Sunday, August 13, 2006
The Hand of Kissinger
Saw this link to a new story from Seymour Hersh over at the New Yorker Magazine on Rawstory this morning, and just thought I would jot down a few notes.
Soooo.... This war wasn't in response to the kidnappings on July 12th, huh? Lets see a quote from the article:
Funny that. Shades of the Downing Street Memo again it seems. But to go on, the Isrealis, seeking a 'green light' from Washington, tried to sell the bombing to them (as if the bushies ever needed a good reason for a war, it hasn't stopped them yet). Quoth the article:
A demo for Iran?? I think we have seen the 'demo', we have seen it in Iraq, and the demonstration has shown us massive civilian casualties, the deaths of many U.S. troops, strife and violence occuring in the local population, and increased regional hatred of America. Lets face it, the bombing campaign is easy, its the occupation where things seem to fall apart with these folks. Iran of course has an active nuclear program, which Iraq did not, so maybe they should have looked else where for their 'demo'.
Bush and his ilk are seemingly having delusions of WWII, with georgie dreaming that he is Winston Churchill (because he would never picture himself as that socialist Roosevelt I can assure you), but the longer this administration's involvement in the middle east continues, the more and more you can really see the parrellels to Vietnam. I am becoming more and more convinced that the hand of Henry Kissinger is here somewhere. A proxy action will make everything all better... oh Hank, will you ever learn?
Where does this end? Well, the Vietnam 'demo' says that this won't end for years. We will involve other parties, eventually a modern day Pol Pot perhaps (where do you think saddam hussien and osama bin laden came from?), or maybe similar devils, with the idea of advancing their ideology, while preventing the spread of others, and eventually, long after the bushies are gone, some other administration is going to have to make the decision to pullout completely, avoid admitting mistakes, and attempt to close the matter. meanwhile, every 9 year old in the middle east will know how to operate a machine gun, and osama bin laden will truly be the robin hood of the middle east, if this isn't already the case.
The Isrealis defending their border is fine by me, every country should have that right. Protecting their citizens is also fine, every country should take that as their responsibility to their people. But this collusion... this preemption... does it make anyone comfortable? Is it truly productive? Will it ensure 'peace and democracy' in the middle east? Is 'peace and democracy' truly the ultimate goal? Will it ensure the saftey and security of Isreal? or is this just another short sighted action, like the war in Iraq, bolstered by ideology, but in fact another part of a simple resouce war?
I suppose my thoughts are running a bit too deep for a Sunday afternoon, so i'm going to get back to work planning my bonfire for November 5th, and call it a day.
I hope that you all have enjoyed your respective weekends!
tomkitty
Soooo.... This war wasn't in response to the kidnappings on July 12th, huh? Lets see a quote from the article:
According to a Middle East expert with knowledge of the current thinking of both the Israeli and the U.S. governments, Israel had devised a plan for attacking Hezbollah—and shared it with Bush Administration officials—well before the July 12th kidnappings. “It’s not that the Israelis had a trap that Hezbollah walked into,” he said, “but there was a strong feeling in the White House that sooner or later the Israelis were going to do it.”
Funny that. Shades of the Downing Street Memo again it seems. But to go on, the Isrealis, seeking a 'green light' from Washington, tried to sell the bombing to them (as if the bushies ever needed a good reason for a war, it hasn't stopped them yet). Quoth the article:
“The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits,” a U.S. government consultant with close ties to Israel said. “Why oppose it? We’ll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels, and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran.”."
A demo for Iran?? I think we have seen the 'demo', we have seen it in Iraq, and the demonstration has shown us massive civilian casualties, the deaths of many U.S. troops, strife and violence occuring in the local population, and increased regional hatred of America. Lets face it, the bombing campaign is easy, its the occupation where things seem to fall apart with these folks. Iran of course has an active nuclear program, which Iraq did not, so maybe they should have looked else where for their 'demo'.
Bush and his ilk are seemingly having delusions of WWII, with georgie dreaming that he is Winston Churchill (because he would never picture himself as that socialist Roosevelt I can assure you), but the longer this administration's involvement in the middle east continues, the more and more you can really see the parrellels to Vietnam. I am becoming more and more convinced that the hand of Henry Kissinger is here somewhere. A proxy action will make everything all better... oh Hank, will you ever learn?
Where does this end? Well, the Vietnam 'demo' says that this won't end for years. We will involve other parties, eventually a modern day Pol Pot perhaps (where do you think saddam hussien and osama bin laden came from?), or maybe similar devils, with the idea of advancing their ideology, while preventing the spread of others, and eventually, long after the bushies are gone, some other administration is going to have to make the decision to pullout completely, avoid admitting mistakes, and attempt to close the matter. meanwhile, every 9 year old in the middle east will know how to operate a machine gun, and osama bin laden will truly be the robin hood of the middle east, if this isn't already the case.
The Isrealis defending their border is fine by me, every country should have that right. Protecting their citizens is also fine, every country should take that as their responsibility to their people. But this collusion... this preemption... does it make anyone comfortable? Is it truly productive? Will it ensure 'peace and democracy' in the middle east? Is 'peace and democracy' truly the ultimate goal? Will it ensure the saftey and security of Isreal? or is this just another short sighted action, like the war in Iraq, bolstered by ideology, but in fact another part of a simple resouce war?
I suppose my thoughts are running a bit too deep for a Sunday afternoon, so i'm going to get back to work planning my bonfire for November 5th, and call it a day.
I hope that you all have enjoyed your respective weekends!
tomkitty
