"Greenspan, who was the country's top voice on monetary policy at the time Bush decided to go to war in Iraq, has refrained from extensive public comment on it until now, but he made the striking comment in a new memoir out today that "the Iraq War is largely about oil." In the interview, he clarified that sentence in his 531-page book, saying that while securing global oil supplies was "not the administration's motive," he had presented the White House with the case for why removing Hussein was important for the global economy."
"I was not saying that that's the administration's motive," Greenspan said in an interview Saturday, "I'm just saying that if somebody asked me, 'Are we fortunate in taking out Saddam?' I would say it was essential."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/16/AR2007091601287.html
tirsdag den 18. september 2007
Dubiøse definitioner på terrorisme.
Efter den bipolære verdensordens ophør foranlediget af Sovjetunionens fald, stod verden tilbage med den amerikanske supermagt som den altdominerende, og da denne nu var blevet et fjendebillede fattigere, begyndte man at rette opmærksomheden mod et nyt fjendebillede, nemlig terrorismen.
Man har især siden den 11. september brugt truslen fra den usynlige terroristiske fjende som undskyldning for at drive en frygtbaseret politik gennem hvilken det er lykkedes, at legitimere omfattende skærpelser af overvågning, samt en lang række juridiske indhug i de borgerlige frihedsrettigheder, hvoraf det amerikanske The Patriot Act må siges at være et kroneksempel.
Et af problemerne med de terror-definitioner der opereres med er, at definitionerne ikke er videre præcise, hvorfor kritikeren uden de store vanskeligheder kan fremhæve træk ved nogle af USAs diktatoriske samarbejdspartnere, som qua den officielle terrordefinition, i lige så høj grad, som mange af de blacklistede organisationer man hævder at være i krig med, kan siges at være skyldige i udøvelsen af terrorisme.
Som eksempel herpå kan det nævnes at man i den såkaldte National Security Strategy - som blev udgivet af Bush-administration i 2002 – udtrykker at “The enemy is terrorism – premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against innocents […] The United States will make no concessions to terrorist demands and strikes no deal with them. We make no distinction between terrorists and those who knowingly harbor or provide aid to them.”
Nogle vil nok undre sig lidt over denne terror-definition, for flere af USA's allierede - nuværende såvel som forhenværende - må siges at være skyldige i terrorisme iflg. den definition. Hvorfor skulle eksempelvis Israels handlinger overfor Palæstinenserne i de besatte områder, hvor børn i mange tilfælde enten lemlæstes eller slås ihjel i gengældelsesangreb, ikke falde ind under definitionen på en terroristisk handling, når nu det er tilfældet når en palæstinensisk selvmordsbomber dræber eller lemlæster israelske børn? Hvorfor er der ikke tale om en “overlagt, politisk motiveret voldshandling begået mod uskyldige,” når en helikopter letter fra israelsk jord, for kollektivt at afstraffe palæstinensere, uskyldige såvel som skyldige? Endvidere melder spørgsmålet sig: Hvorledes USA selv er undtaget fra selv at være skyldig i terrorhandlinger når nu det hævdes at man ikke skelner mellem terrorister og dem som medvidende forsyner disse med støtte, idet man fortsat forsyner Israel med våben til trods for det faktum at staten Israel opretholder en illegitim besættelse af Gaza og Vestbredden. Hvorfor er de mange særdeles ubehagelige konsekvenser af denne langvarige besættelse ikke at anskue, som politisk motiverede voldshandlinger begået mod uskyldige?
mandag den 17. september 2007
lørdag den 15. september 2007
Røde Kors: Afghanistan sliding further into war
"AFGHANISTAN is sliding ever further into conflict with more than half of the country affected and several regions out of reach of humanitarian aid, a senior international Red Cross official warned today."
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22416535-401,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22416535-401,00.html
Iraks Interne Oliekrig
DemocracyNow har et læseværdigt interview med Michael Klare, Professor i Peace and World Security Studies ved Hampshire College.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/14/1422209
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/14/1422209
FOX News: USAs Propaganda Kanal nummer et.
Jeg kan stærkt anbefale at tage et kig på Gleen Greenwalds artikel "Brit Hume and the Bush administration take propaganda to a new level"
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/11/petraeus_interview/index.html
Og en dokumentar i forlængelse heraf, der belyser hvorfor FOX News formidler propaganda fremfor journalistik.
OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdochs War on Journalism
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6737097743434902428&q=outfoxed&total=224&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/11/petraeus_interview/index.html
Og en dokumentar i forlængelse heraf, der belyser hvorfor FOX News formidler propaganda fremfor journalistik.
OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdochs War on Journalism
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6737097743434902428&q=outfoxed&total=224&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
Skræk og Rædsel
Følgende er uddrag fra en artikel af Charlie Reese fra antiwar.com
Highlights:
"There might be some parts of this old world where you can push people around and hurt them and they won't fight back, but the Middle East is not one of them."
"It's both unfair and misleading to refer to "Islamic terrorists" or "Muslim terrorists." You will recall that nobody ever referred to the Irish Republican Army as "Catholic terrorists" or their opponents as "Protestant terrorists."
"It's important to understand that the cause of terrorism is political, and therefore there is no military solution. If killing terrorists were the solution, the Israelis wouldn't be enclosing themselves inside a wall and carrying guns all the time. Unless you solve the political problems that cause terrorism, you will never eliminate it."
"Al-Qaeda hates us because we are occupying Muslim lands and killing Muslims. That's true. Al-Qaeda hates us because we support the Israeli brutalization of the Palestinians 100 percent. That is true. Al-Qaeda hates us because the Muslim governments we support are dictatorships. That is true. Al-Qaeda hates us because we are in the Middle East not to spread democracy, but to support Israel and to control Islamic resources, namely oil. That is true."
Highlights:
"There might be some parts of this old world where you can push people around and hurt them and they won't fight back, but the Middle East is not one of them."
"It's both unfair and misleading to refer to "Islamic terrorists" or "Muslim terrorists." You will recall that nobody ever referred to the Irish Republican Army as "Catholic terrorists" or their opponents as "Protestant terrorists."
"It's important to understand that the cause of terrorism is political, and therefore there is no military solution. If killing terrorists were the solution, the Israelis wouldn't be enclosing themselves inside a wall and carrying guns all the time. Unless you solve the political problems that cause terrorism, you will never eliminate it."
"Al-Qaeda hates us because we are occupying Muslim lands and killing Muslims. That's true. Al-Qaeda hates us because we support the Israeli brutalization of the Palestinians 100 percent. That is true. Al-Qaeda hates us because the Muslim governments we support are dictatorships. That is true. Al-Qaeda hates us because we are in the Middle East not to spread democracy, but to support Israel and to control Islamic resources, namely oil. That is true."
torsdag den 13. september 2007
Petraeus -> Links
Al-Sadr: Irak-rapport er skønmaleri
http://information.dk/146345
De døde i Irak gør optimisme til skamme
http://information.dk/146290
P1's Orientering Søndag: Ny amerikansk kurs i Irak?
http://www.dr.dk/P1/orientering/orientering_sondag/2007/09/10160440.htm
Synspunkt: The General Lies
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070911_scheer_column_9_12_07/
http://information.dk/146345
De døde i Irak gør optimisme til skamme
http://information.dk/146290
P1's Orientering Søndag: Ny amerikansk kurs i Irak?
http://www.dr.dk/P1/orientering/orientering_sondag/2007/09/10160440.htm
Synspunkt: The General Lies
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070911_scheer_column_9_12_07/
kommende Iran-krig -> Links
Iran Linked to Iraq Rocket Attack
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3593296&page=1
The 'proxy war': UK troops are sent to Iranian border
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2953462.ece
Nuclear chief walks out on EU speech on Iran
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22404789-5005961,00.html
U.S. Officials Begin Crafting Iran Bombing Plan
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296450,00.html
Debat: Don’t Let The Dogs Out! Don’t Bomb Iran!
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/12/3803/
Israel-lobbyen: AIPAC lobbies for Iran sanctions
http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/104119.html
Analyse: Iran moves to ditch U.S. dollar
http://www.upi.com/International_Security/Energy/Analysis/2007/09/10/analysis_iran_moves_to_ditch_us_dollar/6990/
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3593296&page=1
The 'proxy war': UK troops are sent to Iranian border
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2953462.ece
Nuclear chief walks out on EU speech on Iran
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22404789-5005961,00.html
U.S. Officials Begin Crafting Iran Bombing Plan
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296450,00.html
Debat: Don’t Let The Dogs Out! Don’t Bomb Iran!
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/12/3803/
Israel-lobbyen: AIPAC lobbies for Iran sanctions
http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/104119.html
Analyse: Iran moves to ditch U.S. dollar
http://www.upi.com/International_Security/Energy/Analysis/2007/09/10/analysis_iran_moves_to_ditch_us_dollar/6990/
tirsdag den 11. september 2007
Daily Telegraph/NY Sun: Kurds Launch Secret War In Iran
Kurdish guerrillas have launched a clandestine war in northwestern Iran, ambushing troops as they seek Western backing to secure an ethnic homeland.
In retaliation, the Iranian army has carried out a series of counterattacks in the mountains, which span the border with Iraq.
Murat Karayilan, a Kurdish guerrilla commander, told the Daily Telegraph that Tehran had originally tried to recruit the outlawed groups to fight coalition troops in Iraq.
"The U.S. and Britain came to Iraq to establish a democratic system, but this scared the Iranians, so they negotiated with us and offered many things to attack the coalition," he said under a canopy of trees near his headquarters on Iraqi territory in the Qandil Mountains.
Iranian newspapers have reported the deaths of seven soldiers in recent clashes with Kurdish guerrillas. Last month, the rebels claimed responsibility for shooting down an Iranian helicopter.
A loose alliance of guerrillas, styling itself the Kurdistan Democratic Federation, is fighting for an independent state which would cover the Kurdish-majority areas of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria.
Mr. Karayilan, who is from the PKK guerrilla group, said Iran and Turkey were acting in tandem to repress their Kurdish regions. But, he added, the Kurds have been inspired by the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq, which has been relatively secure since Saddam Hussein's downfall in 2003. "The regional government in Iraqi Kurdistan has increased the national feeling of Kurds everywhere," he said.
Iran believes that the U.S. and Britain are now arming and training the Kurdish guerrillas to strike its territory from bases inside Iraq. Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, accused America of supporting terrorism inside the Islamic Republic.
" America wants to carry out actions such as blowing up the country's oil pipelines by supporting bandits and small groups of Kurdish rebels," he told the Iranian press.
In retaliation, the Iranian army has carried out a series of counterattacks in the mountains, which span the border with Iraq.
Murat Karayilan, a Kurdish guerrilla commander, told the Daily Telegraph that Tehran had originally tried to recruit the outlawed groups to fight coalition troops in Iraq.
"The U.S. and Britain came to Iraq to establish a democratic system, but this scared the Iranians, so they negotiated with us and offered many things to attack the coalition," he said under a canopy of trees near his headquarters on Iraqi territory in the Qandil Mountains.
Iranian newspapers have reported the deaths of seven soldiers in recent clashes with Kurdish guerrillas. Last month, the rebels claimed responsibility for shooting down an Iranian helicopter.
A loose alliance of guerrillas, styling itself the Kurdistan Democratic Federation, is fighting for an independent state which would cover the Kurdish-majority areas of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria.
Mr. Karayilan, who is from the PKK guerrilla group, said Iran and Turkey were acting in tandem to repress their Kurdish regions. But, he added, the Kurds have been inspired by the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq, which has been relatively secure since Saddam Hussein's downfall in 2003. "The regional government in Iraqi Kurdistan has increased the national feeling of Kurds everywhere," he said.
Iran believes that the U.S. and Britain are now arming and training the Kurdish guerrillas to strike its territory from bases inside Iraq. Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, accused America of supporting terrorism inside the Islamic Republic.
" America wants to carry out actions such as blowing up the country's oil pipelines by supporting bandits and small groups of Kurdish rebels," he told the Iranian press.
Essay af Ole Wæver: Krigen mod terror stimulerer terroren
Den danske professor i international politik, Ole Wæver, har i dages information et glimrende essay, som meget fint opsummerer hvad følgerne af Bush-administrationens War on Terror indtil videre må siges at være.
http://information.dk/146236
http://information.dk/146236
mandag den 10. september 2007
Ny bog om Israel-lobbyen og dens indflydelse på amerikansk udenrigspolitik
Fra N.Y.Times anmeldelse:
“The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” arrives carrying heavy baggage. John J. Mearsheimer, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, a professor of international affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, set off a furor last year by arguing, in an article that appeared in The London Review of Books, that uncritical American support for Israel, shaped by powerful lobbying organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, does grave harm to both American and Israeli interests."
"A bitter debate has raged ever since, with accusations of anti-Semitism leveled by, among others, Alan M. Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor, and Abraham H. Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, one of the principal lobbying organizations taken to task by Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt.
"The problem, Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt argue, is that Israel has become a strategic liability with the end of the cold war and a moral pariah in its dealings with the Palestinians and, most recently, the Lebanese. Uncritical American support for its closest Middle East ally has damaged American credibility in the Arab world, encouraged terrorism, stymied the search for a solution to the Palestinian problem, and in every way made America’s international position weaker and more dangerous.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/06/books/06grim.html
“The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” arrives carrying heavy baggage. John J. Mearsheimer, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, a professor of international affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, set off a furor last year by arguing, in an article that appeared in The London Review of Books, that uncritical American support for Israel, shaped by powerful lobbying organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, does grave harm to both American and Israeli interests."
"A bitter debate has raged ever since, with accusations of anti-Semitism leveled by, among others, Alan M. Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor, and Abraham H. Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, one of the principal lobbying organizations taken to task by Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt.
“The Israel Lobby,” an extended, more fully argued version of the London Review article, has done nothing to calm the waters. The authors have been barred from making appearances by at least one university and several cultural centers to discuss their subject, and continue to reap a whirlwind of criticism and abuse. If they were looking for a fight, they have found it.
Slowly, deliberately and dispassionately Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt lay out the case for a ruthlessly realistic Middle East policy that would make Israel nothing more than one of many countries in the region. On those occasions when Israel’s interests coincide with America’s, it should count on American support, but otherwise not. What Americans fail to understand, the authors argue, is that most of the time the two countries’ interests are opposed.
The reason they do not realize this, Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt insist, can be explained quite simply: The Israel lobby makes sure of it. Working closely with members of Congress, public-policy organizations and journals of opinion, energetic, well-financed groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the American Jewish Committee, along with dozens of political-action committees, perpetuate the myth, as the authors see it, of Israel as an isolated, beleaguered state surrounded by enemies and in need of America’s unstinting financial and military support.
This lobby is particularly adept at stifling debate before it begins, the authors argue. “Whether the issue is abortion, arms control, affirmative action, gay rights, the environment, trade policy, health care, immigration or welfare, there is almost always a lively debate on Capitol Hill,” they write. “But where Israel is concerned, potential critics fall silent and there is hardly any debate at all.”
"The problem, Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt argue, is that Israel has become a strategic liability with the end of the cold war and a moral pariah in its dealings with the Palestinians and, most recently, the Lebanese. Uncritical American support for its closest Middle East ally has damaged American credibility in the Arab world, encouraged terrorism, stymied the search for a solution to the Palestinian problem, and in every way made America’s international position weaker and more dangerous.
Coolly, not to say coldly, Mr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Walt mount a prosecutorial brief against Israel’s foreign and domestic policies, and against the state of Israel itself. They describe a virtual rogue state, empowered by American wealth and might, that blocks peace at every turn, threatens its cowering neighbors with impunity, crushes the national aspirations of the Palestinians and, whenever the opportunity arises, bites the hand that feeds it.
Working tirelessly in the background is the Israel lobby, playing Iago to America’s Othello, leading president after president down ever more dangerous paths. Without intense pressure from the Israel lobby, the authors argue, America would not have undertaken the war in Iraq."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/06/books/06grim.html
Abonner på:
Opslag (Atom)