Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

PALESTINIAN ON HOROWITZ LIST: Israel doesn't drive our ME policy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 01:02 PM
Original message
PALESTINIAN ON HOROWITZ LIST: Israel doesn't drive our ME policy
Joseph Massad of Columbia University has been a consistent target of AIPAC and the Horowitz academic police, so I'd be curious to see their reaction to this piece.

He argues what I suspect is true--Israel is hardly the mouse that has conned successive generations of American leaders to act against our national interests, but instead serves as our "bad cop" in the region, with just enough distance between us that we can claim we can't control them.

Ironically, if this is the case, Israel faces a severe risk: as soon as they no longer serve our purposes, we can turn on them just as we did Saddam, Noriega, and any number of other clients.

I suspect the recent Harvard article on AIPAC is part of a shift like that. "Yes, we screwed up in Iraq, but the Jews made us do it," seems to be the implication.







March 25 / 26, 2006

It's US Policy That Inflames the Arab World

Blaming the Israel Lobby



By JOSEPH MASSAD

<snip>

The underlying argument has been simple and has been told time and again by Washington's regime allies in the Arab world, pro-US liberal and Arab intellectuals, conservative and liberal US intellectuals and former politicians, and even leftist Arab and American activists who support Palestinian rights, namely, that absent the pro- Israel lobby, America would at worst no longer contribute to the oppression of Arabs and Palestinians and at best it would be the Arabs' and the Palestinians' best ally and friend.


<snip>


Let me start with the premise of the argument, namely its effect of shifting the blame for US policies from the United States onto Israel and its US lobby.
According to this logic, it is not the United States that should be held directly responsible for all its imperial policies in the Arab world and the Middle East at large since World War II, rather it is Israel and its lobby who have pushed it to launch policies that are detrimental to its own national interest and are only beneficial to Israel. Establishing and supporting Arab and other Middle East dictatorships, arming and training their militaries, setting up their secret police apparatuses and training them in effective torture methods and counter-insurgency to be used against their own citizens should be blamed, according to the logic of these studies, on Israel and its US lobby.

<snip>

The United States has had a consistent policy since World War II of fighting all regimes across the Third World who insist on controlling their national resources, whether it be land, oil, or other valuable minerals. This extends from Iran in 1953 to Guatemala in 1954 to the rest of Latin America all the way to present-day Venezuela. Africa has fared much worse in the last four decades, as have many countries in Asia. Why would the United States support nationalist regimes in the Arab world who would nationalise natural resources and stop their pillage by American capital absent the pro-Israel lobby also remains a mystery unexplained by these studies. Finally, the United States government has opposed and overthrown or tried to overthrow any regime that seeks real and tangible independence in the Third World and is especially galled by those regimes that pursue such policies through democratic elections.

The overthrow of regimes from Arbenz to Goulart to Mossadegh and Allende and the ongoing attempts to overthrow Chavez are prominent examples, as is the overthrow of nationalist regimes like Sukarno's and Nkrumah's. The terror unleashed on populations who challenged the US-installed friendly regimes from El Salvador and Nicaragua to Zaire to Chile and Indonesia resulted in the killing of hundreds of thousands, if not millions by repressive police and militaries trained for these important tasks by the US. This is aside from direct US invasions of South East Asian and Central American countries that killed untold millions for decades.

Why would the US and its repressive agencies stop invading Arab countries, or stop supporting the repressive police forces of dictatorial Arab regimes and why would the US stop setting up shadow governments inside its embassies in Arab capitals to run these countries' affairs (in some cases the US shadow government runs the Arab country in question down to the smallest detail with the Arab government in question reduced to executing orders) if the pro-Israel lobby did not exist is never broached by these studies let alone explained.

http://counterpunch.com/massad03252006.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. Can turn on them and will, if history tells us anything.
The very moment they turn from a pathway into an obstacle to American hegemony.

Kicked and saved for later reading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. This is how The War of The Apocalypse will begin
Edited on Mon Mar-27-06 01:13 PM by IanDB1
I've been saying this for a long time now.

When Bush starts The War of Armageddon in the Middle East, the Neocons will point the finger at Israel and say, "Israel made us do it! It's THEIR fault!"

FWIW, neither Israel nor Jewish-Americans wanted the war in Iraq-- ever. 86% of American Jews were against the war before it even started. The war in Iraq has made Israel less safe, as we all knew it would.

However, I suspect that if you'd polled Jews and Israelis, a good number (maybe even a majority) would have supported going into Iran instead of Iraq after 9/11. Because Iran was-- and still is-- a threat to Israel and everyone else, while Iraq never was.

Bush has made Iran even more dangerous than before. He has accomplished all of Iran's political goals for them. We may as well have handed Iraq over to them while painting a big target on Israel.

This is how The War of The Apocalypse will begin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. why would Iran attack Israel or US, knowing consequences would be
annihilation of their country and everyone it?

Do you think they are all retarded or mentally ill?

Has the leader of another country ever undertaken an action that had no hope of success?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Think in terms of Jim Jones, Branch Davidians,Heavens Gate, and Iraq War I
Do you think Saddam thought he could defeat the coalition forces when we told him he'd better get out of Kuwait?

(Granted, he thought he had our tacit approval to invade it in the first place).

Now, think also in terms of our own pResident Bush and the GOP: Do you think Bush would withdraw from Iraq, even if he thought not doing so would mean all-out nuclear war with the Russians?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. there's miscalculation and just plain suicide
Bush attacking Iran would be miscalculation, but Iran attacking us would be suicide.

When Saddam went into Kuwait, in addition to having our tacit approval, there was no precedent for us invading an Arab country that size.

Jim Jones, the Branch Davidians and the rest were small groups of true believers.

A whole country is another can of worms.

Stalin was as evil as those guys but knew enough to not directly attack us with nukes once he got them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. The whole country doesn't have to be "true believers"
A handful of Mullahs can lead an entire country into group suicide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. so kill a couple million Iranians & steal their oil just to be safe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. are there any historical precedents for a COUNTRY committing suicide?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. Just because something hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. you're yanking my chain, aren't you? Or are you trying to pre-sell
that the nuke that goes off here is from Iran not the Bushies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. I don't think Iran will detonate a nuke on American soil
But they can in all probability hit Israel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. do you think they would survive the counter-attack? Again, you seem to
be buying into the right wing crazy, retarded Muslim meme.

Individuals can be crazy, nations pursue their geopolitical interests and use religion or nationalism as necessary to get the rubes in the tent.

Islamic fundamentalism while ugly in a lot of ways, is serving the same function over there communism served in Asia, Latin America, and, to a lesser extent, Africa: it's an unambiguous way to say "fuck you" to colonial powers and get them out. Once they are gone, the locals see the inherent flaws with fundamentalism just as China, Russia, and even Vietnam did with Communism.

That process was going pretty well in Iran before we invaded Iraq, which strengthened the Mullahs hand. People will unite in the face of an immediate foreign threat, but that isn't the same as having the political will to commit pre-emptive suicide.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. What if Rev. Jim Jones were president of The United States...
Edited on Tue Mar-28-06 01:40 PM by IanDB1
and you handed him the nuclear trigger?

A suicidal war doesn't require you to mobilize the masses anymore.

It just requires a couple of guys in a bunker with a missile who will follow your orders.

All Iran has to do to commit suicide is for one man to give one order to fire one missile.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Would you want Russia and China to apply that logic to the US?
How many people do you want us to kill to prevent this Austin Powers, Dr. Evil scenario the neocons are shilling?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Of course not. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K-W Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-29-06 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
27. Why, this is nothing like Jim Jones, etc, nothing at all.
But it is instructive that one must pretend the goveernment of Iran is a suicide cult to justify fearing them.

As you explain yourself, Saddam did not think his invasion of Kuwait would cause a US response, at no point did Saddam intend to enter combat with the United States.

And although the situation could never occurr, yes, Bush would withdraw from Iraq if not doing so would mean the destruction of the US because thats what the planners would tell him to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pocket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. Israel writes American foreign policy in the ME
or at least goads them into doing their bidding
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. they knock down any Arab nationalists we can't control
and they even sold weapons to Iran during the Iran Iraq War to keep it going, which was our goal as well.

When have they NOT looked after our interests in beating down Arab neighbors or made a peace that our business interests didn't approve of?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. We sold weapons to Iran AND Iraq during that war, too.
In fact, Cheney has a Halliburton office in Tehran right now helping Iran build the nuclear reactors we claim to be so worried about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. that was my point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. That's what the Christian NeoCons WANT you to think...
so they can blame it all on Israel when things fall apart.

Very many people of good conscience and otherwise clear thought are fooled by that, which is why I don't necessarily think you're anti-semitic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
megatherium Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-27-06 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. I don't really think that's true.
They do have influence, but so do the Saudis. What's driving our foreign policy in the ME is oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #4
22. Don't think so
I suffered through and and Organic --- for .

It's all about oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freethought Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
17. I would say that's correct! Israel does not drive our Mideast Policy
Petroleum is what is actually doing the driving. Israel is in the passenger's seat telling the U.S. how to drive. AIPAC is a back seat driver.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. Half right - no cigar.
You posted " Israel is in the passenger's seat telling the U.S. how to drive. AIPAC is a back seat driver."

Israel and AIPAC are the scapegoats. Harkin Oil Bush and Halliburton Oil Field Service Cheney and Oil Industry/Bush Family Consigliere is watching the GPSS display, and the GPSS display comes from the

Go have some Texas Steak, and Gulf Shrimp, and Lone Star Long Necker
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
20. OIL "O-I-L" Dictates Our ME Policy
It is all about OIL and only OIL.

Look at the American Petroleum Institute and their and just look here in today's New York Times

And as "Peak Oil" bites - it is going to get worse.

I have been in the (non-petroleum) energy industry - and I follow the energy industry. Read anything you want - Kevin Phillips' "American Theocracy" or Craig Ungar's "House of Bush-House of Saud" or Matthew Simmons' "Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy" or William Engdahl's "A Century Of War : Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order"


DISCLAIMER
I am totally biased and prejudiced against the policies and politics of "Big Oil".

I am a doctoral level chemical engineer. When I went to college that meant "petroleum refinery engineering" - no semiconductor fabrication engineering, no biotech engineering, no environmental engineering - just plain old "petroleum refinery engineering".

I have been a government regulator of liquified natural gas transport, petroleum transport, and petroleum terminals ("Coastie" means I was a Coast Guard Port Security-HazMat specialist) and I have worked for chemical companies that bought a feed stock from "big oil", in "oal to oil" and nuclear power and specialty chemicals/petrochemicals, industrial electrochemistry, fuel cells, batteries (electric and hybrid cars - before they were "in"), and semiconductor fabrication - but never worked for "big oil". The closest I ever got was "parking cars and pumping gas" at the neighborhood Amoco station when I was a kid.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=115809&mesg_id=115963


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC