypocritically opposes a nuclear-free Middle East because Israel has nuclear weapons. We hypocritically claim the Iranians are in violation of international law when, in fact, it is Israel that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refuses international inspections. Given our craven obedience to Israel, we have exactly zero credibility in the Arab and Muslim world. As I have said before, I don't care if the Iranians do develop nuclear weapons. My whole adult life was lived with 30,000 Soviet nuclear weapons aimed at me. I can certainly live with the six or seven Iran might be able to scrape together in the next five to 10 years. In the meantime, the U.S. government should kick the Israeli lobby out of the country and support Iran and the Arab League in pushing for a nuclear-free Middle East. The Israeli lobby pushing America to fight yet another war for Israel reminds me of what the French ambassador to Great Britain said at a party: "Why does the world allow this (expletive deleted) little country to cause so much trouble?" Why indeed? You should ask your politicians that question.<<