******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
I agree with Joe's comments above. Re: DW: "There is nothing irrational about US foreign policy in the Middle East, including the invasion of Iraq." Wow, even assuming such an extreme statement was something that didn't need to be qualified with evidence, US foreign policy toward Iraq has varied rapidly between government to government. In the 1980's it was characterized by active support for Saddam Hussein and even some degree of leniency toward the idea of his invading Kuwait. During and after, it was characterized by the 1st Persian Gulf War, during which many of the same policymakers that went on to cheer for Hussein's overthrow in the more recent war were highly skeptical of accomplishing the same ends in the early 1990s. Then came sanctions, then the Iraq invasion. Are we really to believe that in this quagmire of setbacks, shifting loyalties, etc, it is not possible for US policymakers to have made irrational moves? Especially after 9/11, when the public demanded harsh action and the same zany elements whose ideas of regime change in the 1990s were cast aside as "irrational" came back and succeeded? "Imperialism knows fully well what is in it's interest, and that interest means anything from control over other nations to full and total domination over them." And empires fall. They succomb to internal and external pressures, which often get them to make the wrong move. The overbite after 9/11 is a great example. "The idea that Israel is able to bend and distort somehow American Imperialism to actually go against it's class interest is the non-materialist thinking of the likes of Jeff Blankfort and James Petras and is congruent with the original anti-Jewish anti-Zionist "Arab Lobby" of the 1940s and 1950s reflected today by only real decedent of that view, Patrick Buchanan." So now even rejecting/exaggerating Zionist lobby is "anti-Jewish". Great! What if leftists succeed in getting the elites to make concessions that contradict their class interests? Is that inconceivable? And if so, why is it not believable that a slick, well-funded lobby associated with a powerful Middle Eastern regime could have the same effect after a national crisis like 9/11? "Israel is powerful and its lobby AIPAC is quite strong and influential, which no one, least of all AIPAC, denies. But that it can actually shape that policy is nonsense." So what, then, is its power? The power to agree with other strong influential policymakers? "If for whatever reason there is real and actual conflict over the interests of US Imperialism and Israeli Imperialism, AIPAC will disappear or scale back, and every single "politico" will dump Israel like a ton of bricks (as unlikely a scenario as that sounds) and that includes all the Jewish-American politicos as well." This is an oversimplification. That is usually the case, but the stakes have to be high. If the perceived loss among the elites is small and the political support it will gain from the Zionist lobby is big, then why wouldn't/shouldn't US elites go along with Israel against their own perceived interests? That is more or less what motivates the support for the settlements. - Amith On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Joseph Catron via Marxism < marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote: > ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > ***************************************************************** > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Ken Hiebert via Marxism < > marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote: > > Elsewhere, Cuba ... the U. S. is effectively working for its national > > interest > > > Is the US working for its "national interest" (if such a thing exist in > coherent terms) in Cuba now, or was it doing so a month and a half ago, > while pandering to a right-wing lobby by pursuing a very different set of > policies? You'll have to do some pretty fast talking to convince us that > its "interest" shifted so rapidly! > > This kind of denial of the role of domestic pressure always reminds me of > perhaps the last sane essay Christopher Hitchens ever wrote: > > "I wasted a little time before writing this article, to see if I could > produce a satire or a parody. This would have consisted of a fundraising > letter from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee to a potential > donor. 'Dear Leo,' it might begin. 'We are asking you, even in these > straitened times, to make the largest contribution you can afford. The > security of the state of Israel is threatened as never before, and your > help is urgently required. Alas, we can offer you nothing in return for > your donation. Our representatives are still treated with scorn and > contempt in the halls of Congress and by the White House. The news media > remain deaf to our entreaties. If you choose to attend our annual > conference, we can offer you nothing by way of 'access.' As usual, the > secretaries of state and defense and the leadership of the Joint Chiefs of > Staff will find plausible reasons to be absent. So will the speaker of the > House and the Senate majority leader. Try to think of your contribution as > a mitzvah: a private good deed that may not even go unpunished ...'" > > http://slate.me/1CJBG7n > > I mean, do you think the US Congress put on that embarrassing performance > for Netanyahu because they actually like him that much? Or is their some > material basis (aside from cold, hard campaign cash) for their pathetic > groveling? I rather think not. > > -- > "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen > lytlað." > _________________________________________________________ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/amithrgupta%40gmail.com > _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
