Maggie's FarmWe are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. |
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Tuesday, April 20. 2010Root Causes In Middle East: What if there wasn’t an Israel?Today, modern The world would still be dealing with and suffering from MidEast extremists: First of the Soviet proxies, but without Israeli intelligence penetrating them and its military defeating them, exposing the Soviet Union as an unworthy sponsor; Then of the Islamist haters suppressing its peoples and fighting each other while harboring attackers of the West, but without Israel’s development and democracy serving as an unavoidable contrast to the potentials of freedom and sanity and its military and technology exposing the fundamental weakness of their self-created backwardness. No one in the Middle East takes seriously that the Arab-Israeli or Palestinian-Israeli conflicts are the primary, secondary, tertiary or lesser cause of Outside the Middle East, however, we have the core delusion among many of those raised on the puerile pap created by the Left that the modernity and successes of Western civilization somehow oppress the natural decency and advancement of President Obama is the poster boy. But he is not the cause. He is merely the product. He and those who follow him, thus, fall back on the false premise that No, the problem is their core delusion that we can escape history by denying it, even reversing it, though that still would leave the real root cause of MidEast instability, regional petty satraps, backward hatefulness, and those outside powers – from the EU to Russia to China – who benefit from retaining rule or access to oil. If the initial thrust of President Bush’s strategy of spurring democratization in the Middle East proved hollow, then our subsequent neutralization of Iraq’s WMD potential and funding of terrorists and our struggling effort to retrieve Afghanistan from being ruled by as much a threat is at best a holding action. We, as Secretary of Defense Gates admitted, lack a strategy toward even containing Iran, its imminent nuclear armaments, its support for those who kill our soldiers and Iraq’s and Afghanistan’s and their peoples. The exaggeration by Saddam Hussein of his own WMDs was to counter Weakening President Obama and followers are not the root cause of Israel shows the way, not the barrier. The barrier is the purposeful misfocus, the dangerous inanity, of the avoiders of truths. Isn't 62 years enough time to prove that if modern Israel didn't exist the catering to Middle East tyrants would still be the core cause of dire oppression there and threats to the West's security and prosperity?
Posted by Bruce Kesler
in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects, Our Essays
at
14:06
| Comments (16)
| Trackbacks (0)
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
The Wikipedia puts modern Israel’s independence day as May 14th. Are they incorrect, or am I reading too literally?
Your point about the persistent need for nearly everyone—even Saddam—to counter the threat of Iran is a good one. The global leftoids fabricate an opponent that they can influence (Israel) to maintain denial of true and dangerous threats that will not be influenced/eliminated without significant violence. You are not incorrect. May 14, 1948.
However, it is celebrated according to the Hebrew calendar, which this year was yesterday. To add to your confusion, Jewish days run from sundown to sundown, so Israel Independence Day this year actually began at sunset April 19. What if there were no other government (U.S.A.) interfering (foreign aid to the tune of multi-millions of dollars) in the region?
VERRRRY interesting, isn't it, that you choose to focus upon the U.S.A. ?
Yup, no Iranian funds and arms in Lebanon. Oh Yeah. Yup, no Iranian funds and arms in Gaza. Oh yeah. And the USSR stayed out of the Middle East. Oh Yeah. And Saddam stayed out of Kuwait. Oh yeah. And in 1967, Nasser wanted peace when he ordered the UN troops out. Oh yeah. Sing it to me, brother.
(And the KSA, which forbids non-Muslim churches within its borders, has an extensive mosque building program all over the world.) Yup, all to do w US imperialism. Maybe we should make you Secretary of State. How about a different line of speculation. Imagine the modern Zionists failed to establish Israel. Would the Jews still seek a homeland? Is there a way that an acceptable land could be found outside the Levant?
Would that Jewish homeland been seen as the cause of all tension in whichever global region it was established? good question foxmark!
and I admit not being smart enough to know the answers to all the other queries but I do suspect that if the U.S. had not gotten involved perhaps it would not be the mess it is today....perhaps the other nations would not have felt it necessary to join in the fray. I can only say I am not pleased about how much money the U.S send there. You might be interested to know that the Soviet Union vied to be the first to recognize the establishment of modern Israel.
You might be interested to know that it was the US that stopped Israel, Britain and France from stopping Egypt's seizure of the Suez Canal. You might be interested to know that Israel receives no economic aid and that almost all of the military aid is spent in the US. You might be interested to know that Europe and now China are the main recipients of Arab oil, and the US and Israel in effect protect them more than ourselves. You might be interested to actually know many things. That point about where oil flows needs to be heard more often. It’s a drumbeat for both major U.S. political parties that we’re funding bad guys through oil consumption. Nope. Unless Canada is a secret hotbed of terrorism.
Israel is (was?) a U.S. ally not for oil, but for liberty. We never hear a link made between U.S. bases in Britain and the flow of North Sea oil. I am concerned about the harangues we will have to endure when Israel strikes Iran. Even with all the bowing and scraping by the current President, the U.S. will still be guilty due to perceptions about military aid. Yes, I am interested to learn. Always interested to learn but not to be condescended to.
Since you know so much perhaps you can tell me what benefit the U.S. has gained from all the aid that has been sent? Particularly since you admit that it does not appear to serve American interests. Perhaps in your vast wealth of knowledge you can answer why Israel continues to spy on the U.S. (her good friend)? And why there has never been any resolve to the issue of the U.S.S. Liberty incident? Seems to me (but of course, I don't know for sure) that Israel looks after her own interests very well. Perhaps the U.S. should do the same. As in America first! Those who feel humbled have much to be humbled about.
Au contraire, support of Israel has and does serve the US' interests, which you might know if you were studied in the history of the region from 1948 to now. Yes, ultimately, Israel recognizes it must look after its own interests, and does. US soldiers have never died there nor defending it. But, how about Kuwait or Bosnia, two Moslem countries, where they have by defending them, and liberating tens of millions of Moslems in Iraq and Afghanistan from Moslem oppressors, and protecting Saudi Arabia and Yemen though the prime sources of anti-Western hate and terror. Yes, America First, and that includes those who are our helpful allies. What if there were no other government (U.S.A.) interfering (foreign aid to the tune of multi-millions of dollars) in the region?
If you will notice please. I never specified Israel. I said interfering in the region. The U.S. seems to play both sides of the fence. Or is she being played by both sides? U.S. foreign policy seems to me to be fractured and changes from one administration to the next. Would it not be more likely to serve American interests better and perhaps more cost effectively if the foreign policy were more consistent? Israel continues to spy on the U.S. (her good friend)? why has there never been any resolve to the issue of the U.S.S. Liberty incident? You chose to avoid the questions posed. Why? And with "helpful allies" that spy on the U.S. who needs enemies? I suggest that it would be in the interest of America to scrutinize her friends a little better. Of course, I don't know for sure being so ill schooled in the history of the region, but it strikes me that you have a bias toward favoring Israel. LIKE I SAID: AS AN AMERICAN, I AM IN FAVOR OF POLICIES THAT FAVOR AMERICAN INTERESTS FIRST. and if the U.S. were not entangled in what appears to be a web of deceit in that part of the world perhaps things would not be such a mess. Finally, we agree, more consistency and less entangled in, indeed contributing to, a web of deceit.
Yes, I am absolutely biased in favor of Israel, as I am of the US. You may have missed my day earlier post to this point: http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/14205-At-62-I-and-Israel.html If you want, argue with that. I've served with the USMC in Vietnam, and defended the US in all venues since, and will. Since you demand an answer to the Liberty and to the spying: The Liberty was an intel ship, feeding Israel armed dispositions to the Egyptians. Yes, by everything I've read from qualified sources, Israel attacked the Liberty. The US hushed it up, somewhat, to not reveal its double-game, or what you might call being entangled in a web of deceit, of its own making. Israel accepted the intel fed to it by an American, Pollard, and Pollard has properly rotted in prison since. As to the two AIPAC officials who were charged, they have been exonerated. Their info was nothing but what was in the common domain. -- But, does Israel spy on the US? Mostly, it doesn't have to, as we're very open, and most intel work is working open info. On occasion, unrevealed, it may go further, as one can only speculate, but without evidence. But, there's far more evidence that Russia and China do actively spy and suborn, and absolutely not to any common interests in US security, quite the contrary. I might add that Israel has long been and is the US' primary source of valuable intel about doings in the Middle East, and elsewhere. If you want more consistency and less entaglement in webs of deceit, then speak to the Arabists in the State Department who have undermined US security and the US' best ally, consistently entangled in deceits. and if the U.S. were not entangled in what appears to be a web of deceit in that part of the world perhaps things would not be such a mess.
Without the US, they would be even more of a mess. My four years of working in Latin America cured me of the "things are better without the US" syndrome. You might look at it this way. Investigate living in the Middle East. What county in the Middle East offers Americans the economic, social, and political conditions most compatible with what we are accustomed to in the US? As a WASP, my answer is Israel. Try criticizing the government in an Arab country or in Iran. There are Arabs in the Knesset. Are Jews permitted to set foot in Saudi Arabia? Is it permitted in Jordan to sell a house to a Jew? I don't know where to tell you where to start to learn about the Middle East. David Pryce-Jones wrote a good book on Arab Culture: The Closed Circle. You might investigate the Middle East Media Research Institute, which publishes Middle East media in English (memri.org) Arab Human Development Reports are worth looking at. It is one of the few instances of Arabs being able to criticize themselves instead of blaming outsiders. Read whatever Bernard Lewis has written about the Middle East. Martha Gellhorn, an ex-wife of Hemingway, had an interesting article on "The Arabs of Palestine" in the October 1961 issue of Atlantic Monthly. It is available online. An anecdote. During my student years I lived in the same household with a Palestinian Christian student. His father told his children-before the Six Day War- to get out of the West Bank. As Christians, he said, you will always be passed over for promotion by Muslims. As he worked in the Jordanian civil service, he knew what he was talking about. A grandson of the Arab Christian who told his children to get out of the West Bank is all up in arms about the Joos while ignoring what Muslims are doing to his own cousins in the West Bank. All his criticism is about the Jews, not about Muslims do to his own relatives. (I share no names because I want to remain anonymous, but much of what I relate is documented.) If you think that if we feed Israel to the wolves, that will keep the wolves away from us, you are misinformed. Go to memri.org. Kevin - Gringo, one of the best commenters on my own site gives me the lead-in: Latin America. Simplest framing, so you can poke around and do what research and followup interests you most. I grew up hearing that various Latin American countries were in violent deadlock because the US insisted on being there for the silly idea of stopping Soviets. If we would just leave, the reasoning went, it would all die down soon, as the Russians didn't want to spend that much money either. What if they gave a war and no one came, and all that.
Those who justified American presence as being in response to Soviet interference were sneered at. Now the experiment has been run, and those who were sneered at have been proven the honest ones. When the USSR fell and left Latin America, so did the US. We did not force governments that agreed with us on unwilling peoples. Many of those countries regularly dislike us and take actions we disapprove of. Many even have political parties we believe are dangerous to their nations. It's a helluva way to run an empire. A good debating or thinking point but essentially irrelevant and wrong.
As regards Latin America, absent any military threat to the US, our intervention and responses to more localized and remote threats is properly more subdued. That, however, doesn't mean that all threats should be ignored, or that allies should be undercut as Obama has in Honduras and Colombia. Iran has its forces training despot's forces, especially in Venezuela. Venezuela does intervene in the internal affairs of US allies. Brazil is coming back strong, as behooves its huge resources, and Russia and China are heavily involved there, forming a bloc that obstructs US efforts elsewhere in the world. And, so on. The analogy to the Middle East is inappropriate in that there is a threat to the US and the West and that threat to the US and the West is from within the Middle East. A more subdued US involvement is not appropriate. Then, the question arises of where, how, when, as it should be. Israel exists under the US' protection but has never needed US soldiers to do so. Indeed, Israel's inventions and intel have aided the US elsewhere. If Israel didn't exist, the US would still face the same, probably heightened, threats from Arab countries and Iran, but would be in a lesser position to deal with them. |
Tracked: Apr 21, 13:24
Tracked: Apr 23, 21:11