At the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago, antiwar-protesters who massed outside were beaten with bully clubs by Chicago police. The entire episode was covered heavily by the media. This fact was not lost on the students, who chanted loudly, “The whole world is watching.”
If it was not literally true that the entire world was watching–after all, CNN was barely a twinkle in Ted Turner’s eyes at the time–it was most certainly true that the police brutality at the Convention was widely covered, and that it paradoxically played into the hands of the protesters, the leaders of whom wanted to spark a police overreaction and thereby gain sympathy for their cause (see link for discussion of these motivations).
One of the reasons the brutality in Chicago in 1968 was so shocking to those of us watching on television–and I count myself among them–was that its extent was unexpected. Some tear gas, yes; but wading into the crowd and indiscriminately cracking people’s skulls with billy clubs? No. Although many of the protestor’s organizers may have counted on some sort of violence of that type, many of the rest of us did not. We had grown used to relative police restraint–although there is some history, even in this country, of violent official reactions to rioting and/or demonstrations (see the Bonus March of the Great Depression).
But even the police violence in Chicago, although deplorable and excessive by almost all accounts, resulted in no deaths. And this is also part of what the demonstrators relied on; they never thought they were risking their lives.
Not so with many other demonstrators around the world. In fact, recently in Iran, there have been a series of demonstrations in which protestors have died.
There appear to be two sets of types of protests going on right now in Iran. The first type seems to have been sparked by ethnic strife; the result, naturalment, of US provocation, according to Iran’s leader Ahmadinejad.
The ethnic protests erupted over a cartoon (how odd that cartoons have been the subject of so many recent protests that have led to deaths):
Four people were killed and 70 were injured in riots last week in the Azeri region northwest of here, according to local news reports, as tensions spread after the publication of a cartoon that has outraged Iran’s Azeri population.
The Azeris are Turkish in origin, and the region in which they live was (at least, according to the article) one of the strongholds of Iran’s 1979 revolution. The cartoon, by the way, depicted an Azeri-speaking character as a cockroach. It is significant, I think, that the cartoon is described as having been published in an “official” newspaper, and therefore to have had some sort of government approval.
The demonstrators have other demands as well:
…the release of jailed protesters and the right to start independent television channels that would broadcast in Turkish Azeri.
Independent television channels–sounds like a desire for more freedom of speech. Although perhaps not; the article is not very forthcoming on what’s really going on here. In fact, note the passive voice for the rioting deaths: “four people were killed.”
I’d like to know a lot more. Were they killed by police, or did they somehow get trampled in the demonstrations? Gateway Pundit has fairly extensive coverage of the story, and there are reports that police have fired on demonstrators and killed them in some of the protests.
The other type of Iranian demonstrators are anti-government students; ironic, because many of their parents were probably in the forefront of the 1979 revolution, back when they were students. And, despite the increased ability of the post-1968 media to cover these events and beam them instantaneously around the globe, I can’t say that the slogan “the whole world is watching” applies.
Here’s some opinion from a blogger who bills himself as “Winston,” a “Canadian based Pro-America Iranian neo-conservative, seeking a democratic regime change in Iran.”
Winston links to this report at Rooz Online, which mentions accusations of police brutality and students in critical condition.
Of course, these are not unbiased sources. But the same could be said for much of the media. At any rate, it’s impossible to know exactly what’s really happening in Iran right now, or what effect it might have on the Iranian government. My guess is, on the latter question, not much.
But I think it’s logical to suppose that the less the western MSM covers it, the better it is for the Iranian leaders. If the whole world really were watching, it would be a good thing. But it’s not likely to happen.
Is this the fault of our MSM? Partly, I suppose. But it’s also due to the fact that student protests have been going on sporadically in Iran for many years, and it’s old news, not new–it doesn’t seem all that dramatically different.
Generally, something is news because it’s different. Although the police in Chicago had never been known for their gentleness, police brutality against student rioters in Chicago was bigger news, paradoxically, because it was not the norm; it was different, and therefore shocking.
Another paradox is that, in a society with a free press and a fair amount of transparency, even events that make government look bad can be freely covered and widely disseminated. Not so in repressive countries that make it much harder to get such information. The Rooz article reports that coverage of the student demonstrations has been almost nonexistent in Iran itself, except for a short article downplaying them. This, of course, is to be expected. If, as Rooz writes, local reporters are not allowed into the university, it’s exceedingly difficult to cover the event properly, even if the will to do so existed.
Blogger “Iranian Woman” thinks these protests may be the start of something big, however. Wishful thinking? I haven’t a clue. But if she’s correct, the whole world will soon be watching.
[MORE: At the end of this post, Gateway Pundit offers links to other Gateway posts on the subject. Pajamas Media likewise has a roundup of links here).
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
That’s one of those road signs for conned and confud to change the subject or change the thread, when the subject becomes civil. Counter-intuitive to what normal people do, which is change the subject when things become uncivil.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I’m pleased that our disagreements have become much more civil. I hope you stick around and keep us on our toes, and perhaps trolls can see how it should be done.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
reluctantly i agree that we can’t just leave. It was wrong to invade but, given that we have done it, we owe it to the Iraqi people to sort something out. I would argue that the best way is through an international solution; get as many international organisations in as possible, avoid it being an american operation. This is difficult because it so obviously is.
One thing that will make it much worse is miltary action against Iran.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
well, we hope for the best, prepare for the worst, but be committed to success- backing out would be bad- for everyone. The thing is that the Iraqis, after thirty years of Saddam, won’t be so easily cowed by terrorist attacks and reprisals… it’ll work on the surface in places at times, but if we can just give them room enough to breathe, they’ll get through, I think.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
whoops sorry it was the bbc. That other article is interesting. The question i would ask is where all of this leads us. From what i read it looks like a gradual decline into a lebanon in the 1980’s sscenario. Bloody, intractable and seriously destabilizing for neighbouring countries.
I would like to think that at some future point foreign troops will lead and some vaquely democratic and legitimate government will emerge, but at the moment that seems a long way off.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Conned- that link was to BBC news…
But it led me to this
Keep in mind when you read it that when incidents as the ones he talks about occur, the ones to blame are the ones who deliberately fight and hide among innocent civilians- they bring the battlefield and all it’s horror to them.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
It is good to see the American stormtrooper bootheels are having a positive effect.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Douglas that was an interesting link. Trythis from the same source.
The Guardian I think the idea that Iraqi’s are not so perturbed about the incident
in Iraq the incident has caused little controversy - US troops there are already routinely viewed as trigger happy and indifferent to Iraqi casualties.
is particularly depressing.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Chapter Three’s 1949 statement by Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, that “there are no refugees-there are fighters who sought to destroy us, root and branch” is refuted by United Nations documents of the same year. In late 1949 the U. N. reported that well over half of the Palestinians, 726,000 of the total population of 1.2 million, had been uprooted from their homes and turned into refugees, with another 25,000 “borderline” cases not included in the count.
Arab sources maintain that the true figure was closer to one million. Even former Israeli Foreign Ministry Director General Rafael Eytan reported that “the real number was close to 800,000.” The figures expose the fallaciousness of Ben-Gurion’s claim, unless the nearly two-thirds of Palestine’s total population who were driven out of their homes and not allowed to return all were “fighters.” Similar fallacies are refuted concerning the additional 323,000 Palestinians driven from their homes in 1967, of whom 113,000 were second-time refugees, having lost their original homes inside Israel’s “Green Line” in 1948 before being driven out again in 1967 after Israeli forces occupied the remaining areas of Palestine.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Even in economic matters, Israeli practice seems far removed from America I values. ” Writes Israeli economist Steve Pault: “Economic policy in Israel consists of pork barrel politics run amok … Where-as most countries have rigorous anti-trust policies and powerful enforcement agencies, economic policy in Israel is decidedly pro-trust … Production, marketing, export quotas and water and land allotments are distributed as patronage; they are never auctioned … Israeli commercial policy the most protectionist in the democratic world … Any other country would be subject to international trade sanctions for eve a handful of the import restrictions and e) port manipulations that Israel maintains.’
Summarized Sen. Malcolm Wallop (F WY): “The world is marching away from socialism, yet we’re propping up a basically socialist country, Israel, which is n( willing to change. It has very little free enterprise and huge, distorting subsidies wandering through its economy. In man ways, our aid supports that. “
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
“the illusion of shared values. ” For example, in Israel, proselytizing by Christians and other non-Jews is punishable by five years in prison. A Jewish brother-in-law can keep a childless Jewish widow from remarrying. Christians or Muslims cannot marry Jews in Israel, and if they are married elsewhere, the marriage is not recognized by the rabbinical court in Israel.
Israeli law sanctions torture, and prisoners can be convicted and sentenced solely on the basis of confessions obtained by, in Israeli terminology, “mild physical coercion. ” Apologists for Israel explain, however, that torture is never used against Jewish suspects, only against Christians and Muslims.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_C._Rogers_III
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Dear Raseef, if the Marines fired in all directions I guarantee you that you would have been in the ground soon enough.
The families say they cooperated fully with the NCIS, but drew the line at exhumation; investigators’ requests for the bodies to be dug up for forensic examination were flatly turned down by the families. Islam doesn’t permit bodies to be disturbed after burial.
These propagandists gives me a bad grimace. And the United States is too sensitive to being called a bully to stomp on the obstructions to get at the truth in order to obtain justice for our men. They need to throw those requests out the window, come into the night with commandos and dig up the remains, extract the bullets and examine the wounds, then put them back before the night is gone. The bullets should be able to determine whether it was fired from an Ak -47 or a M-16. And the size and shape of the wound will tell us the energy the bullet hit with and at what angle. Bullet holes in the buildings? I could easily fake that if I had access to US arms. Sanitization squads can easily extract bullets and casings.
For the most part, the residents of al-Subhani welcome the kinder, gentler face of the Marines. But they say the damage done by Terazzas’s company on that November morning cannot be undone. “I was an admirer of America,” says Khaliq, the morgue doctor. “When those bodies were brought here, it turned upside down my image of that country and its people.” Of the Marine with whom he shared bread, Thabet says: “He spoke to me politely, and I respect him for that.” But reciprocating the friendly gestures would be asking too much. “As long as they come as bearing guns, we will be reminded of what their colleagues did to our friends and family,” says Thabet. “We will not forgive.”
Do not engage in behavior that brings out the rage for if the Sunnis give no forgiveness they shall be given none by US proxies, who are neither as compassionate nor as restricted as the US Marines.
America will be reminded forever of the Sunni atrocites in Fallujah, and this is why America will never cooperate with Sunnis or return any friendly gestures or give any reconstruction aid. Ah, but we all know that isn’t true, and that is what propaganda does. It makes what is not true, real. And it makes what is real, not true.
In portraying it as they do, they push the memories of Fallujah and the Sunni insurgency into the past. This enrages me to a point where it sublimates into ice, for if they had a shred of wisdom they would not engage in vendetta. Yet they do engage in vendetta, they do contribute to the Times propaganda. They do so, whether knowingly or unknowingly whether manipulated by the Times or of their own free will, without consideration of the consequences.
And that, is for the Marines to forgive, so tell it to the Marines.
Consider all possiblities, including that Marines violated the law and murdered innocent civilians, but wait for the facts before reaching conclusions.
Are you suggesting that we live by the rule of law, douglass? I don’t think the Democrats believe we live by the rule of law. They say they do believe, but as we can see, their actions betray them.
Keep in mind the citizens of Haditha are frightened, not of US Marines, but insurgents…
I already keep in mind the psychological and propaganda aspects of this situation. Considering the competence of military lawyers, Presidents, and commanding officers in combating insurgent propaganda, I’ve already given up most of my hope that anything anyone can do would mitigate the propaganda victory of the insurgents. Too many factors are against the truth.
The military justice system is usually very efficient. It becomes unhinged when the media get in on the pie though, as we often see in rape prosecutions here in the US. There is more than an even chance someone will be suffocated by a mountain of books, regardless of guilt or innocence. I keep being reminded of the incident with the 101st (or was it 82nd) Airborne Division here in the states during Clinton’s term. Someone murdered another fellow soldier while that soldier was sleeping, using a baseball bat to the head. The man that goaded and manipulated the baseball wielder and had planned this attack all along, was let off with a plea bargain. Given that things are not easier because it is in war time, given that it happened in Iraq, in insurgency controlled territory (otherwise the US wouldn’t be there, doing patrols), and given that Murtha initiated a propaganda wave attack, I know that we should expect the worse. That’s what I know.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
A reporter’s shock at the Haditha allegations
By Arwa Damon
CNN
Wednesday, May 31, 2006; Posted: 4:13 p.m. EDT (20:13 GMT)
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — It actually took me a while to put all the pieces together — that I know these guys, the U.S. Marines at the heart of the alleged massacre of Iraqi civilians in Haditha.
I don’t know why it didn’t register with me until now. It was only after scrolling through the tapes that we shot in Haditha last fall, and I found footage of some of the officers that had been relieved of their command, that it hit me.
I know the Marines that were operating in western al Anbar, from Husayba all the way to Haditha. I went on countless operations in 2005 up and down the Euphrates River Valley. I was pinned on rooftops with them in Ubeydi for hours taking incoming fire, and I’ve seen them not fire a shot back because they did not have positive identification on a target. (Watch a Marine’s anguish over deaths — 2:12)
I saw their horror when they thought that they finally had identified their target, fired a tank round that went through a wall and into a house filled with civilians. They then rushed to help the wounded — remarkably no one was killed.
I was with them in Husayba as they went house to house in an area where insurgents would booby-trap doors, or lie in wait behind closed doors with an AK-47, basically on suicide missions, just waiting for the Marines to come through and open fire. There were civilians in the city as well, and the Marines were always keenly aware of that fact. How they didn’t fire at shadows, not knowing what was waiting in each house, I don’t know. But they didn’t.
And I was with them in Haditha, a month before the alleged killings last November of some 24 Iraqi civilians.
Get the rest here
Curiously, Time has this, which seems contra to the CNN reporters experience…
Since TIME’s story and the investigations that followed, residents say the Marines have become more restrained in their behavior. “Before, when they heard a gunshot, they would start firing in all directions,” says Raseef. “Now, they rarely fire at all.”
Point being we know nothing.
Wait for the facts.
Weigh the reliablility of different voices.
Consider all possiblities, including that Marines violated the law and murdered innocent civilians, but wait for the facts before reaching conclusions.
Keep in mind the citizens of Haditha are frightened, not of US Marines, but insurgents…
For perspective, what the insurgents are all about:
The Guardian
Omer Mahdi in Haditha and Rory Carroll in Baghdad
Monday August 22, 2005
The Guardian
The executions are carried out at dawn on Haqlania bridge, the entrance to Haditha. A small crowd usually turns up to watch even though the killings are filmed and made available on DVD in the market the same afternoon.
One of last week’s victims was a young man in a black tracksuit. Like the others he was left on his belly by the blue iron railings at the bridge’s southern end. His severed head rested on his back, facing Baghdad. Children cheered when they heard that the next day’s spectacle would be a double bill: two decapitations. A man named Watban and his brother had been found guilty of spying.
With so many alleged American agents dying here Haqlania bridge was renamed Agents’ bridge. Then a local wag dubbed it Agents’ fridge, evoking a mortuary, and that name has stuck.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
You know what this reminds me of? This reminds me of when mockingbird tequila posted 25 comments in a row, filled with hundreds and hundreds of words tequila pasted (per comment), witout anyone commenting in between those 25.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
“I think we may about to see the whole neo neocon nonsense tested to its ridiculous limits on this affair.
I predict the following will emerge as comments…
You left this out-
Let’s wait and see what the investigations reveal before we convict anyone. We know next to nothing about what happened yet.
But of course, judging by the fact that you already think you know what we will say, there’s not much point in actually trying to engage you, is there?
Enough Troll food for today.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
You probably won’t want to read this.
http://www.arabhra.org/publications/shortreports/shortreports000621.htm
An Israeli friend of mine assures me that this article is truthful and that liberal Jewish organizations in Israel fighting against these obscenities are regularly abused and subjected to hate campaigns by the Likudists and other nationalists.
More food for thought.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Nyomythus asked……
Q: Why can’t Palestinians just accept peace and propriety
If ever they are offered it, they may well accept it, but I dare say it has gone way too far now for there ever to be a just solution for the Palestinians.
Our western collective guilt over the Nazi business has caused us to be craven and cowardly in our treatment of the middle east and we will pay for it.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
“Fly like a butterfly, but sting like a bee, fly like a butterfly, but sting like a bee”, I think I got it!
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
You haven’t defeated my arguments at all. You’re just spouting out of the zionist handbook.
I don’t frequent left wing websites much at all because they as full of s… as you are.
You are denying the reality because you favour one religion over another. A word beginning with B springs to mind.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Nyo, just read Sun Tzu and think of “fly like a butterfly, but sting like a bee”. Mercurial. Toxic perhaps, but with so many forms.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I’m not shaking hands with anyone. The Palestinians would like to be able to live in their homeland and Israel is a European construct. That didn’t necessarily mean that they wanted the Jews out and Hamas isn’t advocating ethnic cleansing, just the dissolution of Israel as a state.
The self defence argument is pure bs.
Who created the refugee crisis in the first place by ethnically cleansing Palestine?
Who has all the guns, helicopters, nuclear weapons etc?
Who has invaded each of its neighbours?
Who is ignoring UN resolutions to return to it’s borders?
Who has refused to allow peacekeepers on the occupied territories?
Your man of peace has advocated genocide as a solution.
Israeli politicians regularly refer to arabs as lice and cockroaches.
The arab population inside Israel is subject to brutal discrimination. Having a vote doesn’t mean much if you don’t have a home.
As I said, read about it.
I don’t unconditionally support the actions of Palestinians. On the other hand you (and the US generally) unconditionally supports Israeli action right or wrong. That is not a moral, just or even adult position.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
racist colours when you start denying the existence of Palestinians as a people. and the rest — rubbish, quit listening to what they tell you on Left Wing web sites — it’s rotting your btrains out.
Leftist inventions and simpleton, reductive logic — I disagree with righteous, smug “you”. I defeat your arguments at every point, so now I’m a racist, and flip flop, you win the debate. You should just answer every debate by stating the opponent is a racist, so, therefore you can always be right. Well I gave this troll “one chance” — I’m done.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Nyo, I’m going to ask you what I asked sally, why do you bother trying to argue against Confud’s prejudices anyways?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Self defense is not genocide. Insisting on a self-inflicted genocide of sorts is not “genocide” as it is traditionally defined as someone is doing it to another. “Wipe Israel off the map!” – that’s genocidal, the guys you are shaking hands with.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
The fact that surrounding arab states (although the Lebanese may object to that term) have done next to nothing for the Palestinians only serves to make the Palestinians’ plight worse. How is that a reason for excusing Israeli aggression and ethnic cleansing?
This is really twisted logic.
The notion of an arab nation is a chimera used by islamic extremists and dictators in the mire and now by you and your zionist ilk.
You are really showing your true racist colours when you start denying the existence of Palestinians as a people. They may well be of many ethnicities but they still lived there in 1948.
The fact that they are living in ghettos is a testament to Israeli brutality and suppression. The living conditions for arab muslims and christians inside Israel isn’t much better. Do some research.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
It is genocide.
Why can’t the Israelis abide by UN resolutions and return to their borders?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
>> The people of Palestine, over hundreds of years, had made no attempt to create an independent Palestinian state west or east of the Jordan. [No desire for a Palestinian State]
>> In 1948, at the request of the Jews who were living in Palestine, the United Nations voted to partition the remaining quarter of the original Mandate to make a Jewish homeland possible. [Legal Mandate]
>> Incited by the mere presence of Jews, five neighboring Arab states declared war on Israel. But the Jews, many of them recent Holocaust survivors, refused to be defeated. [Islamic Jihad, Genocide – Word of Allah]
>> Territories capture were kept for good reason — no responsible Israeli government could relinquish a territorial buffer while its hostile neighbors preach for its annihilation. [Common Sense]
>> Israel large Arab minority, who live inside the state of Israel, have more rights and privileges than any other Arab population in the entire Middle East. [Democracy and fairness]
>> Israel makes no genocidal threat to Arabs, there is no Palestinian “diaspora” [While Israel makes the desert bloom, relocated 600,000 Jewish refugees from Arab states, built a thriving industrial democracy in its allotted sliver, while the Arabs have been busy making sure that their refugees remained in squalid refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza, where they remain powerless, right-less, and economically destitute, and falter for suicide bombings]
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Israel was borne of terrorism and ethnic cleansing, and exists as a racially segregated state.
That must come as a surprise to the 18.5% of the population that is Arabic, who are allowed to vote, who serve in the military, and who are members of parliament.
“Palestine” is an invention. If the surrounding Arab states were in any way hospitable to the “refugees” that comprise “Palestinians”, there would have been no need for the “state” to exist.
You really need to revisit the definition of “genocide.” As an apologist for terrorists, I find you unworthy of further response.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
yomythus said…
Illegal military occupation The victors make the rules and the British mandate was to create a Jewish state, tada, legal, Good Morning America, etc, blah. The Arabs were allied with Hitler [as they are today with his ideology, as you seem to sympathize with, Voila]. Palestinians refused to live in Israel’s multiethnic democracy because Islamic Law “The Sharia” says that Jews are filthy beings on the level if dogs and pigs. Before the Jews showed up in the 40’s, no one wanted to live in that part of the Middle East [until the new immigrants began growing oranges the size of basketballs then “Ohhhhhh woeeee is Palestine!” [Which is actually in western Jordan]. If Palestinian Terrorist would stop lobbing missiles and mortars into Israel, then the IDF would not have to respond to these attacks. Q: Why can’t Palestinians just accept peace and propriety? A: Because to do so they would have to abandon Islam.
That is one steaming load of bovine faeces. The mandate did NOT include the ethnic cleansing of, and land theft from the indigenous population. Palestine had been a relatively peaceful multiethnic and multireligoius place for centuries.
Israel was borne of terrorism and ethnic cleansing, and exists as a racially segregated state.
Democracy? Some democracy that excludes some 6 million people that belong there from entering, let alone voting. Oh, but the arabs and other minorities left there are treated marvellously I suppose in your little view of the world too. Hahahaha.
Of course you expect Palestinians to be Ghandi in the face of helicopter gunships and hellfire missiles and peacefully protest against extrajudial killings and theft of more land.
It is genocide.
Why can’t the Israelis abide by UN resolutions and return to their borders?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
now that’s …. an answer
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Illegal military occupation The victors make the rules and the British mandate was to create a Jewish state, tada, legal, Good Morning America, etc, blah. The Arabs were allied with Hitler [as they are today with his ideology, as you seem to sympathize with, Voila]. Palestinians refused to live in Israel’s multiethnic democracy because Islamic Law “The Sharia” says that Jews are filthy beings on the level if dogs and pigs. Before the Jews showed up in the 40’s, no one wanted to live in that part of the Middle East [until the new immigrants began growing oranges the size of basketballs then “Ohhhhhh woeeee is Palestine!” [Which is actually in western Jordan]. If Palestinian Terrorist would stop lobbing missiles and mortars into Israel, then the IDF would not have to respond to these attacks. Q: Why can’t Palestinians just accept peace and propriety? A: Because to do so they would have to abandon Islam.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
You asked the question, I answered it. Voila.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
and your point is…
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
When was the last time a democracy defended a non-democracy?
Well those democratic friends of the Carlyle Group the Al Sabbahs certainly valued the help of a democracy or two.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
nyomythus said…
This reminds me of the Rachel Corries case, the Washington State student recruited by the International Solidarity Movement. “She inadvertently committed suicide by challenging an Israeli military bulldozer to a game of chicken as part of her attempt to prevent it from destroying houses hiding a smuggling tunnel, through which Palestinian terrorists were bringing in explosives to murder Jewish civilians.”
…and then…..
Some kid putting herself in harms way, and her dopey friends watching and encouraging her is a travesty of humanitarian work in the highest degree. The adults that set these kids up are not innocent.
But you then claim that you are interested in only truth. Not even the IDF version of events made the claim that the houses had a tunnel or anything else. “Suspected tunnels in the area” is somewhat different.
Another neocon construct.
A 1400 year Jihad? More like resisting a brutal 58 year suppression and illegal military occupation. I don’t think the Palestinians need to be fighting the wars of history. They have enough on their plate and they know who their enemy is.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
You can do everything with bayonets if you don’t use bayonets to do everything. So there’s no need to move anywhere.
A fresh vision isn’t envisioning chaos where chaos has always existed. Don’t see anything fresh in that nor in what else was said.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
nnc, I would not expect you to get the point, oh bear of little brain but endless tape loop.
Anyway this thread is about dead and all the cool kids have left. So, there’s just me, the guidance counselor, left to keep an eye on those with poor impulse control.
yamar; It’s time for you to move up from the tactical to the strategic. Remember, “You can do everything with bayonets, except sit upon them.” Get some fresh vision, guy.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I think the swords should be given to those who can use them, lest someone have an accident.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
stumbley I condemn all the violence. Without exception.
Wake up to the real world and you might help make a difference for peace. There have always been wars. Democracy, though, does have a way of minimizing war. When was the last time two democracies fought a war against one another? When was the last time another social system declared war on a democracy? When was the last time a non-democracy defended a democracy? When was the last time a democracy defended a non-democracy? You should have immediate answers with one question, and pause on the next, and so on … it’s a rhythm.
Without exception “Those who do not pick up swords can still die upon them” – J.R.R. Tolkien [WW1, combat veteran]
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
If socialism didn’t apply to the US, it wouldn’t be very dangerous and therefore New Orleans wouldn’t have been a third country world now would it.
as for the execution of civilians, that is more the insurgent modus operandi. I wouldn’t be surprised that they either set the Marines up or the Marines had ulterior motives for saying that these civilians died from a bomb.
For the benefit of the audience, here is a comment conned left at my blog, where I wrote about Future Weapons of the United States.
bet you were wanking away through this programme yermadwanker
grow up and stop being obsessed with death it is unhealthy
eros not thanatos!
Here’s the link if you want to see a partially completed description of future American weapons
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
oh and wasp i am probably being dumb but i can’t see what point you are making. Good luck to the Kurds. Yes, you are right, all these artificial states were created by external powers for their own interests - often to do with the location of oil fields. Well that and to prevent a larger Arabic state - divide and rule. We never encouraged the secular arab states now we get this mess.
sorry but i can’t see the point you are making
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
stumbley I condemn all the violence.Without exception. It is despicable that a person can blow themselves up with the intention of killing and maiming others, leave anti-personnel mines, home made bombs, car bombs, letter bombs, nail bombs, rpg’s, shoot people, drop ’smart’ bombs on people. I am sick of the whole violent parade.
But I can see where it is coming from. I can imagine the frame of mind those young marines were in when (well if) they killed civilians. It has happened in every war and, in general, only gets reported when the other lot do it.
As a rule violence leads to more violence. It gets a reaction. So if you are going to use violence you need to be aware of the consequences and have a clear idea how you will get out of the situation.
I don’t blame people trying to cover this up (and given the age of the story they have done well) because how much more violence will this cause? How much encouragement will it give the ‘terrorists’? How many more dead on both sides as a consequence?
But I do get sick of the casual advocacy of violence by amateur strategists who have no feeling for the death of anyone except thos on their own side. Oh yes and then claim to be christians…christ was unarmed and anti violence, ok a bit keen on the whole god nonsense, but definitely anti violence.
Of people who think
Destabilization is not a bug. It’s a feature. such casual disdain for the daily misery of others while they live safe in dull suburbs smug in the certainty of their own opinions and dreaming of a more exciting life of violence.
You should have seen the kind of damage a .50 caliber sniper rifle will do to steel, concrete, and human flesh targets. It is totally amazing and aweinspiring
guess which little mad child wrote that?
So yes I condemn the violence. And i can see several sides to the situation. But we need something different from ‘more of the same to sort it out’. More marines in Iraq, Afghanistan etc will mean, among many other things, more dead civilians.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Still think it’s something I’ve been smoking? Well, look at this.
It’s the home page for the Kurdish Regional Government. Don’t miss the Photo Gallery. Does it look like these folks need Iraq, an artificial divvy of the spoils of WW I by the Great Powers, to prosper?
Want a model to solve any number of seemingly intractable problems in the ME? These folks won’t be setting up any Worker’s and Peasant’s Soviets anytime soon.
And, therein is the problem that the Left has had with this model of development. Peasant society is not only a leveling culture, it is a profoundly conservative culture, as the Soviets found out with the kulaks. The traditional culture resisted collectivization so strongly, that Stalin eventually exterminated them.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Oh my, those sloppy, nasty socio-cultural centrifugal forces are now in service to the eviill neo-cons and Chimpymcbushhitler’s attempt at world hegemony. Resist, resist.
Just like the eviill neo con tools the Cro-Magnon’s pushed the peace loving, communal Neanderthals out of their niche, setting the stage for Halliburton.
The boundary landscape of the entire ME is an artificial construct. The whole edifice of faux nation states was imposed upon a crazy-quilt of ethnicities.
I’ve got news. People don’t need inherently unstable entities jerking them around when they have workable alternatives, q.v. the Kurds in Northern Iraq. There are about 30 million Kurds watching their brothers in the northern provinces take control of their destinies. And, other ethnic groups are not unaware of the Kurdish renaissance.
Destabilization is not a bug. It’s a feature.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Re: Haditha
From today’s NY Times:
“A military investigator uncovered evidence in February and March that contradicted repeated claims by marines that Iraqi civilians killed in Haditha last November were victims of a roadside bomb, according to a senior military official in Iraq.
Among the pieces of evidence that conflicted with the marines’ story were death certificates that showed all the Iraqi victims had gunshot wounds, mostly to the head and chest, the official said. …
When Colonel Watt described the findings to Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the senior ground commander in Iraq, on March 9, they raised enough questions about the marines’ veracity that General Chiarelli referred the matter to the senior Marine commander in Iraq, who ordered a criminal investigation that officials say could result in murder charges being brought against members of the unit.
Colonel Watt’s findings also prompted General Chiarelli to order a parallel investigation into whether senior Marine officers and enlisted personnel had attempted to cover up what happened.”
A reprehensible tragedy. But we’re dealing with it. And yes, this kind of disgusting thing happens in war…sort of like using car bombs to blow up civilians. Where’s your outrage about that? Where’s the condemnation of the, you know, terrorists?
Oh, right. Freedom fighters. Defeating the hated baby-killing occupiers. Right. Let’s hop in our Zil and go down to the GUM store and wait in line for bread, shall we?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
This is a reasonable statement so I’ll respond – but we should stay on topic not get personal if you can manage that.
Some kid putting herself in harms way, and her dopey friends watching and encouraging her is a travesty of humanitarian work in the highest degree. The adults that set these kids up are not innocent. It’s like adults saying, “Hey kids wait till the sun goes down then go play on the rail road tracks.” … No, don’t, stupid. The reason for originally posting this was to show how the leaders [of riots, demonstrations, movements, revolutions] consume their followers, beware of what you get yourself into. I’m not apologizing for stating the truth. I would have told Rachel to go home, that she has no business doing this. What were her idiotic parents thinking? Do work with the Peace Corp if you must, but don’t get mixed up in aiding International Terrorist – they will swallow you and you will be a martyr for a 1,400 year old Jihad, not human freedom. It was a waste, and a waste should not be celebrated. “…well in theory it was a good idea, still it’s good for stats and analysis, and worthy of further study” …BS!
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
…any guesses on the comments we won’t see?
Apologies for soiling the name “Rachel Corries” by inventing a story which had no basis in fact.
Nyomythus.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
George Bush who apologised unconditionally….
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
…any guesses on the comments we won’t see?
Murtha, a patriot, who stood by his county’s core beliefs….
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
…any guesses on the comments we won’t see?
Compared to a Palestinian boy so frustrated and sickened by constant killing of his friends and family….
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I think we may about to see the whole neo neocon nonsense tested to its ridiculous limits on this affair.
I predict the following will emerge as comments
1. It is all the fault of leftist defeatists - that is a definite.
2. It is the fault of the UN/international community.
3. It is Iran’s fault
4. It is the fault of Saddam
5. You make omlettes without breaking eggs - that will be yrmdwnkr and the other fans of adolf
6. They killed themselves to make the usa look bad - i think this is more likely than you think, examine the comments about rachel corrie.
7. It is the fault of the MSM reporting all this stuff when other far worse acts are taking place - another definite
8. Completely ignore the whole thing and rattle on about more pressing matters like imaginary new weapons that can be used by the 101 fighting chickenhawks to destroy other people’s neighbourhoods live from the safety of their own little suburb.
9. Make some long tendentious post that plays games with philosophy and morality and miss the central point. When you let the military loose civilians get killed and there has been more of this going on than we realise as there always is in a war zone - they are intrinsicly dangerous places.
10. Call me, and others, trolls and run away from the debate. Well that is definitely neo’s strategy
…any guesses on the comments we won’t see?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
and the eye witness account.
http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1629&Itemid=181
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
It’s applicable to any socialist and tyrannical enclave that accrues power to the politicians and leaders instead of taking care of their people.
You’ve completely lost it now. By your broad definition of Socialisim, don’t parts of the US count?
Ah … you are yanking our chain now, you’re doing a cunning but extreme parody of yourself. All right you got me, you can stop now … funny:-)
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Ymarsakar said…
It’s applicable to any socialist and tyrannical enclave that accrues power to the politicians and leaders instead of taking care of their people.
2:32 AM, May 31, 2006
What about the non-Socialist enclaves? Samosa’s Nicaragua, Chile under your puppet, non Jews in Israel or in the occupied territories?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
It’s applicable to any socialist and tyrannical enclave that accrues power to the politicians and leaders instead of taking care of their people.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Just saw the news of Haditha on Sky (an Uncle Rupert station).
I wonder if those marines knew the story of Al-Haditha in Palestine.
What a sick sick world.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Dysentry as a lifestyle is when the water is so bad you’d better carry a lot of bottled water or a lot of purification tablets, or a osmosis water bag.
Oh right, like in New Orleans. Got it.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
It’s more like 3 problems. State Dep, the PKK, and Turkey. Then there is the IED brigade in Baghdad. If we can get them all fighting each other, they should solve at least one of the problems listed.
Like in Afganistan … pity about how that thinking trashed the country, and left a problem for future generations to clean up.
That seems to be neo con thinking though … reacte then ponder. Or maybe just reacte.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
It’s more like 3 problems. State Dep, the PKK, and Turkey. Then there is the IED brigade in Baghdad. If we can get them all fighting each other, they should solve at least one of the problems listed.
Why not leave the reasoning to the big boys. Oh wait, on second thoughts, it could hardly be worse than the diseased thinking that got the US into Iraq.
Perhaps you should be talking to your best friend GWB, God knows he needs all the advice he can get.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Whoa! I believe wasp was talking about the Kurds and Azeris championing democracy in the area, and how it would spread to neighboring states, like, oh, say Syria?
Making things a little rough for Bashar?
No, he was championing the destablisation of an entire region, and looking forward to watching the carnage unfold as a kind of reality TV. What a sicko barely covers it.
You don’t see a problem with that? Silly question. This site does seem to have attracted people with a free floating moral compass, who will support any outrage, and pitch foreign people into whatever abyss to justify the actions of Bush.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
There’s an often said proverb that is very wise. If you one problem, then you have to go out of your way to solve it. However, if you two problems, sometimes they can solve themselves. The Turks are annoying and have repudiated US efforts at good relations, which is a problem. It is simple to get another problem, the PKK, to solve the Turkish problem for us, which in turn solves the relationship problem.
It’s more like 3 problems. State Dep, the PKK, and Turkey. Then there is the IED brigade in Baghdad. If we can get them all fighting each other, they should solve at least one of the problems listed.
Dysentry as a lifestyle is when the water is so bad you’d better carry a lot of bottled water or a lot of purification tablets, or a osmosis water bag.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
What would destabilizing Syria achieve I wonder in todays world?
Reemergence of islamic militants for a start. That can’t be good, but what they hey?
Legitimisation of Israeli occupation of the Golan maybe? What’s a little ethnic cleansing when they’re our allies eh?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
This is exactly the kind of cold, brutal and inhuman commentary that further illustrates why war is such a bad idea.
It flushes these kinds of personalities into the open, and renders their ravings “acceptable”.
Whoa! I believe wasp was talking about the Kurds and Azeris championing democracy in the area, and how it would spread to neighboring states, like, oh, say Syria?
Making things a little rough for Bashar?
And this would be a bad thing, how? ‘Cause he’s such a nice guy and all. But since you’re a citizen of the world, “ask not for whom the bell tolls”, eh?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
If the process really takes off, make popcorn, ice the beer and watch guys like Bashar al-Assad wonder why it just got so quiet all of a sudden.
This is exactly the kind of cold, brutal and inhuman commentary that further illustrates why war is such a bad idea.
It flushes these kinds of personalities into the open, and renders their ravings “acceptable”.
When “they” start killing “us”, anything goes. It doesn’t even particularly matter anymore who “they” are, as long as we are sticking it to “them”.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Just while you’re here and the crack may be waning wasp, can you explain what the hell “dysentry as a lifestyle” is?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Too tired; for 52nd read 51st state in the Union. However, Puerto Rico may be closer than anybody believes.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Of course, the reason the PKK are on the list is that they are an overtly Marxist “revolutionary” terrorist party. At the critical moment they will hemorrhage members and wind up being crushed by the Turks and the peshmerga. Right now they are geographically and politically isolated and many of them can see the handwriting on the wall. They are doomed. The Turks also don’t quite realize yet what is in store for them, given their diverse ethnic demographics.
I mentioned in my previous post the fact that the Kurds are so pro US that it is almost embarrassing at times. There is a common belief among many of them, as reported by several bloggers, Michael Totten for one, and a friend of mine, that they will eventually become the 52nd state in the Union.
My friend ran into a Kurdish businessman in Frankfurt, purchasing appliances by the container load for a family store in Northern Iraq who not only believes that statehood is possible , he lives for the day when they get their first NFL franchise. He is it seems a rabid Chargers fan who left San Diego to “go home” and build a future for his extended family. But, he still loves his American style football.
I don’t quite think that this was the kind of thing that Victor David Hanson had in mind
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Ymarsakar said…
The State Dep lists the PKK as a terroist organization, so there won’t be much pan Kurdish covert guerrila actions any time soon to initiate stability.
10:07 PM, May 30, 2006
Complicated ain’t it? The Turks won’t wear a Kurdish State and the Armenians would probably arm themselves to the teeth at the thought too.
Problems problems problems. Who’d have thought?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
At 11:57 AM, May 30, 2006, neo-neocon said…
To Sally and all others who are still engaging trolls:
Actually, I have a request as well. To everyone who engages with trolls, I ask that they cease and desist.
I may write a post about this some time, or I may not. But I thought this might be a good time to reiterate the fact that I think it’s a very bad idea to interact with trolls or to engage them.
This thread is a good example. I certainly haven’t counted, but I would guess that well over half the comments here are a back-and-forth with people who are out to hijack the thread, change the subject, and turn it into an exchange of insults.
As I’ve said before, I have no problem with substantive arguments that disagree with me. I don’t mount the “troll” accusation lightly, but I think over time trolls show their true trollish colors.
I value substantive discussions in the comments section. As “al fin” wrote at 8:54 AM today:
If the threads get hijacked by combative and redundant people with ulterior motives, the reason for a lot of people to come here disappears.
At this point, answering trolls is, IMHO, an almost complete waste of time. But it’s actually worse than that, because it does their own work for them, hijacking the thread. Anything that needs to be said has already probably been said, to very little result.
I think the best approach is, unless a comment is obscene or otherwise flagrantly offensive, to simply let it stand. Trollish remarks are their own worst advertisement, are they not? By their own remarks trolls reveal themselves, both emotionally and cognitively.”
I’m past being depressed about this site, but this statement both identifies and condemns you neo. The construct whereby you limit your “debate” to only those that agree broadly with you and share your irrational fears, whether they be racists like Yfronts or nasty little nondebaters like Sally confirms the shallowness of your beliefs.
I think you are an intellectually entirely dishonest in your accusations. These sorts of constructs are entirely consistent with PTSD.
Hijacking the thread my butt.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
The State Dep lists the PKK as a terroist organization, so there won’t be much pan Kurdish covert guerrila actions any time soon to initiate stability.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Jack, the cleavages are, in the main, ethnic/tribal except where long term urbanization mixed with western influences have resulted in something like the medieval, chartered city.
What so many people don’t know is that the Kurds are unabashedly pro-US, even after their many betrayals by the Agency during the cold war. They also span a great deal of territory and are culturally “flexible” and able to incorporate some of the absurdities inherent in modern Islamic life. Basically, they want to live well and make a buck or two in the process. As the Kurds and maybe, just maybe, the Azeri become more culturally independent in the patchwork, the US will have a pretty good bulwark in the area.
Actually, getting the US to cease a policy of “Nation Building” would be a good first step. The artificial boundaries are nonsense given the ethnic reality. We would do well just to let the whole area devolve. “Missions” in the old British colonial agency style staffed with cultural specialists drawn from our own population of the ethnic groups would be a good idea.
Look up both the Kurds and the Azari in Wikipedia for some background. It will surprise you.
If the process really takes off, make popcorn, ice the beer and watch guys like Bashar al-Assad wonder why it just got so quiet all of a sudden.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Peasant society is designed to level, so if any crab looks like it is about to escape the bucket, another crab will pull it back down.
The crab in the bucket scenario is so funny. Cause it is so true. In more ways than one.
While I believe the Special Forces has what it takes in skill, experience, and support (tech, jdams), if the same effect can be accomplished using other means I’d choose to try and preserve the Special Forces until we can give them closer support, like in Afghanistan. Anything they do in Iran right now would have to be black ops or at least without air support. They take their risks as they should, but they shouldn’t be squandered either.
Iraq’s most potent resource after the US protection is not oil, but the Kurds. If the Arabs can learn the optimism and go do it attitude of the Kurds, and integrate it into the national character, then Iraq will be good. Kuwaitt is a good example of a tribal society that is described by senescent, elevating itself to something better and more humane. In a way, it was the problem with the NOrth vs the South. The North had some qualities and the South had other qualities. If the union had split, both would have been diminished.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I think that we will see the ME devolving, over time, into a patchwork of ethnic enclaves, petty warlordism and some city states dotted here and there.
wasp — I understand that scenario but I’m hoping for better. How do you see Iraq moving? Evolving or devolving?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Does anyone else think this wasp is just yardwalker on a purer form of crack?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Stumbley, my mistake, I thought you were referring to their decision to hold the inquiry.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Jack Trainor said…
“. In negotiations over nuclear weapons programs he has played the Europeans for fools and then gloated about it.”
That is a flat out straightforward lie and you know it.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
The ‘issue’ they ‘admit to’ is a series of allegations.
Really? That’s not what this sounds like:
“Nonetheless, there are identifiable shortcomings, particularly in respect of gaps in coverage,
analysis, context and perspective and in the consistent maintenance of the BBC’s own
established editorial standards, including on matters of language. All of this points to the
elusiveness of editorial planning, grip and oversight.”
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Jack, I read that as well, VDH is a very smart guy and his historical perspective on the peoples and cultures of the ME give a strong framework for analysis.
My .02 is that the very idea of the nation state doesn’t work very well in areas still under the sway of what used to be called “amoral familism”. That is, cultures where self identification starts at the family and goes up to the clan and the tribe. No ones been able to convince me that Ed Banfield and his school of thought was wrong.
I think that we will see the ME devolving, over time, into a patchwork of ethnic enclaves, petty warlordism and some city states dotted here and there. VDH would immediately recognize that landscape. It is exactly these centrifugal forces that the Islamofascists worry most about. Raising jihad in a lot of petty fiefdoms drove them nuts the last time and the Ottoman Empire was just a better administrated kleptocracy. They really need the resources of a State to survive and support the mission. Otherwise they fall apart into puny little gangs able to sting but not kill their opponent. A lot like fire ants, keep killing colonies until you can come up with a genetic solution. (No I don’t mean bio warfare, moonbats)
Right now the Islamic crab bucket is working pretty well. Peasant society is designed to level, so if any crab looks like it is about to escape the bucket, another crab will pull it back down. Hey, if they want it…? I just want them reduced as a potential threat. If that reduction takes some draconian measures, well I don’t have too much trouble with draconian, in the sense of harsh, as long as it is not genocidal in nature. We will, still, have to look in the mirror to shave.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
confudeforeigner said…
tumbley said…
The BBC item is interesting. They admit that there’s an issue, but believe that the answer is “greater editorial oversight.”
Actually, they commissioned the study because of a campaign of complaints (and not unconsiderable abuse) by Israeli interests. The ‘issue’ they ‘admit to’ is a series of allegations.
4:08 PM, May 30, 2006
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
wasp — Interesting. I do believe that the US military has a far larger array of options than is publicly known.
In a Q&A after a recent talk Victor David Hanson answered a question about the future in the Middle East by saying that we will see things we have never seen before.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I am for surgical air strikes and the use of Special Operations assets should the problem prove intractable. Right now I’m hoping that the internal dissent may rise to a level of either replacing the regime or disrupting it enough so that elements of the Iranian state begin to disassociate into chaos. I hope for the first but would accept an Iran in disarray and helpless against internal turmoil.
The are too many risks with letting the atomic cat out of the bag and a “demonstration” would simply demonstrate that the US was out of options and such action could be manipulated in the final analysis to redound badly.
Unlike many of you, not to trot out my bonafides, I have a very good idea of US military capabilities gained from experience in both overt and shadow war. I can imagine that this statement will draw some cat calls and hooting, but this knowledge allows me to consider a broader spectrum of options than the average citizen, even one who has served may have. I would have not been able to make even that disclosure as recently as early last year, but I have finally hung up my hat after wearing it for forty plus years on both active and civilian service.
In addition, I have studied, formally and informally, ME history and politics during that same period and have been boots on the ground many, many times in areas where, yes, dysentery is a life style.
On that basis I would say that the window is still open and, barring new information to which I am not now privy, will remain so for a “little while more” in an non ordinal counting system.
Concluding, I would say that it is possible to degrade and attrit Iran’s capability to threaten with atomic weapons without ground action or “invasion”. I believe that the mass of its’ citizens will take care of post strike clean up after the US demonstrates it’s ability to both decapitate the power structure and reduce the nuclear program.
Recall that the West has many more covert assets in Iran than it had in Iraq.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Who’s for invasion (of Iran) assuming no change in the current governing process (as opposed to administration, those come and go).
This misses the point. I’m not keen on the Iranian governing process, much less Pres. A., but the issue is not the Iranian process, but what specifically they are doing, having been doing and what they might be doing in the future. Unless one is a pacifist, one cannot rule out the use of force.
President Ahmadinejad is an apocalyptic Islamic leader intent on developing nuclear weapons and removing Israel from the map. In negotiations over nuclear weapons programs he has played the Europeans for fools and then gloated about it.
What do we do? Beats me. I don’t want this guy and his associates to have nuclear weapons and I don’t want to go to war with Iran, but it’s not clear what the other alternatives are.
It would be great if the Iranians overthrew him and the mullahs, but it would be foolish to count on it.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Sally: Thanks! I figured it was something like that. I can’t imagine playing with either one of them - they are typical Leftists.
Wonder how long the folks here will attempt to debate them.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
The psychological impact of a demonstration nuclear bombardment on non-populated Iranian territory, should not be underestimated.
A lot of people believe intimidation and suicide bombings and kidnappings are useless. But that would be untrue. There is obviously some kind of effect from such things.
In psychological warfare, as with conventional warfare, the goal is to put your opponent off balance. Do things and say things that they do not expect from you, so that they lower their guard when surprised. The mullahs believe as you do, stumb, that the West won’t nuke their people.
However, demonstrate to them that you can successfully weather international pressure, that nothing holds you back including any nuclear test treaties, and you demonstrate to the oppositio, Iran, that they do not hold all the cards.
Anyone that has tried to haggle knows that if you just tell the other guy what you are willing to pay, you are basically screwing yourself. The same if you told them what you can afford to pay. It is the uncertainty, the threat of death from every direction, that truly unbalances the opponent and gives you an edge in a fight.
Attack where you are not expected. Why should we play the game by the rules Iran believes they know? If you play by the house rules (casino trade) you will lose.
Things should be done because they are hard. Iraq and Afghanistan are hard. That is why terroists and others fight us there so much, because the simple demonstration of American power has pushed back terroist plans decades. We invaded their homebases because they did not expect us to, thereby acquiring a large victory.
Now we are stalemated, because the terroists are fighting back, counter-attacking, adapting to our tricks and strategy. So we must open another front, with new weapons and new willpower.
President Bush has everything he needs, the authorization, the missiles, the weapons, and loyal men and women to carry his orders out.
This is not a one shot deal, as we know. There are plenty of small kilo tone range nuclear weapons we need to get rid of.
The deception variety would be sending Iraq a nuclear shipment of weapons and then detonating them inside Iraq, using an infiltration style operation. Forged or actual evidence that Iran accepted those weapons willingly, would of course place Iran in a difficult political situation. AQ Khan for example, could perhaps be persuaded into slipping iran a nuclear device, with the arming codes sent from satellites or maybe even a UAV. If it blows up on the way to Tehran, who can say it was the Americans who did it?
Then if the nuclear option is done and the Iranians dont break, then you can always have naval blockades that sink ships. You can annex the villages in Iran that are most disloyal to the government, with Spec Ops and air support. I heard there is a region in Iran that produces 80% of their oil. Dropping the 82nd Airborne and 101st Screaming Eagles onto this location, to hold against all enemy incursions, would cripple Iran’s economy. The government would be toopled in short time, then we can leave. Since we are there to prevent Iran from getting the oil from the region, we don’t care if somebody blows up the pipelines. We don’t have to mount patrols. We would be the asymmetrical guerrila force putting down IEDs and sabotage operations. The Iranians would be the defenders, and if you can stretch this into several months, you will getquite a lot of psychological impact, dissent support, as well as political traction with the Iranian government.
The point is, asymmetrical warfare requires people to think outside the box of bombing or invasion or diplomacy. Asymmetrical and psychological warfare combines the best of bombs, military force, and diplomacy. That is why it is so effective against a conventional force.
You can defeat the bombs, like a nuclear bomb, but you can’t defeat the deceptive diplomacy. If you defeat the diplomacy, then the naval blockades sinks your ships and strips your oil fields dry.
You can’t think outside the box if you limit yourself to what you think people will do. Such limitations are counter-productive to real solutions.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Would be interesting to see a study of global media treatment of the Pali-Israel issue, and the resultant effects on the affected populations. Not being privy to the UK channels, the conclusions of that report are very interesting.
I’d also like to know the associations/attitudes of the panel members.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
try this on the Palestinian Israeli thing from the Glasgow Media Group. Interesting bunch who have been around for years.
http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/sociology/units/media/israel.htm
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
IIRC, the suggestion was put to Truman to use one of our two existing 1945 nukes as a demonstration to Japan. Clearly, the decision was otherwise.
As a demonstration, my belief is that it would be useless. The odds against anyone in the West using a nuclear device against a civilian population are astronomical; the politcal fallout would be too great, and being tried as a war criminal would be a certainty. The mullahs know this. They know we won’t nuke them.
The most viable option that I see in Iran, if the current trend is toward possessing nuclear weapons in contravention of all global pressure, would be to target specific individuals with the intent of destabilizing the mullahcracy, such that reformers had a chance at installing a democratic government.
The likelihood of any of this coming to pass is close to nil. As I’ve said before, I think the hope is that reform will come from within, that the Iranians will do it for themselves. Barring that, we’ll see more of the same ineffectual international “diplomacy.”
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Does anyone else favor demonstration nuclear bombardment or any other kind of intimidation tactic short of invasion, to deal with Iran?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I doubt it. There’s WAY too much downside in invasion.
Well we can agree on that. Lets take a straw poll. Who’s for invasion (of Iran) assuming no change in the current governing process (as opposed to administration, those come and go).
I vote non.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I can get pictures to lie more than words because people believe their eyes more than what they hear. So visual deception is a lot more believable than auditory deception.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Ymarsakar: That’s an excellent question. I’ve wrestled with the answer, and I’m not 100% sure, but this is how I feel at present.
If someone who has previously established him/herself as a troll starts to be respectful and logical in his/her arguments and disagreements, I would suggest replying one time in a substantive manner. Then, if the conversation continues in that respectful way, the troll has reformed.
But only one chance. If the troll responds to reasonableness with a “Nah-na-na-nah-nah!” moment of gratuitous insult, goal-post moving, requests for endless research on a subject at their demand, etc. etc., then the troll is reverting. The seeming reasonableness was just a way to sucker the other commenters into giving a response, and then whammo! Gotcha!
When a troll is just plain being a troll, no response is the best response, IMHO.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
The BBC item is interesting. They admit that there’s an issue, but believe that the answer is “greater editorial oversight.”
I’d rather see more transparency. In fact, it’s much more reasonable to admit that one has a bias, as neoneoconned does…it allows the reader to factor the bias into whatever is said, and then assess the objectivity of the comment or article based on that bias. When someone like confudeforeigner says “I loathe Bush,” it’s easy to see that attempting to counter an anti-Bush statement with facts pointing in the opposite direction might not make any impression; the mind is made up.
Likewise, when I state that I’m in favor of capitalism, that I believe the MSM has a bias, it’s easy to see why my comments reflect that. The problem is, who’s to say that any amount of “editorial oversight” will correct this bias? Aren’t we liable to see stories based on the editor’s bias? And just who do you trust?
The advent of television was thought to be synonymous with accurate reporting: pictures don’t lie. But we’ve all seen how pictures can lie—through selective editing, rigged angles, and ultimately, what is chosen to be shown.
I use Occam’s Razor. If it’s too good to be true, or if it requires that an incredible conspiracy has to have occurred for it to be true, it’s likely to be false. The simplest, most rational explanation is likely to be the true one.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
http://www.bbcgovernors.co.uk/docs/rev_israelipalestinian.html
Food for thought.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Hey Neo, I have a question.
Do you want people to ignore trolls period or are you okay with people responding with reasonable comments?
I wrote about this before, how it is hard to converse with mercurial people so what do you want us to do about Conned if he speaks in an apparently reasonable fashion?
I just see some other corrolaries to your request against arguing with trolls. I’d like to get the loopholes out of the way.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
It is time for students, workers, and minorities to rise up in a coordinated fashion. The mullahs will find it increasingly difficult to continue their rule.
The mullahs know it and are therefore scared to death. That’s one of the reasons why they are literally begging to talk to the Americans. The idiots think that the Americans are planting the seeds of the revolt or that talking to the Americans will demoralize the people. They are wrong. The mullahs’ rule has expired because the mullahs don’t belong to this age. They belong to an age when stoning, mutilation, and blinding were considered norm.
–Iranian Woman
Neo mentioned this post and the recent blog entries are well worth reading too. We live in an interesting world.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Oh, and by the way, in my 11:12, I gave two examples of how the MSM skews news. Is this a “plot”? No, I think it goes more to the notion that since most journalists identify themselves with one side of the political spectrum, they’re just “reporting things as they see them,” without any conscious or overt agenda.
In the case of CBS and the Bush Texas Air National Guard story, it was an overt and clearly biased attempt to affect a U.S. election, and therefore, pretty reprehensible. In the case of NBC and its rigged story on the Pinto, again, an overt attempt to create the “news.”
There have been other incidents recently involving “reporters” from Al-Jazeera manufacturing events to create a certain impression in viewers. No doubt some outlets with a rightward bias do some of the same. It’s why I’d rather get my information from people who have demonstrated objectivity in their reporting, at least when it comes to things like Iraq.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
“I find this glib assumption that the MSM are engaged in a plot faintly silly.”
As do I the assumption that “In neo’s case as a neo-con she is looking for an excuse to invade Iran. This is implicit in the whole neo-con position.”
Not really. Regime change, yes. Invasion? I doubt it. There’s WAY too much downside in invasion. My guess (only MY guess) is that most neocons hope for these demonstrations and internal strife to topple the regime on their own.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Something I would like to know more about: Ahmadinejad motorcade ambush and bombing attacks nearby Ahmadinejad’s speech. It’s hard to say for sure without knowing more, but if these are assassination attempts, Ahmadinejad may be in more trouble than he lets on and perhaps that explains some of his outrageousness.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Stumbley I took neo’s post to mean that she was suspicious of the way in which the Mainstream Media did not cover the riots in Iran. I was making the point that what gets attention reflects the values of those looking.
In neo’s case as a neo-con she is looking for an excuse to invade Iran. This is implicit in the whole neo-con position. At the very least she is looking for the collapse of the Iranian regime (in itself no bad thing).
I semi-randomly came up with a list of other riots and made the point that I would look for signs of capitalist exploitation, hence my focus on the garment workers, because that reflects my values.
The reason behind my comment was that I find this glib assumption that the MSM are engaged in a plot faintly silly. Why would a bunch of rich US corportaions do anything other than support the interests of rich corporate america?
It would have been perfectly possible to put a counter argumnet to mine along the lines of the MSM are anti-bush and so are actively seeking out stories to undermine him, bombings in Iraq, and avoid stories that support him - the decline of the regime in Iran. And Jack T started to do this quite well.
However a lot was not up to much…
Fight Infantile Leftism, innoculate your children with logic.
The MSM will report fantasy if it supports their own template. An Iran in internal turmoil does nothing to further the template.
and the whole distatsteful set of comments about Rachel Corries
well…
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I tend to think Neo disagrees whole heartedly that demonstration nuclear strikes, exhibition executions on town squares, and various other types of a “show of strength” is unnecessary and unwarranted. This puts her at disagreement with me, because i actually think a lot of good and hard working folks in Iraq could benefit from such demonstrations of American power and loyalty, in the least it would protect some of them from insurgent violence by detering insurgents with cruel and harsh punishments.
What are the insurgents and Arabs going to do in retaliation, blow up American embassies? Blow up Iraqi children around american humvees playing in the streets? Send a suicide bomber to Mosul and blow up an American dining tent?
I’m pragmatic, what do we got to lose? If we had something substantial to lose through extreme measures, I am very willing to change my view and say that demonstration nuclear strikes would produce more harm than good. Even demonstration nuclear strikes are not extreme, simply because you’re just blowing up a piece of real estate, not really killing anyone. Although I tend to think it is a very exotic form of execution, if for example we had to get rid of Saddam in a very fast and public way.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Neo-neoconned:
If “debate” were all you were after, that would be fine. However, in your very first comment on this post, you said:
“You neo-cons are looking for an excuse to invade Iran….could this be it? hence your interest and excitement.
I shall return with a list of other places with rioting….i think this may take a while”
Nowhere in neo’s post did she mention “invading Iran.” Nor are “other places with rioting” germane to the discussion of media coverage of riots in Iran.
Immediately following your comment, bmcworldcitizen writes:
“I’m still certain I don’t want to see the country, invaded, nuked, generally trashed and the populace left to rot like Afganistan or Iraq.”
Again, nowhere in neo’s post is anything of the kind mentioned. This is simply hijacking the thread to spout talking points that the commenters wish to parade before “idiots like you who are unwilling to debate” (your charming description).
When and if we can discuss the actual topic of media coverage of events and its selectivity, how that colors what we see/believe (as I think my comment above addresses), this comment section has value. When it’s used for snark and injection of unrelated rants, people lose the real benefit of thoughtful discussion.
I’m trying to be better. I hope you will too.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Nyo, you ain’t bsing me are you? Looks like CiA poison/assassins were good for something after all.
I just think Bush should go up on world wide tv and say that he had a hand in causing the death of the father of Amanie (through divine intervention and prayers to God of course), even if it is a lie. Imagine the look on Amanie’s face when he confronts someone else’s God’s work.
Ridiculous? Perhaps. But very satisfying. If Amanie made up the story or just killed his own father in order to blame the Americans, then that’s pretty cold.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
interesting word “troll” neo. On many blogs the meaning is those who disagree with us. You appear to be no different. If you read this thread you will see I made a critical, but related comment. Now would you rather have a list of “oh super post neo” comments or would you rather debate the issues - well you don’t do debate but you get the point. I will debate until all the tedious accusations start then i snap back. Stylish it might not be, but i do get so bored with the ‘indecent left’ comments as a substitute for evidence.
As for the attention seeking. Well you are the one with a blog
keep a diary if you don’t like public comment. Turn the comments off if you don’t like debate.
Just out of curiosity do you ever get any critical views on here that you do not dismiss as trolling. I would be curious to see what you consider to be acceptable yet still critical comments.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Ahmadinejad’s Father Passes Away
TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- Iranian President’s Father Haj Ahmad Ahmadinejad passed away early Tuesday.
The Media Department of the Presidential Office said that President’s father was 82 and died of a heart attack.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is scheduled to see off his beloved father during a funeral procession on Wednesday morning.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
To sally, I am not concerned with whether you take me personally serious, sally, my questions were solely about whether you said what you meant and meant what you said. That is still not clear.
and I was being serious after a fashion in the comment you refer to, but a fashion that’s not incompatible with sarcasm.
The above is very ambiguous. I see no need to play word games with such phrases as “after a fashion” or “not incompatible with sarcasm”.
If you view my suggestions offered in a polite manner as being too onerous for consideration, then feel free to repudiate me for offering them and I won’t do it in the future. I ask no more honesty than when you state your beliefs and feelings toward Conned and Confud. Which I think, is not too much to ask.
I am also curious as to your original comments toward Bleach and Naruto and why you used those names as the reason why you believed wisdom originated. I refered only to Naruto and Bleach to explain my preferences to robotic research, which was a show of support for Al given the subject of his blog, which was being ridiculed at the time.
If you want to say that wisdom does not come from watching Naruto or Bleach and that I hold the opposite traits of wisdom and knowledge, then I can think of no reason why you cannot forgo the games and say it straight.
Let me assure you, if there be any need, that you are not sparing my feelings in this regard. As I regard duplicitous action from my allies as worse than the discourtesy and rudeness I experience from my enemies. This might seem ironic given my emphasis on political deception and propaganda techniques, but the principles are not inconsistent at all.
So what are you afraid of sally, why don’t you just tell me what you really think?
**********
I wasn’t really bothered by the obscene and disruptive behavior when it was in the old “Why hate the war” threads. But when people started doing the same thing in new threads, without letting the diverse opinions settle without interferene, that was when I drew the line.
There were plenty of threads after the “War hate” ones, gardening that people could have used the comments section for their debate. Given that it was a personal subject and not one related to the thread. However, it makes little sense to say nothing on those threads, gardening for example, and then wait for a substantial thread to start yelling and talking on the same old same old.
It is extremely hard to engage people who are fluid and mercurial. It goes up and down, you don’t want to upset people by not taking the reasonable arguments seriously, but then you also become surprised and angry when the “reasonable arguments” turn out to be the leading strike of a heavy assault. The parley was just a ruse it seemed.
As for comments, it is very hard to search through many many comments to find a specific thing I was looking for. Consolidation, to me, seemed the best solution.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
To everyone who engages with trolls, I ask that they cease and desist.
I will comply.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Sally: I understand your point.
But I still think–and I think this very strongly–that there’s no need to “expose” a troll for what he/she is. The troll does that him/herself–trollish words and behaviors are inherently and obviously trollish.
And the effect of further exposure is not only futile (the troll doesn’t change), but it’s counterproductive, because it reinforces the behavior.
It’s like that old saying: for many people, negative attention is better than no attention. Negative attention is actually what trolls thrive on. They would probably prefer positive attention, but any sort of attention will do quite nicely.
Including, I’m sure, the discussion we’re having right now :-)!!
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Fair enough, Neo — it’s your blog, it’s a very good blog, and I respect your wishes.
But let me just make a point or two in response. The attempt merely to ignore trolls can be a futile one in itself, since an incessant barrage of insults, pseudo-arguments, and irrelevancies can effectively hijack any thread, and then, as al fin said and you quoted, the reason that I and many others have for bothering to read the thread disappears. Like you, I wouldn’t make the “troll” accusation lightly, and I have no problem with substantive disagreements, however sharply expressed (though I don’t promise to avoid a similarly sharp reply). But when, for example, you see a “commenter” who repeatedly attacks not just a particular post, but the blog and its supporters in general, then I think it’s safe to assume the person is here only to provoke, distract, distort, and obscure — and in my view such people should be at least exposed for what they are. My 2 cents.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
To everyone who engages with trolls, I ask that they cease and desist.
Sounds good to me.
I pulled up the home page a few times yesterday and saw the comment count for this topic jumping by twenty or more each time. I was pretty sure I knew what was happening without looking.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
By gum … don’t you people watch television?
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
The current riots in Iran, sparked by ethnic cartoons, here are some links:
National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)
Iran Focus
Guardian Unlimited
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I’d like to apologize for my part and plead extenuating circumstance. When I went to comments yesterday very early, my time, I saw just the two by the usual suspects and succumbed to Lord Nelson’s disease, I “…went straight at ‘em.”. Wrong, mea culpa.
By the time I got back from the services, picnic and BBQ, the flammage was in full spate.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Our hostess keys a post about lack of MSM coverage of demonstrations in Iran and the anti-war crowd wonders why she didn’t include other demonstrations that have nothing to do with the issue of MSM coverage of Iran. Note to Confude, Neoconned, etc.: Demonstrations by garment workers are not relevant to the issue of MSM coverage of Iran.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
To Sally and all others who are still engaging trolls:
Actually, I have a request as well. To everyone who engages with trolls, I ask that they cease and desist.
I may write a post about this some time, or I may not. But I thought this might be a good time to reiterate the fact that I think it’s a very bad idea to interact with trolls or to engage them.
This thread is a good example. I certainly haven’t counted, but I would guess that well over half the comments here are a back-and-forth with people who are out to hijack the thread, change the subject, and turn it into an exchange of insults.
As I’ve said before, I have no problem with substantive arguments that disagree with me. I don’t mount the “troll” accusation lightly, but I think over time trolls show their true trollish colors.
I value substantive discussions in the comments section. As “al fin” wrote at 8:54 AM today:
If the threads get hijacked by combative and redundant people with ulterior motives, the reason for a lot of people to come here disappears.
At this point, answering trolls is, IMHO, an almost complete waste of time. But it’s actually worse than that, because it does their own work for them, hijacking the thread. Anything that needs to be said has already probably been said, to very little result.
I think the best approach is, unless a comment is obscene or otherwise flagrantly offensive, to simply let it stand. Trollish remarks are their own worst advertisement, are they not? By their own remarks trolls reveal themselves, both emotionally and cognitively.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Farsi not being one of my languages, I had to wait until this morning to get a summary digest of regional reaction. It is predictable that the Iranian regime is blaming the all purpose scapegoat, the CIA for the unrest in the Azeri ethnic areas. Would that it were only so. Agency officers have not taken postings where dysentery was a life style for decades.
Apparently, the demonstrations are large and sustained enough to have drawn a significant deployment of Revolutionary Guards. This comes after several reports, not clear if they are seperate, of paramilitary’s firing directly into crowds to no effect.
Sorry I can’t source this; it’s coming in over the Old Boys network in email digests. Not too many journos in Azerbaijan, even in normal times. Hard to get to and damned dangerous anytime. The springtime bloom of the native species tulips have to be seen to be believed.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Just to alleviate your uncertainty, Ymar, I do take you seriously, and I was being serious after a fashion in the comment you refer to, but a fashion that’s not incompatible with sarcasm. I generally agree with your positions, but I think that you sometimes take yourself a bit overly seriously. But perhaps that could be said of a lot of us.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Some things just make my want to shake my head and *sigh*.
May 30th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Oh jeeez! I had forgotten all about the bulldozer martyress - is that the proper word here?? I try to be correct in these matters. I heard the palis smothered her and finished her off in the ER to make it a death for better propoganda purposes, but hey, I hear all kinds of things about the palis…