| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"wake up and smell the plutonium" |
| Date: |
07 Aug 2006 03:44:08 PM |
| Object: |
The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3D9493
August 7, 2006
The New Munich
Lebanon, 2006, and Czechoslovakia, 1938 - the historical parallels
by Justin Raimondo
As the rape of Lebanon proceeds on schedule, the "civilized world"
rushes to give its imprimatur to the slaughter. The U.S. and France are
sponsoring a United Nations resolution that neither calls for a
cease-fire nor demands the withdrawal of invading Israeli troops. So
much for the UN as the last, best hope for peace.
Is there a chance my liberal friends, who have long looked to the
organization founded by Alger Hiss and Franklin "He Lied Us Into War"
Roosevelt as a beacon of hope, will wake up and smell the burned
bodies?
Nah.
Most of them are looking the other way as the Israelis ravage Lebanon
- or are openly cheerleading the mayhem, like San Francisco
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi - and are on vacation, anyway, sitting on
a beach somewhere with their consciences conveniently deactivated.
As I cast my eye over the American political landscape, I espy nary a
single major politician, party, or publication that opposes the Israeli
blitz of Lebanon. Democrats, Republicans, and even ostensible
"libertarians" - left, right, and center - are marching in lockstep
with the aggressors. Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel, the exception that
proves the rule, is virtually alone in proffering even the most
timorous doubts. Among the pundits of some stature, critics of the
invasion can be counted on one hand: Pat Buchanan, Eleanor Clift, our
own Paul Craig Roberts, Georgie Anne Geyer, Vanity Fair's James
Wolcott, and a very few others. Almost no one has risen to decry this
morally indefensible and strategically disastrous invasion of a
sovereign and democratic nation. The online lefty-liberal blogosphere
has been noticeably silent. Arianna Huffington has managed to write at
least two columns referring to events in Lebanon without directing a
word of criticism at the Israelis. Her big concern is that the invasion
will be bad for Israel. She doesn't mention the horrific casualties
inflicted on the practically defenseless Lebanese.
The Israelis have a skillful overseas propaganda operation, and it is
calling the shots by writing the dominant narrative: Israel, they say,
is simply fighting terrorism of the sort represented by Hezbollah,
which is nothing more than a Shi'ite version of al-Qaeda. U.S.
interests are identical with Israel's, in this case - and in all
others. Israel's amen corner is also busy prettifying the ugly facts on
the ground, with the always useful Matt Drudge consumed with
accusations that photographs from the scene are being doctored. Charles
Johnson, of the hate-site Little Green Footballs, is crowing that a
photo of smoke billowing over Beirut was made to look darker and more
profuse, and this is now being touted as "proof" that the massacre at
Qana and other Israeli atrocities either never took place or were
greatly exaggerated by the "biased" media.
This is nonsense, of course. To begin with, to see the effects of the
Israeli bombing of Beirut, one merely has to go here. Secondly, only
the mentally challenged could possibly argue the American media tilts
against Israel and in favor of the Lebanese - but then, "mentally
challenged" describes an awful lot of people, especially in this
country. I mean, where else do millions believe that the prospect of a
nuclear war igniting in the Middle East is a good thing, because it
augurs the Second Coming of Christ? God bless America!
The pro-Israel narrative is imposed on virtually all reporting that
comes out of this war, starting with newscasts that lead off with
reports of Israeli casualties, even if the damage done to Lebanese is
far greater that day. The general attitude of the media is reflected on
the front page of Sunday's New York Times, which features a photo of
two smiling Israeli soldiers in a manly embrace and is captioned
"Brother, we made it" - back into Israel, that is. If only the rest
of their comrades would follow them, but there's no chance of that any
time soon.
How could these two smiling, robust, benevolent figures have anything
to do with war crimes? Are these the soldiers of an invading army -
or just two regular Joes breathing a sigh of relief to get home,
basically good guys, like you and me, who are just defending their
country? The Israelis couldn't buy better publicity - but they don't
have to buy it, because they get it for free. Israel gets a free pass
from the media in this country, contrary to the paranoid delusions of
pro-Israel fanatics, and this reflects the elite political consensus:
anything the Israelis do is okay by us.
The story the pro-Israel propaganda machine is churning out wouldn't
satisfy the worst hack: they were just minding their own business, you
see, routinely kidnapping and jailing Palestinians, and bulldozing
their dwellings, when, out of the clear blue, those Hezbollah nasties
took out after a couple of Israeli soldiers, killing some and capturing
- not "kidnapping" - two others. How dare those Arabs fight back!
Don't they know they should be on their knees, in a position of
supplication, just because the Israelis let them live?
The conquest of southern Lebanon is an accomplished fact, or will be
soon, with the full complicity of the "international community" -
unless either Syria or Iran intervenes to save the rape victim from the
clutches of its assailant. This is what the Israelis, and their
neoconservative allies in the administration, are hoping for: in that
case, they will be spared ginning up a pretext for striking Damascus
and Tehran in fairly short order.
The War Party - temporarily knocked from the saddle by the disastrous
outcome of the Iraq war - is back holding the reins. And we are all
at their mercy. This time, there will be not a peep from most of the
"antiwar" Democrats - if anything, they are more obsequious in
kowtowing to the Israel lobby than the Republicans. The Democrats, at
any rate, don't have a Chuck Hagel among their presidential wannabes.
For any really substantive critique of the Israel lobby and its
deleterious effect on the pursuit of American interests, you have to
look to the "realist" Republican Right, which fears a wider conflict
and the prospect of America's entry into Israel's war.
There are two possible avenues of American intervention in this battle
- aside from the rush of U.S. armaments to Israel and whatever covert
cooperation is underway. The first is via the "international force"
called for in the UN resolution: of course, an American presence is not
stipulated, but, as I have said before, it is difficult to imagine what
other country is either prepared or willing to undertake such an
operation. Policing southern Lebanon will require anywhere from 30,000
to 50,000 troops. Where will they come from? You guessed it...
Secondly, Israel's actions have put U.S. troops in Iraq in mortal
danger. The other day, tens of thousands of Iraqi Shi'ites demonstrated
against the attack on Lebanon, crying "Death to Israel!" and "Death to
America!" in nearly the same breath. We have yet to defeat the
Sunni-led insurgency, which is plunging the nation into civil war -
what will we do when the Shi'ite majority turns its guns against us?
Now there's a familiar "narrative" replete with flashes of d=E9ja vu:
it's that helicopter taking off from the rooftop of the U.S. embassy
all over again. Only this time, it will be broadcast in full color -
my cheap family didn't get a color television until the late '70s -
and over the worldwide Web.
The most perceptive comments I have come across on this subject have
been by former Oslo negotiator Daniel Levy, who also took part in the
Taba talks and was the lead Israeli drafter of the Geneva Initiative.
Writing in Ha'aretz, Levy avers, "Disentangling Israeli interests from
the rubble of neocon 'creative destruction' in the Middle East" is a
strategic priority for Israel, else they will drag Tel Aviv down into
the same abyss that awaits Washington. He delves into the history of
the 1996 "Clean Break" initiative proffered by key neoconservative
defense intellectuals, who, once in power, implemented their strategy
of "regime change" via wars of "liberation."
The decisive influence of this single-mindedly pro-Israel faction in
the councils of state had an unfortunate effect, however, on the
"special relationship" that has always existed between Israel and the
U=2ES.:
"Witnessing the near-perfect symmetry of Israeli and American policy
has been one of the more noteworthy aspects of the latest Lebanon war.
A true friend in the White House. No deescalate and stabilize,
honest-broker, diplomatic jaw-jaw from this president. Great. Except
that Israel was actually in need of an early exit strategy, had its
diplomatic options narrowed by American weakness and marginalization in
the region, and found itself ratcheting up aerial and ground operations
in ways that largely worked to Hezbollah's advantage, the Qana tragedy
included. The American ladder had gone AWOL. ...
"Israelis have grown used to a different kind of American embrace -
less instrumental, more emotional, but also responsible. A dependable
friend, ready to lend a guiding hand back to the path of stabilization
when necessary."
American appeasement of Israel, against all moral and practical
considerations, has resulted in the weakening of Israel, Levy argues,
and ratcheted up hostility to the Jewish state in the region to a fever
pitch. I agree with Levy's analysis, and would add that American
interests aren't too well served by this "symmetry," either.
As opposed to the heroic narrative marketed by the Lobby and its
friends, which portrays this as a defensive war, a mere reaction to
Lebanese attacks, the reality is that this is the most cynical exercise
in brazen aggression since the Germans invaded Czechoslovakia in the
run-up to World War II. Prior to offering the thinnest of pretexts to
justify the invasion of Poland - the Germans claimed Polish soldiers
had launched a raid into their territory - Hitler's wolves tore off a
large chunk of Czech flesh in the form of the Sudetenland. Today,
Israeli predators are biting off a similar-sized chunk of Lebanon on
their way to a much larger meal.
Like the Germans, who utilized the German minority for their own
purposes, the Israelis have the Christian Maronites of the Phalangist
groups to act as their sock-puppets - although perhaps even these
guys have abandoned them. After all, the Israeli air force has been
bombing Christian villages, too.
One hopes the historical parallels will end there, but I fear not: just
as the German push for Lebensraum ended in a world war, so an apparent
campaign to give Israel a bit of elbow room may result in yet another
global conflagration. The UN resolution, then, amounts to a new Munich
agreement, which - if history teaches us anything - will serve to
embolden the Israelis to go on the offensive against Syria, and,
perhaps, Iran. If the appeasement of Israel continues while the U.S.
sacrifices its own clear interest in lessening support for extremists
in the Arab-Muslim world, Condoleezza Rice will go down in history as
the Neville Chamberlain of her time.
NOTES IN THE MARGIN
I trust everyone puts two and two together and connects the point of
this column - that the "narrative" is being determined, at the
moment, by the War Party - and the fact that this is the first day of
our summer fundraising campaign.
Our job is to counter the "official" narrative, and offer an
alternative - i.e., the unvarnished truth. The War Party has many
millions - including full access to the U.S. Treasury and your tax
dollars - and we depend on... you.
We can't offer an alternative to the official "narrative" if you don't
contribute - it's as simple as that. For over a decade, we've labored
in the vineyards, working around the clock to keep you informed and
clueing you in to the latest machinations of the War Party. They never
lack for funding, of that you can be quite sure. The big military
contractors and the neocon foundations keep them rolling in dough.
Whenever they want to get their message out, they can utilize their
friends in the "mainstream" media, who are sure to give them a platform
for their views and "analysis."
We, on the other hand, are entirely dependent on your tax-deductible
contributions, which are typically under $50 and accompanied by
heartfelt notes of support and encouragement, which we value just as
much as the dineros. We don't have any millionaires backing us - no,
not even Hollywood lefty millionaires. Nary a one.
We've survived for 10 years and counting in this way, yet each year it
gets harder for me to write these fundraising appeals, not because I
don't feel any urgency, but precisely because it is so urgent.
Antiwar.com is more important than ever, with events unfolding at such
a rapid pace, and yet I fear that mere words cannot communicate the
danger we are all in. A regional war in the Middle East, an increased
risk of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, at the very least
another Beirut-style attack on a major American asset overseas - all
of which would lead ineluctably to the worst possible outcome.
We can stop it. We must stop it. And that's why your tax-deductible
donation to Antiwar.com is more important than ever before.
.
|
|
| User: "James A. Donald" |
|
| Title: Re: The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
07 Aug 2006 11:20:11 PM |
|
|
"wake up and smell the plutonium"
As the rape of Lebanon proceeds on schedule, the
"civilized world" rushes to give its imprimatur to the
slaughter. The U.S. and France are sponsoring a United
Nations resolution that neither calls for a cease-fire
nor demands the withdrawal of invading Israeli troops.
So much for the UN as the last, best hope for peace.
There can be no peace that leaves Hezbollah with an
independent armed force near the border.
The Israelis have a skillful overseas propaganda
operation, and it is calling the shots by writing the
dominant narrative: Israel, they say, is simply
fighting terrorism of the sort represented by
Hezbollah, which is nothing more than a Shi'ite
version of al-Qaeda.
Yes, Hezbollah is not like Al Quaeda. But when missiles
are raining on your city, the difference is a bit too
subtle to notice.
Everyone is saying how Israeli bombing of Lebanese will
make the Lebanese intransigent and cause them to unite
with Hezbollah. But have you considered what effect
Hezbollah bombing Israelis is having?
It is the nature of war that as long as there is any
possibility of some settlement short of huge slaughter,
it is in everyone's interest to take the most extreme
and intransigent position.
If wars innately tend to escalate, how does any war end?
Usually what happens is that both sides say "Capitulate
or we will kill everyone", and in due course it becomes
apparent that one side is able and willing to do that,
and is getting on with doing it, and the other side is
not.
But Hezbollah has invented a new form of warfare
"Capitulate or we will force you to kill everyone". Of
course the trouble with this form of warfare is that
once things go over the top, to full scale war, all is
lost. Hezbollah cannot cause any problems for Israel and
Israelis that could not be solved by killing everyone in
South Lebanon, or everyone in Lebanon, or everyone in
Lebanon and Syria. As soon as real war began, Hezbollah
was already defeated. All they had was the threat of
starting real war. Now that real war is under way, they
have no threats left, while Israel does have plenty of
real threats left, and if war continues, will in due
course apply them.
Recently Hezbollah had an atrocity showing. They
extracted a dead child from the rubble of a bombed
building in front of the press for colorful photographs
- then as new press arrived, re-extracted the same child
from the same rubble, again - a tactic that indicates a
severe shortage of dead children.
In the months and perhaps years to come, they will find
they no longer have such a shortage. Pretty soon there
will be considerably more dead children than interested
newsmen.
--
----------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because
of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this
right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.
http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
08 Aug 2006 06:20:31 AM |
|
|
James A. Donald <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote in message
news:smpfd2101ariu7b89j807np4qd084u76r6@4ax.com...
"wake up and smell the plutonium"
As the rape of Lebanon proceeds on schedule, the
"civilized world" rushes to give its imprimatur to the
slaughter. The U.S. and France are sponsoring a United
Nations resolution that neither calls for a cease-fire
nor demands the withdrawal of invading Israeli troops.
So much for the UN as the last, best hope for peace.
There can be no peace that leaves Hezbollah with an
independent armed force near the border.
The Israelis have a skillful overseas propaganda
operation, and it is calling the shots by writing the
dominant narrative: Israel, they say, is simply
fighting terrorism of the sort represented by
Hezbollah, which is nothing more than a Shi'ite
version of al-Qaeda.
Yes, Hezbollah is not like Al Quaeda. But when missiles
are raining on your city, the difference is a bit too
subtle to notice.
Everyone is saying how Israeli bombing of Lebanese will
make the Lebanese intransigent and cause them to unite
with Hezbollah. But have you considered what effect
Hezbollah bombing Israelis is having?
It is the nature of war that as long as there is any
possibility of some settlement short of huge slaughter,
it is in everyone's interest to take the most extreme
and intransigent position.
If wars innately tend to escalate, how does any war end?
Usually what happens is that both sides say "Capitulate
or we will kill everyone", and in due course it becomes
apparent that one side is able and willing to do that,
and is getting on with doing it, and the other side is
not.
But Hezbollah has invented a new form of warfare
"Capitulate or we will force you to kill everyone". Of
course the trouble with this form of warfare is that
once things go over the top, to full scale war, all is
lost. Hezbollah cannot cause any problems for Israel and
Israelis that could not be solved by killing everyone in
South Lebanon, or everyone in Lebanon, or everyone in
Lebanon and Syria. As soon as real war began, Hezbollah
was already defeated. All they had was the threat of
starting real war. Now that real war is under way, they
have no threats left, while Israel does have plenty of
real threats left, and if war continues, will in due
course apply them.
Recently Hezbollah had an atrocity showing. They
extracted a dead child from the rubble of a bombed
building in front of the press for colorful photographs
- then as new press arrived, re-extracted the same child
from the same rubble, again - a tactic that indicates a
severe shortage of dead children.
Reminds me of MacArthurs triumphant return to the Phillipines whereupon he
'returned' several times to enable the cameras to get the best shot of his
'return'. Then there was the live coverage of Marines assaulting a beach in
Iraq neatly timed for the six-o'clock news and considerably hampered by all
the news crews ranged between them and the enemy resisting this 'surprise'
attack. Let us not forget President 'Top Gun' Bush landing on that carrier
and no doubt exclaiming sotto voce 'Where the ***** did all these
photographers come from?'
War is hell.
In the months and perhaps years to come, they will find
they no longer have such a shortage. Pretty soon there
will be considerably more dead children than interested
newsmen.
--
----------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because
of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this
right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.
http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ariadne" |
|
| Title: Re: The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
08 Aug 2006 06:42:02 AM |
|
|
James A. Donald wrote:
"wake up and smell the plutonium"
As the rape of Lebanon proceeds on schedule, the
"civilized world" rushes to give its imprimatur to the
slaughter. The U.S. and France are sponsoring a United
Nations resolution that neither calls for a cease-fire
nor demands the withdrawal of invading Israeli troops.
So much for the UN as the last, best hope for peace.
There can be no peace that leaves Hezbollah with an
independent armed force near the border.
The Israelis have a skillful overseas propaganda
operation, and it is calling the shots by writing the
dominant narrative: Israel, they say, is simply
fighting terrorism of the sort represented by
Hezbollah, which is nothing more than a Shi'ite
version of al-Qaeda.
Yes, Hezbollah is not like Al Quaeda. But when missiles
are raining on your city, the difference is a bit too
subtle to notice.
Everyone is saying how Israeli bombing of Lebanese will
make the Lebanese intransigent and cause them to unite
with Hezbollah. But have you considered what effect
Hezbollah bombing Israelis is having?
It is the nature of war that as long as there is any
possibility of some settlement short of huge slaughter,
it is in everyone's interest to take the most extreme
and intransigent position.
If wars innately tend to escalate, how does any war end?
Usually what happens is that both sides say "Capitulate
or we will kill everyone", and in due course it becomes
apparent that one side is able and willing to do that,
and is getting on with doing it, and the other side is
not.
But Hezbollah has invented a new form of warfare
"Capitulate or we will force you to kill everyone". Of
course the trouble with this form of warfare is that
once things go over the top, to full scale war, all is
lost. Hezbollah cannot cause any problems for Israel and
Israelis that could not be solved by killing everyone in
South Lebanon, or everyone in Lebanon, or everyone in
Lebanon and Syria. As soon as real war began, Hezbollah
was already defeated. All they had was the threat of
starting real war. Now that real war is under way, they
have no threats left, while Israel does have plenty of
real threats left, and if war continues, will in due
course apply them.
Recently Hezbollah had an atrocity showing. They
extracted a dead child from the rubble of a bombed
building in front of the press for colorful photographs
- then as new press arrived, re-extracted the same child
from the same rubble, again - a tactic that indicates a
severe shortage of dead children.
In the months and perhaps years to come, they will find
they no longer have such a shortage. Pretty soon there
will be considerably more dead children than interested
newsmen.
--
----------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because
of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this
right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.
http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald
Very good, well-reasoned post.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FEEB" |
|
| Title: Re: The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
08 Aug 2006 09:03:16 AM |
|
|
Please, stop cross-posting this irrelevant thread to
soc.culture.czecho-slovak. Thank you
On 8 Aug 2006 04:42:02 -0700, Ariadne wrote:
James A. Donald wrote:
"wake up and smell the plutonium"
As the rape of Lebanon proceeds on schedule, the
"civilized world" rushes to give its imprimatur to the
slaughter. The U.S. and France are sponsoring a United
Nations resolution that neither calls for a cease-fire
nor demands the withdrawal of invading Israeli troops.
So much for the UN as the last, best hope for peace.
There can be no peace that leaves Hezbollah with an
independent armed force near the border.
The Israelis have a skillful overseas propaganda
operation, and it is calling the shots by writing the
dominant narrative: Israel, they say, is simply
fighting terrorism of the sort represented by
Hezbollah, which is nothing more than a Shi'ite
version of al-Qaeda.
Yes, Hezbollah is not like Al Quaeda. But when missiles
are raining on your city, the difference is a bit too
subtle to notice.
Everyone is saying how Israeli bombing of Lebanese will
make the Lebanese intransigent and cause them to unite
with Hezbollah. But have you considered what effect
Hezbollah bombing Israelis is having?
It is the nature of war that as long as there is any
possibility of some settlement short of huge slaughter,
it is in everyone's interest to take the most extreme
and intransigent position.
If wars innately tend to escalate, how does any war end?
Usually what happens is that both sides say "Capitulate
or we will kill everyone", and in due course it becomes
apparent that one side is able and willing to do that,
and is getting on with doing it, and the other side is
not.
But Hezbollah has invented a new form of warfare
"Capitulate or we will force you to kill everyone". Of
course the trouble with this form of warfare is that
once things go over the top, to full scale war, all is
lost. Hezbollah cannot cause any problems for Israel and
Israelis that could not be solved by killing everyone in
South Lebanon, or everyone in Lebanon, or everyone in
Lebanon and Syria. As soon as real war began, Hezbollah
was already defeated. All they had was the threat of
starting real war. Now that real war is under way, they
have no threats left, while Israel does have plenty of
real threats left, and if war continues, will in due
course apply them.
Recently Hezbollah had an atrocity showing. They
extracted a dead child from the rubble of a bombed
building in front of the press for colorful photographs
- then as new press arrived, re-extracted the same child
from the same rubble, again - a tactic that indicates a
severe shortage of dead children.
In the months and perhaps years to come, they will find
they no longer have such a shortage. Pretty soon there
will be considerably more dead children than interested
newsmen.
--
----------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because
of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this
right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.
http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald
Very good, well-reasoned post.
<feeb@chem.utoronto.ca>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jack Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
10 Aug 2006 02:58:14 PM |
|
|
Crap, no one was firing any rockets to Germany from Czechoslovakia or
kidnaping German soldiers.
"wake up and smell the plutonium" <wake_up_009@lycos.com> wrote in
message news:1154983448.721168.269690@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9493
August 7, 2006
The New Munich
Lebanon, 2006, and Czechoslovakia, 1938 - the historical parallels
by Justin Raimondo
As the rape of Lebanon proceeds on schedule, the "civilized world"
rushes to give its imprimatur to the slaughter. The U.S. and France are
sponsoring a United Nations resolution that neither calls for a
cease-fire nor demands the withdrawal of invading Israeli troops. So
much for the UN as the last, best hope for peace.
Is there a chance my liberal friends, who have long looked to the
organization founded by Alger Hiss and Franklin "He Lied Us Into War"
Roosevelt as a beacon of hope, will wake up and smell the burned
bodies?
Nah.
Most of them are looking the other way as the Israelis ravage Lebanon
- or are openly cheerleading the mayhem, like San Francisco
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi - and are on vacation, anyway, sitting on
a beach somewhere with their consciences conveniently deactivated.
As I cast my eye over the American political landscape, I espy nary a
single major politician, party, or publication that opposes the Israeli
blitz of Lebanon. Democrats, Republicans, and even ostensible
"libertarians" - left, right, and center - are marching in lockstep
with the aggressors. Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel, the exception that
proves the rule, is virtually alone in proffering even the most
timorous doubts. Among the pundits of some stature, critics of the
invasion can be counted on one hand: Pat Buchanan, Eleanor Clift, our
own Paul Craig Roberts, Georgie Anne Geyer, Vanity Fair's James
Wolcott, and a very few others. Almost no one has risen to decry this
morally indefensible and strategically disastrous invasion of a
sovereign and democratic nation. The online lefty-liberal blogosphere
has been noticeably silent. Arianna Huffington has managed to write at
least two columns referring to events in Lebanon without directing a
word of criticism at the Israelis. Her big concern is that the invasion
will be bad for Israel. She doesn't mention the horrific casualties
inflicted on the practically defenseless Lebanese.
The Israelis have a skillful overseas propaganda operation, and it is
calling the shots by writing the dominant narrative: Israel, they say,
is simply fighting terrorism of the sort represented by Hezbollah,
which is nothing more than a Shi'ite version of al-Qaeda. U.S.
interests are identical with Israel's, in this case - and in all
others. Israel's amen corner is also busy prettifying the ugly facts on
the ground, with the always useful Matt Drudge consumed with
accusations that photographs from the scene are being doctored. Charles
Johnson, of the hate-site Little Green Footballs, is crowing that a
photo of smoke billowing over Beirut was made to look darker and more
profuse, and this is now being touted as "proof" that the massacre at
Qana and other Israeli atrocities either never took place or were
greatly exaggerated by the "biased" media.
This is nonsense, of course. To begin with, to see the effects of the
Israeli bombing of Beirut, one merely has to go here. Secondly, only
the mentally challenged could possibly argue the American media tilts
against Israel and in favor of the Lebanese - but then, "mentally
challenged" describes an awful lot of people, especially in this
country. I mean, where else do millions believe that the prospect of a
nuclear war igniting in the Middle East is a good thing, because it
augurs the Second Coming of Christ? God bless America!
The pro-Israel narrative is imposed on virtually all reporting that
comes out of this war, starting with newscasts that lead off with
reports of Israeli casualties, even if the damage done to Lebanese is
far greater that day. The general attitude of the media is reflected on
the front page of Sunday's New York Times, which features a photo of
two smiling Israeli soldiers in a manly embrace and is captioned
"Brother, we made it" - back into Israel, that is. If only the rest
of their comrades would follow them, but there's no chance of that any
time soon.
How could these two smiling, robust, benevolent figures have anything
to do with war crimes? Are these the soldiers of an invading army -
or just two regular Joes breathing a sigh of relief to get home,
basically good guys, like you and me, who are just defending their
country? The Israelis couldn't buy better publicity - but they don't
have to buy it, because they get it for free. Israel gets a free pass
from the media in this country, contrary to the paranoid delusions of
pro-Israel fanatics, and this reflects the elite political consensus:
anything the Israelis do is okay by us.
The story the pro-Israel propaganda machine is churning out wouldn't
satisfy the worst hack: they were just minding their own business, you
see, routinely kidnapping and jailing Palestinians, and bulldozing
their dwellings, when, out of the clear blue, those Hezbollah nasties
took out after a couple of Israeli soldiers, killing some and capturing
- not "kidnapping" - two others. How dare those Arabs fight back!
Don't they know they should be on their knees, in a position of
supplication, just because the Israelis let them live?
The conquest of southern Lebanon is an accomplished fact, or will be
soon, with the full complicity of the "international community" -
unless either Syria or Iran intervenes to save the rape victim from the
clutches of its assailant. This is what the Israelis, and their
neoconservative allies in the administration, are hoping for: in that
case, they will be spared ginning up a pretext for striking Damascus
and Tehran in fairly short order.
The War Party - temporarily knocked from the saddle by the disastrous
outcome of the Iraq war - is back holding the reins. And we are all
at their mercy. This time, there will be not a peep from most of the
"antiwar" Democrats - if anything, they are more obsequious in
kowtowing to the Israel lobby than the Republicans. The Democrats, at
any rate, don't have a Chuck Hagel among their presidential wannabes.
For any really substantive critique of the Israel lobby and its
deleterious effect on the pursuit of American interests, you have to
look to the "realist" Republican Right, which fears a wider conflict
and the prospect of America's entry into Israel's war.
There are two possible avenues of American intervention in this battle
- aside from the rush of U.S. armaments to Israel and whatever covert
cooperation is underway. The first is via the "international force"
called for in the UN resolution: of course, an American presence is not
stipulated, but, as I have said before, it is difficult to imagine what
other country is either prepared or willing to undertake such an
operation. Policing southern Lebanon will require anywhere from 30,000
to 50,000 troops. Where will they come from? You guessed it...
Secondly, Israel's actions have put U.S. troops in Iraq in mortal
danger. The other day, tens of thousands of Iraqi Shi'ites demonstrated
against the attack on Lebanon, crying "Death to Israel!" and "Death to
America!" in nearly the same breath. We have yet to defeat the
Sunni-led insurgency, which is plunging the nation into civil war -
what will we do when the Shi'ite majority turns its guns against us?
Now there's a familiar "narrative" replete with flashes of déja vu:
it's that helicopter taking off from the rooftop of the U.S. embassy
all over again. Only this time, it will be broadcast in full color -
my cheap family didn't get a color television until the late '70s -
and over the worldwide Web.
The most perceptive comments I have come across on this subject have
been by former Oslo negotiator Daniel Levy, who also took part in the
Taba talks and was the lead Israeli drafter of the Geneva Initiative.
Writing in Ha'aretz, Levy avers, "Disentangling Israeli interests from
the rubble of neocon 'creative destruction' in the Middle East" is a
strategic priority for Israel, else they will drag Tel Aviv down into
the same abyss that awaits Washington. He delves into the history of
the 1996 "Clean Break" initiative proffered by key neoconservative
defense intellectuals, who, once in power, implemented their strategy
of "regime change" via wars of "liberation."
The decisive influence of this single-mindedly pro-Israel faction in
the councils of state had an unfortunate effect, however, on the
"special relationship" that has always existed between Israel and the
U.S.:
"Witnessing the near-perfect symmetry of Israeli and American policy
has been one of the more noteworthy aspects of the latest Lebanon war.
A true friend in the White House. No deescalate and stabilize,
honest-broker, diplomatic jaw-jaw from this president. Great. Except
that Israel was actually in need of an early exit strategy, had its
diplomatic options narrowed by American weakness and marginalization in
the region, and found itself ratcheting up aerial and ground operations
in ways that largely worked to Hezbollah's advantage, the Qana tragedy
included. The American ladder had gone AWOL. ...
"Israelis have grown used to a different kind of American embrace -
less instrumental, more emotional, but also responsible. A dependable
friend, ready to lend a guiding hand back to the path of stabilization
when necessary."
American appeasement of Israel, against all moral and practical
considerations, has resulted in the weakening of Israel, Levy argues,
and ratcheted up hostility to the Jewish state in the region to a fever
pitch. I agree with Levy's analysis, and would add that American
interests aren't too well served by this "symmetry," either.
As opposed to the heroic narrative marketed by the Lobby and its
friends, which portrays this as a defensive war, a mere reaction to
Lebanese attacks, the reality is that this is the most cynical exercise
in brazen aggression since the Germans invaded Czechoslovakia in the
run-up to World War II. Prior to offering the thinnest of pretexts to
justify the invasion of Poland - the Germans claimed Polish soldiers
had launched a raid into their territory - Hitler's wolves tore off a
large chunk of Czech flesh in the form of the Sudetenland. Today,
Israeli predators are biting off a similar-sized chunk of Lebanon on
their way to a much larger meal.
Like the Germans, who utilized the German minority for their own
purposes, the Israelis have the Christian Maronites of the Phalangist
groups to act as their sock-puppets - although perhaps even these
guys have abandoned them. After all, the Israeli air force has been
bombing Christian villages, too.
One hopes the historical parallels will end there, but I fear not: just
as the German push for Lebensraum ended in a world war, so an apparent
campaign to give Israel a bit of elbow room may result in yet another
global conflagration. The UN resolution, then, amounts to a new Munich
agreement, which - if history teaches us anything - will serve to
embolden the Israelis to go on the offensive against Syria, and,
perhaps, Iran. If the appeasement of Israel continues while the U.S.
sacrifices its own clear interest in lessening support for extremists
in the Arab-Muslim world, Condoleezza Rice will go down in history as
the Neville Chamberlain of her time.
NOTES IN THE MARGIN
I trust everyone puts two and two together and connects the point of
this column - that the "narrative" is being determined, at the
moment, by the War Party - and the fact that this is the first day of
our summer fundraising campaign.
Our job is to counter the "official" narrative, and offer an
alternative - i.e., the unvarnished truth. The War Party has many
millions - including full access to the U.S. Treasury and your tax
dollars - and we depend on... you.
We can't offer an alternative to the official "narrative" if you don't
contribute - it's as simple as that. For over a decade, we've labored
in the vineyards, working around the clock to keep you informed and
clueing you in to the latest machinations of the War Party. They never
lack for funding, of that you can be quite sure. The big military
contractors and the neocon foundations keep them rolling in dough.
Whenever they want to get their message out, they can utilize their
friends in the "mainstream" media, who are sure to give them a platform
for their views and "analysis."
We, on the other hand, are entirely dependent on your tax-deductible
contributions, which are typically under $50 and accompanied by
heartfelt notes of support and encouragement, which we value just as
much as the dineros. We don't have any millionaires backing us - no,
not even Hollywood lefty millionaires. Nary a one.
We've survived for 10 years and counting in this way, yet each year it
gets harder for me to write these fundraising appeals, not because I
don't feel any urgency, but precisely because it is so urgent.
Antiwar.com is more important than ever, with events unfolding at such
a rapid pace, and yet I fear that mere words cannot communicate the
danger we are all in. A regional war in the Middle East, an increased
risk of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, at the very least
another Beirut-style attack on a major American asset overseas - all
of which would lead ineluctably to the worst possible outcome.
We can stop it. We must stop it. And that's why your tax-deductible
donation to Antiwar.com is more important than ever before.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AnonMoos" |
|
| Title: Re: The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
08 Aug 2006 12:24:58 PM |
|
|
Yep, there's no "appeasing" of either terrorism or Hitler!
--
Hamas motto: لا إله لهم
إلا الموت،
«حماس» رسول
الموت (The death-worshipping cult)
Murderers are not martyrs! http://symbolictruth.fateback.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "kujebak" |
|
| Title: Re: The New Munich: Lebanon 2006 and Czechoslovakia 1938 |
08 Aug 2006 12:58:22 PM |
|
|
How about that Lebanese infant, clearly too stiff to have
died on site, that was pulled out of the rubble several times
for different camera crews - a scene as comical as an old
Monty Python skit, if it wasn't so sad.
AnonMoos wrote:
Yep, there's no "appeasing" of either terrorism or Hitler!
--
Hamas motto: لا إله لهم
إلا الموت،
=ABحماس=BB رسو =
4;
الموت (The death-worshipping cult)
Murderers are not martyrs! http://symbolictruth.fateback.com/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
